Illarion.org

I have read many threads about this topic, but there were a few arguments wich I haven't found.

1. I read somewhere that it would be easier to hande a sword and a shield than two swords. This surprised me, since a shield (talking about real shields) is much heavier than a sword. And the two-shields-matter, thinking about a mage, who supposedly studies a lot, wearing about 40-60 Kg. of steel in his hands made me laugh.

2. Also I've read that with a twohanded weapon it's impossible to beat a demon, while with a shield and firesword it's easy for maxed chars. Someone said that when a trucksize demon hits you, you have no chance without a shield. I've never seen a demon (lol), but I don't think you couldn't even hurt them enough with a sword, if you ever managed to get close enough. One of his blows would break your shield and throw you against a wall if you tried to block it. Thinking about it, with a two metres long war axe you could at least cut something off, if you were strong enough, while dodging a few hits.

My idea is that with a high enough weapon skill, enough dexterity and agility or whatever determines parry effectiveness you should be able to dodge attacks with a two handed weapon, or two one handed weapons, not as good as with a shield, but you deal more damage in return. Then you would at least have a choice of weapons and performance, now your choice is good warrior or mediocre warrior.

wrong forum... but i support this proposal.

Parrying isn't just dead blocking the blow, it is about deflecting it. As their double axe comes twards you it would hit the shield but you would want to push the shield outwards therefore making it kind of miss you, meanwhile you stick you sword in his leg/gut or wherever you can reach as he hasn't much chance of dodging. Agility helps you dodge attacks too. Good and Mediocre fighters shouldn't be able to kill demons alone anyway.

In PvP shields should have a clear advantage. But how are you going to deflect a hit from a demon? He's hitting with his claws, so he has more stability in his blow.

And from what I've heard not even the best two handed warriors can beat demons - correct me if wrong.

I am almost 100% sure he uses a double axe. He attacks too slow for using his claws, and his parry higher than with claws too.

you should be able to dodge attacks with a two handed weapon, or two one handed weapons, not as good as with a shield, but you deal more damage in return.

I agree that 2 weapons should provide better parry, as you are then much more nimble n such. But all else than minimal parry with a 2 handed weapon would be wrong. In order to use it you have to swing it hard, using it's weight to get power. As such stopping a swing n moving your sword or hammer or whatever around to block an enemy blow would be VERY difficult. You simply would not be able to move your weapon fast enough to be able to parry adequately.

As for the more dammage with 2 weapons I disagree. The whole point of using two swords is to be able to be swift and nimble. You would not very well be able to cause big blows, but it should be easier to hit. Thus you'd do less dammage per hit, but you would hit much more often.

A 2handed sword's parry is right on the mark IMO. Staves however, should have more parry.

Not until they can break.

Just as a note I notice none of you have actually thought about the weapon as a design. I mean there are two-handed swords and then there are two-handed swords. Broad sword uses it weight, size and power of swing to take down a target. Where as a Catana also favourably a two handed sword uses the sharpness and quality of its blade and user. This is a weapon you can dodge whist using, parry with and be nimble to avoid taking the blow.

A short sword is generally for thrusting attacks, the point of its tip with a well-aimed thrust being the desired killing mechanism and thus goes hand in hand with a shield of sorts. Same goes the fire sword by looking at the shape of it. That is not to say you can not slash to kill with it, only its design is to be used from behind a shield and so to slash would bring you from your defence. This style of fighting is not necessarily to dodge, you can’t with a large shield easily. But rather to take the bow on the shield and use your opponents now soft underbelly to strike at.

But then at the end of the day, it all depends on the skill of the warrior. Anybody can cut a potato with a blade but to use it as a killing weapon is another game

I think theses should be considered in the weighing up of parry and dodge, which I might add, is not an easy job, even with research. I am very sure this has all been taken into account for the new client, I just wanted add to the topic *Smiles*

I think that a dagger should be a good parry weapon. I was watching a show on the history channel called "Conquest", and in the show, the host shows various ways of fighting in certain time periods. And he showed that a short sword and a dagger would be good weapons to parry with, because they aren't very heavy and you can move them around easier.

Then again, with a dagger you have a much smaller blade to protect yourself with, so you have to parry much more accurately to fen off blows.

I am of the opinion that with a sword and shield there should be a higher chance of being hit just because with a shield you are weighed down and you are less agile but lower damage dealt when hit because a shield offers protection.

Two handed weapons like katanas and spears I think should give a warrior a lower chance of being hit but make the warrior suffer more damage when hit because they offer less protection. The exception to this would be two handed weapons like the bastard sword, heavy sword, and so on which are two handed but very heavy.

I agree that two handed weapons are pretty much useless against demons and anyone with a sword and shield in illarion. I think it would be nice if this were different because I think it would do a lot to balance the fighting system.

Daggers are more of a stabbing weapon than a slashing weapon. It's small and easy to carry so you could conceal it from your enemy/victim (etc.) and stab them before they had the chance to call for help or draw a weapon.

It's a shame that in Illarion every character at all times is ready for attack, you can't sneak up behind someone and hit them. This is IMO very unrealistic, which brings up the idea of LOS (Line Of Sight). If could only see another character/monster/animal if they were in front of you, and you could only hear those behind you it would give a more realistic effect, IMO. Sorry this paragraph is a little off topic but it is related to the first.

Well I think that its odd that everyone asumes that all the characters are Ambidextrous(no preference as to left handed or right) This makes a big difference I think. If you've ever used a sword or machete you notice its harder to hit percicely with your left hand, so a parry obviously would be more difficult. But if you just had a shield that all you had to do was push that would be much simplier. Like in DnD you suffer penalties when using two weapons because its harder to use it in your offhand. I think that should have more of an affect in parry, along with wieght.

Well now the secret is out (if it wasn't already) that chars in Illarion are definately NOT ambidextrous.

Fighting system changes don't really need to be discussed until we get the new fighting system which is in the works as mentioned by Martin.

What do you mean by that they're not ambidextrous? I roleplay all my chars as lefties (like myself). Does this mean that they're at a disadvantage?

MAYBE I shouldn't have said anything. My chars hit harder with the weapon in one hand than in the other, however if your dexterity is perfect, it probobly won't matter much.

Has anybody ever thought about it that if you fight a left-handed person, being a right-handed person yourself, with a shield means that a shield is pretty much useless, because most slashes come towards your right side where you are carrying your sword. Parrying a blow on your right with your shield on your left is quite hard i guess.

hm, well thought!

~~Mitch

the other one have the same problem. that are equal chances

Hm, that's not what I was thinking, though. It's not that it would equal out; rather, each would do more damage and each would take more damage. If a right-handed fighter took on a left-handed fighter and each had a sword and a shield it would be a deadly battle! Each could more easily strike and each would be more vulnerable. That's what I thought was interesting, at least.

~~Mitch

The left-handed fighter who would use a two-handed sword, or two swords at once would have a big advantage, as would the right-handed fighter with that kind op weaponry who would take on a left0handed fighter with a shield in his right.

But I guess there are millions of details you could go in to that would make a combat system unnecessarily complex.