Previous Thread
Previous
Expand All
Collapse All
Ignore Author
Reply
Coming from an ex-lance using bard, I agree with Menos and Evarin. Lances don't need to be touched. The lighter and faster polearms need incentive to use, not lances.
~Galenok
Bear in mind, too, that lances as implemented in GS are actually footman's lances. From armouronline.com:
>The footman's lance was essentially a spear used solely for thrusting. Generally, lances were considered to be a cavalry weapon but foot soldiers used a smaller version of them during the iron age throughout the known world. The main difference between a spear-proper and a footman's lance is that spears were often designed such that the spear tip broke off upon impact with the target. Lances, conversely, were designed such that the tip would not break off in the hands of the wielder. Other than that, though, a footman's lance is a spear.
http://www.armouronline.com/encyclopedia_of_historical_weapons/276/footmans_lance.html
>The footman's lance was essentially a spear used solely for thrusting. Generally, lances were considered to be a cavalry weapon but foot soldiers used a smaller version of them during the iron age throughout the known world. The main difference between a spear-proper and a footman's lance is that spears were often designed such that the spear tip broke off upon impact with the target. Lances, conversely, were designed such that the tip would not break off in the hands of the wielder. Other than that, though, a footman's lance is a spear.
http://www.armouronline.com/encyclopedia_of_historical_weapons/276/footmans_lance.html
Remember, too, that the original reason lances are mechanically different from spears is because the "lance attack table" from Arms Law was intended to be used for attacks delivered from a charging mount. Yes, the überest weapon in the game is actually a fossilized mechanical oversight.
-Dan
-Dan
>> the original reason lances are mechanically different from spears is because the "lance attack table" from Arms Law was intended to be used for attacks delivered from a charging mount.
Spot on, though I'd forgotten. Led me to remember this too:
>>m
>
>But there is no horse here to mount.
This dates back to the days too when those very mounts, like functional armor, were "in the works." Thanks for the memory jolt.
Spot on, though I'd forgotten. Led me to remember this too:
>>m
>
>But there is no horse here to mount.
This dates back to the days too when those very mounts, like functional armor, were "in the works." Thanks for the memory jolt.
>"This is a fine point about the size to weighting rationale. Lances would be naturally weighted to the same or more of a degree than the claid due to size, yes?"
Weapon size has no factor in the crit weighting of an item. You'll need to find a warrior trained in polearms to guage the level.
*Claids may be the exception but only in terms of flavor for Gemstone. I think you're stating what you are because of the website RP/flavor description of claids in specific.
Rath hit the nail on the head with this one.
RT and DF are the standard methods of representing the "size" of a weapon as compared to other weapons (And the Lance has a lot of both!). Changing this format to include crit weighting as a standard would devalue crit weighting as a stat entirely as it would become the norm as opposed to something special.
Gamemaster Konacon
Squares Team
RT and DF are the standard methods of representing the "size" of a weapon as compared to other weapons (And the Lance has a lot of both!). Changing this format to include crit weighting as a standard would devalue crit weighting as a stat entirely as it would become the norm as opposed to something special.
Gamemaster Konacon
Squares Team
Speaking of lances. Is it intended that lances and halberds only receive half their enchant bonus in the parry DS formula when compared to the other two-hand GRIP polearms? I've submitted a bug report just in case it is not.
The table includes the DS results (DEF stance) for each polearm. The values in the last column represent the total DS increase between a +0 and +20 weapon enchant bonus. The DS increase for lances and halberds (+9) is only half the increase (+18) for all other similarly enchanted polearms.
Mark
The table includes the DS results (DEF stance) for each polearm. The values in the last column represent the total DS increase between a +0 and +20 weapon enchant bonus. The DS increase for lances and halberds (+9) is only half the increase (+18) for all other similarly enchanted polearms.
| WEAPON | 0x | 1x | 3x | 4x | DS Increase w/+20 Bonus | ||
| Halberd | 274 | 276 | 281 | 283 | +9 | ||
| Lance | 274 | 276 | 281 | 283 | +9 | ||
| Spear 2 | 274 | 278 | 288 | 292 | +18 | ||
| Trident 2 | 274 | 278 | 288 | 292 | +18 | ||
| Naginata | 274 | 278 | 288 | 292 | +18 | ||
| Jeddart-axe | 274 | 278 | 288 | 292 | +18 | ||
| Hammer of Kai | 274 | 278 | 288 | 292 | +18 | ||
| Awl-pike | 274 | 278 | 288 | 292 | +18 |
Mark
>Is it intended that lances and halberds only receive half their enchant bonus in the parry DS formula when compared to the other two-hand GRIP polearms?
