Jump to content

Welcome to Obsidian Forum Community
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!
Photo

Two weapon style (dual wield)

weapon dual wield rouge fighter

  • Please log in to reply
160 replies to this topic

Poll: dual weapon options you prefer? (147 member(s) have cast votes)

what kind of dual weapon/two weapon fighting style you prefer in game?

  1. off hand weapons should be smaller in size (long sword-dagger style) (41 votes [27.89%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 27.89%

  2. off hand weapons can be same size (long sword-long sword style) (83 votes [56.46%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 56.46%

  3. doesn't matter/don't care (23 votes [15.65%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 15.65%

Should off hand weapon has to be same type of weapon?

  1. yes (sword-sword or axe-axe etc.) (6 votes [4.08%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 4.08%

  2. no (sword-axe ; axe-dagger ; staff-dagger ; sword-flail etc.) (118 votes [80.27%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 80.27%

  3. doesn't matter/don't care (23 votes [15.65%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 15.65%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#41
Vargr

Vargr

    Cursed and Slightly Mad Berserker of The Obsidian Order

  • Members
  • 49 posts
  • Pillars of Eternity Silver Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer
  • Deadfire Silver Backer
  • Fig Backer
  • Black Isle Bastard!
Oooh, this old thing! It always shows up whenever a new game involving swords is being developed, doesn't it?


I love the option of dual wielding. I hate when dual wielding is restricted to dual daggers (a la Dragon Age 2).

As well as hate when in order to dual wield, you have to invest loads of points in dexterity or the equivalent ability score.
Thus creating a "duelist" kind of character. Meaning he's very precise and deliberate.
Usually when I play a character which dual wields, I typically use a sword+axe combo. I don't imagine the character as a duelist who
slowly wears his opponent down with quick, light strikes, but rather puts weight behind the swings. He swings his broadsword with the
intention of shattering the chainmail of his opponent and cut deep into his abdomen.
He swings his axe towards his opponent's head with the pure intent of cleaving the helmet and sinking the axe-head down to his
enemy's teeth! A ferocious, brutal combat style. Not friggin dancing around with a rapier and dagger!
/end rant

I also hate when it is poorly implemented.

I would like to see a system where rather than doing more damage faster, it instead offers tactical flexibility.
If you can gain advanced combat moves based on what weapon is being used, this could be very nice indeed.
Especially if, like previously said, different weapon types would be effective against different types of armor.

For instance, an axe might give you a "hooking" kind of special move, which lets you hook shields and maybe weapons and pull them aside,
leaving your opponent open and extremely vulnerable to attacks for a very brief moment.

A sword might give you a special attack which lets you swing three times very swiftly.
Or (depending on sword type) a powerful thrust ability which ignores all armor except Plate.

Give a warrior a sword and axe combo against a sword-and-board opponent, and combine these two abilites.


Of course, just an example off the top of my head about roughly what I'd like to see. Lots of balancing and stuff to be done for it to work right.

Dual wielding is such a difficult thing to get right in a game. Especially when ALL styles should be balanced and equally useful.

The following is... not really ideal, cause the idea of a weapon doing less damage because of fighting style is stupid. But anyway, here's how
I see it balanced.... I think:

1h weapon + shield
Low Attack
High Defense
Average Flexibility

2h weapon
High Attack
Average Defense
Low Flexibility

1h weapon + 1h weapon
Average Attack
Low Defense
High Flexibility



Bah!


In short! I want it, but I want it balanced!

Edited by Vargr, 15 December 2012 - 01:20 PM.


#42
Lephys

Lephys

    Punsmith of the Obsidian Order

  • Members
  • 7245 posts
  • Location:The Punforge
  • Pillars of Eternity Silver Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer

What [video] games fabricated is the balance issue.

Dual wielding doesn't help when someone in heavy plate armor and a shield simply wades into you.
It doesn't do "more damage", or even comparable damage, to a brute cracking your skull with a two-handed hammer.

That was part of my 'silly hat' remark.


