Dual Wielding, Styles and Specialization. What why?

[JohnnySideburns]

I did some testing on dual wielding, and it seems that without picking the talent for the 20% speed increase, you get a 20% speed increase compared to single handing. There are no penalties. So in POE everybody is automatically well suited for dual wielding, Single handing is just a loss on all levels. No talents really need to be picked to be effective with any weapon or any style, instead you just get a slight bonus on an already effective build. Same goes for weapon specialization -slight bonus. All classes start out being good with all weapons and all styles.

 

I just feel it takes a bit away from immersion that my guy is going to be equally good no matter how I equip him, its not like: This one is a sword guy and this one gets the axes. Now my adventurers will just pick up the best magic weapon all throughout the game. "oh this magic dagger will get a slightly better dps than my two-handed sword, I guess now I am dual wielding priest instead.

 

ps. sorry for rant.

 

pps. everybody starts out as jacks of all trades and masters of none, but specializations won't make them masters of anything either.

[wanderon]

So are you saying that dual weilders start off 20% faster than single handed without the talent and don't gain another 20% with the talent?

[Sensuki]

While I don't see the problem that dual wield is good (dual wield alone is an unrealistic thing), One handed style is terrible at the moment, yes.

 

1H is a fair bit slower than dual wield too.

Edited March 15, 2015 by Sensuki

[Diogenes]

I'd rather be automatically be decent with everything then improve than to be **** with everything until I put a talent point into the right skill, meaning I can't pick something thats more mechanically interesting than more accuracy.

[Odd Hermit]

One handed definitely needs serious buffing. It's my favorite style aesthetically but it just isn't good at anything right now, you don't deal better damage or take less, and it offers no unique utilities.

 

Having a free hand in combat should come with more substantial and interesting benefits. 

 

However, dual wielding w/out vulnerable attack and two weapon style will still do substantially less damage against most targets than un-talented for it, and jack-of-all trades builds aren't much good right now. You want to focus characters on achieving their best possible damage output, buff and debuff duration and AoE. Then you just have a few more durable ones and/or maybe one super-tanky character.

Edited March 15, 2015 by Odd Hermit

[Luckmann]

I'd love it if someone would crunch the numbers on what'd happen if the +10 Accuracy Bonus for dueling was upped to +20, and the bonus for the "One-Handed Weapon Style" Talent was doubled.

 

Beyond that, I'd like to either see a Hit-to-Graze modifier on incoming attacks, or a reduction to recovery time for every attack the duelist deflects, granted by the "One-Handed Weapon Style" Talent.

[JohnnySideburns]

So are you saying that dual weilders start off 20% faster than single handed without the talent and don't gain another 20% with the talent?

Not quite, you start out with an aprox. 20% faster attack rate and will get around 15% on top of that. I don't know excactly how their math is, but that seems to be the case

[Sensuki]

Dual wielding swords with no armor by default is one second per swing

Using a sword 1H with no armor is 3 seconds per swing

[Shevek]

I am going to make a one handed style character purely for aesthetics. I think priority one for me with unity will be making a mod to make the style decent (I am thinking some dr bypass or some such). This takes me back to the IE games. One of the first mods I made for myself in BG2 was trying to give myself more bonuses for using one handed style.

[crackwise]

In real life, using a one-handed weapon and having a free hand has its own advantages.  With your off-hand you can catch the opponent's spear, pole shaft or grapple your opponent etc. 

 

I think they should give 1H weapon style a bonus to interrupt to reflect the above mentioned possibilities.

[Odd Hermit]

In real life, using a one-handed weapon and having a free hand has its own advantages.  With your off-hand you can catch the opponent's spear, pole shaft or grapple your opponent etc. 

 

I think they should give 1H weapon style a bonus to interrupt to reflect the above mentioned possibilities.

 

[Shevek]

Bonus to interupt would still make it crappier than dual wield at interupting unless the bonus is massive. Im going to go with dr bypass.

[crackwise]

Bonus to interupt would still make it crappier than dual wield at interupting unless the bonus is massive. Im going to go with dr bypass.