I took a look into this, found the cause, and am now investigating whether this was the intended behavior or not. I'll keep you updated. Thanks for bringing this up!
Gamemaster Konacon
Squares Team
I took a look into this, found the cause, and am now investigating whether this was the intended behavior or not. I'll keep you updated. Thanks for bringing this up!
Gamemaster Konacon
Squares Team
| >Is it intended that lances and halberds only receive half their enchant bonus in the parry DS formula when compared to the other two-hand GRIP polearms? - Mark |
| I took a look into this, found the cause, and am now investigating whether this was the intended behavior or not. I'll keep you updated. Thanks for bringing this up! |
| Gamemaster Konacon |
| Squares Team |
.
Thanks. I appreciate your reply.
I've been unable to reconstruct a reliable polearm parry DS formula. Any chance you can confirm that it is working as intended?
When a polearm is held with 0 weapon ranks the user receives a DS bonus. That bonus is (30 * stance), where stance is 50% + (stance/2). So, the DS bonus ranges from 15 in stance OFF to 30 in stance DEf. However, once a character trains 1 rank in polearms that bonus decreases slightly and continues to decrease with additional ranks. It may be intended that both the natural polearm bonus and the weapon enchant bonus both decrease with increasing skill ranks but it would be nice to know for sure.
Thanks again.
Mark
The issue with lances and halberds halving +enchant DS should be fixed. Let me know if you see any further issues like this!
>When a polearm is held with 0 weapon ranks the user receives a DS bonus. That bonus is (30 * stance), where stance is 50% + (stance/2). So, the DS bonus ranges from 15 in stance OFF to 30 in stance DEf. However, once a character trains 1 rank in polearms that bonus decreases slightly and continues to decrease with additional ranks. It may be intended that both the natural polearm bonus and the weapon enchant bonus both decrease with increasing skill ranks but it would be nice to know for sure.
Can you show me some examples of this?
Gamemaster Konacon
Squares Team
>When a polearm is held with 0 weapon ranks the user receives a DS bonus. That bonus is (30 * stance), where stance is 50% + (stance/2). So, the DS bonus ranges from 15 in stance OFF to 30 in stance DEf. However, once a character trains 1 rank in polearms that bonus decreases slightly and continues to decrease with additional ranks. It may be intended that both the natural polearm bonus and the weapon enchant bonus both decrease with increasing skill ranks but it would be nice to know for sure.
Can you show me some examples of this?
Gamemaster Konacon
Squares Team
>The issue with lances and halberds halving +enchant DS should be fixed. Let me know if you see any further issues like this!
>Gamemaster Konacon
>Squares Team
Thanks for the quick fix!
>>When a polearm is held with 0 weapon ranks the user receives a DS bonus. That bonus is (30 * stance), where stance is 50% + (stance/2). So, the DS bonus ranges from 15 in stance OFF to 30 in stance DEf. However, once a character trains 1 rank in polearms that bonus decreases slightly and continues to decrease with additional ranks. It may be intended that both the natural polearm bonus and the weapon enchant bonus both decrease with increasing skill ranks but it would be nice to know for sure.
>Can you show me some examples of this?
First is the DS increase with a polearm and 0 weapon ranks.
With 0 weapon ranks empty handed in stance OFF/DEF:
AS: -7 vs DS: +199 with AvD: +19 + d100 roll: +57 = -130
AS: -7 vs DS: +261 with AvD: +19 + d100 roll: +35 = -214
With 0 weapon ranks holding a lance in stance OFF/DEF:
AS: -7 vs DS: +214 with AvD: +19 + d100 roll: +82 = -120
AS: -7 vs DS: +291 with AvD: +19 + d100 roll: +43 = -236
Second, the table below contains raw data which shows the unusual pattern of the decreasing polearm DS bonus. This is with a 0x polearm.
Polearm DS Bonus by stance w/N weapon ranks
.
Also, the DS bonus from the weapon enchant for polearms is applied differently than other two-hand weapons. The DS increase for two-hand weapons with a +20 enchant bonus is 21 (20 * 1.05) in DEF stance. A polearm with a +20 enchant bonus adds 18 DS in DEF stance. So, there are two issues: the application of the natural polearm bonus and the polearm weapon enchant bonus.
