Blaze997

Aha! I did some more research and it looks like what we are calling a "sabre" in game is actually more of a falchion. The sabre was a weapon made for use on horseback, while the curved sword used by foot soldiers was the falchion, and it was designed for devastating chopping force and penetration. It could cut through mail, or damage plate armor and injure the wearer. It all makes more sense now.

I guess I just see sabres as an especially poor weapon for attacking mail, because they only slash and are relatively lightweight. However, they are just as good or better than stilettos against plate due to the raw damage. I suppose I was wondering if anyone has seen firsthand how destructive a sabre or equivalent can be (like maybe someone has been to a medieval/historical festival and seen a demonstration). If they are destructive even against armor then the game still makes sense and I like the game to make sense. My only experience with combat would be a bit of boxing and kickboxing. I remember that blocking with just my forearms was super effective, so perhaps I see armor and shields as more effective than they are. Steel on steel should be close to flesh on flesh though eh.

When I damage a opponent wearing plate or mail armor with a sabre, what is happening in terms of real life physics? Am I striking with such force and precision that I actually cut through the armor? Am I applying an improvised bludgeoning effect through the force of my blow? I just think it's funny my offensive sabre fighter can do respectable damage to mailed opponents, due to the raw damage they put out. I guess with high might, skill and a high quality weapon, I'm possibly cutting though plate??

The biggest glaring issue with combat in this game is how hard CC interacts with defenses. The fact that even grazes result in hard CC, just for a lesser duration, makes hard CC by far the best option in combat - for players and enemies. I am still going to win a fight easily if spells like confusion or Gaze of the Adragon graze. "Oh no the enemy is totally screwed for 9 seconds instead of 18, I still win." This problem is further exacerbated by the lack of immunities in the game. Unless you are a main character paladin with a very strong Faith and Conviction, you cannot rely on CC spells to miss you with much regularity, the window for misses is just way too small. This creates a situation where the only real strategy is to CC the enemy spellcasters first (mental binding is good for this - which is why ciphers are so damn good). Again, even if it just grazes their spell doesn't go off and they become an easy kill. If we aren't going to have even temporary immunities in this game then defenses need to be much better at stopping hard CC. Grazes should not just result in a lesser duration, they should result in a lesser effect. This would be easy to do with already existing game mechanics. For example: charm, dominate, and confusion effects that graze should result in a daze. Paralyze and petrify that graze could weaken you instead. It makes sense and balances combat, what more could a person want? Currently when a physical attack grazes it does barely anything. When a hard CC grazes you are still screwed.