Weapons and block
 

Would anyone else agree that it'd be more fair if certain weapons had a block percentage as well? This way every class with any weapon could utilize the block from endurance, making it an all around more useful stat. Not to mention it'd make for more viable tanking builds. The block doesn't have to be significant, something like 1% block or 2% block, depending on the weapon for balance. It'd just have to be enough so that getting endurance on your shieldless character wouldn't be a complete waste.

Hm, I think that would be fair, since shield-users not only get block, but a lot of extra defense too. D:

Every weapon. I mean, physically it'd be possible for a staff to block an attack once in a while at least. A two hand sword or axe should be capable of it too, along with bows and cross bows. I'm not sure what to think about cleric weapons and one handed swords though, it'd add some more spice to tanking for sure though.

hey, if tira can block with a giant metal hula hoop in SC III, then why cant a staff or bow block?

Yeah, i mean staffs/wands could have like magical sheilding to help prevent attacks.
If i was a real mage i would do that for sure!
Pity im not.

what would remain of a crossbow after it blocked a huge overhead hit from my axe? =)

I'm pretty they're both tempered with the same steel. Afterall, Karls makes everything.

Well I think archer weapons are a different thing entirely. I don't think any archer would try to block with their bow or crossbow. They're hardly designed for that.

But otherwise I do agree fully. As it is now, the blocking is strictly limited to clerics and 1h sword fighters, and as it completely negates damage once it kicks in, it's pretty unfair to other characters to not have such an option. Especially the less rigid ones.

Staffs and bows should maybe gain more evade for that part where fighters and clerics have block? That would work better possibly as staffs and bows can be rather quick weapons.

Archers could wear one of those mini shields on one arm to block

It's perfectly plausible that a person blocks with any weapon. People thinking that staves and bows are fragile clearly haven't ever handled them in real life. With staves, I'm talking about combat staves of course, but magic staves and combat staves would essentially be the same. Bows aren't so fragile, they've been known to be used to block sword attacks and what not before.

maybe think of blocking with bare hands eek.
You can actually block a swordhit by hand if you know some things xD
So if we go to real life thingy, all characters should be able to wear some mini knives to stab, know some asian kickass moves etc. -.-
it's just a game so yeah, if you would make all characters block it would be weird from that point i guess because as i get all Characters in Fiesta are kids. watch the size and what we looks like. xD
And for another example you can take Blahs drawings ^^ the lil fiesta kiddies with big boobs ;)
So i guess that we aint some ninja-babies nor superbabies so no blocks are needed ^^





















btw: super-ninja-babies kick asses ! ^^

I kinda have to disagree, while end does need to be revamped a little i think block should only pertain to classes that will fight in melee.

I mean c'mon compare a mage staff to a equivalent of a fighter's axe/2handed sword...If you TRIED blocking with that it would break

i agree with this except for archers. what archers should have i think is kinda a more evade kinda thing. you know because we would want balanced classes

I think endurance should benefit all classes equally. Why should an archer invest points into endurance only to not benefit completely from what it gives? It won't upset the balance of the game terribly in my opinion. Block occurs quite rarely, but it could be life saving.

I'm aware I brought the whole real life argument in, but that was purely an example case for people who were wondering how exactly block would be brought about by a bow, staff, two handed sword or axe. It wouldn't be completely illogical for it to be implemented into the game.


I suppose I could argue that the mage could imbue a burst of magic into their staff making it temporarily unbreakable, or that Smith Karls had tempered all weapons with the same steel. It wouldn't be outside the realm of possibility in a game based on fantasy afterall.

But let's swing this back into the real question, and avoid discussing trivial details like whether or not it's "realistic." I'm just asking, would you find this more fair, and why?

With the whole realistic-issue aside, I think enabling blocking to all classes would indeed be more fair. There is no reason to limit it to just meleeing characters other than the "realistic aspect".

Fighters and clerics already have higher defense than mages and archers, and they both get evade just like mages and archers do. (archers to a higher degree) Whereas, mages and archers (and exclusively 2H fighters) simply lack blocking altogether.

When a block occurs, it means no damage whatsoever. Adding this to a cleric who is already ridiculously hard to kill makes no sense to me. >_>

why the fuck do mages need shield block anyways ? just spam skills be4 you die, you dont have to kill high lvl mobs.
And about archers, kinda same thing but you have more hp when a mob aggros you.