With a 0x polearm in DEF stance:
AS: -23 vs DS: +248 with AvD: +4 + d100 roll: +53 = -214
With a +20 enchant bonus in DEF stance:
AS: -23 vs DS: +266 with AvD: +33 + d100 roll: +84 = -172
There are no issues with one-hand gripped polearms; they follow the one-hand weapon parry formula exactly, including the weapon enchant bonus.
Mark
>Gamemaster Konacon
>Squares Team
Thanks for the quick fix!
>>When a polearm is held with 0 weapon ranks the user receives a DS bonus. That bonus is (30 * stance), where stance is 50% + (stance/2). So, the DS bonus ranges from 15 in stance OFF to 30 in stance DEf. However, once a character trains 1 rank in polearms that bonus decreases slightly and continues to decrease with additional ranks. It may be intended that both the natural polearm bonus and the weapon enchant bonus both decrease with increasing skill ranks but it would be nice to know for sure.
>Can you show me some examples of this?
First is the DS increase with a polearm and 0 weapon ranks.
With 0 weapon ranks empty handed in stance OFF/DEF:
AS: -7 vs DS: +199 with AvD: +19 + d100 roll: +57 = -130
AS: -7 vs DS: +261 with AvD: +19 + d100 roll: +35 = -214
With 0 weapon ranks holding a lance in stance OFF/DEF:
AS: -7 vs DS: +214 with AvD: +19 + d100 roll: +82 = -120
AS: -7 vs DS: +291 with AvD: +19 + d100 roll: +43 = -236
Second, the table below contains raw data which shows the unusual pattern of the decreasing polearm DS bonus. This is with a 0x polearm.
Polearm DS Bonus by stance w/N weapon ranks
.
| Ranks | Off | Adv | For | Neu | Gua | Def |
| 0 | 15 | 18 | 21 | 24 | 27 | 30 |
| 1 | 15 | 17 | 21 | 23 | 25 | 29 |
| 2 | 14 | 18 | 20 | 24 | 26 | 29 |
| 3 | 14 | 18 | 20 | 22 | 26 | 28 |
| 4 | 14 | 17 | 20 | 23 | 25 | 28 |
| 5 | 14 | 17 | 20 | 23 | 26 | 28 |
| 10 | 15 | 18 | 20 | 23 | 25 | 27 |
| 15 | 15 | 17 | 19 | 21 | 25 | 27 |
| 20 | 14 | 18 | 19 | 22 | 25 | 26 |
| 32 | 14 | 17 | 18 | 21 | 23 | 26 |
Also, the DS bonus from the weapon enchant for polearms is applied differently than other two-hand weapons. The DS increase for two-hand weapons with a +20 enchant bonus is 21 (20 * 1.05) in DEF stance. A polearm with a +20 enchant bonus adds 18 DS in DEF stance. So, there are two issues: the application of the natural polearm bonus and the polearm weapon enchant bonus.
With a 0x polearm in DEF stance:
AS: -23 vs DS: +248 with AvD: +4 + d100 roll: +53 = -214
With a +20 enchant bonus in DEF stance:
AS: -23 vs DS: +266 with AvD: +33 + d100 roll: +84 = -172
There are no issues with one-hand gripped polearms; they follow the one-hand weapon parry formula exactly, including the weapon enchant bonus.
Mark
To add to my previous post.
For a character with 32 weapon ranks, 37 STR bonus, 17 DEX bonus, and a +20 polearm, I expected to see a polearm parry DS of 98 in stance DEF. The actual parry DS is 91.
Expected formula: ((Weapon ranks + STR/4 + DEX/4 + weapon enchant bonus) * 1.05) + 30 (polearm bonus)
((32 + 9 + 4 + 20) * 1.05) + 30 = 98 DS
What I'm actually seeing is:
((32 + 9 + 4) * 1.05) + 18 (weapon enchant bonus) + 26 (polearm bonus) = 91 DS
Mark
For a character with 32 weapon ranks, 37 STR bonus, 17 DEX bonus, and a +20 polearm, I expected to see a polearm parry DS of 98 in stance DEF. The actual parry DS is 91.
