I would like to see a number of different options for your 1 hander while tanking, shield and spear would be a nice option. Other options could include mace/hammer, sword and axe they may have their own skill line thus providing different skill possibilities.
Then if you start to apply resistances to creatures such as less damage from say blunt and crushing then it may pay to swap to an edged or piercing weapon to do more damage. Different creatures could have resistance or vulnerability to a type of weapon damage, could be interesting to figure out, though doubt this will find its way into the game.
Since there are many classes, I'd say something like spear and shield is highly possible. I can't remember correctly but I think I saw someone say that all classes can use any weapons but it's a matter of compatibility with their abilities but I could be wrong.
I personally love the idea of resistances, our knowledge of mobs should include what they are vulnerable to. Bludgeon, Pierce, Slash, Acid, Fire, Frost, Lighting, Nature should all be included in our required mob knowledge. Trying to pierce an Iron Golem should send you back to the life stone (re-spawn point) with a new respect for your lack of knowledge of the relevant flora and fauna.
@Uzial I respect the idea of having various damage resistances - but this should be met with character specialization into the weapon they are wielding to some degree. Because even an Axe (slashing) can eventually be used like a club (crushing)
I think we could have resistances that are setup by just having a damage reduction system based on opposing factors then give each weapon 2 damage types. Like a Halberd would have Slashing/Piercing damage. Axes would be Slashing/Bludgeoning, Swords could be Slashing/Piercing.
And that damage reduction should never equate to doing zero damage to a target. Just means you'll have a slight disadvantage when fighting that hopefully someone else in your party compensates for.
The inverse to this is those same enemies should also have vulnerabilities to take additional damage from certain types, like having a resistance to blugdeoning should have a vulnerability to Slashing, resistance to slashing has a weakness to piercing, resistance to piercing should be vulnerable to bludgeoning. This makes for a simplistic rock-paper-scissors system but it's recognizable by the player base.
The problem with resistances is the magic weapons (spell book for example). Since it is magic damage and not slashing/ect, then it would get an unfair advantage. Unless you then give monsters "magic resistance" but as soon as you do that you don't just nerf a kind of weapon, the whole mage faces a problem.... also with physical damage resistances, things like summoned creatures won't be able to change their type, putting the summoner at a disadvantage.
I like the idea of resistances in terms of game immersion. I don't like the practice of it much because it allows for some classes to become less useful in some situations, and more likely to be excluded from parties trying some content.
Unless there is a good level of monster diversity in each encounter, where maybe there are 4-5 different kinds of monsters. Then everyone will be effective against something at least.
Different mobs have different magic resistances, just as they would have natural resistances. Every Player archetype would be able to easily over come them with there weapon set. Spear and shield becomes staff, or cast a spell and add fire, frost, acid, bludgeoning lighting etc. as the principal source of damage.
Just as @Uzial said different enemies = different resistance, we already know that any archetype can use any weapon, it's just most aren't compatible with the class/abilities.
Comments
Then if you start to apply resistances to creatures such as less damage from say blunt and crushing then it may pay to swap to an edged or piercing weapon to do more damage. Different creatures could have resistance or vulnerability to a type of weapon damage, could be interesting to figure out, though doubt this will find its way into the game.
Having to choose your equipment to match your activity sounds like a solid idea
Like a Gladius is a thrusting weapon, while a scimitar is a slashing weapon.
I think we could have resistances that are setup by just having a damage reduction system based on opposing factors then give each weapon 2 damage types. Like a Halberd would have Slashing/Piercing damage. Axes would be Slashing/Bludgeoning, Swords could be Slashing/Piercing.
And that damage reduction should never equate to doing zero damage to a target. Just means you'll have a slight disadvantage when fighting that hopefully someone else in your party compensates for.
The inverse to this is those same enemies should also have vulnerabilities to take additional damage from certain types, like having a resistance to blugdeoning should have a vulnerability to Slashing, resistance to slashing has a weakness to piercing, resistance to piercing should be vulnerable to bludgeoning. This makes for a simplistic rock-paper-scissors system but it's recognizable by the player base.
I like the idea of resistances in terms of game immersion. I don't like the practice of it much because it allows for some classes to become less useful in some situations, and more likely to be excluded from parties trying some content.
Unless there is a good level of monster diversity in each encounter, where maybe there are 4-5 different kinds of monsters. Then everyone will be effective against something at least.