I wasn't directing my "This is why I'm against removing it completely" remark at anyone, in particular. I was just trying to emphasize the fact that the only good point that's been brought up against dual-wielding is that video games tend to do it badly, which suggests that it could be done better. Obviously developers have had a tendency to just stick with the super-simplistic "you get more attack/damage, but less defense/armor" model. I don't think it's been that they keep trying their hardest to add depth to the system, and it's just ultra difficult or something.

Dual-weapon fighting allows you to do different things than single-weapon fighting. If anything, you're going to do less damage (in general), really, than with a weapon wielded with 2 hands, or with a single weapon. With two weapons, you'd have to worry about balance more, as an attack with the other hand has to be feasible. So, you can't go around swinging one arm as hard as you can. Also, using Junta's scenario of the double-daggers in a concealed scenario, if you're discovered and have to fight your way out of something with 2 daggers (and you know what you're doing with 2 weapons), you can parry Foe A's weapon with your left hand in such a way as to follow up by striking Foe B with your right hand.

Another simple example that a friend of mine actually showed me with historically accurate viking weapons (he's a history buff and LOVES the vikings) is, if you're fighting with a sword and a handaxe, you can actually use the bottom of the axe blade as a hook to grab the top of someone's shield and pull it down, allowing your sword to bypass their shield defense.

So, it's stuff like that. I think it should be a different method of fighting (just like using a bow is different, rather than simply more damaging, than using a melee weapon). And I really like Junta's example of it being more effective against certain foes (like humans being susceptible to feign moves) and being less effective against others (like a bear).

I am wholeheartedly against the usage of dual-wielding sheerly for badass aesthetics and overly-simplified damage boosts. I just think that's reason to improve the implementation, rather than remove the mechanic.
  • general_azure, Adhin, PrimeJunta and 3 others like this

#43
PrimeJunta

PrimeJunta

    Arch-Mage

  • Members
  • 4900 posts
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer
  • Deadfire Silver Backer
  • Fig Backer
@Lephys: I like the way you're thinking. Those would be dead simple to model in a cRPG. Make it harder to flank a dual-wielder, and give your handaxe/sword combo a bonus against sword-n-board. Lots of possibilities.

#44
Lephys

Lephys

    Punsmith of the Obsidian Order

  • Members
  • 7245 posts
  • Location:The Punforge
  • Pillars of Eternity Silver Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer
Sorry Vargr. I didn't see your post before I finished mine, haha. Nailed it with the shield hooking, 8D. Sorry for technically copying you on some things, haha.

But yeah, regarding how you don't want a fencing champion as a dual-wieldist, there are ways to be very, very aggressive (even berzerker-like) with dual weapons, yet, you're still using them in a tactically different manner than you would a single weapon. It's the same thing as being very precise and organized in your usage of a 2-handed sword or axe as opposed to using your strength and the weapons weight to basically keep so much pressure on your enemy that you don't really set up for formal parries and maneuvers. The number of weapons you use and how much finesse your fighting style uses is not mutually exclusive.

Either way, it obviously doesn't equal just more DPS than before. You don't just run about double-karate-chopping at people with your two weapons. I'd LOVE to see P:E break from this with an awesome dual-wielding system.

Also, I'd love to see a shield do more than change armor numbers and block percentages. Obviously it's a much more defensive piece of equipment, but I think it should be treated merely as a different off-hand weapon, and should get as much utility in combat as anything else (albeit probably less actual mortal damage). But, that's kind of the point... it's the whole reason it's called "off-hand" (with the exception of maybe daggers, or small swords if you're just a ridiculously ambidexterous person); the off-hand weapon supports your main-hand weapon, in general (you could obviously flip those roles for brief periods in battle to confuse the enemy... intentionally parry with your sword, only to focus on a powerful shield bash, etc.). That would be very simple to implement. It would just require a little more effort and resources than the typical system.

#45
Tamerlane

Tamerlane

    (8) Warlock

  • Members
  • 1125 posts
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
I said earlier that I don't like dual-wielding as a simple "I attack twice as often" thing, but I didn't really elaborate on what I might be interested in.

