Poll series:Weapons/Inventory

Thief13x on 15/5/2009 at 03:28

WHERE ARE THE CLIMBING GLOVES:mad:

:laff:

Chade on 15/5/2009 at 03:35

Quote Posted by kamyk

That's the beautiful thing about Thief and one of the sore points about TDS. Having the sword allows you to engage in combat if you choose to.

Ah, I'm not saying that my idealistic side thinks the sword should be present ... that's my cynical side. ;)

Personally I prefer the TDS approach of rewarding players who run away and try sneaking again. It's just a matter of having tighter design. My completely unscientific and possibly incorrect observation over the years has been that new TDS players seem more likely not to try fighting when things go wrong.

Being able to duel is nice, but thief does not focus on providing a good combat experience, and it shows. T1/2 has a broken melee system that you can beat with one hand tied behind your back, just by stepping behind the AI. Obviously no-one spent much time making sure it played well, and why should they? It's a stealth game.

Clint Hocking has a good quote that is relevant here, I think: don't simulate around the edges of your game.

Ironpants on 15/5/2009 at 03:56

Quote Posted by kamyk

As far as the argument about "defending yourself WITHOUT BEING FORCED TO KILL" is concerned, you do know you can block with the Blackjack right? If you need to block at all. Seriously how many people get themselves into a situation where you need to block rather than run?

I'd forgotten that you can block with the blackjack; mostly because the idea of blocking sword blows with a floppy weighted leather bag is so ludicrous that I never did in-game. Might get lucky with a successful slap parry, but it's no sure defense.

I think we've all been cornered at least a few times (unless you habitually reload or strictly ghost all the time). There should be a (non consumable) tool that makes escape viable, and I'd really prefer it wasn't the blackjack.

Quote Posted by Chade

The sword encourages face to face combat.

While that is subjective, Thief's base concept already discourages combat of any sort.

Quote Posted by Chade

The idea that being able to block incoming blows discourages face to face combat requires some tortuous logic.

I made no such assertion - only that it enables the player to continue playing if (inevitably) drawn into combat without having to kill anyone.

Quote Posted by Chade

The dagger, at worst, encourages backstabbing, which is indeed killing ... but from a gameplay pov, backstabbing is similar to blackjacking, so at least it still requires some stealth.

So what is the point of the dagger? Why not just use the blackjack?

Quote Posted by Chade

Murder restrictions are a totally separate issue. And yes, murder restrictions encourage stealth.

They are not a totally separate issue; they have a huge impact on the gameplay dynamic of any weapon provided. I played on expert, and found the sword useful. Were it a dagger, it would have been useless.

Quote Posted by pwyll

Why do you need sword instead of dagger? Are you going to a fight instead of thievery?

Because I like to Ironman missions, and I'm not perfect. Were I actually in the business of thieving in the City, you can be damn sure I'd carry a shortsword to preserve my life with.

pwyll on 15/5/2009 at 04:09

Quote:

Because I like to Ironman missions, and I'm not perfect. Were I actually in the business of thieving in the City, you can be damn sure I'd carry a shortsword to preserve my life with.

If you were a good thief, you'd never need to use it. Throw a flashbomb or something or even reload. The joy of Thief is how to pass near the guards without being detected. Strategy making is cool. If there is no way you can pass a guard without disturbing it that means that the mission is not done correctly. :sly:

kamyk on 15/5/2009 at 04:40

Well, yes, but the main rule of Ironman mode is that you can't reload or save anywhere but the start of the mission, which goes a long way towards explaining his need of the sword :)

I reload if I get spotted, as I play a very loose interpretation of Ghosting. If he plays Ironman, he can't.

Chade on 15/5/2009 at 04:48

Quote Posted by Ironpants

Thief's base concept already discourages combat of any sort.

Sort of. Thief 1 is worse then the others in this regard. The T1 tutorial spent a great deal of time on combat, and many new players regarded monsters as "things you had to fight" (much to their ensuring frustration, I'm sure).

It's all about affordances ... monsters and swords affords fighting.

Quote Posted by Ironpants

I think we've all been cornered at least a few times ...

... [the sword] enables the player to continue playing if (inevitably) drawn into combat without having to kill anyone ...

... I played on expert, and found the sword useful. Were it a dagger, it would have been useless.

