Are weapon skills interesting?

[rusty_shackleford]

Thread title. Is it fun or interesting to put points into a skill that just makes you be able to use a type of weapon better?

[rusty_shackleford]

Any RPGs where you have to actually train under a master to learn weapon skills?
I don't mean go to him and click "buy next skill level".

[logincrash]

Any RPGs where you have to actually train under a master to learn weapon skills?
I don't mean go to him and click "buy next skill level".

KCD1?

[rusty_shackleford]

Any RPGs where you have to actually train under a master to learn weapon skills?
I don't mean go to him and click "buy next skill level".

KCD1?

I actually have good memories of training with Bernard

[logincrash]

Thread title. Is it fun or interesting to put points into a skill that just makes you be able to use a type of weapon better?

Depends on what you mean by 'better." If the skill is just "Do +5% more damage," then no. If it changes the gameplay in some way, then yes. Gothic 1 is very cool with the way your character changes weapon animations, like holding the sword properly or doing acrobatics.

[rusty_shackleford]

Thread title. Is it fun or interesting to put points into a skill that just makes you be able to use a type of weapon better?

Depends on what you mean by 'better." If the skill is just "Do +5% more damage," then no. If it changes the gameplay in some way, then yes. Gothic 1 is very cool with the way your character changes weapon animations, like holding the sword properly or doing acrobatics.

I'm referring to games where you just put points into a weapon skill and you get better at using the weapon e.g., Fallout

[Val the Moofia Boss]

I think skilling up with a certain weapon should be seen as a reward or mark that you really like that weapon, rather than as a requirement for basic functionality like chance to hit.

Players choosing to use different weapons is one of the more visible and cool ways to microdifferentiate players from each other, especially if you decide to main a nonstandard weapon for your class. Ofcourse in multiplayer games you will see some metaslaves online complaining about people not bringing the "optimal" build (that some rando or webdote told them was so) and wasting their time, but so long as the fame can be beaten, that's good in my book.

[TKVNC]

They can seem a bit pointless, and almost an abstraction, but...

They're very good for immersion.

I see as such, using a weapon for skill is fine, but spending points is similar to actively practicing, not just using it to learn from use.

[logincrash]

Ofcourse in multiplayer games you will see some metaslaves online complaining about people not bringing the "optimal" build (that some rando or webdote told them was so) and wasting their time, but so long as the fame can be beaten, that's good in my book.

This is partially why I quit playing GW2.
No, I don't want to spend an hour "perfecting my DPS rotation" by hitting a literal wooden dummy, actually. I don't give a **** that my character build is unoptimized. I play games to have fun, and not to log in daily and grind for hours so that my number is 2% higher than yesterday like a ******* wageslave.

[logincrash]

Thread title. Is it fun or interesting to put points into a skill that just makes you be able to use a type of weapon better?

Depends on what you mean by 'better." If the skill is just "Do +5% more damage," then no. If it changes the gameplay in some way, then yes. Gothic 1 is very cool with the way your character changes weapon animations, like holding the sword properly or doing acrobatics.

I'm referring to games where you just put points into a weapon skill and you get better at using the weapon e.g., Fallout

Then no, weapon skills are not interesting. Doesn't make them horrible either, though. They just become serviceable.

[logincrash]

Apologies for the triplepost, but I'm on mobile and multiquoting is a pain in the ***.

They can seem a bit pointless, and almost an abstraction, but...

They're very good for immersion.

I see as such, using a weapon for skill is fine, but spending points is similar to actively practicing, not just using it to learn from use.

If you want immersion, the Elder Scrolls system of improving skills with use is superior. Some other games do it too, like Project Zomboid, but the list isn't long, sadly.

[TKVNC]

Apologies for the triplepost, but I'm on mobile and multiquoting is a pain in the ***.

They can seem a bit pointless, and almost an abstraction, but...

They're very good for immersion.

I see as such, using a weapon for skill is fine, but spending points is similar to actively practicing, not just using it to learn from use.