I think it'd be neat if a dual-wielding character attacked attacked with only the primary weapon, but got a second attack with the off-hand if they missed or were blocked. Similarly, if your present target misses you or you parry their attack, you get an automatic counterattack with the off-hand weapon. Maybe there's a perk/feat to make it apply to any attacker. Maybe that's all perk territory. I dunno.

I guess that's more of a "finesse" thing and it might not mesh all that well with Vargr's "I'm strong enough to pick up two weapons and whale away at a mother****er" dual-wielder, and I hope that that's A Legitimate Thing, too. They've said that they want to give fighters more in the way of useable feats and "stances" than in the IE games so between those and stat requirements and the design of the weapons, I think they've got a lot of room to implement both a more interesting "finesse dual-wield" and a more smash-your-way-through dual-wielder.
  • ogrezilla likes this

#46
Tamerlane

Tamerlane

    (8) Warlock

  • Members
  • 1125 posts
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
Incidentally, the second-last option in those polls made me imagine a sword-flail which is pretty ****ing awesome.

#47
TMTVL

TMTVL

    (3) Conjurer

  • Members
  • 109 posts
  • PSN Portable ID:TMTVL
  • Pillars of Eternity Silver Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer
  • Deadfire Backer
  • Fig Backer
The only experience I have with dual-wielding IRL is kung-fu, so I don't think it's really in place in a WRPG. Still, my two cents are that you tend to be able to attack quite a bit faster, yet blocking becomes a bit more of a challenge. Also, we use either dual straight swords, or dual sabers, which are about an arm long. I believe in some Japanese koryu there's dual wielding, where they use two hand-and-half swords (the famous katana), yet I haven't really seen any of these styles, so I can't vouch for their effectivity. I'm also not really up to date on western fencing after the Roman Empire.

#48
Sacred_Path

Sacred_Path

    (9) Sorcerer

  • Members
  • 1328 posts
  • Location:Germany
  • Pillars of Eternity Silver Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer

Another simple example that a friend of mine actually showed me with historically accurate viking weapons (he's a history buff and LOVES the vikings) is, if you're fighting with a sword and a handaxe, you can actually use the bottom of the axe blade as a hook to grab the top of someone's shield and pull it down, allowing your sword to bypass their shield defense.


Theoretically possible, though something like that should require a strength check or similar mechanic. It would actually be an example of bad implementation and balancing state-of-mind to just say "axe in off-hand negates shield protection!".

It's also another example why dual-wielding is too specific in its uses to justify implementation in an FRPG. Two lightly armored human duelists? Yes. Against heavy armor+ big shield? No. Against animals/ huge monsters that don't have the intelligence or anatomy to call for subtle tactical differences? No. In tight formations in mass combat? No.

It's one of the gimmicks, like romances and monks, that won't ruin my game experience but I must question the reasons for implementing them.
  • Karkarov likes this

#49
Atreides

Atreides

    (11) Wizard

  • Members
  • 1743 posts
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer
  • Deadfire Backer
  • Fig Backer
I'd like to see different styles, dual-wield, sword/shield, double-handed greatsword, dual-handed longsword, pole-arms/spears etc. with their advantages and disadvantages within reason (swords replaceable with other weapons).

Defaulting to sword/shield combination because everything else is sub-optimal in the game feels restrictive. For example in BG, if people use a single-handed sword they would equip a huge shield in their off-hand because there's no reason not to.

#50
Karkarov

Karkarov

    Arch-Mage

  • Members
  • 3116 posts
  • Steam:Karkarov
  • PSN Portable ID:Karkarov
  • Xbox Gamertag:Karkarov
  • Pillars of Eternity Silver Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer
  • Deadfire Watcher
  • Fig Backer
  • Black Isle Bastard!
Dual wielding is okay as long as the off hand weapon doesn't double attacks and instead actually focuses more on buffing things like parry chance etc. One of the few people who developed a real world dual wielding style was Miyamoto Musashi which he called Niten Ichi Ryu. Point being his off hand weapon was always smaller and he typically only used it for parries or the tie down an opponents weapon so he could create a opening to attack with his katana.