This makes no sense to me. I see no advantage in hanging around and blocking blows unless you also intend to fight the guard. Why not just run away? I can't recall being in a situation where it was advantageous to block blows rather then just run away ... maybe once or twice, but that's in ten years of playing thief!

Quote Posted by Ironpants

So what is the point of the dagger? Why not just use the blackjack?

The dagger is still a last ditch weapon. It's just a poor one, and doesn't have the same affordances a sword does.

Also, it allows you to make moral judgements. The first time I played TDS, I switched from ghosting to murderous bastard after reading how the pagans had infiltrated that family's home.

EDIT: So if you are in Ironman mode and get spotted, why not just run away and try again? This is much easier in TDS then in T1/2.

jtr7 on 15/5/2009 at 05:00

The only time I can understand anybody getting caught is during the first couple of times through the games when nothing has been memorized yet, including playing on different difficulty levels. If the player is distracted by a goal, or a little impatient, they can blunder into a confrontation. If the player doesn't know how the AI actually work nor understand their limitations, then they may not know they can get out of fighting. But this is only when it's all new, or, I suppose, if there's a memory deficit.

But after playing scores of missions, a taffer has little excuse for getting caught on accident--or at all--and should know they can just run away and dive off a balcony, hide in the shadows and wait five-minutes. If they are getting into confrontations, then something's not right OR they are provoking the situation with full intent. I'd like to hear some scenarios where none of these are true, and FMs don't count since the topic is intended for OMs and new OMs.

Ironpants on 15/5/2009 at 06:25

Quote Posted by Chade

First you claim the scenario makes no sense, then concede finding yourself in the exact situation in which it makes sense. I understand you found it rare enough to consider trivial; I did not. I enjoy the immersion of playing until dead or otherwise defeated, and the extra objectives in expert sold me right away.

Beleg Cúthalion on 15/5/2009 at 06:35

[Together with Ironpants et al.]

Quote Posted by ZylonBane

Do TRY to pay attention, would you? A dagger is an assassin's weapon, while a sword can be used for both offense and defense. That's the relevant difference.

Also, it's a gigantic pain in the ass to hack down banners with a dagger.

As long as you don't want to slash a free-hanging banner which would have no sense since you can walk around, using a dagger or knife will be much faster. You don't need a long blade for fabric, you know; or do you really think you can hit into the wall without touching it like in good old TDP/TMA? :rolleyes: OK; to speak a language you use yourself: That's nonsense. A lot of people carried a knife or dagger in the late middle ages AFAIK and that wasn't an assassins weapon (since assassins are usually a fictional construction as well) but a tool.

About carrying, well, now, bow and arrows are even worse if the space gets narrow (and I've a 50" horse bow which is about as small as it can get) and at least for the average mansion mission or maybe infiltration any large weapon doesn't make sense for a thief. Take one for the HC setting to be able to smash old doors when no one can hear you anyway, then it would be useful. Sword as a defense weapon is video game reality. If a trained fighter is as close to Garrett that he can parry with the sword, it's already too late to use it anyway OR a dagger would be useful as well.

The only argument for Garrett carrying a sword in a mansion mission would be some sort of gameplay balance. I cannot argue against gameplay mechanics, but the sword would be quite far from reality. After all it would be ridiculous to assume that everybody in the City was armed just because everybody's so into romantic/fantasy adventure universes.

I'd say a sword for any outdoor mission like HC or LC and a dagger for anything in confined space.

Ironpants on 15/5/2009 at 07:15

Quote Posted by Beleg Cúthalion

That's nonsense. A lot of people carried a knife or dagger in the late middle ages AFAIK and that wasn't an assassins weapon (since assassins are usually a fictional construction as well) but a tool.

Yes, they were carried primarily as eating utensils. ZylonBane didn't literally mean that only assassins used them, but that they are easily concealed and can be quickly drawn and thrust into a belly - thus they are suitable for assassination.

Quote Posted by Beleg Cúthalion

Sword as a defense weapon is video game reality. If a trained fighter is as close to Garrett that he can parry with the sword, it's already too late to use it anyway OR a dagger would be useful as well.

Sir, I must disagree with such a statement based on personal experience and that of George Silver's:

(http://www.pbm.com/~lindahl/paradoxes.html)
(http://www.pbm.com/~lindahl/brief.html)