Who's Online
0 registered and 3 anonymous users online.
Newest Members
Mog, GreenGems, Minzuki, evaker, juffsion
83 Registered Users
Top Posters
608
Cerberus
368
Charon
209
MacTORG
204
Kim
164
carmy
148
Muod
106
Shadowraith
89
Minstrel
88
sabu
49
Rancid
Recent Topics
Page 1 of 1 1
Topic Options
Rate This Topic
#2254 - 11/03/08 03:50 PM Future Plans
Cerberus Administrator Offline
addict
***

Registered: 11/28/07
Posts: 608
Loc: Arlee, MT, USA
Current description:
Fighters are the primary arms specialists. They are warriors and are experts in weapons, as well as tactics and strategy. Fighters find it very easy to develop a variety of different weapons and to wear heavier types of armour. They are less skilled at maneuvering and manipulating mechanical devices such as locks and traps and have the greatest difficulty with anything connected with spells.

My take:
These are not tinkers. The fighter's combat skill set will have only the basic offense and defensive skills, with few noteworthy exceptions (the defense skill, resist stun, etc). All other skills that have an effect on combat will move to the 'special' category (sweep, kick, disarm, etc).

Unique Role: Combat styles (sweep, kick, disarm, defense, resist stun)
Non-unique Roles: Offensive power (100% combat devs), Defensive power (up to plate armour at no penalty)

Considering: Weapon trees - skill in weapon A acts as a bonus to weapon B

Top
#2257 - 11/03/08 04:22 PM Re: Future Plans [Re: Cerberus]
Kim Offline
enthusiast
*****

Registered: 10/11/07
Posts: 204
Loc: Europe
Fighters being.. fighters and the experts of tactics and combat related skills I can see. However, I don't see them as knights. (that is more... Paladins and maybe CLs in my mind). I don't see them as the Heavy Armoured guys. Rather more likely light armour, chainmail, or even just leather, which allows them to use their various tricks, and not rely on merely "hit hard, and able to take hard hits". Things like the defense skill being more effective the lighter the armour and best with leather etc. Let other guilds rely on heavy armour, and fighters on their skills.

That they are not tinkers I agree with. Things like skinning and leather crafting, finding healing herbs and similar things of an "organic" nature I see as well within their field though. More barbarians or rangers than knights or mercenaries.

Top
#2258 - 11/03/08 04:37 PM Re: Future Plans [Re: Kim]
Cerberus Administrator Offline
addict
***

Registered: 11/28/07
Posts: 608
Loc: Arlee, MT, USA
I agree that fighters should not be pigeon-holed as heavily armoured tanks. They should be able to wear any sort of armour they please and do better in it than any other guild though. The light armour route is more in line with the thief guild - for which I will be posting the future plan soon - this might as well be pulled directly from the thief plan:
 Originally Posted By: Kim
Let other guilds rely on heavy armour, and fighters on their skills.
_________________________
Please mail your views on balance to:
cerberus@darkemud.com

Top
#2259 - 11/03/08 04:52 PM Re: Future Plans [Re: Cerberus]
Kim Offline
enthusiast
*****

Registered: 10/11/07
Posts: 204
Loc: Europe
"They should be able to wear any sort of armour they please and do better in it than any other guild though."

That is what I disagree with. A Paladin is a knight in shining (plate) armour, a fighter is not. Chain or scale should be the norm for a fighter, with leather and plate at the extremes.

Though I guess what I really wonder about here is the "up to X armour without penalty". Because it sounds like penalty will be based on guild, not skill(s). Is the intent to make it so that depending on guild, you get a penalty for wearing some armour, or is the idea that some skills will be affected by armour (and, in turn, affect armour, like defense giving a higher bonus with armour that is more "agile"). If it is the first, I think it is a bad way to do it. If it is the second, it could be interesting, and allow for people trying to use a guild in a way the creators didn't foresee, which is good IMO ;\)

Top
#2260 - 11/03/08 04:55 PM Re: Future Plans [Re: Kim]
Byakko Offline
stranger
*

Registered: 06/05/08
Posts: 13
Fighters are the generic warrior who lives and fights by his own expertise. Their combat abilities are just that and should be learned in the heat of battle. Yes, they could practice tactics such as disarming outside of combat, but the same could be said of any combat related skill. Thus, they should all remain within the domain of c.
There are some skills that any adventurer should be able to pick up over time. Things like repairing a weapon, skinning a corpse, or finding nature resources are things fighters should be able to do, which are not combat related. Actually, ANY guild should be able to do these things in theory. The world lore skills are already set up this way.
The Spec category should be reserved for those whose primary profession is some specialized craft. Fighters' primary focus is not a craft, but fighting, so realistically, they shouldn't even have a Spec category of xp. This was the case in early cms, actually. Whether this is feasible or balanced is another matter (although the issue of overall levels is easy to fix, as are most of the typical rebuttals to this).

