Shields

[galehar]

There are a few things I dislike about shields
- the penalty completely disappears at a certain skill level (hard breakpoint are ugly and spoilery)
- most trolls end up using one. It's almost a no-brainer and sucks thematically
- for most other characters, they are often a bit weak

So, I think the effect of skill on the penalty should be similar to armour. It linearly decreases but never completely removes it. Armour can reduce the penalty up to 2/5 of the original penalty. Shields could be identical, or a bit stronger (up to 1/5?).
Do we want strength to factor in? I really don't know. If yes, then we should probably use the same formula as for armour. And also change the penalty unit to match armour (encumbrance rating).
Do we want to keep the size modifier? I'd say no. This would help diversifying trolls and would probably not change much for small races which already have restrictions (only buckler for Sp and no large shield for Ha and Ko). GSC would have even less competition for Og, so maybe we could dust off the old idea of letting them use great mace one handed.

Of course, the change to the penalty is a nerf, so buff them a bit to compensate.
Remove the speed penalty to one-handed. Not being able to use 2 handed weapons is enough of a drawback.
Make the penalty to blocking several attacks in a turn decrease with skill.

[crate]

I agree that shield evp or encumbrance rating or whatever you want to call it working differently from armour is silly.

If you want stats to matter I think the way shields already check them makes sense (small races have more dex and dex helps bucklers, which thus end up being meaningful for small races) but making the effect of stats stronger sounds ok.

I'm not convinced that shields are actually weak for non-troll races at all. GONG used shields on 15.5 (I count the OpTm as half a character because I would not have used a shield except it found specifically Shield of the Gong) out of 27 wins. Our one troll did use a shield, our one felid obviously did not.

Your proposal to only compensate for more difficult spellcasting (and less accuracy but that in practice isn't important) by removing the speed penalty still sounds like a nerf to me though, since in practice I never care about the weapon speed penalty to begin with.

[galehar]

If you want stats to matter I think the way shields already check them makes sense (small races have more dex and dex helps bucklers, which thus end up being meaningful for small races) but making the effect of stats stronger sounds ok.

I forgot about that. Maybe simplifying shield formulas would be good too! Yes, using stats seems to make more sense than using size, I'll have to look how the effect currently work.

I'm not convinced that shields are actually weak for non-troll races at all.

Me neither, but since the penalty change is a nerf, seems fair to suggest a couple of buffs to compensate.

[Davion Fuxa]

Core Problems with Shields:

1. Basically having to train the Shield Skill in Addition to the Weapon Skill.
2. Shields don't add enough defense (or any defense) when having to kill things is important.
3. Poor Synergy with Too Many Other Playstyles In Crawl

For #1, a player is unlikely to have enough time to train enough Shield Skill and the accompanying Weapon Skill within a normal 3 rune game while training all the other skills they need. Even in a 3 rune game, the #2 problem rears its ugly head since the Shield becomes less and less important the longer you go in as Offense is the only real Defense - and Shields sacrifice Offense. Then there is #3 where using Shields doesn't mesh well other playstyles - Bows and Crossbows don't work with them, you can't use Two Handed Melee Weapons, Spells get hampered, and in the case of some Transmutations they meld.

If Shields are going to get love then some creative thinking will need to be done and that perhaps 'thematically' you can't have everything incorporated into the Shield and expect them to work well.

[tasonir]

Remove the speed penalty to one-handed.

I hardly ever notice this since it's entirely gone once you have enough skill. Would you also remove the non-removable unarmed combat speed penalty?

[Mankeli]

For #1, a player is unlikely to have enough time to train enough Shield Skill and the accompanying Weapon Skill within a normal 3 rune game while training all the other skills they need.

This is not true because you don't have to invest in the weapon skill that much! Getting a great mace to min delay as opposed to getting a demon whip or an eveningstar to a min delay leaves much experience to shields, at least 10-15 levels IIRC depending on the hander and aptitudes of course. I think a specific problem is with the large shields at the moment in which case your statement maybe true.

[nordetsa]

For #1, a player is unlikely to have enough time to train enough Shield Skill and the accompanying Weapon Skill within a normal 3 rune game while training all the other skills they need.

This is not true because you don't have to invest in the weapon skill that much! Getting a great mace to min delay as opposed to getting a demon whip or an eveningstar to a min delay leaves much experience to shields, at least 10-15 levels IIRC depending on the hander and aptitudes of course. I think a specific problem is with the large shields at the moment in which case your statement maybe true.