If you want immersion, the Elder Scrolls system of improving skills with use is superior. Some other games do it too, like Project Zomboid, but the list isn't long, sadly.

Mount and Blade too. It's subtle, but I do actually like it.

[Nemesis]

Thread title. Is it fun or interesting to put points into a skill that just makes you be able to use a type of weapon better?

Yes. It's cool to see your character show improvement the more points you allocate to the weapon skill.

[rusty_shackleford]

I like how in Gothic your character actually gets better at combat in mechanical ways(animation, speed, etc.,) and not just number go up.

[maidenhaver IV]

Arcanum separates expertise and skill. You spend character points to level skills, then find a trainer to level further in the skill. I hate character points, generic points spent on both abilities and skills, but I like the requirement to find trainers to advance in a skill. Might and Magic also did it this way. That's what trainers in Morrowind should have been used for.

I don't believe in increasing abilities/attributes. These ought to be treated as innate, outside of augments or potions.

[logincrash]

I don't believe in increasing abilities/attributes. These ought to be treated as innate, outside of augments or potions.

What about Strength and Dexterity and Endurance? Those can be improved with exercise.

[OnTilt]

Any RPGs where you have to actually train under a master to learn weapon skills?
I don't mean go to him and click "buy next skill level".

Not an RPG, but Zelda:The Wind Waker. Also, Twilight Princess. Not sure if these training moments are really what you mean by "train under" though.

As far as weapon skills I don't care for them. This might be because I've only played games where they're a static "swing betterer" stat though. Never played Gothic, but that sounds cool.

[J1M]

Thread title. Is it fun or interesting to put points into a skill that just makes you be able to use a type of weapon better?

This is an anti pattern that is hard for designers to spot. The magic equivalent would be assigning skill points to magic missile and then later never wanting to cast fireball because you couldn't allocate enough points to it.

When systems like this exist it forces players down a very narrow path and makes the majority of found weapons useless to the player. A fighter should be happy to find a new magical spear even if they are holding a sword when they find it.

If you absolutely have to include something like this it should be weapon categories, just as wizards are better at a school of magic instead of one spell. Example: bladed weapons, two-handed weapons, ranged weapons, metal weapons, even all swords would be better than what most games do.

[rusty_shackleford]

I think the only time it's kinda interesting is if a certain weapon class has unique traits. If a sword and a mace are both weapons and only differ in e.g., damage type, there's not too much different. But if it's more of choosing between completely different character builds e.g., daggers tend to be focused on poisons, speed, critical etc.,(often the only weapon type that get this!)
Even then, I dunno.

Feel free to provide examples if you can think of any

---

Still don't particularly find putting points into a skill to be interesting. Maybe this is more of point-build just not being fun at all, much more interesting to need trainers.

[rusty_shackleford]

re: people mentioning "learn by use", I don't like this. Tends to not actually represent how learning is done despite supposedly being more simulationist.
Definitely need to somehow link it to failing/chance of failure, not sure how.

[J1M]

re: people mentioning "learn by use", I don't like this. Tends to not actually represent how learning is done despite supposedly being more simulationist.
Definitely need to somehow link it to failing/chance of failure, not sure how.

Skill only increases on failure. (Miss, failed lock picking, etc)

[rusty_shackleford]

re: people mentioning "learn by use", I don't like this. Tends to not actually represent how learning is done despite supposedly being more simulationist.
Definitely need to somehow link it to failing/chance of failure, not sure how.

Skill only increases on failure. (Miss, failed lock picking, etc)

Encourages the same behavior because you'd just go find things you always fail at.
Probably some sort of formula where the amount of XP you get on success is proportional to the chance of failure.

---

Tim Cain did a video on this, I'd have to go dig it up, but I remember it having interesting ideas.

[Acrux]

re: people mentioning "learn by use", I don't like this. Tends to not actually represent how learning is done despite supposedly being more simulationist.
Definitely need to somehow link it to failing/chance of failure, not sure how.

