New weapon - the spear

Me · Post by Me » Wed Jul 23, 2003 10:10 pm

Okay, here's an idea...
How about creating a weapon that can allow party members at the back to attack monsters. Something like a spear that has a "jab" or "stab" option and won't produce a "can't reach" message. Throwing the spear might be a nice option too.
What do you other RTC players out there think about this idea?
George, (or any other exprienced RTC programmers) how hard would this be to implement?

And here's another idea that I had a while back:
Having to pick projectile weapons and place them back into the quiver has always been a pain for me. It takes up to much time when I'm in a sticky situation surrounded me monsters. Why not have an auto-reload option/button that places the projectile weapon (ie: arrow, dagger, etc) back into the highlited player's quiver after the object has been picked up. As it stands now, this action can kind of be performed with any object by clicking the object on a players status bars from the main screen (the object then goes into the player's backpack). To me this idea is a small feature that would make a tremendous difference when it comes to missile combat. What do you think?

Post by **cowsmanaut** » Wed Jul 23, 2003 11:05 pm

hmm yes the reload has been a big thing for me too.. I think if you drag and drop to the weapon icon (the blue attack ones on the right side) instead of over the player portrait it could drop it to quiver for you instead of into the back pack.

moo

PicturesInTheDark · Post by **PicturesInTheDark** » Thu Jul 24, 2003 9:48 am

The reload idea sounds nice. However, new weapons are like new spells or monsters... a definite change to the game. As always a lot of discussions to be expected...

Regards, PitD

Post by **Gambit37** » Thu Jul 24, 2003 10:45 am

In real life, it takes a long time to go and pick up all your spent arrows and place them back in your quiver. Not all archers have Legolas' speed. I think DMs approach simulates this well enough -- giving any kind of auto-load facility detracts from the believability.

Post by **Lunever** » Thu Jul 24, 2003 11:26 am

We had this topic several times before.
Gambit: As I said before, when we are talking about real archery, you'll have to admit that a real quiver can easily hold more than 5 arrows. An auto reload would make up a bit for that lack of believability. Also, it is far more believable for a acharacter to quickly put a picked up arrow into the quiver than into the backpack. And besides it would increase the worth of the somehow not too useful ninja class a bit.
So I strongly recommend that an arrow which is clicked unto the status bars of a achracter is stored into the quiver, while all other items still would go into the backpack.

Spear: I like the idea. And it does not need neccesarily change the game: As with true quivers, key-rings or purses, it'd be enough to implement them into the engine, so they can be used in new dungeons without changing anything for DM/CSB.

Post by **Gambit37** » Thu Jul 24, 2003 11:50 am

I agree that a quiver can hold more than 5 arrows, but that was not my point. I was commenting on the original poster's point about it being a pain to pick up thrown weapons.

If you follow the rationale, imagine you're an archer standing in a narrow corridor with two fighters in front of you. You enter a battle and fire some arrows over the heads of your fighters at the creatures advancing towards you. Odds are that the arrows are going to travel a long way. If they don't, and they hit the creature, they will either stick in the creature or drop to the ground. If they drop to the ground, how can the archer easily get the arrows back while obstructed by two burly fighters who are trying to chop the creatures into small pieces?

One possibility is that the fighter kicks the arrows back with his feet; perhaps he actually is defended by the other fighter while he picks up the arrows and passes them backwards. Whatever, the issue here is the real amount of time it would take for the archer to get his arrows back. My argument is that the time it takes for Theron's spirit (i.e. the player) to pick up the arrows from the ground and place them in the relevant quiver MORE THAN ACCOUNTS FOR, AND REPRESENTS, THE TIME TAKEN IN THE REAL SITUATIONS OUTLINED ABOVE.

These repeated requests for auto-load buttons, in my opinion, don't add anything to the game and are for lazy players who can't be bothered to learn stragetic ways of playing and/or who can't enter the spirit of the game properly. You might as well have a big button on screen when you start the game saying "Click here to complete the game without playing"...