Yep. Right now, I think buckler is the most useful out of the three shiel types as it provides extra AC and shield while not having to invest much on it.

But large shields... I don't know if it's worth for normal-sized race to invest like fricking 25 skills to use it effectively. That's as much as investing on a 2H weapon.

[galehar]

Remove the speed penalty to one-handed.

I hardly ever notice this since it's entirely gone once you have enough skill. Would you also remove the non-removable unarmed combat speed penalty?

Well, now the penalty would stay so you might notice it if we don't remove it. No, I wouldn't remove the UC penalty, otherwise there would be even less reason not to use a shield. With a weapon, you forgo the 2 handed option, you don't do that with UC.

After some IRC discussion, there was some opposition to removing the size modifier but support for changing the penalty formula. Could be identical to armour, with the effect of str replaced by dex for bucklers and the average of dex and str for shields.

[Tiber]

I agree that the current formula for shields is bad (I feel the same about attack speed). However, I think the size/shield relationship is sort of a counterbalance to that of dodging. I kind of feel like either both should stay or both should be gotten rid of (though reducing the bonus would be acceptable too).

As for a different buff, I think it'd make sense that shields reduce the damage of explosive attacks like fireball or fire storm. It's maybe a bit a spoilery, but I feel like shields not working against piercing attacks sort of sets a precedent for shields being different.

[kenmtraveller]

It's pretty wierd to me that warrior types face a difficult choice when considering a shield, while for spellcasters a buckler is a no-brainer.

[Davion Fuxa]

For #1, a player is unlikely to have enough time to train enough Shield Skill and the accompanying Weapon Skill within a normal 3 rune game while training all the other skills they need.

This is not true because you don't have to invest in the weapon skill that much! Getting a great mace to min delay as opposed to getting a demon whip or an eveningstar to a min delay leaves much experience to shields, at least 10-15 levels IIRC depending on the hander and aptitudes of course. I think a specific problem is with the large shields at the moment in which case your statement maybe true.

#1 was more in anticipation to a change to the formula, where you would likely have to train up Shields considerably to offset the penalty to spellcasting. Even without it though, it isn't like someone who is primarily focused on Melee should stop training once he hits Minimum Skill Levels for Weapon Choice or Shield Choice in the current environment - my GhFi of Ashenzari win is a bit exaggerated by proof of that.

[XuaXua]

• rename Shields skill to Blocking.
• allow all weapons some amount of blocking potential (scaled to blockability with weapon type; eg: short blades = minimal bonus at 27 skill, staves have inherent blocking (2-h staves are comparable to a buckler))
• ensure the actual item "shield" has better Blocking ability than any weapon
• rework other "shield" mechanics that people are complaining about
• ...
• profit

[XuaXua]

Of note, isn't a buckler something you strap to your forearm when using a rwo-handed weapon? When doing so, both could be made less effective.

[Wahaha]

[*] replace Shields skill with Blocking.
[*] allow all weapons to block (scaled to blockability with weapon type;frex, short blades = minimal bonus at 27 skill, staves, espc. 2-h staves have inherent blocking (comparable to buckler)
[*] give shields a better blocking ability than any weapon
[*] rework other "shield" mechanics
[*] ...
[*] profit

What does this fix or accomplish?

[Wark]

Of note, isn't a buckler something you strap to your forearm when using a two-handed weapon? When doing so, both could be made less effective.

Not really, bucklers are normally held using a handle on the back, which is obviously impossible if you're using a proper two-hander. Also, the devs have been steadily removing the cases of "you can use the shield and weapon together, but receive additional penalties" (i.e. 1.5-handedness was removed and quarterstaves/lajatangs are now regular 2-handed weapons), so I dare to say that introducing such a case again is not a good idea.

[Davion Fuxa]

Of note, isn't a buckler something you strap to your forearm when using a rwo-handed weapon? When doing so, both could be made less effective.

Bucklers were usually tools in Fencing, and the purpose of them were multi-tooled. Unlike Shields which were usually worn on the Arm and used for defense, Bucklers were held in the hand and used both to bolster and individuals offense and defense. Commonly fighters would not only use it to deflect attacks, but also to bash people with it or to hide their Sword Arm so that the opponent couldn't see where the next attack would come from.

To be blunt, they shouldn't be in Crawl since we don't have dual fighting or shield bashing which is what they really stand out for.