 

What is the mentality with DR bypass? You use your off-hand for half-swording, which makes it stiffer and easier to guide through openings and joints in the armor etc.? This is a technique especially done with long-swords (two-handed).

[Shevek]

Exactly. That offhand can be used on occaision to help you push through. Also, the whole Errol Flynn, Inigo Montoya fencing aesthetic. Meaning you are not flailing your weapon as wildly. You have more controlled swings and have more skill at finding gaps in armor, etc.

[gkathellar]

Exactly. That offhand can be used on occaision to help you push through. Also, the whole Errol Flynn, Inigo Montoya fencing aesthetic. Meaning you are not flailing your weapon as wildly. You have more controlled swings and have more skill at finding gaps in armor, etc.

 

If you're looking to real life for inspiration, you may have some difficulty. Using a weapon with two hands is generally how you get the most control out of it - you simply have better leverage, and can put more of your body behind the blow. In truth, a fighter using a single weapon tends to shift back and forth between one-handed and two-handed grips as the situation demands. Only certain polearms and heavy clubs actually demand two-handed use, and only weapons with short hilts actually demand one-handed use. With many battlefield weapons, one-handed and two-handed use really don't constitute the pair of distinct styles that RPG players often imagine. If you need to narrow your body's profile with a one-handed grip, you do that. If you need to put your whole body behind a thrust, you do that. Etc.

 

Putting that aside, the greatest advantage of a one-handed grip is probably balance, because it serves as a counterweight and control mechanism for the body in general. The hand can also grab, punch, push, and even parry weapons if you know what you're doing (disclaimer: this hurts and you can break your hand doing it). Such variety is mechanically difficult to represent, especially without treading on the toes of the other combat styles (TWF is fast, two-handed hits hard, shield has good defense). The only thing that occurs to me is giving it a bit of everything - a smaller speed boost, a smaller damage boost, and a smaller defense boost - to represent single-weapon as the "jack-of-all-trades" style.

[Shevek]

Naw, I think I will go with DR bypass. When I listed Inigo Montoya and Errol Flynn, you should have noticed that I wasnt looking to real life as inspiration.

[Diogenes]

Realism is less important than one handed style just needing something to make it worthwhile.

[Sock]

What if 1H style was some kind of random proc style?

 

Say, on Hit: 15% chance to apply one of: hobbled/dazed/frightened and on Crit: 5% chance to apply one of: crippled/stunned/terrified.

 

With it's natural bonus to accuracy, you'd hit frequently, and higher accuracy would turn more hits into crits. Orlan's would crit very frequently. 

 

I was always a fan of wild mages and random chance. We already have a weapon style that boosts damage, one that boosts speed, and one that boosts defense. What else is there to boost that would make 1H style significantly different from the others, giving it a niche function within a party? Outlandish ideas are the way to go. Introduce something different in how we utilize the soul when fighting.

[gkathellar]

Realism is less important than one handed style just needing something to make it worthwhile.

 

Of course.

 

(On further consideration, I do kind of like the idea I had of giving it reduced versions of the bonuses from the others styles, though. Might make it too strong, but ... eh.)

[Luckmann]

As you people are musing, let's not forget that there's two things that needs to be fixed, through two separate mechanics.

There's the innate bonus to fighting One-Handed (currently +10 Accuracy).

And then there's the One-Handed Weapon Fighting Talent (Currently +20 Graze-to-Hit, if memory serves).

 

I'm of the opinion that innate changes such as to just wielding a weapon should be very simple, such as adding a flat Penetration bonus, increasing the Accuracy bonus (my proposal is still +20 Accuracy), extra attack speed, reduced recovery speed, etc. That is, modifiers that are very plain and easy to grasp and understand, without significant changes to the play style.

Now the Talent, however, is another matter entirely. Talents should primarily, imho, influence how something plays, or basically require you to read the Talent to know what changes it does to your character. So this could be anything from turning Grazes into Hits, turning incoming Hits into Grazes (something I'd like to see added), or adding something like a chance to XYZ when you Crit.