Post by **cowsmanaut** » Thu Jul 24, 2003 4:46 pm

Gambit, I'm gonna have to disagree fully here.. you're not making sense. if you can grab the arrow quickly enough and stuff it into your back pack, whats the difference of stuffing into your quiver instead. You can still do only one at a time and it still takes as long as draging and dropping it. Only difference here is there is no opening the character screen and closing it again. it's what they added in CSB by allowing you to drop items on the chars portrait. It's just they never added an option to dump to the quiver rather than the back pack.

at any point, your theory for it taking longer to get it into your quiver appears incorrect. There is no way I can logically rationalize that.

Me · Post by Me » Thu Jul 24, 2003 6:35 pm

Wow, I didn't know I would be causing such controversy with this topic. I simply wanted to make the point that I would use projectile weapons more if the RTC engine had this feature. I find that as my characters advance in skill, I tend to depend more on the fireball, and then thrown/projectile weapons just are not needed after that. Eventually, I have both my back of the party members holding staffs, the horn of fear, or the magic map. Why lug around a heavy crossbow that requires both hands to use... Come to think about it, any player can cast a spell while holding any two objects in both hands; why then should that feature be allowed? Does not a spellcaster need at least one free hand to cast a spell?
So if this apparent "third hand" is allowed with magic, why would it be so unreasonable to have a small feature that puts an arrow back into a player's quiver AFTER it has been picked up? (key point, it still has to be picked up)
With regards to the arguement that it would be impossible for archer to pick up the arrow in the middle of combat... Yes, I totally agree that an archer could not do this while a monster is being hacked away at by the two front players - it is actually impossible to pick up an object when it's lying at the feet of a monster. I was thinking more around the lines of shooting a monster, the arrow doesn't stick and falls to the ground, then the monster continues to advance on the party. As soon as he's close the party moves around and goes to the location where the fallen arrows are. Certainly there is nothing stoping the archer from quickly picking up the arrows now when the monster is slowly trying to catch up. The situation I have described has happened many times, and it sure is frustrating when that monster is a slow moving rockpile. I often resort to this tactic of shoot and run when my four player's mana is low and I don't want to get to close (especially when the rockpile can poisen me).
The main reason I bring up this topic in the first place is that I am designing an RTC dungeon where the magic runes are restricted and no spellbook is provided - the goal of that adventure is to find the spellbook. Doing this makes the back party members limited to projectile weapons and I just thought that a situation like that might make it really difficult anyone playing.
I suppose an alternate proposal for this problem (and I know that some might gasp at this idea even more) would be to remove the condition that the arrow be held in the other hand; just have the bow/sling shoot when the propper missile is loaded in the quiver. How about that?

Post by **Gambit37** » Thu Jul 24, 2003 8:43 pm

Ok, I haven't made myself clear with this!

My argument is that the time it takes for Theron's spirit (i.e. the player) to pick up the arrows from the ground and place them in the relevant quiver MORE THAN ACCOUNTS FOR, AND REPRESENTS, THE TIME TAKEN IN THE REAL SITUATIONS OUTLINED ABOVE

This is where I'm coming from. I don't care whether you want to put the arrow in your quiver, your backpack, your pouch or anywhere else. What I'm trying (and failing) to point out is that using the current mechanism, the time taken to pick up and put the arrow in any of these places might be a bit fiddly, but it represents how awkward it would be in a real situation. I'm not talking about the difference in time between sticking it in your backpack or your quiver, but how you picked up the damn arrow in the firstplace!

I guess I just have a different way of looking at things!

Me · Post by Me » Thu Jul 24, 2003 10:19 pm

Ah, now I see what you're saying. Fair enough.
What do you think about the spear weapon?

Post by **cowsmanaut** » Fri Jul 25, 2003 4:07 am

well, I must say that in many cases the thrown/launched weapon sticks into the monster or goes beneath their feet in which case you can't get them back untill you've dealt with them. On top of this it is hard enough already to go about collecting the items without being beaten near to death while fumbling around. So as it stands it's rather hard to retreive your arrow or dagger from the ground unless you are far enough from threat that it would be simple enough to simply pick it up and stuff it blindly into you quiver.. which incidentally is at your side as opposed to your back pack which is on your back. So truth to tell I think it would be easier to get something in there than in your back pack and if any quick placing function should be criticised it's the back pack.

However, that is something that the crew themselves placed into DM. (not that their every idea was gold mind you)

All I'm saying is it seems rather practical to me. in fact I think that having to open your back pack.. stop running.. stop seeing anything else.. just to put away something makes much less sense. How many people run to catch a bus while juggling various items into a purse or back pack because they are running late? rushing through the house on their way to school or work and stuffing things into the pockets like wallet, keys, bus pas.. etc. Lot's of people are doing this kind of thing on the run.