[XuaXua]

[*] replace Shields skill with Blocking.
[*] allow all weapons to block (scaled to blockability with weapon type;frex, short blades = minimal bonus at 27 skill, staves, espc. 2-h staves have inherent blocking (comparable to buckler)
[*] give shields a better blocking ability than any weapon
[*] rework other "shield" mechanics
[*] ...
[*] profit

What does this fix or accomplish?

A better question would be, what doesn't it fix or accomplish?

[galehar]

A better question would be, what doesn't it fix or accomplish?

Your credibility

[tcjsavannah]

FreeCredibilityScore.com

[Lasty]

If shields are getting a nerf, I think that it's time to add a buff that's been needed: make shields absorb some % of beam damage, and perhaps also AOE damage (the latter as per Tiber). The amount of damage absorbed would be heavily based on shield type and somewhat affected by STR/DEX/Shields skill -- so, basically SH. In fact, you could probably just use the SH value as a % damage reduction and that would be fine.

Alternately, if not using a shield, you use your offhand as an aux attack. There's no particular reason that when using a shield, you wouldn't use it as an aux attack, too -- and since the aux punch is affected by UC, unlike other aux attacks (IIRC), it would probably make sense to make the shield aux attack dependent on shields skill. Of course, it shouldn't be strong enough to compete with a two-handed weapon, or there would be little reason to get two-handers.

[rebthor]

most trolls end up using one. It's almost a no-brainer and sucks thematically

I posted this in the other thread that spawned this one and it's entirely 100% possible that I'm wrong wrong wrong, but I think the reason most trolls use shields is 1) claws 3 and 2) no other viable defenses until they find a dragon armour. They can't wear anything other than robes or skins early game and they have terrible dodging.

If you want to buff shields at all, don't have them get worse for every blocked attack. Dodging doesn't, armour doesn't. I agree that thematically it makes sense that shields should get worse for every blocked attack, but so should dodging; how easy is it really to dodge 8 hydra heads in one turn? And I don't see why armour shouldn't either - getting hit in the same spot over and over again would still hurt, even with armour.

[galehar]

most trolls end up using one. It's almost a no-brainer and sucks thematically

I posted this in the other thread that spawned this one and it's entirely 100% possible that I'm wrong wrong wrong, but I think the reason most trolls use shields is 1) claws 3 and 2) no other viable defenses until they find a dragon armour.

3) Size penalty reduction
4) Unarmed penalty is much less harsh than weapon penalty (1 handed vs 2 handed).
But forget about it, I'm not trying to change it anymore. Most people seems to be happy with the situation and I think it's a detail. I'll focus on just improving the penalty formula just like I did for armours.

If you want to buff shields at all, don't have them get worse for every blocked attack. Dodging doesn't, armour doesn't.

If shields are getting a nerf, I think that it's time to add a buff that's been needed: make shields absorb some % of beam damage, and perhaps also AOE damage (the latter as per Tiber).

You are both suggesting to make shields more like armour, I disagree. Differentiation is good. Shields shouldn't be just another layer of armour, it's good that it works differently and is not effective against the same stuff in the same way.
Although, I did propose to make the penalty for successive block decrease with skill level.

[Lasty]

You are both suggesting to make shields more like armour, I disagree. Differentiation is good. Shields shouldn't be just another layer of armour, it's good that it works differently and is not effective against the same stuff in the same way.

It's still differentiated. AC blocks a flat quantity of damage, possibly reducing damage to zero, and it works best against low-damage attacks. Dodging either blocks all damage or no damage, and works best against low-accuracy attacks. Shields currently are like Dodging, but for a subset of the attacks that Dodging applies to and worse against successive attacks. What I'm proposing is adding a flat percentage damage mitigation to some of the attacks Dodging works against but Shields don't. This works differently from both AC and Dodging (though it is somewhat similar to resistances).

Since SH value with a buckler or even regular shield doesn't get all that high, it wouldn't be a huge defensive bonus against these types of damage, but it would make shields not completely useless against these attacks. It also makes a certain amount of sense: presumably a chunk of your body about the size of the shield isn't being exposed to the beam or AOE strike.

[Tiber]

You are both suggesting to make shields more like armour, I disagree. Differentiation is good. Shields shouldn't be just another layer of armour, it's good that it works differently and is not effective against the same stuff in the same way.
Although, I did propose to make the penalty for successive block decrease with skill level.

