Sheathing weapons

[BeaRock]

It would be nice to see that every character is sheathing his/her weapons, it's a trifle but very realistic reaction. It's not realistic when characters that aren't in combat have their weapons unsheathed. It's not natural when they talk to someone or something. They should pull out thier weapons only in combat. That would be awesome.

[rjshae]

That's one thing that DA:O got right: unsheathing weapons at the start of combat then sheathing them when it was over.

[LadyCrimson]

I definitely agree with this. I like games where characters have a combat-stance and once a brief time has passed after combat is over, they go back to a relaxed/non-weapon stance...or something. It definitely has always felt a bit weird when a game has you walking up to people to have a convo while still pointing a sword/gun/laser/bow/whatever in their face.

[Lephys]

Zomg, yes! It becomes ESPECIALLY confusing when SOMETIMES your character can actually be (as far as the game code is concerned) threatening people, and other times you're not, but you have absolutely no visual cue, as your characters always look like they're about to attack.

 

Some town guard's all like "Hey, you look like you could cause trouble around here!", and you have to unequip your weapons just to get him to calm down, if that even works.

 

Besides... Not only is it immersive, but it also provides a nice bit of layering to the hostility/tension level of a given situation.

 

Stage 1: Calm, weapons sheathed.

Stage 2: Wary/aggravated -- Hands on hilts.

Stage 3: Expecting impending conflict/furious -- Weapons drawn

Stage 4: Considers conflict initiated -- Weapons at the ready.

 

Stage 3 and 4 are VERY close, but would be different in that 3 wouldn't necessarily stop a dialogue situation and begin conflict.

 

But, this would be a nice touch on things. Some people you bump into might lay their hands on their weapon hilts/grips, and some might outright draw their weapons. You could get a visual idea of how tense/hostile they are from things like this. If someone removes their hand from their sheathed weapon, completely, then you can almost bet they're pretty calm and trusting at that point.

[Nonek]

In Divine Divinity they had a nice couple of scabbards on the hip, one for straight swords and the other for curved. Also you'd be asked to sheathe your weapon if talking to somebody, which seems sensible. Small axes and maces were carried on a belt loop, while the bigger weapons were carried on the back. Thought that was an eminently sensible way to go about it, but Lephys' suggestion is also very clever.

 

I would argue however that when entering a dungeon I want my weapons out, shield raised, wizards grimoire hefted and all eyes peeled.

Edited May 17, 2013 by Nonek

[Lephys]

I would argue however that when entering a dungeon I want my weapons out, shield raised, wizards grimoire hefted and all eyes peeled.

Oh, definitely. I didn't know how to label Stage 4. Basically, if you were in dialogue directly with someone who now either became hostile with you, or with whom YOU became hostile, you'd already be "in" conflict. Essentially, your weapons are "at-the-ready," and/or are physically being "brandished" (maybe not literally brandished, but maybe) at the person, as you are either about to attack them in a moment, or are simply awaiting the attack of theirs that you expect to come as soon as they can make it, to parry and/or counter, etc. If it were a turn-based game, combat would begin at this point.

 

Whereas, when you're entering, you're in the same state, only you don't have an immediate target. You know things are hostile to you, and will attack as soon as they can. The only difference is that you weren't just in dialogue with them, then transitioned into combat, and they are currently nowhere in sight, as they have not yet been encountered.

 

I just think there's enough of a potential difference between feeling the need to actually draw your weapon simply to hold it (so you won't need to spend the time drawing your weapon when the poop hits the fan) and holding your weapon at-the-ready.

 

The best way I can illustrate this is with a bow: You may have the bow drawn and even nock an arrow, but you may have that nocked arrow pointing at the ground while speaking to someone, indicating that you're prepared for hostility, but don't intend it to be toward or stem from them. OR, you could have that bow upright and aimed at them. Both are states of "weapons drawn," but each is different from the other.

 

I was merely worried that if the game says "Wait, your weapons are drawn? THAT'S A HOSTILE GESTURE!," things would get a bit silly in situations in which it would make a lot of sense to go ahead and draw your weapons, yet you would in no way be directly threatening nearby people with them. Of course, who's to say you might not NEED to threaten nearby people with them? You're holed up in a tavern, windows boarded up, against some orc attack on a town. Then, you find out someone inside the tavern is in cahoots with the orcish invaders. Well, now you need to go from "My weapons are prepared for those orcs outside, but I have no qualms with anyone in here" to "I now have qualms with someone in here."

