Bash & Crush vs. Cut & Slash

[Saulot]

I can confirm that slower rates of fire do not work on melee weapons, I tried that for a shield bash type weapon in Urdheim.
It's a shame, because that polearm, amongst other examples is a nice idea.

Personally, I feel the main distinguishing factor between blunt weapons and swords is that blunt weapons should be far more common, and take far fewer resources.

[MaxWilson]

Well, vs. a unit with heavy armor (16), the mode for the hammer's damage (w/ a strength of 10) is 1 while the broadsword's mode is 0. Because of the random numbers the mean will work out to be more like 1.3 vs. 0.5, but the hammer is still more effective vs. armored opponents. The difference is IIRC more significant the more heavily armored the foe is. Of course, you could increase the difference by increasing the base damage of the hammer as well, but the thing is that there's no reason to think a hammer would be *good* against plate armor. It's just that it's better than a sword, because of the extra momentum. (And a broadsword is a pretty heavy sword, which you could think of as a club with an edge to it. The hammer is something like three times as effective as a shortsword in this scenario.)

Picks are a different story. I could imagine those as armor-piercing, because that's what they do.

-Max

[Folket]

Would it not be easier to lower the damage of blunt weapons across the board and add 1 AN damage.

[Frostmourne27]

Well, if this is to be modded, No. Aside from the 1AN+MR mode, I don't think there's a way to add extra, non-elemental, damage to an attack. If its a developer change, maybe. Not quite sure how much code would be needed for that. Not too much I don't think, but it could be quite a bit.

[Maraxus]

To add 1 AN damage sounds strange in the first moment, because as long as you do any damage anyway, it helps equally as much against Protection 1 opponents as against Protection 30 - Namely 1 per strike.

Next I think: However, it does mean, that, the more likely it is to totally deflect a blow, the more useful it is for the opponent to wield a blunt weapon.

And than again - I do not want a Horde of monkeyees with clubs to easily beat through an Obilisk.



So what? I say: Blunt weaons agains heavy armor should do extra fatigue to the victim.
This would work that way: Take the damage, reduce the rolls, reduce by the value of the natural armor and the damage actually inflicted, than, what is left is multiplied by a factor based on the weapon (daggers bad, swords better, axes even better, maces best) and a factor based on the armor (plate - leather - chain).

[jaif]

"So what? I say: Blunt weaons agains heavy armor should do extra fatigue to the victim. "


For a combination of realism and simplicity, I would suggest that blunt weapons do less damage and more fatigue across the board. No need to worry about armor, changing calculations, etc.

-Jeff

[Novi]

MaxWilson said:
Well, vs. a unit with heavy armor (16), the mode for the hammer's damage (w/ a strength of 10) is 1 while the broadsword's mode is 0. Because of the random numbers the mean will work out to be more like 1.3 vs. 0.5, but the hammer is still more effective vs. armored opponents. The difference is IIRC more significant the more heavily armored the foe is. Of course, you could increase the difference by increasing the base damage of the hammer as well, but the thing is that there's no reason to think a hammer would be *good* against plate armor. It's just that it's better than a sword, because of the extra momentum. (And a broadsword is a pretty heavy sword, which you could think of as a club with an edge to it. The hammer is something like three times as effective as a shortsword in this scenario.)

Picks are a different story. I could imagine those as armor-piercing, because that's what they do.

-Max

Ahh, I've never really delved into the game mechanics (I'm still not that devoted a player), but if your estimations are correct perhaps justice has already been served (Now, don't take that too literally - been excessively playing Baldur's Gate II lately. )
Anyway, that was referring to the comparison between the shortsword and the hammer. And on the second thought, you might be right about the broadsword as well though I have little idea how heavy it really is...

[Ygorl]

Maraxus, Obelisks don't wear armor. AP and AN only get through armor, not natural protection. Obelisks, sphinxes, anyone who's ironskinned or wearing the Marble Breastplate, all those guys will be well protected against AP and AN damage. At least, I'm pretty sure that's the way it used to work; I don't think it's changed?

[Kristoffer O]

AP and AN goes through any protection, natural or added armor. It has always been like that.

[mr_Logic]

maybe a maul or so should get 'armor dent'..