Skill only increases on failure. (Miss, failed lock picking, etc)

Cleve had that in Grimoire, dependent on Wisdom score

[TKVNC]

Thread title. Is it fun or interesting to put points into a skill that just makes you be able to use a type of weapon better?

This is an anti pattern that is hard for designers to spot. The magic equivalent would be assigning skill points to magic missile and then later never wanting to cast fireball because you couldn't allocate enough points to it.

When systems like this exist it forces players down a very narrow path and makes the majority of found weapons useless to the player. A fighter should be happy to find a new magical spear even if they are holding a sword when they find it.

If you absolutely have to include something like this it should be weapon categories, just as wizards are better at a school of magic instead of one spell. Example: bladed weapons, two-handed weapons, ranged weapons, metal weapons, even all swords would be better than what most games do.

I'm not so sure. There are treatises on the handling of many weapon types, and on battlefield tactics. Generally they all refer to the need to train specific skills.

I don't really see how the skills required to use a spear would translate to a sword or vice versa

[J1M]

Thread title. Is it fun or interesting to put points into a skill that just makes you be able to use a type of weapon better?

This is an anti pattern that is hard for designers to spot. The magic equivalent would be assigning skill points to magic missile and then later never wanting to cast fireball because you couldn't allocate enough points to it.

When systems like this exist it forces players down a very narrow path and makes the majority of found weapons useless to the player. A fighter should be happy to find a new magical spear even if they are holding a sword when they find it.

If you absolutely have to include something like this it should be weapon categories, just as wizards are better at a school of magic instead of one spell. Example: bladed weapons, two-handed weapons, ranged weapons, metal weapons, even all swords would be better than what most games do.

I'm not so sure. There are treatises on the handling of many weapon types, and on battlefield tactics. Generally they all refer to the need to train specific skills.

I don't really see how the skills required to use a spear would translate to a sword or vice versa

The same way people who are very good at one sport are able to quickly learn another.

[rusty_shackleford]

Tim Cain did a video on this, I'd have to go dig it up, but I remember it having interesting ideas.

Pretty sure this is it:


He has a few good videos on this.

[Tangerine]

Learn by use should plateau until you go to a trainer to learn better techniques. Like mastering arithmetic and then being introduced to algebra to improve your math skill.

As for learning by failing, maybe only improve the skill on failure/success if you're within a certain threshold of success. If it's something that'd be impossible for you to pass regardless of attempts, then you're not learning anything. If you blow past the skill check requirement to succeed, then you're also learning nothing because it's too easy. That'd stop farming on the low/high ends of challenge.

[Oyster Sauce]

The Pathfinder games are great examples of "guess which of the 27 weapon types the developers actually cared about" (it's fauchards and scimitars).

There's a mod that condenses the weapon feats from individual types (short swords, daggers, dirks, knives, krises, kukris) into broader, more logical categories like (short blades) and I think everybody should use it.

[rusty_shackleford]

The Pathfinder games are great examples of "guess which of the 27 weapon types the developers actually cared about" (it's fauchards and scimitars)

also a great example with how most of the weapon types are nearly identical in what they do except for the ones that can hit further away I guess

[TKVNC]

This is an anti pattern that is hard for designers to spot. The magic equivalent would be assigning skill points to magic missile and then later never wanting to cast fireball because you couldn't allocate enough points to it.

When systems like this exist it forces players down a very narrow path and makes the majority of found weapons useless to the player. A fighter should be happy to find a new magical spear even if they are holding a sword when they find it.

If you absolutely have to include something like this it should be weapon categories, just as wizards are better at a school of magic instead of one spell. Example: bladed weapons, two-handed weapons, ranged weapons, metal weapons, even all swords would be better than what most games do.

I'm not so sure. There are treatises on the handling of many weapon types, and on battlefield tactics. Generally they all refer to the need to train specific skills.

I don't really see how the skills required to use a spear would translate to a sword or vice versa

The same way people who are very good at one sport are able to quickly learn another.

I suppose it's more that they understand training regimes, and have the discipline.

This could be reflected by Fighters having a 200% increase in skill gain with physical weapons.