Just a little more devils advocate for you

Post by **Gambit37** » Fri Jul 25, 2003 11:11 am

A quote from Andy Jaros:

...once we moved the inventory from the basic screen onto a separate window covering the dungeon view. We rationalised covering up the view as the price one pays for digging around in a backpack.

copperman · Post by **copperman** » Fri Jul 25, 2003 6:39 pm

Ignoring the arrows/quivers stuff, for me it works fine, I like the idea or having a spear/pike class of weaponry. Maybe with the possibility of losing your grip during attack and the weapon remianing embedded in your foe (which opens up needing even more graphic elements and possible additions to the monster class to incorparate this). Hope it happens, what do you say "GG"

Post by **cowsmanaut** » Sat Jul 26, 2003 8:39 am

unfair pulling some FTL quotes !

Still, they *did* put in the quick drop in CSB. So someone felt you should be able to shove and run.

moo

PicturesInTheDark · Post by **PicturesInTheDark** » Sun Jul 27, 2003 1:20 pm

As a player I quickly abandoned (cross-/speed-)bows pretty soon after my first few experiences with the game because reloading got on my nerves and the three pockets in the quiver seemed a pretty award for the time-consuming process of picking up arrows and replacing them.

I felt (and still do) that while most of the interface was built with a maximum of efficiency that this process lacked the usual style of the game. On the other hand, reloading in real life is tricky: you have to pick up arrows/slayers, put them in the quiver and take them out again, placing them on the respective bow. And in my opinion, you should not be able to do so while in close combat.

So while I do not like fighting with distance weapons, I respect that maybe this was part of the reason to make the use of bows of any kind a more difficult weapon to use. But I still don't like the arrow/slayer limit...

Regards, PitD

Post by **cowsmanaut** » Sun Jul 27, 2003 11:49 pm

that's annother good point.. quivers.. they contain upwards of 30 arrows many of them.. not 3 or 4. I would even preffer a change to the quiver to be like the chest or coin box. Only you can place it in one hand and the bow or what have you in the other and it will draw ammo from it as you shoot. I'd even concede to having then to put it in your action hand to open it up (as with eny chest item) and then drop them in there.

if you ignore the rest of this thread let you not neglect this one George.. this is a good idea I think

Post by **Lunever** » Mon Jul 28, 2003 4:42 pm

Gambit: What is it, that makes the DM Engine so superior? It is it's sense of realism, so many details that has been thought of! So of we start talking about REPRESENTING we stop to talk about a good engine. REPRESENTING is to admit, that one has been unable to properly care for the details to create that sense of relism that makes an engine superior!

Post by **Gambit37** » Mon Jul 28, 2003 5:49 pm

*Sigh* You're getting the wrong end of the stick. I guess I didn't explain myself clearly.

I'm not stating that DM is superior. I am trying to show how the DM system, while it has flaws, is logical if you follow a certain way of thinking. I like the DM system BECAUSE it's simple and doesn't confuse the player with extra controls when a representational approach works just as well.

You're arguing that realism makes a game superior. That's rubbish. Look at the multitude of modern games that are realistic yet unplayable. Superior engines should be about playability, and the minute you sacrifice playability for reality in a game, you're on to a loser. Look at Unreal 2.

And anyway, how would adding a 'quick drop into the quiver' facility make DM more realistic? It doesn't -- if anything it adds to the unreality of it! At the moment, I think the balance is right -- as the player you get the 'realistic' bit by having to manually place the arrows in your quiver. And you get the fun bit that limits you to a few so you don't get bored by picking up 30 or so arrows. I agree it's not perfect, but it works, and the argument for 'auto-dropping' arrows into the quiver by clicking on a champion, as I said before, is for lazy players. Even though DM and RTC both support dropping any item onto the champion and placing it straight in the backpack, I still play by opening the inventory and putting it in there manually. It feels right to me, and that's what I'm trying to defend.

Post by **Lunever** » Tue Jul 29, 2003 8:33 am

Hm, I suppose you'd argue against any change, no matter what it is, just because it is a change, wouldn't you?

