Angband.oook.cz
Angband.oook.cz
AboutVariantsLadderForumCompetitionComicScreenshotsFunniesLinks

Go Back   Angband Forums > Angband > Sil

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old September 29, 2014, 23:39   #31
debo
Veteran
 
debo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 2,371
debo is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by taptap View Post
An idea that hasn't been proposed, would not require changes to greatswords, yet would completely restore greatswords to their glory is unifying long- / bastardswords under one name (afaik the swords called longsword irl were in fact often used two-handed) and make them 2d5 when used single-handed, 2d7 when two-handed.

I just wanted to put this idea into the thread as well.
I kinda like that. Also, that would make Aranruth even more amazing
__________________
Glaurung, Father of the Dragons says, 'You cannot avoid the ballyhack.'
debo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 30, 2014, 12:37   #32
Thraalbee
Knight
 
Thraalbee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Stockholm
Posts: 553
Thraalbee is on a distinguished road
I haven't played Sil in a while, but as far as i understand, the weight of the weapon is not included in the KnockBack die roll. How about a linear bonus to the Knock Back die roll based on weapon weight? It could work if the bonus was capped somehow, e.g. based on effective Str
Thraalbee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 30, 2014, 12:54   #33
half
Knight
 
half's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 904
half is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thraalbeast View Post
I haven't played Sil in a while, but as far as i understand, the weight of the weapon is not included in the KnockBack die roll. How about a linear bonus to the Knock Back die roll based on weapon weight? It could work if the bonus was capped somehow, e.g. based on effective Str
We redesigned it to include Str in a recent version (1.2?) and wanted to keep the formula simple (it is basically an opposed Str vs Con check). We figured that people will usually be using weapons that make best use of their strength, so the weight is not really a factor. It has been suggested a couple of times that we could use 'effective strength' (i.e. Strength limited by weapon weight). This is a good idea and we'll think about whether the small gain is worth the small complexity increase.
half is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 30, 2014, 17:16   #34
bagori nd
Apprentice
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 56
bagori nd is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by taptap View Post
An idea that hasn't been proposed, would not require changes to greatswords, yet would completely restore greatswords to their glory is unifying long- / bastardswords under one name (afaik the swords called longsword irl were in fact often used two-handed) and make them 2d5 when used single-handed, 2d7 when two-handed.

I just wanted to put this idea into the thread as well.
I kinda like this too. Note however that

(a) it'd prevent you from two-weaponing longswords, which is probably good for realism but arguably bad for gameplay and in my opinion definitely bad for awesomeness; and
(b) it'd be a de facto nerf to the strong elf, for whom the one-handed bastard sword is currently a great option; and
(c) two-handing a longsword would be a niche option, worse than a shield or greatsword in almost every case.

But these might be outweighed; idk. fwiw I do this with curved swords already in my game (though I've eliminated their evasion bonus to compensate), and it seems to work okay. (I'm a little ashamed to say that I mainly did this so I could put in Aglarang. Apart from that the main effect is to make the very early game a bit faster and more dangerous.)
bagori nd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 1, 2014, 03:26   #35
huiren
Rookie
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 14
huiren is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by half View Post
We redesigned it to include Str in a recent version (1.2?) and wanted to keep the formula simple (it is basically an opposed Str vs Con check). We figured that people will usually be using weapons that make best use of their strength, so the weight is not really a factor. It has been suggested a couple of times that we could use 'effective strength' (i.e. Strength limited by weapon weight). This is a good idea and we'll think about whether the small gain is worth the small complexity increase.
In the manual, the description of knock back states that it is effective strength, capped by weapon weight, +2 for wielding a weapon in two hands. Is that not the case and it's just strength with no cap?

Also, what is an average monster constitution? Obviously, higher strength is better, but about what amount of strength do you need to get good use out of knock back?
huiren is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 1, 2014, 04:00   #36
debo
Veteran
 
debo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 2,371
debo is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by huiren View Post
In the manual, the description of knock back states that it is effective strength, capped by weapon weight, +2 for wielding a weapon in two hands. Is that not the case and it's just strength with no cap?
I think you still get a +2 bonus for twofisting. I don't know about the cap part.

Quote:
Originally Posted by huiren View Post
Also, what is an average monster constitution? Obviously, higher strength is better, but about what amount of strength do you need to get good use out of knock back?
Monster "constitution" is basically the Con value that would be closest to their actual HP.
__________________
Glaurung, Father of the Dragons says, 'You cannot avoid the ballyhack.'
debo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 1, 2014, 11:06   #37
half
Knight
 
half's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 904
half is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by huiren View Post
In the manual, the description of knock back states that it is effective strength, capped by weapon weight, +2 for wielding a weapon in two hands. Is that not the case and it's just strength with no cap?

Also, what is an average monster constitution? Obviously, higher strength is better, but about what amount of strength do you need to get good use out of knock back?
If it says that in the manual, it is probably true! Sounds like we had already implemented the good version, so everyone can rest easy.

I don't have a good feel for what strength works well. It definitely depends on the monster. Monster constitution is determined by their health (in the same way that your health is determined by your Con). Anyone can knock back really low health monsters, but there is little point as they often die on the first attack. A good strength level will depend on the enemy, and as their health generally increases with depth, you will need more strength later on. You need *a lot* to have much chance of knocking Morgoth back as he has a very high health.
half is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 1, 2014, 12:47   #38
taptap
Knight
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 710
taptap is on a distinguished road
I have knocked back dragons (on charge with crazy high STR 4+4 and a two-handed war hammer). Knockback is really cool for low health, high protection opponents. That is serpents and deathblades.

As one of the people who proposed this, I believe I did so after noticing a lot of longsword knockback going on in one of my chars...
taptap is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 1, 2014, 15:40   #39
Scatha
Swordsman
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 414
Scatha is on a distinguished road
I'd wondered before about making bastard swords 2d5, but that would make three swords with the same damage numbers, and probably be confusing.

Removing bastard swords and making longswords hand-and-a-half is an interesting suggestion. A (+0,2d5)[+1] hand-and-a-half weapon wielded two-handed would be comparably good with a greatsword at STR 1 or perhaps 2. It would compare unfavourably with a Glaive, but not massively so.

Another reasonably elegant possibility in this vicinity would be to merge bastard swords and curved swords, to a (-1, 2d5)[+1] hand-and-a-half weapon. I'm not sure which name they'd want to keep. They'd be on the weak side, though slightly better than the current curved swords, and a decent all-rounder.
Scatha is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 1, 2014, 20:16   #40
debo
Veteran
 
debo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 2,371
debo is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scatha View Post
Another reasonably elegant possibility in this vicinity would be to merge bastard swords and curved swords, to a (-1, 2d5)[+1] hand-and-a-half weapon. I'm not sure which name they'd want to keep. They'd be on the weak side, though slightly better than the current curved swords, and a decent all-rounder.
An inadvertent nerf to Anguirel and Anglachel could probably be tolerated
__________________
Glaurung, Father of the Dragons says, 'You cannot avoid the ballyhack.'
debo is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 15:46.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions Inc.