Proposal: Rebalancing Valaryan Weapons

[Pinkie Pie]

Currently the stats of all valyrian weapons regardless of what it is stands at +6, this means a valyrian knife is better than a steel two hander and the match for a valyrian sword. To make it fairer I propose the following.

Valyrian weapons be placed into 3 catagories
Small items such as knives have a +2 attack but can be wielded with a one handed sword to add attack power (not sure if any house is shown to have one of these but they could be gained through events).

One handed valyrian weapons have a +4 to attack making them better than their steel variants and a match for even the largest swords in terms of attack power. Their ability to be wielded wih a shield makes them better than any steel weapon but not too much stronger as to make them overpowered which they currently are.

Two handed valyrian weapons have a +6 to attack but can not be used in conjunction with another weapon or a shield. This means that like the standard two handed weapons it turns out to be the sme stats as the one hander with a shield but your trading off defence for offence.

[Gandalfus]

oppose. don't fix what ain't broke.
Obviously daggers would be +6 assassinations instead of duels, they give bonuses in their respective fields. Personally I dont think it makes a difference if the VS sword is a greatsword or longsword, a greatsword is heavier, so why should it give a better bonus if a longsword is quicker? Plus, you say balancing, but it could lead to arguments of unfairness, and then normal steel swords will be worthless too.

[Trot]

I like it valyrian weapons are a little op right now

[Gandalfus]

but then you could argue Wargs are OP.

[Pinkerton]

I like the division, but I think it shouldn't be for Valyrian swords only

[Gandalfus]

Currently the stats of all valyrian weapons regardless of what it is stands at +6, this means a valyrian knife is better than a steel two hander and the match for a valyrian sword. To make it fairer I propose the following.

Valyrian weapons be placed into 3 catagories
Small items such as knives have a +2 attack but can be wielded with a one handed sword to add attack power (not sure if any house is shown to have one of these but they could be gained through events).

One handed valyrian weapons have a +4 to attack making them better than their steel variants and a match for even the largest swords in terms of attack power. Their ability to be wielded wih a shield makes them better than any steel weapon but not too much stronger as to make them overpowered which they currently are.

Two handed valyrian weapons have a +6 to attack but can not be used in conjunction with another weapon or a shield. This means that like the standard two handed weapons it turns out to be the sme stats as the one hander with a shield but your trading off defence for offence.

This happens anyway lol. You cannot use Say, Ice with a shield. I agree with offhand weapons but dividing long swords and great swords (Valyrian) seems silly IMO. It's been like it has been since the original adaption, and all the old schoolers (Bonez, me, Lucius, Clagius, Jakev and the oldies others who are playing or returning) were happy with it.

[Pinkie Pie]

This happens anyway lol. You cannot use Say, Ice with a shield. I agree with offhand weapons but dividing long swords and great swords (Valyrian) seems silly IMO. It's been like it has been since the original adaption, and all the old schoolers (Bonez, me, Lucius, Clagius, Jakev and the oldies others who are playing or returning) were happy with it.

Not one person before me actualy took the time to go over the Valyrian weapons then.

*edit*That depends on your definition.

Say I had a valyrian greasword and you had a longsword with a shield

With top armour that is
+6 attack each
+6 defence for me
+8 defence for you

You can claim the weapons are even but you do not realise that one has a bonus of defence from a shield while the other does not, this can make the difference between ending a roll with 2 hitpoints or losing a duel. Standard greatswords have +2 more attack to compensate for this yet you refuse to add the same consideration to the valyrian weapons.

[Pinkie Pie]

What a surprise that your opposing this Gandalf. Your argument is flawed for they are indeed broken.

Steel sword +2 (+4 with shield)
Steel greatsword +4 (no shield bonus) This is what I call even.

Valyrian sword +6 (+8 with shield)
Valyrian greatsword +6 (no shield bonus) This is what I call unfair.

You can not claim that Valyrian swrods should all be the same if your not using the basis for standard weapons.
Changing it so standard steel greatswords are the same as longswords to show that valyrian weapons should stay the same does not solve anything either (in case you try it) because the greatsowrd would end up weaker due to the inability to use a shield with it.

As I stated several times in VM's the only logical way to keep the weapons fair is to change them. Something you promised to look into then ignored which I am taking to mean that you won't do it because it makes your character beatable in stats (even with the +3 you added to both duels and jousting).

However if we simply added +2 to valyrian greatswords they become far to strong when concerning standard wapons. THus I proposed we also drop their stats slightly so they are still better than steel weapons but not too powerful as to ruin the dueling side of the game.

[Trot]

I dont think valyrian one handed swords should give the same bonus as a two handed sword and there's a 1 in 50 chance of being a warg and then you tame an animal and a hawk gives a different bonus then a bear

[Gandalfus]

Something you promised to look into then ignored which I am taking to mean that you won't do it because it makes your character beatable in stats (even with the +3 you added to both duels and jousting).

not gonna bother if your going to sink to petty insults. keep going on like this and you will get this closed. I am willing to listen, but outright "you are wrong" or "you are opposing because your character is overpowered and it will limit it LULZ" will get this closed. if you are for one moment suggesting that I am cheating, there are Pm's and the thread of whining. otherwise, shut the door on your way out please.

[Zeus Almighty]

Damn I started a storm lol. I still do not like the separation by type of weapon. Syrio forel weilded a wooden sword an stomped a couple gold cloaks, oberyn beat the mountain with a spear (albeit poisoned and his pride still got the best of him) point is that I think it's more about the individuals proficiency with a weapon, it souls not be based on just raw weapon strength. For us gamers, if any of us have ever played an elder scrolls game, the damage a weapon does is about your characters ability to use that weapon. In other words, a wood elf would not be served better by using a two handed sword just cuz it's two handed, they would be better off using a dagger since its more to their skill. See what I'm sayin?

[Gandalfus]

and if you look, armour and weapons dont stack. Armour reduces what the enemy hits, not increases what you hit.
SO say i rolled a 20 against you yeah?

My modifiers:
+12 (Altogether)

Your defence Modifiers (+8)
and you rolled a 20 too. I would deal you 4 damage since your armour absorbed 8 of my +8 extra points of damage.

[Gandalfus]

Not really. They all found it fair.

[Zeus Almighty]

See my post post lol

[Pinkie Pie]

Not really. They all found it fair.

And yet not one of them bo8ught this issue up. This means they did not look at it properly.

See my post post lol

I did and if the same is taken into consideration for standard weapons then I would want it for valyrian ones.

[Gandalfus]

If they did not bring it up, it means they have no problems with it. Do not assume they are stupid because they do not agree with you.

[Pinkie Pie]

If they did not bring it up, it means they have no problems with it. Do not assume they are stupid because they do not agree with you.

Do not assume that because something is not bought up everyone loves it. It may simply be because no one has looked into it properly and realised the problem.

You changed the merchant rules when it was clear they were not as well done as they could be. At no point then did you state "If they did not bring it up, it means they have no problems with it".

[Gandalfus]

That's because the merchant rules had been abused anyway. And if you remember correctly I had no part in changing them. That was Bonez.

And true to my word, one of the original players has voted no. Go figure.

[Pinkerton]

http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=563581

Please check this out, let me know how you feel about it

[Gandalfus]

failed. Archived.