And here's how you do it: . itemDB.xml Code: <item name="Unarmed Strike" iconFile="sprites/fist_1.png" level="1" type="2" special="1" > <price amount="0" /> <weapon crushing="1" /> <description text="Your fists! No, they don't come off." /> </item> Then put the Unarmed Strike item (or two of them, even) as an always="1" loadout item for Unarmed. Leveling up unarmed gives you two new Unarmed Strikes with new damages (in addition to what the skill gives you). Leave Dual-Wield alone, and it'll function perfectly alongside.
This would not work very well. For one, Unarmed attacks use your foot, not your hands. Secondly, these weapons are maces and that's how they'll will animate when you attack. Thirdly, you're not actually solving the request of making empty hands required for Unarmed. You're just giving players two strange weapons. The idea was to have no items in your hand to make Unarmed work. (Which I think is a dumb idea anyway, because it's a huge nerf to the skill, and again, unarmed = foot!)
It's a mechanism that works within the existing bounds of the game. The only new code it would require is adding type="7" for an unarmed weapon. Furthermore, it'd allow unarmed-type weapons (such as boxing gloves). Even if the unarmed animation is using his foot, it doesn't necessarily have to replicate what's on the character sheet. Or are you telling me you get upset when you right-click cheese and your character eats chicken?
I wasn't clear. It has little to do with the graphics. It has to do with the spirit of the Unarmed skill. It's designed around your foot and kicking. It's not meant to be about using your fists. The people you quoted are trying to change the skill to make it require truly empty hands, which is not only against the flavor of the skill, but would needlessly nerf it. And you did word your post as if it were a solution to that request, which it is not.
Skills as in abilities, I use "skill tree" when I'm referring to an actual skill [tree] (that is composed of a few skills). Yeah, you can kill me now, and I'll try to use "ability" in the future when referring to things that are in skill trees but are not skill trees. Pretty much what I wanted, thank you for clarifying it for people who are less insane than me.
Wait... I'm not getting where this thread is going... You want to buff shield to the point where people might use them but first want to nerf unarmed? Unarmed is pretty weak compared to dual wield CoE weapons. I think it would be best to just make some better shields. If unarmed too powerful then nerf something.
The point of this thread is to brainstorm the problem of "weapon and shield" build being weaker than "dual-weapon", "dual-shield" and "weapon and something that is not shield" ones. Adjusting Unarmed after that is done is easier than adjusting Shield Bearer without affecting anything. And what we (as in, those of us who are really discussing it) want is to make the game more interesting. Making various alternate builds viable alternatives to different builds does make the game more interesting, after all.
Sure, why not... Generally speaking, every build (that doesn't use conflicting skills, like using Killer Vegan with Vampirism, or have overlapping skills, like only weapon skills, only two of which can have any effect at the same time, and even then the lack of Dual Wield would injure such a build) should have equal, or almost equal, chances at getting to Dredmor and defeating him, provided that the player uses both builds with the same level of skill and the RNG doesn't do something insane. Right now, some skill trees are viable alternatives of each other (Archeology and Burglary are an example if you want bonus experience, and Burglary and Artful Dodger are viable alternatives if you want something to avoid being hit), that also means that builds with just skills of this kind switched around [so that instead of the skills you wanted to use, you use their alternatives] would still be playable most of the time, even if not optimal, because we would still have something similar to what we wanted. That should also, if you chose to invest in combat skills instead of utility skills (please note that I am not talking about the whole skill trees there, though some skill trees obviously have more combat-purpose skills than other skill trees), the combat effectiveness of your builds should be similar, even if the gameplay changes - they should be "viable alternatives". And, lo, various combat-centred magic skill trees can be pretty effective, and combat based on thrown weapons and bolts is also effective, provided you have some means of getting enough ammunition; melee builds with Dual Wielding can also approach said level (even if not reach it), and characters with Unarmed holding two pieces of non-weapons can also hold their ground; heck, even gish [warrior-mage hybrids] characters hold their ground with one weapon and one orb or book (or two books/orbs). Meanwhile, using one weapon and a shield is something that people rarely do, because there aren't any benefits to it - none from Unarmed, none from Dual Wielding, neither your magic power nor your melee power nor your defensive abilities will reach their peak levels. Thus, "blade and shield" style of combat is an issue that something could, and probably should, be done about, because it needs more love. Was that understandable enough, Glazed?
