against a human maybe. Against a giant dragon? Not at all.
The bigger the difference in physical strength the more important it becomes tl concentrate your attack on a narrow spot through piercing or cutting.
And the more important it becomes to protect yourself from a big huge dragon claw coming at you?! Big metal barrier between me and it? Yes please! Hehehe
A meak little piece of metal wont protect you from the crushing, flesh randing claws of a giant dagon though? xD
My first char in Skyrim was sword/shield. He was a beast.
The biggest issue I can see with this idea currently is that you can swap weapons in combat. (You have to not take or deal damage for a few seconds but still). This means that everyone will expect you to only swap to this in order to offtank adds or take over If the tank flops on the ground. No serious group would bring this for damage unfortunately.
Now if the game proves me wrong and let's you significantly dump defensive stats on a shield for damage stats then hey congrats you found a neat new weapon meta. More power to ya.
The biggest issue I can see with this idea currently is that you can swap weapons in combat. (You have to not take or deal damage for a few seconds but still). This means that everyone will expect you to only swap to this in order to offtank adds or take over If the tank flops on the ground. No serious group would bring this for damage unfortunately.
Now if the game proves me wrong and let's you significantly dump defensive stats on a shield for damage stats then hey congrats you found a neat new weapon meta. More power to ya.
I do have to agree with this.
If you are using one offensive and one defensive item, then you shouldn't expect to do the DPS of someone holding two offensive items, or an offensive item in both hands. That just doesn't make sense.
Now, a sword and shield would be fine for non-DPS roles, I could see bards making use of this, and perhaps even some healers, as well as tanks, obviously - I just don't see how it would be a DPS build with that specific load out.
Rangers are going to have a minimum distance requirement where they are eligible to use their ranged weapons.[15]
While melee characters have a max distance proximity where they're eligible to use their sword and melee weapons, Rangers are going to have a minimum distance requirement.[15] – Steven Sharif
If you're mooching along carrying your bow, and a melee player comes up to you and attacks you, are you going to be able to use a weapon to fight back? They're melee, so they're going to be in close, and the Bow has a minimum distance where it's allowed to shoot, so you won't be able to shoot your bow. And, you won't be able to change weapon, cos the other player is going to be dealing damage to you. So, you've instantly lost part of your offensive/defensive capability just cos you were holding a Bow when you were attacked.
Rangers are going to have a minimum distance requirement where they are eligible to use their ranged weapons.[15]
While melee characters have a max distance proximity where they're eligible to use their sword and melee weapons, Rangers are going to have a minimum distance requirement.[15] – Steven Sharif
If you're mooching along carrying your bow, and a melee player comes up to you and attacks you, are you going to be able to use a weapon to fight back? They're melee, so they're going to be in close, and the Bow has a minimum distance where it's allowed to shoot, so you won't be able to shoot your bow. And, you won't be able to change weapon, cos the other player is going to be dealing damage to you. So, you've instantly lost part of your offensive/defensive capability just cos you were holding a Bow when you were attacked.
Or, am I just looking at it wrong...?
Maybe this will help:
Characters performing ranged abilities will switch to the ranged weapon, then can switch back to the melee weapon and shield or two-handed melee weapon.[7]
The weapon held in the main hand slot determines the active weapon ability.[7]
Do I want my main hand to be my ranged weapon or do I want my main hand to be my melee weapon with regards to skill usage. For example, with the Ranger, if you have a range skill it'll automatically swap regardless of what your main weapon hand is, but for the combat ability for the "Auto Attack" feature it would be your chosen weapon.[7] – Steven Sharif
This leads me to believe that it will be depending on your main weapon if you can swap effectively between skills to deal with a range or melee foe.
Rangers are going to have a minimum distance requirement where they are eligible to use their ranged weapons.[15]
While melee characters have a max distance proximity where they're eligible to use their sword and melee weapons, Rangers are going to have a minimum distance requirement.[15] – Steven Sharif
If you're mooching along carrying your bow, and a melee player comes up to you and attacks you, are you going to be able to use a weapon to fight back? They're melee, so they're going to be in close, and the Bow has a minimum distance where it's allowed to shoot, so you won't be able to shoot your bow. And, you won't be able to change weapon, cos the other player is going to be dealing damage to you. So, you've instantly lost part of your offensive/defensive capability just cos you were holding a Bow when you were attacked.