 

It's a matter of helping the player know exactly what it is his characters are conveying, in regard to their interaction with their weapons, to nearby characters.

[Lysen]

Judging by the video they released, they aren't going to implement that. And I think it's fine. Sheathing weapons is a nice feature to have, but for an isometric game, this is not that important.

[BeaRock]

Judging by the video they released, they aren't going to implement that. And I think it's fine. Sheathing weapons is a nice feature to have, but for an isometric game, this is not that important.

why not? they can resolve it like it's in Dragon Age series, auto sheathing/unsheathing or unsheathing when we attack

[Lysen]

I am not against it, I am just saying that this isn't very important. And DA isn't a very good example - it doesn't have proper sheathing. Even Skyrim did a better job.

[Lephys]

Judging by the video they released, they aren't going to implement that. And I think it's fine. Sheathing weapons is a nice feature to have, but for an isometric game, this is not that important.

To be honest, I'm not sure it's really possible to make such an objective assessment from a first-peek video, in which the extent of the character design we see is merely a few characters in some arbitrary gear walking for a few seconds, then standing around while a little pixie lights them dynamically.

[motorizer]

That's one thing that DA:O got right: unsheathing weapons at the start of combat then sheathing them when it was over.

I think it's one thing that DA:O got wrong, having weapons magically float on your back

 

Skyrim did it better, with proper scabbards on your hip, as did mount and blade, actually M&B did it best, since your bow didn't disappear just because you pulled out your sword (You can mod this into skyrim by changing one line in the .ini, makes me wonder why they didn't include it in the end, they must have been intending it)

 

though both these games still had two handed swords stick to your back

Edited May 18, 2013 by motorizer

[Fearabbit]

I think we need to differentiate between the following situations:

 

1) There is no threat and you don't want to pose a threat. Weapon sheathed.

2) You want to intimidate someone in dialogue - you put your hand on the hilt, you play with your weapon, you place your dagger at the person's neck or you shoot an arrow at a bird in a tree behind the person you're talking to. Whatever works. (Also depends on whether you're angry or relaxed.)

3) You actually want to kill the person you're talking to. You're still talking, however. You have your weapon ready and aimed.

4) You are talking to someone and there is a threat nearby, but it's not that person, and that person knows that you have your weapon drawn because of that other threat.

 

Now, which of these situations require animations? Realistically we want to make it as simple as possible, so I'd say scrap the "at the ready" animation - the only real difference it makes is for bows, as Lephys said. Sheathed and drawn are important animations that should be there.

And what about situation 2? You want to intimidate someone or show that you're getting angry... there are dozens of ways to do that. It all depends on what kind of character you are playing. A rogue wouldn't place his hand on the hilt, he'd instantly draw a dagger and (depending on how much he's in control) get close and put it on the person's neck, or idly play with it et cetera.

 

And this is where I think we don't need that many additional animations. We just need a good dialogue system that describes what we're doing in an imaginative way. Same goes for NPCs - we don't actually need a generic system that has them place their hand on their sword's hilt when their "disposition" stat reaches 50%. We need well-written dialogue where, when you say something offending, the NPC doesn't merely reply "You should be careful what you say". The text should read: "The NPC glares at you. You can see his hand slowly reaching for the sword at his belt. With a hiss, he says 'You should be careful what you say.'"

 

For us, the main character, it would be cool to have an interesting description of what we're about to do instead of the typical [intimidate] prefix. Generic ones like [You glare at him], and more specific ones that depend on what weapon you're using - [You play with your dagger], [You casually let sparks fly from your fingertips], [You smash your hammer on the ground in front of him] and so on.

The point is: I don't need animations for these, a dialogue system is more flexible.

[Lephys]

^ Agreed, Fearabbit. I didn't mean that we need literally a UI toggle for 4 different states of aggression/weapon interaction. I basically just meant that, if I have a toggle button for "sheath/unsheathe," I don't want the game to say "Well, if you want to threaten people, then obviously you'll just unsheathe your weapons."

 

I don't want to be in that boarded-up tavern, with orcs outside attacking the village, and unsheathe my weapons, only for the game to say "Ahh, CLEARLY you are threatening the people in the room! They shall react as if you just shouted 'TIME TO DIE, FOOLS!'"