Expected formula: ((Weapon ranks + STR/4 + DEX/4 + weapon enchant bonus) * 1.05) + 30 (polearm bonus)
((32 + 9 + 4 + 20) * 1.05) + 30 = 98 DS
What I'm actually seeing is:
((32 + 9 + 4) * 1.05) + 18 (weapon enchant bonus) + 26 (polearm bonus) = 91 DS
Mark
>I'd say you were seeing that 1.05 is something smaller rather than those other effects. Maybe the two handed version of poles gets +1/3 rather than +1/2 that THW get or something like that. - Rathboner
No. It's definitely using the two-handed weapon parry formula for the base DS (Ranks + ST/4 + DE/4) * Stance Mod. With stance mods .30, .45, .60, .75, .90, 1.05 from offensive to defensive, respectively.
I rolled characters and checked this by changing stat mods and weapon ranks. The issue is with the weapon enchant and natural polearm bonuses. I couldn't find any set of mods for either or both that would satisfy the empirical data.
To see what I mean, compare the polearm bonus results for each stance with 1, 10 and 32 weapon ranks from the table I previous posted.
Mark
No. It's definitely using the two-handed weapon parry formula for the base DS (Ranks + ST/4 + DE/4) * Stance Mod. With stance mods .30, .45, .60, .75, .90, 1.05 from offensive to defensive, respectively.
I rolled characters and checked this by changing stat mods and weapon ranks. The issue is with the weapon enchant and natural polearm bonuses. I couldn't find any set of mods for either or both that would satisfy the empirical data.
To see what I mean, compare the polearm bonus results for each stance with 1, 10 and 32 weapon ranks from the table I previous posted.
| Ranks | Off | Adv | For | Neu | Gua | Def |
| 1 | 15 | 17 | 21 | 23 | 25 | 29 |
| 10 | 15 | 18 | 20 | 23 | 25 | 27 |
| 32 | 14 | 17 | 18 | 21 | 23 | 26 |
Mark
The deviation increases with weapon ranks and stance. That says to me that the stance mod isn't quite what you think it is. If you had the stance mod right, that pattern wouldn't be there. There isn't enough data there for to to readily pick out the truncation pattern so I can't quantify it precisely, but that looks like the weapon rank dependency in defensive is around 0.9-0.95 rather than 1.05
>The deviation increases with weapon ranks and stance. That says to me that the stance mod isn't quite what you think it is. If you had the stance mod right, that pattern wouldn't be there. There isn't enough data there for to to readily pick out the truncation pattern so I can't quantify it precisely, but that looks like the weapon rank dependency in defensive is around 0.9-0.95 rather than 1.05 - Rathboner
That's what I thought at first, but here's the problem I'm having with that.
Character A : 8 weapon ranks, 29 Str bonus, 20 Dex bonus, 30 Polearm bonus
Base: 8 + 7 + 5 + 30 = 50
Def DS:
empty handed: 136
w/0x hal: 184 (48/50) = .96
Gua DS:
empty handed: 124
w/0x halb: 167 (43/50) = .86
Neu DS:
empty handed: 112
w/0x halb: 149 (37/50) = .74
For DS:
empty handed: 101
w/0x halb: 132 (31/50) = .62
Adv DS:
empty handed: 89
w/0x halb: 115 (26/50) = .52
Off DS:
empty handed: 78
w/0x halb: 98 (20/50) = .40
Character B : 32 weapon ranks, 37 Str bonus, 17 Dex bonus, 30 polearm bonus
Base: 32 + 9 + 4 + 30 = 75 and 95 with a 4x weapon
Def DS:
empty handed: 183
w/0x lance: 255 (72/75) = .96
w/4x lance: 273 (90/95) = .95
Gua DS:
empty handed: 170
w/0x lance: 233 (63/75) = .84
w/4x lance: 249 (79/95) = .84
Neu DS:
empty handed: 157
w/0x lance: 211 (54/75) = .72
w/4x lance: 224 (67/95) = .71
For DS:
empty handed: 144
w/0x lance: 189 (45/75) = .60
w/4x lance: 199 (55/95) = .58
Adv DS:
empty handed: 131
w/0x lance: 167 (36/75) = .48
w/4x lance: 175 (44/95) = .47
Off DS:
empty handed: 118
w/0x lance: 145 (27/75) = .36
w/4x lance: 150 (32/95) = .34
And these are results from two more sets: (.98/.87/.76/.65/.55/.44)(.96/.85/.75/.64/.53/.41)
If you put them in a table you'll see that as the (base value + polearm bonus + enchant bonus) increases, the stance mods decrease.