 

So suggestions for specific changes should probably specify exactly which part of the duelist playstyle should be amended and how.

[Rostere]

Dual wielding is not a realistic way of fighting, unless your second weapon is a short dagger/sword. Try holding a heavy weapon and you will understand. It should be reserved for experts of exotic fighting styles. The thought that there is no penalty for untrained characters dual wielding is crazy.

[gkathellar]

Oh, paired long weapons were definitely used, though almost always in a civilian context. Case of rapiers/Florentine swordsmanship was quite popular for a time, and I've heard historical fencers claim that it provides unparalleled control. The Chinese, south-Asian and southeast-Asian martial arts have a fairly extensive history of it as well. Of course, you'd never have done it on the battlefield, but in a duel? Yeah, it happened.

 

Obviously it requires some measure of skill to do effectively, but ... a lot of characters aren't going to get any real mileage out of fighting with two weapons, which I feel covers the matter adequately.

 

Besides, penalizing people for playing the way they want is totally, like, so AD&D, guhrlfriend. Like, get with the times, uhkay?

[Rostere]

Oh, paired long weapons were definitely used, though almost always in a civilian context. Case of rapiers/Florentine swordsmanship was quite popular for a time, and I've heard historical fencers claim that it provides unparalleled control.

 

Like you say, a style used in dueling (when you have pre-arranged rules). Not in a valetudinarian military context, nor in group battles.

 

The Chinese, south-Asian and southeast-Asian martial arts have a fairly extensive history of it as well. Of course, you'd never have done it on the battlefield, but in a duel? Yeah, it happened.

 

Goes under "experts of exotic fighting styles". If you train enough, I'm sure you can learn how to kill a man with chopsticks in 3 seconds.

 

Obviously it requires some measure of skill to do effectively, but ... a lot of characters aren't going to get any real mileage out of fighting with two weapons, which I feel covers the matter adequately.

 

Besides, penalizing people for playing the way they want is totally, like, so AD&D, guhrlfriend. Like, get with the times, uhkay?

 

Penalizing people for stupid choices is 50% of what a game is all about (the other half is rewards).

 

Sadly this game does not have a critical miss system similar to Arcanum, but if it had, giving two flails to an untrained character would drastically increase their chance of dropping their pants, accidentally blinding themselves, and throwing their weapon in a random direction. Fighting effectively with two weapons normally designed for one-hand or two-hand use, if you are not ambidextrous, is extremely hard and should be reflected as such.

Edited March 16, 2015 by Rostere

[gkathellar]

 

Oh, paired long weapons were definitely used, though almost always in a civilian context. Case of rapiers/Florentine swordsmanship was quite popular for a time, and I've heard historical fencers claim that it provides unparalleled control.

 

Like you say, a style used in dueling (when you have pre-arranged rules). Not in a valetudinarian military context, nor in group battles.

 

Skirmishing =/= pitched warfare. There is a great deal of space in between duels and formation fighting alongside hundreds or thousands of others.

 

The Chinese, south-Asian and southeast-Asian martial arts have a fairly extensive history of it as well. Of course, you'd never have done it on the battlefield, but in a duel? Yeah, it happened.

 

Goes under "experts of exotic fighting styles". If you train enough, I'm sure you can learn how to kill a man with chopsticks in 3 seconds.

 

I don't suppose you'd care to qualify what makes Asian martial arts more "exotic" than European martial arts, would you?

 

(Also, note: I didn't say "experts." In Filipino martial arts, you might well learn to fight with a pair of batons before you learn to fight unarmed.)

 

Edit: On considering that you don't see critical miss rules as an abomination, I'm going to assume we're incapable of coming to agreement and respectfully bow out of this.

Edited March 16, 2015 by gkathellar

[crackwise]

I think characters who are specialized in two weapon fighting should acquire the ability to engage (lock down) +1 opponents. It makes perfect sense that another sword in your offhand helps you keep multiple opponents at bay.

 

Those who are not specialised in 2W fighting, they only have the regular benefits and no engagement bonus.

Edited March 16, 2015 by crackwise