Breaking block
- Thread starter Kamamura
- Start date
Users who are viewing this thread
LarZal
Recruit
I'd say give some two handed weapons a special attribute: Knockdown. This would either send the targets arm with the weapon flying (no not disintegrate it, just move) resulting in a longer recovery time or simply knock him down. it could be somehow associated with the weights of the weapons. You could also get the ability if your power strike reaches a certain level.
Simetrical
Recruit
You can already knock down enemies with a strong enough hit.
-Simetrical
-Simetrical
The Pope
Sergeant Knight
Unarmed combat/weapon looting should definitely be implemented beforehand, because nothing would be more annoying than spending an entire battle unable to fight. It would be cool to have your axe hilt break, wrestle your opponent to the ground, take his weapon then gut him with it.
Questor
Recruit
I might have a workable idea.
People being trampled by horses suffer from knockback.
Likewise, people being on the receiving end of any high-damage attack, might fall back from momentum or massive shock.
It could work with any weapon, melee or ranged, as long as damage being inflicted is high enough - implying target is being hit squarely or painfully.
About dodging: I'd say remove the Jumping action and implement a Crouch movement instead.
It would present a smaller profile to arrowshots, could be used in a pinch to dodge cavalry, would be required to set a pike/spear against a charge, and could also work as a last ditch defense against slow weapons aimed to the head.
About Gothic fencing, most sources I could refer to seem to imply just that: bring in your sword/buckler to intercept an enemy's attack, and strike him with the other blade.
Up to 1650 weapons were just too heavy/unwieldy to warrant close fencing action [that is, feint and counterattack using the SAME weapon].
That is the reason, apparently, why Colichemarde swords were introduced in the first place, as a stop-gap solution between heavier rapiers and lighter foils.
[Yep, found out rapiers weren't light enough for close fencing].
People being trampled by horses suffer from knockback.
Likewise, people being on the receiving end of any high-damage attack, might fall back from momentum or massive shock.
It could work with any weapon, melee or ranged, as long as damage being inflicted is high enough - implying target is being hit squarely or painfully.
About dodging: I'd say remove the Jumping action and implement a Crouch movement instead.
It would present a smaller profile to arrowshots, could be used in a pinch to dodge cavalry, would be required to set a pike/spear against a charge, and could also work as a last ditch defense against slow weapons aimed to the head.
About Gothic fencing, most sources I could refer to seem to imply just that: bring in your sword/buckler to intercept an enemy's attack, and strike him with the other blade.
Up to 1650 weapons were just too heavy/unwieldy to warrant close fencing action [that is, feint and counterattack using the SAME weapon].
That is the reason, apparently, why Colichemarde swords were introduced in the first place, as a stop-gap solution between heavier rapiers and lighter foils.
[Yep, found out rapiers weren't light enough for close fencing].
Husar
Regular
I´ve also recognized that shields can absorb a chouched lance charge, although Kradus says they can´t.
Well, I´m also concerned about the easy way for everyone to block even the strongest strikes. In my opinion attacking with a non-couched lance from a galloping horse should not be so easy to block without a shield. Especially the double-sided lance doesn´t look like a weapon for a couched lance attack, but it´s not very useful otherwise because it can easily be blocked.
Well, I´m also concerned about the easy way for everyone to block even the strongest strikes. In my opinion attacking with a non-couched lance from a galloping horse should not be so easy to block without a shield. Especially the double-sided lance doesn´t look like a weapon for a couched lance attack, but it´s not very useful otherwise because it can easily be blocked.
If you time it right you can clip a blocking opponent from horseback, then slash them in the head on the way down.
Blocking is annoying, which is why I always take some javelins. The problem is I don't think it could easily be altered without unbalancing the combat.
Perhaps adding a bonus against blocking for specific weapons which means the opponent always takes damage may work. Even if its just three or four points worth of damage.
Blocking is annoying, which is why I always take some javelins. The problem is I don't think it could easily be altered without unbalancing the combat.
Perhaps adding a bonus against blocking for specific weapons which means the opponent always takes damage may work. Even if its just three or four points worth of damage.
the butcher
Recruit
Hi all. I followed the link from the frequent suggestion thread and here is how I think parries should be hanled: let each weapon have a parry number, modified by the skill you have on that class of weapons and the type of attack (example, thrusts with fast weapons should be harder to parry). If the damage you do is larger from that number you are hit, otherwise you block succesfully. I leave it to the devellopers to balance out the importance of weapons and skill. This will keep combat as simple as it is now, should be very easy to create and should fix the stupid parrying we sometimes see (small club vs greatsword etc.).
I utterly agree with the breaking block. However, with this added, there would need to be other additions also I think. Dodging and the like.
As long as its realistic and, as such, intuitive, (for basic techniques anyway) i'm for it.
I like this Thread.
As long as its realistic and, as such, intuitive, (for basic techniques anyway) i'm for it.
I like this Thread.
Here's a new take on the dual weapons discussion: Defensive pole-weapons.
