Hunting&Fighting-connection

[Agar]

Fighting and hunting are not related. Not at all.

Think Conan was a good hunter? All we ever see him eating is roasted rat, and those look kind of flat, like he just stomped on them to hunt them. Not a very good hunter.

Where as Robin Hood on the other hand, he's not some powerful "Hulk Smash" type of personalilty, but he can stroll up in the castle with a deer over his shoulders.

Do you have any idea how much better deers taste versus rat?

They are not related in real life, just similar process of selction in cantr. Who/what you're attacking, how hard and with what. That's the end of the similarity. They will remain seperate.

[formerly known as hf]

I'd rather skills weren't seperated along the lines of hunting / fighting, but along weapon types.

Shooting a running man with a crossbow is much more similar to shooting a running deer, than to attacking the same man with a broadsword.

Some people should be good sword/axe bearers (which should probably be useless against most animals - hunting with claymores... yeah...) others should be good with melee weapons, others with bows etc.

[Kael]

That actually makes more sense, that way everybody isn't just walking around with ultra powered crossbows, but some had to have swords cuase they suck with ranged weapons.

But I like the differentiation of hunting and fighting, but would it be possible to add skills (maybe ones you can't see if it becomes to cluttered) with different weapon types like melee and ranged?

[Agar]

Spears, knives, small axes, stone pots can all be thrown, how would you figure those skills?

Maybe if range MATTERED, the seperation between ranged and melee combat skills could be added, but with the system as it is, it should stay what it is.

[NightThief]

I agree that melee and ranged skills should be added.In that way you could practice your shooting with your bow on birds,and your ranged fighting should increase with your hunting skill.Melee fighting should stay unchanged.So you can't increase your melee skills with hunting.I say that fighting skill should be seperated on melee fighting skill and ranged fighting skill.

[The Sociologist]

I'd rather skills weren't seperated along the lines of hunting / fighting, but along weapon types.

Shooting a running man with a crossbow is much more similar to shooting a running deer, than to attacking the same man with a broadsword.

Some people should be good sword/axe bearers (which should probably be useless against most animals - hunting with claymores... yeah...) others should be good with melee weapons, others with bows etc.

Yes, on the right track, imo. Then all charries might have a chance with some kind of fighting skill. A bulky type with a battleaxe, an agile but strong type with a bow, a dexterous stealthy type with a dagger and so on. Your premier hunters would be your bowmen, the stealthy types might set traps, and so on. As I've said repeatedly, the current skills system is a pathetic scandal.

[Kael]

But then if it goes that way (i.e. having different skills for stealth-daggers, ranged-bows, and melee-swords) then it has to be evened out.

From what I see right now in the current system, melee is way too powerful. Once your rich enough to make yourself a steel battle axe or whatever then the games in the bag, and then comes the crossbows in strenght, then the other smaller weapons.

If you implement a system like that then agile people good with stealth weapons should get say a 20% chance of doing triple attack or something to even everything out.

[formerly known as hf]

I'm pretty sure, as it stands, the crossbow is the most powerful thing a character can wield...?

[Sho]

Yes.

[Phalynx]

Does it depend on some other variable.... I have two characters about the same age, both expert hunters. One uses a steel broad sword for 50 damage (when its freshly repaired) the other a crossbow for 34 damage?

[Chris Johnson]

Does it depend on some other variable.... I have two characters about the same age, both expert hunters. One uses a steel broad sword for 50 damage (when its freshly repaired) the other a crossbow for 34 damage?

to quote Sho

Yes

Strength and tiredness are also taken into account as well as the animals natural armour . There is also a small random element as well . Repair condition of the weapons is not a factor

[Kael]

Well whichever is stronger, you would still need to have it more balanced out if you were to implement skill types based on weapons.

[Racetyme]

Wait, I thought claymore and crossbow were identical?

[the_antisocial_hermit]

Wait, I thought claymore and crossbow were identical?

According to the Wiki:

The crossbow is better than the steel battle axe which is better than the claymore. (Granted, not really a lot of difference between them all.)

All still powerful and still depends on the character wielding the weapon. Got one char that hits people for 30ish with a crossbow and another that hits people for 50ish with a claymore. The same char with the crossbow hits 50ish on animals, while the char with the claymore hits about 30ish on animals. Not to mention how tiredness and damage affect it.

[Sho]

To put things in perspective, the crossbow's attack value is 42, the steel battle axe's is 41 and the claymore's is 39. The difference in weapon power is completely swamped by the character-to-character differences, as can be seen from the examples people have been posting here.