Also I want to echo one part of what Sacred_Path said. Dual Wielding, while not a gimmick to me, is something that realistically is designed for duals and small scale personal engagements. In any form of large melee or against "monsters" like a dragon dual wielding really would not be viable realistically.

Edited by Karkarov, 16 December 2012 - 07:27 AM.


#51
Dream

Dream

    (6) Magician

  • Members
  • 607 posts
  • Pillars of Eternity Silver Backer

against "monsters" like a dragon dual wielding really would not be viable realistically.


Oh, really?

Been fighting dragons, have you?

#52
Wulfic

Wulfic

    (2) Evoker

  • Members
  • 57 posts
I dont know bout Karkarov but I fought a dragon. The easiest way to kill such is with a long spear or halberd and targeting the belly as it swoops down on ya. You need a shield also to protect urself from fire. The best way to kill a dragon though is with harpoons. You have to think a strategy how to catch such a beast. THe easiest way is to circle it as it is asleep. Then you just shoot from all sides and hold the lines allowing someone to strike his heart with a long spear. Dream If you want to kill a dragon just visit the lodge of the dragon hunters up in Canada they will show you some of the beasts.
  • Dream likes this

#53
Tamerlane

Tamerlane

    (8) Warlock

  • Members
  • 1125 posts
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer

I dont know bout Karkarov but I fought a dragon. The easiest way to kill such is with a long spear or halberd and targeting the belly as it swoops down on ya. You need a shield also to protect urself from fire. The best way to kill a dragon though is with harpoons. You have to think a strategy how to catch such a beast. THe easiest way is to circle it as it is asleep. Then you just shoot from all sides and hold the lines allowing someone to strike his heart with a long spear. Dream If you want to kill a dragon just visit the lodge of the dragon hunters up in Canada they will show you some of the beasts.

Ooh, I should show you some pictures of the frost wyrm my dad trapped last year in northern Saskatchewan. He was just trying to clean out some beavers from a slough near my parents' place, and bam! Mother****ing frost wyrm!

#54
Pipyui

Pipyui

    (4) Theurgist

  • Members
  • 371 posts
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer

Ooh, I should show you some pictures of the frost wyrm my dad trapped last year in northern Saskatchewan. He was just trying to clean out some beavers from a slough near my parents' place, and bam! Mother****ing frost wyrm!


Ugh, I hate those buggers. They're not good eating, but if you leave them alone they'll devour all game in the area. With such voracious appetites, why can't they ever inhabit someplace more urban, meat-populated, and out of my hair? Mother****ing frost wyrms!


I dont know bout Karkarov but I fought a dragon. The easiest way to kill such is with a long spear or halberd and targeting the belly as it swoops down on ya. You need a shield also to protect urself from fire. The best way to kill a dragon though is with harpoons. You have to think a strategy how to catch such a beast. THe easiest way is to circle it as it is asleep. Then you just shoot from all sides and hold the lines allowing someone to strike his heart with a long spear. Dream If you want to kill a dragon just visit the lodge of the dragon hunters up in Canada they will show you some of the beasts.


Better luck than I've had, most times I've gone hunting dragon, the only meat I'd scramble back with is half my party - medium well.

Edited by Pipyui, 16 December 2012 - 05:28 PM.

  • Lephys likes this

#55
Lephys

Lephys

    Punsmith of the Obsidian Order

  • Members
  • 7245 posts
  • Location:The Punforge
  • Pillars of Eternity Silver Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer

Theoretically possible, though something like that should require a strength check or similar mechanic. It would actually be an example of bad implementation and balancing state-of-mind to just say "axe in off-hand negates shield protection!".


Oh, definitely. The first/simplest thing that came to mind was an active skill. Whereas, if you had a short sword, you would have a different skill (or the very same type of Disarm or Defense Breach skill would provide a different effect, as a short sword would obviously not hook the top of a shield to forcibly lower it.)