The ultimate defensive weapon is, of course, the madu, but you can reach a similar effect by holding a spear, polearm, or even great-sword in the off hand- known as "fighting Christian", because the upside-down great-sword looks like a cross.
The way it works is that you hold the weapon point-down about a third or a quarter from the top, unless it's a mass-weapon like an pole-axe or hammer, in which case you hold it right-side up. For a sword, you hold it on the blade, so that the cross-guard is resting on top of your hand- medieval blades weren't all that sharp, and certainly not just above the hilt, so there's no worry about cutting your hand. Great-swords even have handy leather strapping there so you can choke-up for close-quarter combat.
The bonus for this style of combat is that your "shield" is much faster than the usual board shield. The down-side is that unless you're fighting Christian with those handy cross-guards, you have very little defense against overhead swings and you have to use your regular weapon for that. The secondary bonus is that you can do a damaging strike with your off-hand weapon. For thrusting weapons, you use a "Psycho"-esque stabbing motion and with bladed weapons like axes, you just lean the blade of the weapon with all your weight into the opponent's head.
I know a guy that fights (in the SCA) with two single-hand axes and he holds the left-hand one just below the blade and used the haft for blocking. Both have spikes at the top for thrusting. Both have butt-spikes. That's eight striking surfaces.
Oh, and he hits hard. Ouch.
Btw, the idea of parrying is definitely period, and it takes VERY little force to move the direction of an overhand chop enough so that it misses your head, and yes, that leaves your opponent EXTREMELY vulnerable. There's a reason you don't do that with mass weapons. With pole-weapons and swords it's a little different because of that beautiful thing called an "Oar-stroke" (put the blade of your weapon behind your opponent's head, walk past him, and back-hand him in the back of his head like you're rowing a boat), but for heavier axes and hammers, over-hand swings should always mean someone dies- either the sap that wasn't fast enough to block it or the sap that completely overextended himself and is now bent over into the oncoming couner-attack.
The ultimate defensive weapon is, of course, the madu, but you can reach a similar effect by holding a spear, polearm, or even great-sword in the off hand- known as "fighting Christian", because the upside-down great-sword looks like a cross.
The way it works is that you hold the weapon point-down about a third or a quarter from the top, unless it's a mass-weapon like an pole-axe or hammer, in which case you hold it right-side up. For a sword, you hold it on the blade, so that the cross-guard is resting on top of your hand- medieval blades weren't all that sharp, and certainly not just above the hilt, so there's no worry about cutting your hand. Great-swords even have handy leather strapping there so you can choke-up for close-quarter combat.
The bonus for this style of combat is that your "shield" is much faster than the usual board shield. The down-side is that unless you're fighting Christian with those handy cross-guards, you have very little defense against overhead swings and you have to use your regular weapon for that. The secondary bonus is that you can do a damaging strike with your off-hand weapon. For thrusting weapons, you use a "Psycho"-esque stabbing motion and with bladed weapons like axes, you just lean the blade of the weapon with all your weight into the opponent's head.
I know a guy that fights (in the SCA) with two single-hand axes and he holds the left-hand one just below the blade and used the haft for blocking. Both have spikes at the top for thrusting. Both have butt-spikes. That's eight striking surfaces.
Oh, and he hits hard. Ouch.
Btw, the idea of parrying is definitely period, and it takes VERY little force to move the direction of an overhand chop enough so that it misses your head, and yes, that leaves your opponent EXTREMELY vulnerable. There's a reason you don't do that with mass weapons. With pole-weapons and swords it's a little different because of that beautiful thing called an "Oar-stroke" (put the blade of your weapon behind your opponent's head, walk past him, and back-hand him in the back of his head like you're rowing a boat), but for heavier axes and hammers, over-hand swings should always mean someone dies- either the sap that wasn't fast enough to block it or the sap that completely overextended himself and is now bent over into the oncoming couner-attack.
Norjen
Regular
I think it would be great if the enemies could be knocked down. Also it would just be realistic if there would be only a small chance to inflict minor damage.
What really could happen? Maybe the shield's edge could hit you somewhere a bit, but that wouldn't be very high at your list of things to worry about at the moment.
What really could happen? Maybe the shield's edge could hit you somewhere a bit, but that wouldn't be very high at your list of things to worry about at the moment.
leprechaun
Marquis
Yes, and it should apply the other way round. If I swung a sword into a wall hard enough, for example, the impact could leave my hands nerveless, either doing damage or making me drop the sword.Kamamura said:
Lord Jaden
Veteran
i never stop laughing when i hit some dude with my heavy 2 handed war axe, and he blocks it with his chipped hatchet. 
lather
Sergeant
You could only really dodge a downward chop or a swipe to the head right? Or stab I guess. I agree with knockdown applied to blocks, you can already dodge downward chops, I agree with crouch button for anti-horse and dodge head-swipe etc. Breaking block with a hard blow I can't see, if you directly opposed the hit like everyone is saying, the sheild should just move back into you; and that's why I agree with a knock-down chance on blocks. You'd regain before the next hit could come anyways.