Note #46 by Ducian at Fri Dec 10 20:38:31 2010 on board warriorsguild On Fri Dec 10 19:19:43 2010, Pigsty wrote: > On Fri Dec 10 08:11:50 2010, Faye wrote: > > Guess what I'm saying is tactics gimps you guys and makes you the > > fighters because all other guilds utilise int. Remove tactics. > Or better yet, just change it so that it doesn't depend on int.
I just spent a few minutes thinking hard about this, and I may have come up with a potential fix:
New skill, does not completely replace fighting.special.tactics (tactics would remain, and with the same stat distribution as before), but would do a lot of things that tactics is currently used for (rate of consumption of action points for certain activities that involve movement or position in combat, such as moving into a position to attack [how many attacks you get per round] or being able to defend). Most importantly, stat distribution would be 2 con, 2 dex, 1 str (the same as the adventuring.movement skills).
This skill would essentially be the "physical" component of maneuvering in combat. Tactics could be left as the "mental" component of maneuvering in combat, i.e. how well a combatant is able to anticipate how others will move (would still be essential for fighting multiple opponents, for instance) and how to plan movement in order to get into a good location in the combat. It could definitely be used for any kind of directing or inspiring commands in the future (i.e. directing troops, yelling advice to allies, etc). To be the best fighter possible, you would need both mobility and tactics.
This would mean that in a plain one-on-one combat, you would need mostly mobility in order to be able to get the most efficient use of action points, and tactics wouldn't help much. In multiple-opponent combat, you'd need both mobility and tactics in roughly equal measures to get the most efficient use of action points, while in a huge melee (6 or more combatants) tactics would become more and more important, since you need to anticipate how people will move and where you need to move (but mobility would still be necessary).
Let's think about the justification for this. Warriors are typically thought of as being very strong combatants in one-on-one combat. Take your typical barbarian from folklore. Feared in one-on-one combat, they aren't typically smart enough to have a good grasp of tactics, and hence when fighting in numbers, a disciplined force of soldiers, led by a leader with a good grasp of tactics, will tend to prevail. This would allow a "barbarian type" on the disc to actually be good at "maneuvering" (using action points efficiently) in single combat, and getting the proper amount of attacks and defends per round. Why should int and wis affect how well a warrior can maneuver into a position to attack or defend in single combat?
tl;dr - split tactics into two skills: a physical and a mental, and have the mental only important in directing troops or in large melees.
Note #49 by Ducian at Fri Dec 10 20:58:59 2010 on board warriorsguild On Fri Dec 10 20:38:31 2010, Ducian wrote: > Idea: fighting.special.mobility > tl;dr - split tactics into two skills: a physical and a mental, and have the>mental only important in directing troops or in large melees.
After having a little more thought, I realized this would affect the primaries of almost every specialization of the warriors guild. My suggestion to deal with this would be to switch fighting.special.tactics for fighting.special.mobility as a primary for all the "single combat themed" specializations, (I would identify these as the weapon masters, the hunters, the samurai, and the musketeers). For the "soldier" type specializations, (in this category I would include all three guard specializations, the highland regiment, and the foreign legion) I would leave them with fighting.special.tactics as a primary, since these specializations emphasize fighting together.
To that end, I would think fighting.special.tactics should be very important in a group of people fighting together, for people to not end up tripping hopelessly over each other or even hitting each other by accident. This would make the "soldier" type specializations having tactics an advantage for them, and fit the theme.
Also, I would seriously think hubland barbarians should get fighting.special.mobility as a primary as well (even though they don't have tactics right now) in exchange for fighting.defense.blocking. What kind of barbarian uses a shield, anyway?