[Frax]

I was just working on a character idea when I realized that many of the mu*s out there have fairly limited weapon selections. It seems like most focus almost entirely on the sword, dagger, mace system and add the others as an afterthought. So, please try to talk me out of this opinion. I’d love to believe that this community is as rational as it could be.

Anyway, this is turning into a rant so I'll stop now. Please don’t post any links to your mud here, as I’ve already seen it if it is in this list. However, if you do know where this perceived focus on a few weapons came from, I’d be fascinated to know.
Thanks,
Frax

Sorry to forget this earlier, but the poll is asking which is the best in reality.

[Kenjar]

I chose sword, only because it is usually the best.

I think swords are almost always the best because there are always far more swords to buy or pick up off monsters in any MUD- try finding a cityguard with a whip, for example. Plus in all the popular RPG games, the main character always has a huge sword, and fantasy books such as Lord of the Rings with their magic swords project the image that teh swords r teh best. I like player forging systems because it allows just about any weapon to be the best.

What I would propose is a system where each weapon type could progressivly get naturally stronger yet less accurate and less attacks, for example-

In order of Highest power/lowest accuracy, to lowest power, most hits-
Polearms
Axes
Spears
Swords
Staffs
Daggers
Whips.

Just a rough idea.

[Terloch]

Originally Posted by many of the mu*s out there have fairly limited weapon selections

Many...but not all...

Feudal Realms has the following weapons: axe, bastard sword, battle axe, bow, broadsword, club, crossbow, dagger, dart, dirk, flail, great axe, great mace, hammer, hand axe, horseman's flail, horseman's mace, khopesh, knife, lance, lochaber axe, long spear, long sword, mace, main gauche, maul, polearm, quarterstaff, rapier, sabre, scimitar, short sword, spear, stiletto, two-hand sword, and whip...

[KaVir]

I would suggest that any mud which has a "best melee weapon" has a balance issue that needs to be addressed.  Each weapon should be designed with its own strengths and weaknesses - eg a shield should be an effective defensive weapon, but give poor offensive options, while a bastard sword should have the advantage of being usable in either one or two hands.  Whip and nets shouldn't cause much damage, but it should be possible to entangle your opponent with them.  And so on...

Of course it also depends on the theme.  A Star Wars mud might well have a very powerful lightsabre weapon - balanced against the fact that melee weapons aren't very good within that theme.

Re Terloch: You have "polearm" as a weapon? It also seems a bit strange to have battle axe, great axe, hand axe, lochaber axe - and then just "axe".

[WarHound]

He's asking what's best IRL.

It depends, I would say. Are you fighting a battle, in ranks, or are you alone, against a single opponent?

In ranks, it's situational. A phalanx can cause terrible damage on a formation of horsemen with lances, but then again a flexible sword formation can shred a phalanx, as the Romans taught us.

One on one? Dunno, longsword probably, as it's maneuverable, you have alot of reach, and it's equally good on offense or defense.

[KaVir]

Originally Posted by (WarHound @ June 22 2004,15:51) He's asking what's best IRL.

Ah, missed that part (strange question though, when posting on a mud forum).

I'd say the answer is pretty much the same though - each weapon has its own strengths and weaknesses. There is no 'best' weapon (otherwise there would never have been much variation throughout history).

Originally Posted by One on one? Dunno, longsword probably, as it's maneuverable, you have alot of reach, and it's equally good on offense or defense.

Yet it lacks the speed of a rapier, or the strength of a battle axe, or the reach of a spear.

[Terloch]

Originally Posted by (KaVir @ June 22 2004,01:16) Re Terloch: You have "polearm" as a weapon?  It also seems a bit strange to have battle axe, great axe, hand axe, lochaber axe - and then just "axe".

Yeah, I know, I plan on seperating out to a couple different types of polearms since they are very different, and the just plain "axe" category will be phased out...

[Kenjar]

Originally Posted by (KaVir @ June 22 2004,00:16) I would suggest that any mud which has a "best melee weapon" has a balance issue that needs to be addressed. Each weapon should be designed with its own strengths and weaknesses - eg a shield should be an effective defensive weapon, but give poor offensive options, while a bastard sword should have the advantage of being usable in either one or two hands. Whip and nets shouldn't cause much damage, but it should be possible to entangle your opponent with them. And so on... Of course it also depends on the theme. A Star Wars mud might well have a very powerful lightsabre weapon - balanced against the fact that melee weapons aren't very good within that theme. Re Terloch: You have "polearm" as a weapon? It also seems a bit strange to have battle axe, great axe, hand axe, lochaber axe - and then just "axe".

Well, if each weapon has it's own strengths and weaknessess, one will end up being the best and most used, because it's strength will be helpful in more situations than other weapons, and it's weakness perhaps slightly less hindering.

[Amnon]

I liked KaVir's idea from that TMC thread... about using torn-off limbs to fight

Bah, show me ONE person who won't get an immediate shock, long enough for me to knock him dead, the moment he sees me coming at him with a leg... or at least a person who wouldn't laugh hysterically...