+ the block rate is about 5% maybe ?
which means 1 mishit per 20 ?

clerics/warriors usually take all those in 1 or 2 mobs, so 1 mishit doesnt do anything -.-

So i have no fucking idea what's the deal -_-
Anyways discussing such things in here is kinda pointless, None will pay attention to this and stuff. If you want something like that mail the Outspark's Fiesta team and they'll do it if they like the idea, if not, nothing will happen.
.....PointLess Thread...

and once this would be implented, clerics and 1h sword fighters would have an even higher block rate, because then they could block with the shield and even with their weapon :)

sure, id like to see my char block as well, and yes, some hits can be blocked with any type of weapon (even if a fragile crossbow would prolly shatter) but..

..but then i would also like to see my axe, which im wielding with huge swings - to do damage to all nearby enemys that are crossing its way =)

Even if the staff was made out of a the same metal as the staff, do you really think a small stick of metal backed by small flimsy mage arms can block a figther's REDICULOUSLY larger and heavier axe or 2handed sword who the fighter himself is very strong.

Do you think a sword held by a human can stop a massive monster???
A mage could block attacks from a warrior and in most other games they can at least make wards or somthing to increase defense and block.
You have to realize mages dont just use staffs, they can use magic also.

If their blocking by magic then make it should BE LIKE that thier blocking with magic. It should be like like a buff skill that uses SP just like all OTHER magics. If thier using wards, magic or something else to block then really its nothing like blocking with a weapon or shield.

I'm Not at all against character balancing but this isn't how i would picture the way it should be balanced.

I believe it could work if all weapons got it be I think it would only be fair if warriors still get the most out of it since there more of a tanking class.

yeah but a staff, with out any magic, could still block better than say, a
2-hand sword or axe, but worse than a sheild but they still can block.

@rokaraged: im saying they should have a skill, BUT THEY DONT
it could be exactly like the clerics aura to boost def or some other stat for blocking. im just saying they should make it.
and mages dont have flimsy arms (we just arnt as hard-headed as tanks)

I still fail to see how a bow can have even the potential to block.

everyone who says "how can weapon X block?"

go play soul calibur III. Tira (picture below) blocks with her ring blade and its got a big F'in hole in the middle. If that can block Sigfried's Zwiehander, i think an xbow can block a little slap from a monster.

http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h241/xFei/Tira.jpg

if ^that can block Vthat, anything's possible

http://content.answers.com/main/cont...iedArtwork.jpg

Blocks don't involve just defending against an enemy's weapons full attack, that would be foolhardy. In reality a competent staff user would try to block a sword user at their weapons hilt, the source of the momentum of the swing. The staff has a much more extensive reach than the sword, so the staff user will take advantage of this and try to disarm the sword user. The sword user's best tactic against this is to repeatedly thrust into the opponent's torso, which would be much harder to defend against for a staff user, and will most likely force him/her to begin evasive maneuvors.

Blocking doesn't always involve negating an enemy attack with your own defense, it can involve offensives as well.

I've already told people that I don't want this thread to discuss how "realistic" it is that a staff or bow block a sword. It's possible, just think outside the square here, they could just be blocking the hilt of the blade by stepping in slightly. With swords, the power becomes less and less as you get closer to the hilt.

I want to discuss how fair you think it would be if this were implemented into the game. Why should the block gained from endurance be exclusive to shield users? Doesn't this turn people off without shields from using their free stats on endurance? By not allowing characters the block from endurance, doesn't it scar overall character versatility? I mean, I was reading a "full end mage" thread the other day, and immediately thought it was absurd because the mage wouldn't benefit from the block, which is the best aspect of the endurance stat in my opinion.

Ummmmm. I really have to disagree.

End doesn't give you as much benefit because you're a mage/archer? Well, you know what? You're a mage/archer. Of course it wouldn't. If you think mages/archers should get block from end because it's more fair, then I think clerics should get double the crit bonus from spirit because it's fair. I mean, think about it - we only have half a DD's DPS, so our points in spirit are half as useful. But guess what - as cool as it'd be, that'd destroy the balance. My cleric HAS TO suck at DD because she's great at so many other things. And that's the point of having classes.

