It's also just a stupid idea. I don't know why you all think boxers or brawlers would be such an awesome char to have. I personally think it would make no sense. Fighting a dragon with a pair of iron knuckles is pretty lame if you ask me.I'd love to see it and I have asked for something like this on a few occasions. Every time this has been asked,a pvper has chimed in to say we can't have it because it would "ruin" pvp.
According to some pvpers all changes would 'ruin' pvp, up to and including neon shoe dye.a pvper has chimed in to say we can't have it because it would "ruin" pvp.
Wrestle specials currently don't require tactics. That's a big point of playing a wrestle mage.Weapon specials require tactics. Tactics is also a determining factor in how often you hit. I don't see why either of these things would change. These would be weapons that you could use and if you want to put in the tactics and not cast as your attempting to use the special I don’t see why that’s really over powering. It sounds like your remembering things from a while back. Most pvp mages run a SC weapon anyway which I should say these should require too if you want to cast spells while wearing them. Its not really all that over powered at all.
Wrestling is a very useful skill. It's just not meant to put out damage. It's a defensive skill that is meant to help keep you alive. I still have a wrestle/archer on sonoma or napa that works completely fine. I hardly use wrestling on him but when I get disarmed I'm glad I have it. You have to actually think about what you do with wrestling you can't just work it into the normal warrior temps which it seems is all you guys wanna do. Make wrestle exactly like swords, macing, fencing, and archery cuz you wanna play a pali or sampire with wrestling cuz it'd look cooler.According to some pvpers all changes would 'ruin' pvp, up to and including neon shoe dye.
I think this would be a good addition. Finally make wrestling a usable skill.
It's also about the specials, tactic requirements, swing speed, and whether or not they can be disarmed.I'm for any addition that expands the way we can effectively play this game. As per ruining pvp, just make it so the damage bonus granted by the gloves doesn't apply when the target is a player (a thing the system already does for a lot of damage outputs) and voilà, problem gone.
So what's wrong with that? Variety is the spice of life.You have to actually think about what you do with wrestling you can't just work it into the normal warrior temps which it seems is all you guys wanna do. Make wrestle exactly like swords, macing, fencing, and archery cuz you wanna play a pali or sampire with wrestling cuz it'd look cooler.
100% agree. Adding new things is great and for this it would qualify as a weapon so it would require tactics. Which for the record it might be a good idea to require to use a special anyway.So what's wrong with that? Variety is the spice of life.
Besides, nobody is talking about changing the skill, the OP is suggesting an item that can be used to make wrestling an offensive skill. You want wrestling to work as a defensive skill? Fine, don't use the gloves.
what's wrong with it is that it would mess up the current system of wrestling. Wrestling as an offensive skill would be way overpowered as I've stated numerous times and will repeat again in caps so you can't miss it.So what's wrong with that? Variety is the spice of life.
Besides, nobody is talking about changing the skill, the OP is suggesting an item that can be used to make wrestling an offensive skill. You want wrestling to work as a defensive skill? Fine, don't use the gloves.
UO has sooooooo many other things that are worth working on other than this. Also are you suggesting that they make only the wrestle weps require tactics and leave people who use a spellbook or shield still not require tactics? Cuz if so given UO's history I seriously doubt they have the know how to make such a system work without seriously messing it up for a good while.100% agree. Adding new things is great and for this it would qualify as a weapon so it would require tactics. Which for the record it might be a good idea to require to use a special anyway.
You don't like the idea, you are entitled to feel that way. Please stop replying to every signle post with the same arguement, it's getting old.UO has sooooooo many other things that are worth working on other than this. Also are you suggesting that they make only the wrestle weps require tactics and leave people who use a spellbook or shield still not require tactics? Cuz if so given UO's history I seriously doubt they have the know how to make such a system work without seriously messing it up for a good while.
Ok, so now I think you're being deliberately stubborn.what's wrong with it is that it would mess up the current system of wrestling. Wrestling as an offensive skill would be way overpowered as I've stated numerous times and will repeat again in caps so you can't miss it.
UO is a fantasy game full of wizards, dragons and people who can come back from the dead as much as they want. So your "it doesn't make sense" arguments go right out the window. We're clearly out of the realm of reality all ready. A pair of removable gloves isn't the crazy leap you're making it out to be.1)IT WOULDNT MAKE SENSE FOR A WRESTLE WEP TO BE DISARMABLE.
More non issues that are easily fixed. Special moves already require tactics, why would this be any different? Besides IF an item like this was added they could make it disarmable or just make it useless as a PvP weapon.2)A WRESTLE MAGE WITH A NON DISARMABLE WEP THAT HAS HIT SPELL AND NEW SPECS (WHICH WOULD PROBABLY BE BLEED, CONC BLOW, OR MORTAL) WOULD BE OP GIVEN THE SWINGS IN BETWEEN SPELLS AND THE NON REQUIREMENT OF TACTICS AND THE FACT THAT IT WOULDN'T BE DISARMABLE.