Or, am I just looking at it wrong...?
Maybe this will help:
Characters performing ranged abilities will switch to the ranged weapon, then can switch back to the melee weapon and shield or two-handed melee weapon.[7]
The weapon held in the main hand slot determines the active weapon ability.[7]
Do I want my main hand to be my ranged weapon or do I want my main hand to be my melee weapon with regards to skill usage. For example, with the Ranger, if you have a range skill it'll automatically swap regardless of what your main weapon hand is, but for the combat ability for the "Auto Attack" feature it would be your chosen weapon.[7] – Steven Sharif
This leads me to believe that it will be depending on your main weapon if you can swap effectively between skills to deal with a range or melee foe.
Hmmmm, maybe. Will be interesting to see the footage when we get some gameplay videos.
I totally understand that IRL, the S/S is an excellent combination but in games it's a bit unbalanced since what you want is both high DPS and high suitability. How will you justify that to the MDPS that sacrifice their protection to go all out damage? Therein lies the problem, you can't have BOTH the highest DPS and the best protection or else EVERYONE would be playing them. There has to be a trade off.
So S/S will have excellent DPS and good protection (probably heavier armor as well) while that 2 handed Berserker or dual wielder will have lower survivability but more extreme DPS capability.
I totally understand that IRL, the S/S is an excellent combination but in games it's a bit unbalanced since what you want is both high DPS and high suitability. How will you justify that to the MDPS that sacrifice their protection to go all out damage? Therein lies the problem, you can't have BOTH the highest DPS and the best protection or else EVERYONE would be playing them. There has to be a trade off.
So S/S will have excellent DPS and good protection (probably heavier armor as well) while that 2 handed Berserker or dual wielder will have lower survivability but more extreme DPS capability.
I totally understand that IRL, the S/S is an excellent combination but in games it's a bit unbalanced since what you want is both high DPS and high suitability. How will you justify that to the MDPS that sacrifice their protection to go all out damage? Therein lies the problem, you can't have BOTH the highest DPS and the best protection or else EVERYONE would be playing them. There has to be a trade off.
So S/S will have excellent DPS and good protection (probably heavier armor as well) while that 2 handed Berserker or dual wielder will have lower survivability but more extreme DPS capability.
THE BALANCE MUST BE MAINTAINED!
Holy cow, that's one amazing dog trick! I'm calling deep fake!
0
Options
NagashMember, Leader of Men, Kickstarter, Alpha One
I totally understand that IRL, the S/S is an excellent combination but in games it's a bit unbalanced since what you want is both high DPS and high suitability. How will you justify that to the MDPS that sacrifice their protection to go all out damage? Therein lies the problem, you can't have BOTH the highest DPS and the best protection or else EVERYONE would be playing them. There has to be a trade off.
So S/S will have excellent DPS and good protection (probably heavier armor as well) while that 2 handed Berserker or dual wielder will have lower survivability but more extreme DPS capability.
THE BALANCE MUST BE MAINTAINED!
Such a good dogo
The dead do not squabble as this land’s rulers do. The dead have no desires, petty jealousies or ambitions. A world of the dead is a world at peace
I totally understand that IRL, the S/S is an excellent combination but in games it's a bit unbalanced since what you want is both high DPS and high suitability. How will you justify that to the MDPS that sacrifice their protection to go all out damage? Therein lies the problem, you can't have BOTH the highest DPS and the best protection or else EVERYONE would be playing them. There has to be a trade off.
So S/S will have excellent DPS and good protection (probably heavier armor as well) while that 2 handed Berserker or dual wielder will have lower survivability but more extreme DPS capability.
In my experience, it's never been a popular class because you can see in this video, the player only uses the shield once in the entire fight - the rest of the time he's just dodging efficiently (also the enemy is just standing around for no reason?)
Whereas a lance player would use their shield almost all the time - which is what I imagine a tank would do.
So what is this guy Captain America's only fan or something? Most would probably just prefer to hold another weapon or wield one weapon with 2 hands.
Hell in WoW warriors do both. Dual wield two handed weapons. xD
I don't particularly care for shields as offensive tools.
Let's not be too hostile about it, Shields can be used offensively the issue with this specific request is that anyone can use any weapon/armor. A sword and shield dps would require a specific class or archetype to solely focus on making an otherwise tank item do more damage only when wielding said shield.
