Weapon attributes

[johonka]

adom had 4 ways to use weapons, one hand, one hander and shield, two onehanders and two handed weapon.

The two handed weapon delivers most damage but defence is being lowered and the shield had reduced damage but greatly encanced defence. The other two options went mostly unused since they had no benefits over the other two styles. I suggest that the one handed weapon and two weapon styles would be made useful. For examble that the one weapon would simply cost less energy than shield style(and maybe do more damage) and dual wielding would not cost more in energy than using one weapon, but would instead reduce dv. Or these could have their own skills, in addition to the weapon specific skills(and marks).

Basically it would be like
(MORE to-hit?)//MORE ATTACKS..................(LESS to-hit?)//FEWER ATTACKS
dual-onehanded weapons>onehander>shield and one handed weapon
LESS DV...............................................M ORE DV

two handed weapons sit somewhere in the middle, greatly depending on the weapon used(as is in adom).

[Grey]

I agree to a certain extent. I also think that the power of shields should be scaled back. In ADOM they are ridiculously powerful when well-trained, to the point that good two-handed weapons will be neglected because they can't compete for DV.

[theotherhiveking]

I agree to a certain extent. I also think that the power of shields should be scaled back. In ADOM they are ridiculously powerful when well-trained, to the point that good two-handed weapons will be neglected because they can't compete for DV.

Quoted for truth. 100% agree.

[Tannis]

Some good thoughts here. I also think that weapon classes should have special abilities that are unlocked as you become more proficient in them. It'll be a nice way to make sure that this time we avoid everyone gravitating towards spears.

For example, upon reaching mastery in swords, one could gain a chance to parry attacks. A successful parry could increase your dv, or even dodge the attack outright. Mastery in axes could grant a small chance of a decapitation attack against humanoids, mastery in spears could let you attack people one square away as opposed to only adjacent targets.

Basically, flesh out the weapons so that there's a bigger difference between choosing between them, yet without one obvious class that is superior.

[Dorten]

The other two options went mostly unused since they had no benefits over the other two styles.

You haven't ever played with two onehanders, have you? Or with a twohander wielding berserker?

Except for that, I agree, that fighting styles should be reworked...

[Dougy]

Some thoughts about special abilities based on weapon skills:

1.a. Shouldn't the PC be able to disarm an opponent too?
1.b. The PC could disarm the opponent and catch their weapon, adding it to their inventory.
2. Shield attacks.
3. Displays of skill - to scare away (large groups of) lesser beings. Swordsmen may attempt a display of their own in return.
4. Circular attack (like circular kick of the monk).
5. Non-lethal attacks, i.e. so that you disable the opponent without killing him/her - they can then run away or join you (or if they're an honourable creature might kill themselves - "Disgraced by his defeat in battle, the <foo> quickly takes his own life.").
6. Confusion attacks. "The <foo> is confused by your attack."
7. Slingers and rockthrowers can stun their opponent.

[Eidre]

Mainly for reasons of perversity, I would love to see a good reason to only wield a single weapon (and leave the off-hand empty). I have a thought, but it would make the game sigificantly more irritating...

Proposal: characters must have at least one empty hand to do any of the following actions: open doors, zap wands, read scrolls, quaff potions, cast wizard spells, pick up items from the floor, use hand-type-skills (alchemy, lock picking, picking pockets, etc). They would also have penalties to actions using the hands (swimming, climbing), and couldn't hold a light-source. Therefore, characters would be strongly motivated to have their off-hand free while exploring and travelling, drawing their second weapon or shield only when they saw the enemy hordes closing in (possibly dropping their torch/lantern to the ground in the process...where exactly on the body is the "light source" slot, anyway?).

This would also give a greater advantage to hiding, silent, and invisible monsters, since they would be more likely to catch the character without his optimal weapon configuration.

It would also make heavy weapon, two-weapon, or weapon and shield characters significantly more limited, since they couldn't get through closed doors (other than kicking) or pick up useful objects while fighting, and would be dependent on ambient light or infravision to see their way around.

It would also get rid of the ridiculous (in my humble opinion) wizard with a shield in each hand.

The down side, of course, is it would require endless shifting between map and inventory for those that want to walk around fully armed. This would make the real penalty to be applied to the player (irritation and extra keystrokes) rather than within the game, rewarding the *player's* boredom resistance with improved combat abilities all the time. A hot-key or macro to shift between single weapon and 'full tactical' without going to the inventory scren might ameliorate this.

As a less-game-altering option, perhaps apply a penalty to the above-mentioned actions proportional to the weight of the stuff held in the hands (as the character has to shift them around and balance them while trying to free up a hand to wave the wand or cast the spell).

[Tannis]

Another option is to add a command from the Magic candle series: (S)heathe and (d)raw. You would have to temporarily sheathe your weapon to do certain actions: perhaps cast a spell, perhaps use a bow. Actually, especially a bow. I always found it silly how in Adom you could run aorund with a sword and shield and pelt people with arrows at the same time.

The advantage with the sheathe and draw mode is that it could extend to other aspects of the game. Perhaps sheathing your sword in front of a hostile monster might make negotiations more of a possibility. Perhaps drawing it would make lesser creatures afraid. Perhaps Lawful towns could demand weapons to be sheathed at all times, while in outlaw towns a warrior without a drawn weapon could be more likely to be attacked.

Thoughts?

[Dougy]

Eidre: sounds like too much of a pain.

Tannis: interesting, but it's probably much easier if the PC sheathes and draws his weapon automatically - having the turn take some extra energy. I don't think you can sheathe a whip, etc. Perhaps "You ready your <weapon>" and "You stay your <weapon>" are a little bit better in general.

[BenMathiesen]

Proposal: characters must have at least one empty hand to do any of the following actions: open doors, zap wands, read scrolls, quaff potions, cast wizard spells, pick up items from the floor, use hand-type-skills (alchemy, lock picking, picking pockets, etc). They would also have penalties to actions using the hands (swimming, climbing), and couldn't hold a light-source. Therefore, characters would be strongly motivated to have their off-hand free while exploring and travelling, drawing their second weapon or shield only when they saw the enemy hordes closing in (possibly dropping their torch/lantern to the ground in the process...where exactly on the body is the "light source" slot, anyway?).

I think this is an excellent idea, personally.

Ben