Who said anything about a new wrestling skill? We're discussing a weapon the OP would like to see added. We wouldn't need a new skill for it. Each use would check your wrestling skill, just like swinging a sword checks your swordsmanship.3) GIVEN UO'S TRACK RECORD THEY DON'T HAVE THE CAPABILITY TO CREATE TWO SEPARATE FORMS OF WRESTLING (ie. THE "DEFENSIVE" KIND THAT ALREADY EXISTS AND THIS NEW "OFFENSIVE' KIND THAT I GUESS YOU WANT TO REQUIRE TACTICS) WITHOUT SERIOUSLY SCREWING UP THE CURRENT SYSTEM FOR AT LEAST A MONTH.
Again, we're not talking about changing a skill at all. So this had zero bearing on the conversation.4) 5 OF THE 6 WEP GROUPS ARE ALREADY OFFENSIVE SKILLS (SWORDS, FENCING, MACING, ARCHERY, THROWING) IT'S GOOD TO HAVE A DEFENSIVE ONE. SORRY THAT YOUR BORED OF THE CURRENT OPTIONS BUT ITS BOUND TO HAPPEN WITH A 14 YEAR OLD GAME GET OVER IT.
In your opinion a wrestle template is dumb. But going by your logic I could say a PvP template is dumb so we shouldn't devote any more time to things that are used for 'dumb' templates. But I wouldn't do that because I think everyone should enjoy playing the game, not just people who share my particular play style.lastly a wrestle temp is just dumb. Role player can already bash each other with their fists or even with clubs and numchuks if they want. Sorry for all you guys that think it would be oh so cool to punch a dragon to death.
1) Who associates wrestling with boxing? I sure dont.Cestus.
Weapon Skill: Wrestling.
Slot: Weapon or Glove.
Graphic: Virtue Gauntlets.
Special Moves: Armor Ignore. Double Strike.
The point? Allowing wrestlers to be the Boxers and Pankration fighters we associate with the term.
My point is that if you're going to nitpick over things being unrealistic, it seems to me there are things that are much more unrealistic than being able to pull a pair of gloves off someone.Btw BlackSun there is a difference between making sense real world and making sense as pertains to ingame mechanics.
Why is it that everytime some cowboy has a crazy idea some people have to say that it can be done solely for the fact that nothing has to make sense?
THAT makes no sense![]()
Wrong!leather armor never existed in the real world.
Actually no I am not. What was initially thought in the Renaissance armor from the Romans was actually scale mail that the weather had eroded off statues. This has been gone over and over again and also been showed in the Romans own histories. There were leather jerkins but those were worn under the metal armor like the middle ages arming jacket to lessen the blunt force damage that came from the blows. It actually makes sense if you think about it for the leather to be strong enough to resist anything it would have to be boiled so hard as to be completely inflexible and that would not work for armor at all. The only source that still claims there was leather armor is Osprey which has been widely discredited in historical fields and is targeted primarily to gamers and moddlers who are more interested in appearance then in historical fact. Tactius had some wonderful descriptions of what Roman armor was like in some of his writings if your curious I can try and look them up when I get home.Wrong!
I will have to disagree, atleat for the time being. Whist I am not a practicing archeaologist I do have BA hons in the dicaplin. I did not specialse in historical archaeology, choosing to focus more on prehistory. I thank you for the references and will look into the points you have put forward.Actually no I am not. What was initially thought in the Renaissance armor from the Romans was actually scale mail that the weather had eroded off statues. This has been gone over and over again and also been showed in the Romans own histories. There were leather jerkins but those were worn under the metal armor like the middle ages arming jacket to lessen the blunt force damage that came from the blows. It actually makes sense if you think about it for the leather to be strong enough to resist anything it would have to be boiled so hard as to be completely inflexible and that would not work for armor at all. The only source that still claims there was leather armor is Osprey which has been widely discredited in historical fields and is targeted primarily to gamers and moddlers who are more interested in appearance then in historical fact. Tactius had some wonderful descriptions of what Roman armor was like in some of his writings if your curious I can try and look them up when I get home.
Martell.
So is fighting a Dragon in a Robe with a Clever. Dawg.It's also just a stupid idea. I don't know why you all think boxers or brawlers would be such an awesome char to have. I personally think it would make no sense. Fighting a dragon with a pair of iron knuckles is pretty lame if you ask me.
I myself am a military historian. Depending on when you graduated it’s very likely that you were taught at some point that there was leather armor. Now the debate is actually was brigandine armor actually used and if so how widespread its use was. If you’re interested in the prehistory aspect of it there may have been a section that was put in to The Britians, but I can't be sure as it has been a few years since I read that book. I will give that one since it’s a bit closer to your field that Tacitus.I will have to disagree, atleat for the time being. Whist I am not a practicing archeaologist I do have BA hons in the dicaplin. I did not specialse in historical archaeology, choosing to focus more on prehistory. I thank you for the references and will look into the points you have put forward.