 

I want to see dialogues in which the situation calls for our characters to have arrows nocked and weapons ready, but not for the purposes of threatening the person(s) they're speaking to. And I want the ability to do things like unsheathe my weapons in combat, or place my hand upon my weapon grip, without the game saying "YOU OBVIOUSLY INTEND TO KILL PEOPLE RIGHT NOW and can't POSSIBLY be simply being cautious!".

 

That isn't to say that there can't be some super edgy person who freaks out when you, as they see it, "go for your weapons." I just don't want a limited gameplay mechanic to go making decisions for me that I didn't know I was making.

[Sensuki]

How do you sheath a Pike btw?

 

I think characters will always have their main weapon out tbh. From the gameplay video it seems equipped weapon out, unequipped weapon on the back (perhaps at the hip for small weapons who knows).

[AGX-17]

I don't see how this is an issue. What few cRPGs have been made in the last half decade or so have, in my memory, all had characters sheathe their weapons out of combat. This isn't 1998, after all.

 

Zomg, yes! It becomes ESPECIALLY confusing when SOMETIMES your character can actually be (as far as the game code is concerned) threatening people, and other times you're not, but you have absolutely no visual cue, as your characters always look like they're about to attack.

 

Some town guard's all like "Hey, you look like you could cause trouble around here!", and you have to unequip your weapons just to get him to calm down, if that even works.

 

Besides... Not only is it immersive, but it also provides a nice bit of layering to the hostility/tension level of a given situation.

 

Stage 1: Calm, weapons sheathed.

Stage 2: Wary/aggravated -- Hands on hilts.

Stage 3: Expecting impending conflict/furious -- Weapons drawn

Stage 4: Considers conflict initiated -- Weapons at the ready.

 

Stage 3 and 4 are VERY close, but would be different in that 3 wouldn't necessarily stop a dialogue situation and begin conflict.

 

But, this would be a nice touch on things. Some people you bump into might lay their hands on their weapon hilts/grips, and some might outright draw their weapons. You could get a visual idea of how tense/hostile they are from things like this. If someone removes their hand from their sheathed weapon, completely, then you can almost bet they're pretty calm and trusting at that point.

I think adding various states of weapon drawn-ness and linking them to character interaction is taking things a bit too far. Details are nice, but details are also a bog.

Edited May 22, 2013 by AGX-17

[Lephys]

I think adding various states of weapon drawn-ness and linking them to character interaction is taking things a bit too far. Details are nice, but details are also a bog.

 

 

My point with the various distinctions was that, if the game's going to account for some form of "this is what you do if you want to voluntarily threaten people," I'd rather it be more accurate than simply "OMG, you drew weapons! The people you're about to help fight off an invasion now assume that you suddenly want to kill them! If you just wanted to help with the invasion, then you OBVIOUSLY should've left all your weapons sheathed until 'combat started,' THEN unsheathed them at a disadvantage to the enemy."

 

Like you said: This isn't 1998. If they're not going to handle things of that nature at all, really, via player choices and character actions (such as drawing your weapons during a dialogue as opposed to not), then obviously they don't need to pay attention to the finer distinctions of weapon interactions. I'm hardly demanding a 4-tiered system be in the game no matter what.

[rjshae]

 

That's one thing that DA:O got right: unsheathing weapons at the start of combat then sheathing them when it was over.

I think it's one thing that DA:O got wrong, having weapons magically float on your back

 

My statement was with regard to the action; not the graphical implementation. That was clearly the focus of the discussion. But I suppose you have some appendages to scratch, so have at it.

Edited May 22, 2013 by rjshae

[Azmodiuz]

sheathing weapons like in divinity: original sin. Just hit tab and they pull them out, but only the characters selected. This was awesome.

 

I would love it if it had the slighest mechanic to it to, like maybe your intimidating or something with it out, but also less social....but there does not seem to be any mechanic in the game that I am aware of that really uses some social reputation or something to interact with characters/npc's, if there is, its invisible and not understood or seen in beta beta by me so far.

[Quadrone]

sheathing weapons like in divinity: original sin. Just hit tab and they pull them out, but only the characters selected. This was awesome.

 

I would love it if it had the slighest mechanic to it to, like maybe your intimidating or something with it out, but also less social....but there does not seem to be any mechanic in the game that I am aware of that really uses some social reputation or something to interact with characters/npc's, if there is, its invisible and not understood or seen in beta beta by me so far.

 

Why do you desecrate the dead like this?