It's also another example why dual-wielding is too specific in its uses to justify implementation in an FRPG. Two lightly armored human duelists? Yes. Against heavy armor+ big shield? No. Against animals/ huge monsters that don't have the intelligence or anatomy to call for subtle tactical differences? No. In tight formations in mass combat? No.


I get where you're coming from, but I hate to tell you... medieval armies didn't all line up for 1-on-1 duals or little squad-based skirmishes, and they trained accordingly. My history buff friend does a lot of re-enactment type fighting, and studying the way they did it. He was showing me how to use a 2-handed sword, and a sword-and-shield, and a sword and axe (even a short spear and an axe) to fight in the midst of a battle. Although, that's a whole different story all-together. I mean, once the line (between all your allies and all those foes) breaks, you pretty much just hope 3 foes within your vicinity don't all kill their engagers at the same time and turn toward you.

It's all still viable, in one way or another, though. It's just like different martial arts styles. One might involve almost nothing but kicking, and you may think "there are situations in which you'd want to just use your hands instead." But, you'd be surprised. These people don't just develop entire fighting techniques because they like using their feet, or because they like holding a weapon in each hand.

Also, I understand what you mean by different scenarios, like fighting trolls, or a bear, or even a dragon. But, I don't think ANY set of weaponry or fighting style doesn't lose effectiveness against a non-human or a dragon. I don't think it's so much lost effectiveness as it is a different bracket of effectiveness. I mean, you're fighting something that isn't capable of the exact same movements that you are, and it's using a much more feral strategy. Not to mention the strength difference.

But, just because you can't pull a bear's shield down or feign attacks to deflect its blade arm doesn't mean that dual weapons are inherently less effective against it. Also, I don't see how 2 short swords are any less effective versus heavy armor with a big shield than one short sword is (sort of part of the dragon/bear point, as well). I would think it wold be a lot easier to catch a fully-plated-out enemy in the armor joints with 2 daggers than it would be to do so with a greatsword, for example. Sure, the greatsword may do more damage directly against the armor and shield, as it swings with more force, but that's the tradeoff. Doesn't make the twin daggers any less viable.

I almost see the difference between dual weapons and a single weapon as equal to the difference between different weapon types (short spears/staves, daggers, mauls, flails, etc.)

#56
Tamerlane

Tamerlane

    (8) Warlock

  • Members
  • 1125 posts
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer

Ugh, I hate those buggers. They're not good eating, but if you leave them alone they'll devour all game in the area. With such voracious appetites, why can't they ever inhabit someplace more urban, meat-populated, and out of my hair? Mother****ing frost wyrms!

Oh sure, they taste like hell, but they've got historic merit, y'know? Only reason we explored half the country was because frost wyrm hides made such fashionable hats across the Atlantic for a couple centuries.

And it's not like they flood roads like beavers. Stupid rodents.
  • Pipyui likes this

#57
TheTeaMustFlow

TheTeaMustFlow

    (2) Evoker

  • Members
  • 94 posts
  • Location:United Kingdom
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer
First up, the use of dual wielding is `realistic` even in a purely western context: for example, the Florentine style using a broadsword and a main-gauche (I think that is the correct term) mostly for defence. I think this style actually fits PE given that it emerged in the late middle ages/renaissance period. Using two weapons is difficult, but far from impossible: I'd make it like that in game - you need to dedicate more feats/perks/ability points/whatever towards it to make it effective than more conventional close combat styles, but after that effort is put in it becomes very effective against those styles (as it is exotic and harder to predict) but remains vulnerable to longer-distance attacks like polearms or projectiles.