I am also a serious military historian and I believe that the taunting Frenchman from Monty Python & The Holy Grail wore leather armor so there is no more need for debate on the subject.I myself am a military historian. Depending on when you graduated it’s very likely that you were taught at some point that there was leather armor. Now the debate is actually was brigandine armor actually used and if so how widespread its use was. If you’re interested in the prehistory aspect of it there may have been a section that was put in to The Britians, but I can't be sure as it has been a few years since I read that book. I will give that one since it’s a bit closer to your field that Tacitus.I will have to disagree, atleat for the time being. Whist I am not a practicing archeaologist I do have BA hons in the dicaplin. I did not specialse in historical archaeology, choosing to focus more on prehistory. I thank you for the references and will look into the points you have put forward.
I am also a serious military historian and I believe that the taunting Frenchman from Monty Python & The Holy Grail wore leather armor so there is no more need for debate on the subject.
Yeah, uhm. No.Goldberg said:What do you mean Weapon OR Glove? Needs to be one or the other for starters. Obviously not well thought out as it pertains to current UO weapon/armor slots. IMO you realized afterwards that it doesnt make sense mechanics-wise so you simply said either
Ever hear of a Shield Bash? Expert.Special Moves? why would a piece of armor allow/perform special moves?
No, I have never heard of a Shield Bash in UO. I was talking about game mechanics but you are too obtuse to understand that.Yeah, uhm. No.Goldberg said:What do you mean Weapon OR Glove? Needs to be one or the other for starters. Obviously not well thought out as it pertains to current UO weapon/armor slots. IMO you realized afterwards that it doesnt make sense mechanics-wise so you simply said either
There are certain limitations associated with the Classic Client. One of those is whether Weapon Modifiers can be added to a Pair of Gloves. (e.g. Cestii, Brass Knuckles, etc.) Brawling should remain a 'weaponless' talent. It would add an element of danger to those who focus on disarming, only to get their teeth knocked out. But if the code doesn't allow for that, then the Cestus needs to be in the Weapon Slot.
Thus either and or.
Careful about assumptions. They are bad for your health.
Ever hear of a Shield Bash? Expert.Special Moves? why would a piece of armor allow/perform special moves?
I think it should be a balanced two handed weapon that goes in the weapon slot. I think that would fix most of the tricky code issues and make logical sense. Well as much logical sense as we are going to get when there are dragons and magic. I also like the temp ideas it could add to mages. It would also not damage wrestling as a defensive skill but allow for mages to take it further and have a functioning weapon for it.No, I have never heard of a Shield Bash in UO. I was talking about game mechanics but you are too obtuse to understand that.
What kind of person cant understand that some rl archaic items do not translate well into UO?
If a new idea does not work with game mechanics it simply makes no sense at all no matter how much someone wants it or how many rl examples you can prove.
Mabe I missed it but where did you explain to us all the exact game mechanics that will allow for gloves to perform specials? Ohh, thats right you didnt. Not only that but you couldnt even figure out if it was gloves or a wep in your scenario lol.
Dont even get me started on your Brawling/element of danger quote. Talk about a classic example of someone having a 1% fragment of a half-ass idea and then trying to make it fly with absolutely no logic. *shakes head*
Thats kinda funny.I think it should be a balanced two handed weapon that goes in the weapon slot. I think that would fix most of the tricky code issues and make logical sense. Well as much logical sense as we are going to get when there are dragons and magic. I also like the temp ideas it could add to mages. It would also not damage wrestling as a defensive skill but allow for mages to take it further and have a functioning weapon for it.No, I have never heard of a Shield Bash in UO. I was talking about game mechanics but you are too obtuse to understand that.
What kind of person cant understand that some rl archaic items do not translate well into UO?
If a new idea does not work with game mechanics it simply makes no sense at all no matter how much someone wants it or how many rl examples you can prove.
Mabe I missed it but where did you explain to us all the exact game mechanics that will allow for gloves to perform specials? Ohh, thats right you didnt. Not only that but you couldnt even figure out if it was gloves or a wep in your scenario lol.
Dont even get me started on your Brawling/element of danger quote. Talk about a classic example of someone having a 1% fragment of a half-ass idea and then trying to make it fly with absolutely no logic. *shakes head*
I would say that if it was they would need tactics for it to work, and they could not toggle specials while casting, and it would need to have SC to not drop when a spell was cast. I have to confess I am the biggest dexx monkey around. I hate playing mages and rarely ever use my necro. But if a mage is willing to actually put in the points to work like a dexxer I am willing to support that. Of course it would also keep them from using a spell book and a shield, but that is a fair trade off if you ask me. To an extent it will allow tank mages but they will have to spend the skill points for it. If they want to keep it defensive then can do that as well.Thats kinda funny.
Take a perfectly fine functioning spellcasting skill that was created and has always been for defense and give it properties and also make it an offensive weapon?
Its not enough that Mages already have by far the most versatile & powerful template right?
IMO so poorly thought out that it belongs in S&R.
Right next to my crazy new idea where all bows have an extra property added that allows them to cast all 64 Magery spells on spelltrigger.
Never heard of a magical bow? Its in more then one fantasy novel so must be valid lol.