Too be honest I don't think we should worry about changing Shield Bearer affecting any build, because that would imply people use shield bearer
Weapon and shield builds with reasonable equipment should be equal to dual wield builds with the same sort of equipment. Unarmed needs to be more potent than Dual Wield in most cases, and would make sense to have some actual advantage to not having *ANYTHING* in the hands.Otherwise CoE weapons ruin any chance of a shield winning. Like a skill based proc that only works when one or both hands are free. Likewise, having the Shield Bearer skill and wielding a shield should grant an additional chance to block since that is really the bread and butter of that skill. (Not just a few points extra , I mean an additional chance when you fail the first roll to block.) Any weapon skill with Shield Bearer and a single shield should be encouraged by a means other than more potent shields. The skill is the weak point. Sure, there are few potent shields in the game, but that can and will be fixed. There still needs to be a reason to walk right past that nice CoE weapon since you already have one good weapon. You need to have a shield for a proc that makes it difficult to decide which way to go. If every time you make a character you have to stop and think a minute to decide between Dual Wield and Shield Bearer, then the skills are fixed. Otherwise we are left with Dual Wield wining every time.
Unless, of course, our man wants to spend no skills in an equipment specific direction. Game needs to be balanced for the guy who wants to be a Berserk Big Game Hunting Blacksmithing Clockwork Knight Assassin Tinkerer with a side in Viking Magic and Fungal Arts as well as for a Dual Wielder and a Shield Master.
Some people do use Shield Bearer. I do, for example, even if it's not that often (in fact, my usage count for it is higher than the usage counts for both Promethean Magic and Necronomiconomics combined, which does say something [that some people simply prefer to get physical in games]), because it's a decent skill tree. The point is, it's the shields themselves that need changes, and the changes to Shield Bearer (if any) would only be used to make the changes to equipment possible.
Is the argument being made that a dual wield build has a better chance at making it to dredmor than a sword and board build, because I don't believe that to be true. By the metric you are suggesting, dual weild is at least on par with sword and board. I understand that a dual wield build may be more powerful, but I don't think anyone would argue that a 1 weapon + shield build is less likely to reach dredmor. Let's be honest, a shield build is perfectly viable.
I have it -- the solution. Give Chests of Evil a 50% chance of spawning a named boss, a 25% chance of spawning a CoE weapon, and a 25% chance of spawning a CoE SHIELD. These would be perfectly normal level-appropriate shields that have extra random stat bonuses equal to 1-per-item level, plus an additional 5-per-item-level points distributed between Armor Absorb, Block, Dodge, Counter, and the Resistances. Or something. The point is, Dual Wield is (like everything else in the game) edgy primarily because of CoE Weapons. Make Shields crop up just as often as weapons in CoEs, and make them just as powerful defensively as the weapons are offensively, and the problem is 90% solved without any dicking around with skills or other core mechanics.
I never understood why CoEs only spawn weapons anyway. You'd think the bad guys would need other gear too.
Let me try to make a convincing argument for you. The best shields have around 10. That means you block 10% of the hits against you, which you would have otherwise missed (let's assume you don't already have 100% block via other means.) Blocking reduces exotic damage by 50% - so your shield effectively reduces incoming damage by 5%. Shields also provide - and in some cases quite a bit of it. But in my experience I max out useful pretty easily if I am playing a melee build - so I don't consider it very important. Dual Wield, on the other hand, effectively doubles your damage output in melee. In practice this means killing enemies in 1 hit instead of 2 (100% damage reduction!) or 2 hits instead of 3 (50% damage reduction!). Thus, Dual Wield reduces damage more than a shield. Even if a player chooses to take the Shield Bearer line (I like it, and use it pretty frequently myself) there is no reason to actually equip a shield - since you get all the benefits of Shield Bearer without one. If you didn't take Dual Wield, then putting a second weapon in your off hand still increases your damage output by 60% or so. Furthermore, in the late game it is quite likely that you'll find an enchanted weapon which gives some useful resistances - so the weapon will actually reduce exotic damage even further.
Oh snap! I just had an idea to dramatically improve shields: Change the way block works. If you do NOT have a shield, block reduces basic damage by 50%, and exotic damage by 25%. If you DO have a shield, block reduces basic damage by 75%, and exotic damage by 50% (like it always is now.) For characters who don't rely on blocking, this doesn't really change much. For warrior characters who rely on blocking (which includes most of them, including Dual-Wield, Unarmed, etc) this makes holding a shield of real value. No fancy ability re-working, no "unarmed weapon" adjustments - just a straight-forward tweak to the calculation of blocked damage.
Are you sure about this? I read that the penalty reduced damage from both of your weapons effectively negating the second weapon entirely.