On the subject of armour: I am strongly opposed to anything that limits the armour a character can wear based on class or training. Any strong person can put on a suit of armour, which will protect them even if they just stand there. (the ability to dodge blows is covered by the dodge skill) The urge to limit armour is usually a result game balance - but there are other ways to encourage "squishies" to not wear armour, such as making spellcasting in armour more difficult or fumble-prone.

You also hint that spellcasting and lock picking might be possible, but difficult, for fighters. I advise against going down any path such as this without serious and lengthy design meetings as it completely changes the nature of darke. To be able to cross-train skills was one thing that was added (more or less) in pre-cms darke but quickly realized to be rich in balance problems and abuse issues, and removed. Such a change would require an extensive redesign of darke and shouldn't be considered as a balance tweak.

Top
#2262 - 11/03/08 05:17 PM Re: Future Plans [Re: Byakko]
Cerberus Administrator Offline
addict
***

Registered: 11/28/07
Posts: 608
Loc: Arlee, MT, USA
Whether a fighter is a knight in plate armour or not is entirely up to that fighter. You could be a knife fighter in cloth or a knight with a two-handed sword and platemail and you're still a fighter. The key to that statement was meant to be that a fighter is better at fighting in any given armour than any other guild in that same armour, not that you must wear any particular armour.

 Originally Posted By: Byakko
The Spec category should be reserved for those whose primary profession is some specialized craft.
Fighter's craft is combat, thus the reason they'd use the specialized category.
 Originally Posted By: Byakko
You also hint that spellcasting and lock picking might be possible
That particular 'hint' is listed under the section labeled Current Description and is in no way implying that there will be crosstraining for fighters.
_________________________
Please mail your views on balance to:
cerberus@darkemud.com

Top
#2263 - 11/03/08 05:20 PM Re: Future Plans [Re: Cerberus]
Kim Offline
enthusiast
*****

Registered: 10/11/07
Posts: 204
Loc: Europe
"The key to that statement was meant to be that a fighter is better at fighting in any given armour than any other guild in that same armour, not that you must wear any particular armour."

Ya. And the key to my opposition is I disagree. I think fighters should be worse at fighing in plate armour than a Paladin (or rather, a paladin should have no drawbacks for it, while a fighter should have some). \:\) And I never thought you had to wear some certain armour.

Top
#2265 - 11/03/08 05:33 PM Re: Future Plans [Re: Kim]
Byakko Offline
stranger
*

Registered: 06/05/08
Posts: 13
Armour is no more than a protective layer. Regardless of what guild a character belongs to, if they have 90 strength and spend 100 hours fighting in plate mail, they should be equally used to wearing it.
Now a fighter should generally spend more time fighting and be a higher C level since the paladin has all those holy services to attend to.... ;\) , and thus be more comfortable with the armour on that grounds. On the other hand, all those prayers may well pay off and Celebron may grant a paladin aid which puts them on more than even ground when it comes down to a fight.

Fighting is NOT a craft. Rather, it is an area of training, but this area of training has been specifically broken off into its own category: Combat. We could also break off other area of training, such as "Metal-Working", etc, etc, etc, but for simplicity we have lumped all OTHER areas of mundane training into a category called "Specialized".

Top
#2268 - 11/03/08 09:50 PM Re: Future Plans [Re: Byakko]
Cerberus Administrator Offline
addict
***

Registered: 11/28/07
Posts: 608
Loc: Arlee, MT, USA
 Originally Posted By: Byakko
Fighting is NOT a craft. Rather, it is an area of training, but this area of training has been specifically broken off into its own category: Combat. We could also break off other area of training, such as "Metal-Working", etc, etc, etc, but for simplicity we have lumped all OTHER areas of mundane training into a category called "Specialized".
I disagree. Simple fighting, as exemplified by the 'attack', weapon, and defensive skills are all the Combat level entails. Anything that goes beyond the scope of these basics I consider specialized - mundane training that happens to deal with harming others physically or augmenting the combat round as the Magic level can do.

I understand the view you're presenting here and disagree with you. Since it's only my opinion there's no reason not to argue your side, but I don't foresee being swayed. Balance is more difficult without keeping combat slimmed and specialized skills in the special category. Dance of Daggers isn't a combat skill, but whirlwind attack is? The argument of course works both ways, but I prefer my view... well... because it's mine. I've thought it through and found it neither lacking nor objectionable.
_________________________
Please mail your views on balance to:
cerberus@darkemud.com

Top
Page 1 of 1 1


Hop to:
July
Su M Tu W Th F Sa
1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 30 31
Forum Stats
83 Members
33 Forums
333 Topics
2540 Posts

Max Online: 255 @ 06/20/13 12:21 AM

Generated in 0.013 seconds in which 0.001 seconds were spent on a total of 14 queries. Zlib compression disabled.