Call me unfair or mean if you want, but that's how it works, and I agree with it. ;x

Then wouldn't that make shields pointless? The point of getting a shield is for the block rate. If everyone gets block rate from endurance, why get the shield for?

I kind of agree with Laffie. o:

Does shield give us enough block rate that will actually be twice as much? I mean, even with my shield now, I don't notice myself blocking that much. o.O

I do agree with that, block should be on all weapons. Perhaps for non shields, they get a lowered amount per point of END? Shields should have a better block ability than a weapon because....duh, its a shield but it seems reasonable that blocking with any kind of weapon is possible.

But a shield will allow us to enhance the use of that stat - this is why we get a shield! I really wouldn't get the point in getting a shield if it all classes get block rate. Extra defense and HP is already a significant amount - I notice that an archer with 10-15 endurance (forgot exact numbers) tank better than an archer with no endurance at all. Just having extra HP and defense is enough to be make a difference.

Now let's imagine that weapons for each class get a certain amount of block rate. Picture this: an archer that has a full endurance build. They will be blocking half of the hits with their END/block rate on weapon and evading the other half with their natural stat DEX. Their damage will still be great (of course, this will vary depending where they put their stat points to) as they have the skills for it. They will also crit a lot because of their stats on the weapon.

Then you have a full end cleric. They block half the hits with their END/block rate on weapon, and they will be further blocking the other half of the hits from the extra block rate of the shield compared to the archer's weapon as well as with their shield block rate skill. However, their damage will still suck. We don't have that many offense skills and our weapons doesn't have the extra crit rate.

If you compare the archer and cleric : archer seems to sound better because they can block AND do a sufficient amount of damage, whereas the cleric can only block properly.

Now let's imagine the same situation in the game right now. Full end archer = survive a bit better, evades, deals nice damage. Full end cleric = blocks and survive very well (more than the archer), deals only moderate damage. This will prevent a class from becoming too powerful in both defense AND damage.

And this is why only shield users - namely clerics and fighters - get to benefit from block rate. If archers and mages get block rate too - what will make clerics and fighters special? Archers and mages will get to block/survive almost just as well as a cleric and fighter and deal great damage while the clerics and fighters can't.

The point of having different classes is so that each class get to master a certain ability. We have weapons and skills to help master that ability. You can bring up a fighter/cleric that deals a lot of damage by following a certain build, but they will never match up an archer/mage who also does the same thing and uses a build that enhances their damage. This is the same vice versa. You can have a full END archer/mage, but their defense will never match up a full END cleric/fighter. Different classes for different abilities are needed to have the game in balance. If you make everything completely fair between all classes - then we're all going to end up to be the same and that's no fun at all.

Where are you getting these statistics with block and evasion =/. It's not going to tip over that much at all. An archer evading half the time and blocking half the time? I don't think so. I'm not trying to make every single little thing fair between every character. I would just like to see all the free stats to benefit every class the same (excluding strength and intel), because why shouldn't they? You're treating it as though if this were implemented, the entire game's balance would tip over. Would it honestly do that?

You're neglecting a lot of details here. In answer to the question. A fighter would have enormous amounts of HP and a bigger defense bonus from his equipments (archers get a higher evasion boost from their equipments, and a weaker defense gain). That is what would keep the fighter special. It's a far more capable tank, and the archer would never be able to match that. A cleric has a heal, and various support abilities for themselves and their party. That's what makes the cleric special. Whilst all the archer really has going for him is slightly improved survivability, and higher damage. He won't have the HP, defense or heal that the other two classes you brought up have. He isn't the same as either the cleric or fighter in most respects. Fighters, clerics and archers/mages are unique, and still capable in their respective fields of tanking, support and dealing damage, regardless of whether or not you give them block.

The blocking/evading half the time thing was only an example. I couldn't be bothered to say "imagine the archers blocking 3 hits every 20 hits and evade another 4 hits every 20 hits..." etc. My main point of that would be the archer may be able to block/evade as much as a shield user can block.

If it's not going to make that much of a difference, why implement it then? If you're talking about adding such little block rate that's not going to make much difference, I don't see the point in adding an element that won't make much difference to the game in its current state.

I don't understand. D: