On the subject of weapons

I know I might be jumping the gun a bit here by thinking of how we're going to treat the different varieties of sword, axe, etc., but it could impact our skill system, so here goes:

should we separate 2-handed long blades from 1-handed? Because as it stands, Long Blades covers all manner of weapons. Or should we just standardize long swords, broad swords, katanas, and sabers as essentially the same thing, and claymores, dai-katanas, and similar are all equal (that's it, I've had it with all the bullshit going on in the Elder Scrolls P&P system...)? Same goes to a lesser extent for axes, spears, and maces. And should we lump staves in with spears instead of blunt?

Not jumping the gun at all, there. Well, maybe a little, but that's okay. Separating one-handed from two-handed swords sounds okay, but I kinda like staves where they are. They're for whapping people upside the head with, not poking, prodding, or stabbing.

But then you might as well seperate Two handed other weapons from their one handed brothers. A warhammer is different from a club, a hand axe is different from a battle axe.

The real question, I guess, is is it worth adding extra skills to the character sheet? I can see virtues either way - two-handed weapons ARE quite different from one-handed. On the other hand, keeping things simple makes it easier on the player.

Honestly, while i'd love to incorporate as many skills as we can just to leave it up to the player's choice, there's a line we shouldn't cross. We're already splitting Marksman into 3 different types. If we split 1-h from 2-h we'd just be crossing from "varied list" to "holy shit what do I pick..."

Plus keeping them grouped together would mean a little leeway for characters. Say you're using sword and board and find a good claymore, you'd be crap with it if you didn't juggle a million combat skills.

Hexx wrote:Honestly, while i'd love to incorporate as many skills as we can just to leave it up to the player's choice, there's a line we shouldn't cross. We're already splitting Marksman into 3 different types. If we split 1-h from 2-h we'd just be crossing from "varied list" to "holy shit what do I pick..."

Plus keeping them grouped together would mean a little leeway for characters. Say you're using sword and board and find a good claymore, you'd be crap with it if you didn't juggle a million combat skills.

Especially important since You only get 5 Major and 5 Minor skills. You can get major to 100 and Minor to 75. Add too many skills in, this can become a large problem. It might not in a video game when you can grind yourself stupid, but no one wants to grind in a p&p game with a party of other people.

I'm still unsure as to whether the hardcap for non-chosen skills is a good idea. One the one hand, it makes a lot of sense, and you're not some sort of incomprehensible god-killing maniac. On the other, it is somewhat limiting, and perhaps not as true to the games. I'm sort of torn, honestly.

Admin wrote:I'm still unsure as to whether the hardcap for non-chosen skills is a good idea. One the one hand, it makes a lot of sense, and you're not some sort of incomprehensible god-killing maniac. On the other, it is somewhat limiting, and perhaps not as true to the games. I'm sort of torn, honestly.

To be fair we don't necessarily have to follow the game 100% all the time. We HAVE to make sacrifices in some areas to allow for a more fluid gameplay experience on paper. Plus, we can easily make up in other parts.

Also, we can provide bonuses to the misc skills even if they are hardcapped at 50 from XP raising. Like equipments, enchantments, permanent blessings etc

I kinda like the hardcap. In Morrowind, you have to be a one-man god-killing machine because:
a) how many skills for each attribute determines how much of that attribute you gain at level
b) You're just one man (albeit a prophesied man) and you pretty much have to do everything your goddamn self. In a P&P game, you're likely to have a whole party, who can diversify skills and reduce the necessity of ubermensch characters.

[edit] I've been swayed regarding the 1h/2h split - I think it's better keeping them inclusive. Now that I think about it, I can't tell you how often specializing in just one weapon has pissed me off in, for example, D&D. Improved crit weapon focus/gwf weapon spec/gws in longswords? Here's a +4 bastard sword! FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFU-

I think the split should either be 1h/2h OR Long/Short.

Just thinking aloud here.

I think the long/short division for blades makes sense from a class-creating point of view. Your long blades (1h or 2h) are going to be used by combat oriented classes, while short blades are going to be used by stealth-oriented classes. If you think about how the skills were grouped in the game, they were grouped basically according to the fighter-thief-mage triad. Now, in the original thread, it was stated that this was going to be a classless system, which is fine, but I think keeping 1h and 2h weapons in the long blade category also allows for a sort of "fighter package" if that makes any sense.

It makes sense. That's basically the way the vidya devs designed the classes in Morrowind - Battlemages were a grouping of skills, but only because they were fluffy, not to pigeonhole you into that class.

Right, and I think that as we develop this more, we're going to see classes emerge, especially if we think of things as packs of skills (like the skill synergy idea suggests). On the other hand, I could also see the emergence of characters combining sort of disparate packs of skills, so who knows?

That's part of the beauty of TES. You can have a character that specializes in fireballs, mercantile pursuits, and wearing plate armor - and who's to stop you? As long as you can devote the time to your skills, there's no penalty for diversifying or choosing really weird picks.

Saint Jiub wrote:That's part of the beauty of TES. You can have a character that specializes in fireballs, mercantile pursuits, and wearing plate armor - and who's to stop you? As long as you can devote the time to your skills, there's no penalty for diversifying or choosing really weird picks.

I'm going to quote this because I think it's something to keep in mind while we build the skill system. While the skills should work in packs to an extent, we need to keep that freedom intact.

Ideally, that's what the synergy system is all about. We're including it specifically so you don't have to take every skill you want - if you want multiple similar skills, you can focus on one as a major and just naturally be better at the surrounding skills. With 10 groups of synergizing skills, you could theoretically put a major or minor in every single group, and be a jack of all trades. There's your Bard-type character.

Saint Jiub wrote:Ideally, that's what the synergy system is all about. We're including it specifically so you don't have to take every skill you want - if you want multiple similar skills, you can focus on one as a major and just naturally be better at the surrounding skills. With 10 groups of synergizing skills, you could theoretically put a major or minor in every single group, and be a jack of all trades. There's your Bard-type character.

The catch being you have to be pretty good in one of the skills for the others to be anything, since they don't get any higher than apprentice, and even then only if you have 100 in the highest skill that the others gain from.

I think a Bard-type character is going to be our test-to-destruction on whether skill synergy works.

LessRudeScrib wrote:
I'm going to quote this because I think it's something to keep in mind while we build the skill system. While the skills should work in packs to an extent, we need to keep that freedom intact.

quotin dis too

Seriously, this game has to avoid the cliched "I'm a mage so I'm physically incapable of wearing armor" thing.

Dagoth Durr wrote:

LessRudeScrib wrote:
I'm going to quote this because I think it's something to keep in mind while we build the skill system. While the skills should work in packs to an extent, we need to keep that freedom intact.

quotin dis too

Seriously, this game has to avoid the cliched "I'm a mage so I'm physically incapable of wearing armor" thing.

Are we going to go with heavy and medium armor hampering magic a little, or just leave that out completely? I figure either works. If we let it in, I imagine mages focusing mostly on Intelligence for magicka and power, willpower for power and fatigue, and Endurance for hp. Perhaps agility instead of endurance, I don't know. Agility for normal mages, Endurance for battlemages perhaps.

Maybe your armor only hampers you if your armor skill (or your casting skill?) is below a certain level? That might make a good apprentice ability for med. armor and a journeyman ability for heavy (since, you know, it's heavier...)

Saint Jiub wrote:Maybe your armor only hampers you if your armor skill (or your casting skill?) is below a certain level? That might make a good apprentice ability for med. armor and a journeyman ability for heavy (since, you know, it's heavier...)

Sounds pretty good actually. Another way is if your armor skill is lowe than your casting skill level in the spell you are casting, you have a chance to fumble equal to the difference added to your normal fumbling chance. If your armor skill is equal to or greater, this is no problem.

I like that one, Rainbay. Only problem I can think of is: When does it come to play? That is to say, at what point is this fumble chance applied? Is it an extra roll, or is that difference subtracted from your skill/added to your roll?

Outlander wrote:I like that one, Rainbay. Only problem I can think of is: When does it come to play? That is to say, at what point is this fumble chance applied? Is it an extra roll, or is that difference subtracted from your skill/added to your roll?

It's just added to your roll, I would think. Similar as when you are fighting someone with melee and they have armor on.

We see the emergence of more Skill Perks! Say when we get 50 or so Medium or Heavy skill (and reach that new level) we gain no casting penalties? It shouldn't be too high as i'd imagine if you're able to use plate armor to move/run/swing a weapon in, it should hamper a few hand movements.