[Kenjar]

Originally Posted by (Amnon @ June 22 2004,11:27) I liked KaVir's idea from that TMC thread... about using torn-off limbs to fight Bah, show me ONE person who won't get an immediate shock, long enough for me to knock him dead, the moment he sees me coming at him with a leg... or at least a person who wouldn't laugh hysterically...

Ooh, especially if it's his own leg!

Bigman tears off your leg, ouch!
(####.)
Bigman wields Smallman's Leg in his right hand!
(What the...?)
Bigman CRUSHES you with your leg, causing total woundedness!
(...)

SKills-
Digging 20%
Fishing 14%
Swords 56%
Limb Wieldin' 100%

[KaVir]

Originally Posted by (Kenjar @ June 22 2004,18:30) Well, if each weapon has it's own strengths and weaknessess, one will end up being the best and most used, because it's strength will be helpful in more situations than other weapons, and it's weakness perhaps slightly less hindering.

Not really (unless you badly mess up the game balance).

[the_logos]

Originally Posted by (Amnon @ June 22 2004,13:27) Bah, show me ONE person who won't get an immediate shock, long enough for me to knock him dead, the moment he sees me coming at him with a leg... or at least a person who wouldn't laugh hysterically...

Jesters and Shamans in Achaea can blow people up, causing body parts to rain down a bit afterwards. You can eat the liver, use the intestines as a whip, etc. =)

--matt

[Estarra]

Originally Posted by (Amnon @ June 22 2004,13:27) I liked KaVir's idea from that TMC thread... about using torn-off limbs to fight

Wouldn't limbs be a little.... floppy... to use as a weapon?

[Cierel]

Haven't you heard of rigor mortis? Freezing the limb will also help, though of course when the limb thaws it will then melt due to cell membrane rupture from the expanding frozen water.

Clearly, however, the ideal solution is to tie a pair of deflated lungs together and use them to garrote your foes. The irony is a killer even if the weapon isn't.

My, this has become rather macabre rather quickly!

[KaVir]

Originally Posted by (Estarra @ June 22 2004,20:43) Originally Posted by (Amnon @ June 22 2004,13:27) I liked KaVir's idea from that TMC thread... about using torn-off limbs to fight Wouldn't limbs be a little.... floppy... to use as a weapon?

Well I never said they made good weapons...

The idea really is just that every object in the mud can potentially be used as a weapon (and by "object" I mean anything you can pick up - which includes small creatures).

[Davairus]

Should also make all weapons eatable.

[KaVir]

Originally Posted by (Davairus @ June 23 2004,03:32) Should also make all weapons eatable.

While I realise (or at least presume) that your comment was made in jest, I would still like to say that IMO whether or not something is edible should be defined by its material (and the race of the eater), not by the object itself.

[Alice]

My home mud (accursed lands - and note, not trying to pull this off as an ad, just an example of game features) uses all items as weapons. Basically, there's not 'wield' command, to use an items as a weapon, you just hold it.
All of the items not flagged as weapons, use the brawling skill (an all purpose combat skill for any non-weapon).

In regards to the original topic, AL has many weapons, and skills to go with them. Though many of the lighter weapons may not be as offensive or as reliable as say, a sword, or an axe, they make this up in the speed in which you can use them.

Using this example, any non usual weapon can be created - there just needs to be a possible change in the coding of weapons. Adding weight to speed, offensive to hits, and dodge to defense in weapon stats will create a whole new world to combat...but only if you can keep it balanced.

A staff, for example, would have good parry, increase dodge slightly, but would be pointless offensively. An axe would have an increase in dodge, large increase in offensive, but be a very heavy weapon and not be as quickly to swing as say a dagger.

This post would be better off in the coding forum, and possibly no help at all, though to me the original question seems to be more of a coding question than an RP one. In any mud, as long as weapon stats are clearly defined and weight-speed is a factor in their creation, then any weapon is possible. Hope this has been of some help.

[KaVir]

Originally Posted by (Alice @ June 24 2004,22:20) My home mud ... uses all items as weapons.  Basically, there's not 'wield' command, to use an items as a weapon, you just hold it.

Hmmm... then surely the "hold" command is exactly the same as "wield"?  Or is there some other difference?  I'm just curious, because this is an issue I encountered as well.  In the end I decided to have a "wear" command which equips the item in its appropriate location (which means in your hand for weapons), and a "wield" command which forces you to use the item in your hand.

Unless you have a system whereby your inventory is your hands (something I've done in the past and didn't like that much), I can't really see any other way to get around the issue.

Of course as I said before, the next step on from having all objects as potential weapons is to allow other things, such as creatures - there are few things as satisfying as beating someone to death with a rat

Originally Posted by A staff, for example, would have good parry, increase dodge slightly, but would be pointless offensively.

IMO the main disa