Post by **Gambit37** » Tue Jul 29, 2003 9:59 am

Now what are you on about!?

I never said that change is bad, only that *some* changes don't make a lot of sense to me.

Change is good if it makes sense. I fully support the spellbook in RTC as it's logical and addresses something that I never felt was quite right in DM. I love lots of the little changes such as the smooth lighting and independent monster movement (except when it makes paired monsters look silly). There are many others.

Your last message didn't even address anything I said in my response, so it sounds to me like you just want to argue for the sake of it, or that you really must have the last word!

PicturesInTheDark · Post by **PicturesInTheDark** » Tue Jul 29, 2003 11:24 am

I'm with Gambit on this subject. Although the details of projectile weapons may not be as smoothly worked into the game mechanism as others, I agree that the overall function suitably simulates the problems you can have with them in reality. Therefore I would also argue to leave it as it is,
because theoretically a lot of changes could be implemented to correct small unrealities without really enhancing the atmosphere and I'd rather have something like the aforementioned spellbook than corrections on existing (working!) mechanisms.

Regards, PitD

Post by **cowsmanaut** » Tue Jul 29, 2003 3:23 pm

so you are against chested quivers too? now why is that? I thought it a rather reasonable addition. However, the way you are arguing it is as if it was their idea to allow you *only* 4 arrows to begin with.

you know there are a lot of other inconsistancies that could be addressed with regards to teh quick drop and why it's possible. I don't think it's really been well thought out as an argument against it.

It's possible to pick up more than one item at a time in one hand, like 4 rocks or 4 arrows. I mean has anyone spilled straws? how did you put them back? did you pick them up one at a time placing them each individually in the container or did you wander around put them all into one hand and then drop the lot? Can you really argue that that is not a time saver? Also sheathing something or dropping things into a pocket or pouch can be done with two hands while keeping your eye on something else. One hand to place the other to guide or hold open the container.

anyway, my only point here is there are a lot of things that are possible that would speed up or change the mechanics of the way we did things to be more realistic. Many of them possible but many may end upp being complex as a mouse does not works as 4 fingers and a thumb. Nor does it work well as two hands. etc etc etc. so the only way around some things is to compromise which is whats being asked here. I'm sure they only way to convince you is to prove under the basis of speed of completing the actions both ways and comparing. However, since groups of mummies don't wander anywhere near by nor do I have an arrows on hand I doubt I'll be doing that anytime soon.

Anyway, I partly agree with you and partly not. I think I've visualised the situation and actions more thoroughly. However, one single detail I'm surprised you've not brought up is the idea that someone behind you reaching around in front of you us rather unlikley unless they are to end up tripping you up. however, that's a whole other ball of wax isn't it?

moo

Post by **Gambit37** » Tue Jul 29, 2003 4:50 pm

*Aaargh* Cow, please read my responses more carefully! I'm not arguing over implementing things that make the game quicker or easier -- I've been trying to show how it's possible to use a certain way of thinking (mine!) to interpret DMs existing mechanisms, whether they are flawed or not.

Me · Post by Me » Tue Jul 29, 2003 9:09 pm

Let's see what the creator of the game thinks...
George, if you're still reading, what do you think about all this?

(and anyone, please comment on my orginal idea about the spear weapon

)

copperman · Post by **copperman** » Wed Jul 30, 2003 5:39 am

A Pole Arm class for RTC is a great idea. Arrows, quivers yad yada yada Trout slaps all round

Post by **cowsmanaut** » Wed Jul 30, 2003 9:13 am

Gambit, I did read your post(s).

While talking about manually placing things in their place...

"And you get the fun bit that limits you to a few so you don't get bored by picking up 30 or so arrows"

to which I stated..

"so you are against chested quivers too? now why is that? I thought it a rather reasonable addition. However, the way you are arguing it is as if it was their idea to allow you *only* 4 arrows to begin with."

and you also said

"And anyway, how would adding a 'quick drop into the quiver' facility make DM more realistic? It doesn't -- if anything it adds to the unreality of it! "

to which I said...

"It's possible to pick up more than one item at a time in one hand, like 4 rocks or 4 arrows. I mean has anyone spilled straws? " etc etc

I also agreed with you...

