Half-swording is usualy used with two-handed swords,  to deliver PIERCING damage to overcome the armor. (maby long swords but its questionable, one handed sword is not long enough)

The technique requires two hands and one sword.

 

In the current game you could use half-swording dual-wielding. However non playable race has four arms to make it properly.

 

 

Would you fix half-swording:

- Enable this modal for two-handers (great sword, estock)

- dmg done make ALWAYS piercing

- in case of sword&board or dualwield make "auto-rearm" to single weapon, it takes some time of course, then apply modal technique

- replace text "Fight in close quarter style, using your blade to penetrate ... " with "Fight in close quarter style, using your point of our sword to penetrate ... "

 

Maby the weapon skill proficiency might be used more times for one weapon to get more modals with that particular weapon. Perhaps taking more modals for one weapon is reserved for Fighter class exclusively. That would give them enough "spells" or "active skills" without exploiting areas of whirlwind skills and other nonsense.

Edited April 5, 20187 yr by gGeorg

Minor correction: longsword refers* to what in D&D is called a bastard sword (what D&D calls a longsword is actually an arming sword or knightly sword). Moreover these were almost always used two handed, though they could be wielded one handed. The swords in the picture you show are longswords. I mention this because longswords were the quintessential half swording weapon.

 

Anyway, totally agree with your point. The idea of half swording whilst dual wielding is ridiculous. That said, half the modals are ridiculous (the sabres annoys me most).

 

Personally I'd suggest giving half swording to great swords instead (they cover both longswords and larger two-handed swords which would fit the style better). Of course your often wield an estimate in a half swording fashion too (they are basically the evolution of this style, completely abandoning cutting to be better at it).

 

*These are all modern terms. Typically they would have been referred to as "sword" in their own era.

Well, agree that terms long sword, broad sword, bastard sword were forged by those who didnt use them :D

It always depends the size of a user and his strength to squeeze the size to current fantasy games terminology.

 

Just make agree that for half-swording you need:

- one sword

- two empty hands

- deliver piercing damage

- lenght of a blade must be at least 30cm longer than wide of shoulders of the user

 

///

Orlan should not be allowed  to use of great size weapons like great sword/estock/halberd/pike. Simply because Orlans are too short and light weight. On the other side they could do half swording with a regular one handed sword or sabre.

 

////

Sabre and hatchet stats are made by someone from other univers.

Its probably to late to change weapon fight dmg model to something believable. Personaly I would like to see crushing weapons ( like mace) always deliver a dmg on hit. a bit. So a knight in the full armor could be beaten by a bunch of angry mob with sticks. Contrary piercing weapons, if not pierce then no dmg at all.

Edited April 5, 20187 yr by gGeorg

So apart for complete lack of real life practicality, what is the problem gameplay/balance wise?

 

Renaming half-swording to something else seems like the best way of solving the conflict. Adding additional requirements for modal to work, or switching modals around doesnt seem like the best approach.

 

The discussion here seems to revolve around mechanics representing real life use of weaponary, which doesn’t seem relevant or meaningful in anyway. There are many things which don’t make any sense (healing injuries by sleeping? Food needed to sleep? You can move your ship freely without consideration for wind paths? Guns get reloaded very quickly, no friendly fire etc. Etc.)

I vote for "half double-sword"!

So apart for complete lack of real life practicality, what is the problem gameplay/balance wise?

 

Renaming half-swording to something else seems like the best way of solving the conflict. Adding additional requirements for modal to work, or switching modals around doesnt seem like the best approach.

 

The discussion here seems to revolve around mechanics representing real life use of weaponary, which doesn’t seem relevant or meaningful in anyway. There are many things which don’t make any sense (healing injuries by sleeping? Food needed to sleep? You can move your ship freely without consideration for wind paths? Guns get reloaded very quickly, no friendly fire etc. Etc.)

complete lack of real life practicality but balanced is ok for you, perhaps. But not for me. Game rule-set of nonsense drives me mad. Sabres stats, hatchet stats, ... . Maby balanced but, ... just wrong.

 

Yes, renaming "Half-swording" to a "Brute swing" would solve the problem.

Yes, renaming Sabre to "The Best weapon" and change weapon model to Teddy bear would solve a problem.

 

However, I thing that designer chose "Half-swording" name because they wanted taste of real life but programmer missed implementation.  So, if it is this case then my post is a bug report.

 

"There are many things which don’t make any sense." Some of these you named, are game mechanic simplification of real life. Some are unfortunate accidents, so the biggest bugs should be crushed first.

Edited April 6, 20187 yr by gGeorg

My intention wasn’t to criticise your complaint but rather redirect conversation into a more practical direction.

 

I think we can agree that adding additional requirement for a modal wouldn’t mesh with the current system. It also has been stated that some modals were made up on basis of gameplay needs, rather than faithfulness to real life.

 

On a more philosophical level, life is a badly designed game, and I would be careful with criticising game design based on its real life counterparts. A system faithfully representing a real life combat wouldnt be very entertaining.

 

However, flavour naming can be misleading or annoying, therefore changing the irrelevant naming seems like the easiest solution, rather than redesigning the abstract combat system. Apologies on my part, but “in real life” arguments are my pet peeve whenever it’s games or movies or whatever else.

 

Op I don't think your premise is universally accepted. Many believe that half swording was also used to deliver blunt hits with the pommel and guard.

 

This video provides a solid example for both techniques 

 

The point being that the second method could easily be used with one hand (and the guy in the video does just that at one point despite using quite a large sword)

Edited April 6, 20187 yr by George_Truman

On a more philosophical level, life is a badly designed game, and I would be careful with criticising game design based on its real life counterparts. A system faithfully representing a real life combat wouldnt be very entertaining.

 

This, +1000.

 

"Realism" in and of itself is not a criteria that makes a game good. A game should be relatable enough given the real world, but detailed realism for realism's sake is not necessarily going to be fun. I mean, you're talking about the specifics of half-swording in a game where people are using little rods to shoot balls of energy at each other (implements) and can go for extreme stretches of time without having to eat and when was the last time you saw your characters go the restroom?

 

Sorry to rant, it just reminds me of people complaining about realism in Age of Empires II, forgetting that realism goes out the window when you run entire empires with apparently less than 200 discrete people (the normal unit cap). Games are about abstractions.

Edited April 6, 20187 yr by thelee