When I think of a shield/sword dps I think of a gladiator or very skilled footsoldier that has learned to use their shield to knock opponents off guard for devastating damage. The best way to explain it would be if a Rogue in 5e dnd had shield master, allowing them to shove a target prone as a bonus action allowing them to gain sneak attack without an allies help.
I actually have the build for this if anyone wants the full build. I chose lizardfolk for the race with 2 levels fighter and the rest go into swashbuckler rogue. You don't wear armor, you wield a rapier and a shield. This makes you very tanky, very mobile, and quite good at dealing strong damage each round.
Comments
Indeed - the current wording we have is that it will "maybe be a few seconds", so at least we know it shouldn't be too long.
My first char in Skyrim was sword/shield. He was a beast.
Now if the game proves me wrong and let's you significantly dump defensive stats on a shield for damage stats then hey congrats you found a neat new weapon meta. More power to ya.
I do have to agree with this.
If you are using one offensive and one defensive item, then you shouldn't expect to do the DPS of someone holding two offensive items, or an offensive item in both hands. That just doesn't make sense.
Now, a sword and shield would be fine for non-DPS roles, I could see bards making use of this, and perhaps even some healers, as well as tanks, obviously - I just don't see how it would be a DPS build with that specific load out.
If you're mooching along carrying your bow, and a melee player comes up to you and attacks you, are you going to be able to use a weapon to fight back? They're melee, so they're going to be in close, and the Bow has a minimum distance where it's allowed to shoot, so you won't be able to shoot your bow. And, you won't be able to change weapon, cos the other player is going to be dealing damage to you. So, you've instantly lost part of your offensive/defensive capability just cos you were holding a Bow when you were attacked.
Or, am I just looking at it wrong...?
Maybe this will help:
Characters performing ranged abilities will switch to the ranged weapon, then can switch back to the melee weapon and shield or two-handed melee weapon.[7]
The weapon held in the main hand slot determines the active weapon ability.[7]
Do I want my main hand to be my ranged weapon or do I want my main hand to be my melee weapon with regards to skill usage. For example, with the Ranger, if you have a range skill it'll automatically swap regardless of what your main weapon hand is, but for the combat ability for the "Auto Attack" feature it would be your chosen weapon.[7] – Steven Sharif
This leads me to believe that it will be depending on your main weapon if you can swap effectively between skills to deal with a range or melee foe.
Hmmmm, maybe. Will be interesting to see the footage when we get some gameplay videos.
So S/S will have excellent DPS and good protection (probably heavier armor as well) while that 2 handed Berserker or dual wielder will have lower survivability but more extreme DPS capability.
Holy cow, that's one amazing dog trick! I'm calling deep fake!
Such a good dogo
Pretty sure those are treats too.
Must be a happy fat good dogo.
Heh, I hadn't spotted that. Good eye, sir!
https://youtube.com/watch?v=OltfWqxcGUs
The charge sword is honestly more of an axe dps and an off-tank SnB.
for SnS it's probably more like this one:
In my experience, it's never been a popular class because you can see in this video, the player only uses the shield once in the entire fight - the rest of the time he's just dodging efficiently (also the enemy is just standing around for no reason?)
Whereas a lance player would use their shield almost all the time - which is what I imagine a tank would do.
Hell in WoW warriors do both. Dual wield two handed weapons. xD
I don't particularly care for shields as offensive tools.
U.S. East
Let's not be too hostile about it, Shields can be used offensively the issue with this specific request is that anyone can use any weapon/armor. A sword and shield dps would require a specific class or archetype to solely focus on making an otherwise tank item do more damage only when wielding said shield.
When I think of a shield/sword dps I think of a gladiator or very skilled footsoldier that has learned to use their shield to knock opponents off guard for devastating damage. The best way to explain it would be if a Rogue in 5e dnd had shield master, allowing them to shove a target prone as a bonus action allowing them to gain sneak attack without an allies help.
I actually have the build for this if anyone wants the full build. I chose lizardfolk for the race with 2 levels fighter and the rest go into swashbuckler rogue. You don't wear armor, you wield a rapier and a shield. This makes you very tanky, very mobile, and quite good at dealing strong damage each round.