Secondly, while I would agree that more excessive styles of dual wielding, such as two longswords, are unrealistic, what's important is that they are not implausible. I can see someone use two longswords and not know that that's impossible - particularly when both magic and the Charles Atlas Superpower that hero-types tend to possess are bought into play. Willing Suspension of Disbelief is what matters, not realism: and when the fireballs are flying, the chappy doing a Miyamoto Musashi impression doesn't seem to present a problem.
  • Lephys likes this

#58
Nihatek

Nihatek

    Prodigy of the Obsidian Order

  • Members
  • 21 posts
  • Location:Brno, Czech rep.
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer
I got two points here:

First question - answer to this lies in the strength of character - its pretty hard to swing with two long swords - its even harder then to swing consistently with two-hand swords - so to fully use that there should be some requirements and also reductions (lower chance to hit if your strenght is on the edge of base)

Second question - example used there - staff-dagger is just too bad. But why limit - there are many useful combinations that brings various effect (eg. flail can just let you expose your opponent more), light trident + net - why not - you got another tactical element. (in turn base it will be great)

#59
ReyVagabond

ReyVagabond

    (3) Conjurer

  • Members
  • 161 posts
  • PSN Portable ID:ReyVagabond
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer
I still mantain my own expirience with DW its posible is not that hard and the limititations of weight and what ever you think its a limitations are removed by the fact that this is game, a fantastic tale in a world where souls are reborn time after time where our heroes may axceed the limitations of a human being.
I remember many times after some kendo training with some friends and my master to grab some toy swords light as paper when compared with real swords, and practice some free for all fun, my instructor and me usualy DW, and its was a blast the freedom to strike from anywhere to any place and the fact we didnt hurt each other (much).

Back into the game, Fighting shoud be deep and DW needs to be an option.
The implementations its all about how the combat is consived. for example. if the combat has weapon speed with a strengh check, it could lead to exceeding the weapon check could recibe a bonus to the weapon speed. etc.
A DW could be you sum of the weapons speeds and then divede it by 2 or 2/3 or any number that has a smart reation of how ofter you could attack with any of the two weapons any given time.

Now deeper in the Melee Fighting system they could add a Stamina fueled no cooldown activate abilyties where your next move has X property. and that skill bar could be something like GW2 skilbar where depending on What weapon you are using it changes.

Lets say you have depending on your equiped weapon 4 skills, for each weapon equiped or 8 for a 2h weapon with that in mind, a sword and shield could have 8 diferent active skills diferent from Sword and sword, etc.
and for Magical Enchantments, If a 1h weapons has 2, and Shild has 2, a 2h weapons should have 4.

now as Example how the the system could work.

Warrior 1 has Mace and shield, A weapon speed of 3 that means that he can create a oportunity to attack (even dragons and bears) every 3 secods.
So in standard fight just swinging the weapon he could atack every 3 secods and has 8 skills at his disposal, those 8 skills could be, powerblows, feints, hilt atacks, shield bashes, a total defence block, etc. standard stuff.
(for any one wandering, if the skills dont have cooldwon what stops me from spaming, anweser nothing exept that with no stamina you should be dead, its all part of my other post of a stamina centric game).

Berzerker 1 has an Axe and Sword, A weapon speed of (3+3)/2= 3, Every 3 secods he can create a oportunity to attack witch one of his two weapons. His active skills could be server leg to criple, axe hook to try to remove the shiled defence from the targer. relentles furry of blows, lowering the "weapon speed" and placing a penalny to the chace to hit. etc.

And so on and on with any weapon combination. like Trident and net, with special net skills like grab the leg for a knowdown, do a deep stab with the trident that can hit some one behind the first target. what ever feels natural.

what do you guys feel?

#60
PrimeJunta

PrimeJunta

    Arch-Mage

  • Members
  • 4900 posts
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer
  • Deadfire Silver Backer
  • Fig Backer
I feel that it would be a good deal of work to properly implement a dual-wielding system, but it could contribute greatly to the depth and tactical options in the game.

And I still don't like the simple "hit twice as often with penalties" mechanic that we usually end up with. I'd rather not see it in at all.

Put another way, if it's not worth doing well, it's not worth doing at all.
  • FlintlockJazz and Lephys like this





Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: weapon, dual, wield, rouge, fighter

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users