"You're arguing that realism makes a game superior. That's rubbish. Look at the multitude of modern games that are realistic yet unplayable. "

and I said

"you know there are a lot of other inconsistancies that could be addressed with regards to teh quick drop and why it's possible"

it was meant as, "you know, there are..." I was tired and forgot the comma. which changes it from accusatory to casual. So I'm sorry about the ommision. However, the essential meaning behind saying that was that I agree that there are issues with the idea. However, there are also issues witht he arguments against it.

I just think that neither side has fully thought out their arguments for or against it.. which is why this particular debate is good. It's the very thing we had when getting the spell book in place which had it's turn of arguments against it.

moo

(hey, uhm is this a clump of your hair? you should really sit down and have a breather)

PicturesInTheDark · Post by **PicturesInTheDark** » Wed Jul 30, 2003 11:55 pm

Hmm. Certainly there are many ommissions in the DM engine that could be addressed, neat as the game is. But with the arrows I'm not sure this lack does need a change, since in my opinion it suitably enough simulates the elapsing time for picking up arrows, re-stuffing them and then picking them out for use. (Although I admit I don't use bows because of that *cough*).

However, I think that a change here would be perfectly the same as a new purse (or "wallet") for coins instead of using chests or the backpack - perfectly rational (and I argued for it a lot of times already) but apart from my personal preference not really a needed change.

So let's break down the discussion to a conclusion: are we exchanging reasons here for anything somebody would like because it's more realistic (and I'm sure we could find about two dozen of alike ommissions at least) and would - if all implemented- make the engine more complicated each time; are we looking for real holes and if so, what makes one? It would be more comfortable, but is that a sufficient enough reason? It would be more comfortable if I need not exchange bottles when I'm training my priest abilities, but it's certainly not necessary and does no unjustice to reality. As a simulation it is close enough.

Regards, PitD

Seeker19 · Post by **Seeker19** » Fri Aug 08, 2003 10:10 pm

<ahem>

It seems to me that the addition of a quick-drop into the quiver, the "chested" quiver, and the spear are all fine ideas that would, to a greater or lesser extent, change the gameplay of the engine, much as the spellbook changes the gameplay. So my suggestion would be to have any attempt at implementing any of these ideas approach them as optional modifications, rather than "fixes". I mean, the spellbook is a neat idea, but I don't want to have to use a spellbook in every dungeon. In much the same way, I'd like to be able to choose whether to make reloading the bow easier and faster, or just go around throwing the arrows along with all the other thrown weapons in the game, as I usually do when the quiver is empty.

Actually, I'm surprised that no-one else has brought this up: you can always throw the missiles when your quiver is empty and the press of enemies prevents you from reloading. In addition, you can do what I often do anyway, when you have more than 5 arrows and slayers: make a pile at your feet of the remainder. Then, when the quiver is empty, you pick up an arrow from the top of the pile and drop it in the left hand of the person using the bow/crossbow and click "shoot". This, in my mind, is comparable to archers sticking arrows in the ground near them so that they are more easily drawn and shot.

It's fascinating to me to read all these different playing styles. In most games, my characters compete to see whether they will end the game with higher wizard or ninja levels, because the party leader is always throwing everything, and the party leader changes every few minutes.

Ah, yes, there's nothing like taking out a pair of rats with a hail of falchions!

Seeker19

Unlucky_Mule · Post by **Unlucky_Mule** » Sat Aug 09, 2003 5:11 pm

... In addition, you can do what I often do anyway, when you have more than 5 arrows and slayers: make a pile at your feet of the remainder. Then, when the quiver is empty, you pick up an arrow from the top of the pile and drop it in the left hand of the person using the bow/crossbow and click "shoot".

Actually, you don't even have to wait for the quiver to be empty. You can put an arrow in the left hand between reloads. This way the quiver stays full in case you have to run away from your arrow pile for a short while.

Did you also know that the first slot of the quiver can hold a large weapon, like a sword or axe? This way all the fighters can throw a projectile and then automatically arm their melee weapon.

UM

Post by **cowsmanaut** » Sat Aug 09, 2003 9:34 pm

for that matter you don't even need to wait for reload or place in the hand just have theron's hand throw ninja style as fast as you can.. since you can throw as fast as you can move and click the mouse..

Dungeon Master Forum

New weapon - the spear

New weapon - the spear

Projectile weapons

The Spear