Well, right now a shield is a second layer of evasion that doesn't work against piercing spells, and has diminishing returns against multiple enemies. It's not differentiated from evasion right now, except in ways that make it worse. The only unique functionality you can get from shields that I can think of reflection, and that's not considered very good. Given that there are only a few ways to reduce damage, it's very hard to think of new ways to improve shields that can't be accused of stepping on armor or evasion. Armor doesn't give any specific bonus to splash damage, only melee attacks, so I don't think it's too similar to armor.

The shield bash idea could be good too. I think a way to differentiate it from an offhand punch is to make it more likely to proc if you didn't block an attack last turn.

Oh, and to repost an ego idea I had a while back: Absorption - When successfully blocking a spell, you gain mana, up to the cost of the spell (not sure on monster-only spells).

[Davion Fuxa]

You are both suggesting to make shields more like armour, I disagree.

Diminishing the effect of Armour or Dodging to protect you would go a long way in making Shields more beneficial; is it possible some of the intrinsic from these defense mechanisms can be given to Shields? Particularly with the suggestion on Damage Absorption, it seems thematically wrong that Fire seeping through the cracks and roasting you alive in your Armour while a big shield that your hiding behind does offer at least a little more damage absorption anyways.

[rebthor]

most trolls end up using one. It's almost a no-brainer and sucks thematically

I posted this in the other thread that spawned this one and it's entirely 100% possible that I'm wrong wrong wrong, but I think the reason most trolls use shields is 1) claws 3 and 2) no other viable defenses until they find a dragon armour.

3) Size penalty reduction
4) Unarmed penalty is much less harsh than weapon penalty (1 handed vs 2 handed).
But forget about it, I'm not trying to change it anymore. Most people seems to be happy with the situation and I think it's a detail. I'll focus on just improving the penalty formula just like I did for armours.

If you want to buff shields at all, don't have them get worse for every blocked attack. Dodging doesn't, armour doesn't.

If shields are getting a nerf, I think that it's time to add a buff that's been needed: make shields absorb some % of beam damage, and perhaps also AOE damage (the latter as per Tiber).

You are both suggesting to make shields more like armour, I disagree. Differentiation is good. Shields shouldn't be just another layer of armour, it's good that it works differently and is not effective against the same stuff in the same way.
Although, I did propose to make the penalty for successive block decrease with skill level.

I'm not sure that 4) is correct above. Assuming I'm reading the bot correctly, using a shield prevents the offhand punch of 5+(unarmed skill / 5)+3d3 on a Troll. That's a lot of potential damage and definitely comparable to the difference between say an executioner's axe and a broad axe or a demon whip and a great mace even granting that it doesn't proc every hit.

[galehar]

You are both suggesting to make shields more like armour, I disagree.

So, I think the effect of skill on the penalty should be similar to armour.

Well yeah. I also think it's good that weapon skill works the same way for all weapons and that different weapon types play differently.

[tasonir]

Also if you're going to keep the weird special-cased unarmed combat delay penalty on shields then that's kind of defeating the entire point of this change, making it the same as armour penalty. If you want it to be a no-brainer to avoid shields with unarmed you can always make the offhand punch a bigger portion of your damage but I'm not really sure why you hate unarmed with shields so much in the first place. If you're worried everyone will use shields with unarmed, well, you're just plain wrong (and you're wrong about it in the current system too, incidentally) - we're adding a permanent spellcasting penalty to shields, and plenty of characters that avoid shields because of the spellcasting penalty will also be unarmed characters. Unarmed berserkers are pretty rare aside from TrBe, and if you're going to change up trolls, you should really fix this much worse problem first: it's a no-brainer to use unarmed on trolls.

Also of course shields skill will be almost completely useless after this change unless you increase its effect on SH by a lot.

I wouldn't mind shield penalty becoming more like armor penalty if we could get rid of the special case penalty. You could easily see two builds: a warrior type build which would work well with a race like minotaur, who goes for unarmed/shield and doesn't get any transmutations, and an unarmed mage build who goes for unarmed/transmutations but doesn't use a shield because of the additional spell penalty. If you wanted to use a shield with transmutations you're already limited to statue form, so avoiding shields because of the penalty also opens up more flexibility in form choice. [Necromutation is left out here because that's primarily a mage form, and not used for unarmed damage.] I'd like to see more support for the minotaur warrior type to be allowed to wear heavy armor, but that's probably more of an impossible dream than the next logical step.