Mark
That's what I thought at first, but here's the problem I'm having with that.
Character A : 8 weapon ranks, 29 Str bonus, 20 Dex bonus, 30 Polearm bonus
Base: 8 + 7 + 5 + 30 = 50
Def DS:
empty handed: 136
w/0x hal: 184 (48/50) = .96
Gua DS:
empty handed: 124
w/0x halb: 167 (43/50) = .86
Neu DS:
empty handed: 112
w/0x halb: 149 (37/50) = .74
For DS:
empty handed: 101
w/0x halb: 132 (31/50) = .62
Adv DS:
empty handed: 89
w/0x halb: 115 (26/50) = .52
Off DS:
empty handed: 78
w/0x halb: 98 (20/50) = .40
Character B : 32 weapon ranks, 37 Str bonus, 17 Dex bonus, 30 polearm bonus
Base: 32 + 9 + 4 + 30 = 75 and 95 with a 4x weapon
Def DS:
empty handed: 183
w/0x lance: 255 (72/75) = .96
w/4x lance: 273 (90/95) = .95
Gua DS:
empty handed: 170
w/0x lance: 233 (63/75) = .84
w/4x lance: 249 (79/95) = .84
Neu DS:
empty handed: 157
w/0x lance: 211 (54/75) = .72
w/4x lance: 224 (67/95) = .71
For DS:
empty handed: 144
w/0x lance: 189 (45/75) = .60
w/4x lance: 199 (55/95) = .58
Adv DS:
empty handed: 131
w/0x lance: 167 (36/75) = .48
w/4x lance: 175 (44/95) = .47
Off DS:
empty handed: 118
w/0x lance: 145 (27/75) = .36
w/4x lance: 150 (32/95) = .34
And these are results from two more sets: (.98/.87/.76/.65/.55/.44)(.96/.85/.75/.64/.53/.41)
If you put them in a table you'll see that as the (base value + polearm bonus + enchant bonus) increases, the stance mods decrease.
| B+P+E | Off | ADV | FOR | NEU | GUA | DEF |
| 37 | .44 | .55 | .65 | .76 | .87 | .98 |
| 44 | .41 | .53 | .64 | .75 | .85 | .96 |
| 50 | .40 | .52 | .62 | .74 | .86 | .96 |
| 75 | .36 | .48 | .60 | .72 | .84 | .96 |
| 95 | .34 | .47 | .58 | .71 | .84 | .95 |
Mark
What that table shows is that the game formula has a different structure to the one used to construct the table. The pattern suggests that something in the BPE that was assumed to be affected by stance, isn't. The asymptote at high ranks will be the actual stance mod and it looks consistent with an extra 1/3 for polearms rather than an extra 1/2 for THW. Its definitely heading down into the 0.9 - 0.95 region not up into the 1.05 region.
You steered me in the right direction, thanks! Your analysis is pretty accurate. The polearm base value and weapon enchant stance mods are (one-hand stance mods * 1.35). This is 90% of the two-hand weapon stance mods. But, there is an additional two-hand grip polearm DS bonus which ranges from +15 in stance OFF to +30 in stance DEF.
This order of operations has been the most accurate.
Two-hand grip polearm DS formula:
.
The stance modifiers are ((20% + stance/2) * 1.35) where stance is 0/20/40/60/80/100 from OFF to DEF respectively. Both advanced (.405) and neutral (.675) mods round up.
.
.
Polearm DS bonus formula is: 30 * (50% + stance/2)
.
Mark
This order of operations has been the most accurate.
Two-hand grip polearm DS formula:
.
| ((Weapon Ranks + STR/4 + DEX/4) * stance modifier)) + (weapon enchant bonus * stance modifier) + polearm bonus |
The stance modifiers are ((20% + stance/2) * 1.35) where stance is 0/20/40/60/80/100 from OFF to DEF respectively. Both advanced (.405) and neutral (.675) mods round up.
.
| Polearm Stance Modifiers |
| Stance | OFF | ADV | FOR | NEU | GUA | DEF |
| Modifier | .27 | .41 | .54 | .68 | .81 | .94 |
.
Polearm DS bonus formula is: 30 * (50% + stance/2)
.
| Polearm DS Bonus |
| Stance | 0FF | ADV | FOR | NEU | GUA | DEF |
| DS bonus | 15 | 18 | 21 | 24 | 27 | 30 |
Mark
