Proposal: Class-specific weapons
s/k’d and Failed. - lilomar
Adminned at 14 Jul 2010 05:57:31 UTC
Change the rule titled “Wielding, Wearing, and Enchantment”
from
An @ may change their wielded weapon to any weapon which they carry, or to no weapon. An @ may only wield one weapon at a time.
An @ may change their worn armor to any armor which they carry, or to no armor.An @ may only wear one armor of each Armor Type at a time.
The weapon an @ is currently wielding, and all the the armor they are currently wearing, are each tracked in GNDT columns, which both default to “Noneâ€.
All weapons and armors have an enchantment. An enchantment is an integer, and may be positive, negative or zero. If the name of a weapon or armor includes “+X†where X is a legal value for an enchantment, its enchantment is X. If the name of a weapon or armor includes “-X†where X is a legal value for an enchantment, its enchantment is -X. If a weapon or armor does not specify an enchantment, its enchantment is 0.
Each type of Armor has a Base AC. The AC of an Armor is its Base AC plus its enchantment, or 0 if it would be negative.
If an @ is ever wielding or wearing an item that is not in their Inventory, they cease to wield or wear that item.
to
An @ may change their wielded weapon to any weapon which they carry, or to no weapon. An @ may only wield one weapon at a time.
An @ may change their worn armor to any armor which they carry, or to no armor.An @ may only wear one armor of each Armor Type at a time.
An @ whose role is not either a Wizard or Priest may not wield any weapon with the word “wand” or “spellbook” in its name.
An @ whose role is not either a Valkyrie or Barbarian may not wield a two-handed sword.
The weapon an @ is currently wielding, and all the the armor they are currently wearing, are each tracked in GNDT columns, which both default to “Noneâ€.
All weapons and armors have an enchantment. An enchantment is an integer, and may be positive, negative or zero. If the name of a weapon or armor includes “+X†where X is a legal value for an enchantment, its enchantment is X. If the name of a weapon or armor includes “-X†where X is a legal value for an enchantment, its enchantment is -X. If a weapon or armor does not specify an enchantment, its enchantment is 0.
Each type of Armor has a Base AC. The AC of an Armor is its Base AC plus its enchantment, or 0 if it would be negative.
If an @ is ever wielding or wearing an item that is not in their Inventory, they cease to wield or wear that item.
In addition, any @ whose role is not a Wizard or a Priest and is wielding a weapon with “wand” or “spellbook” in its name will instead have no weapon equipped, and any @ whose role is not a Valkyrie or a Barbarian and is wielding a two-handed sword will instead have no weapon equipped.
This proposal is meant to add more meaning to the roles, rather than it just being a title and a set of starting weapons. Hopefully this will have the side-effect of more items being created with specific requirements to wield them to make a bigger difference between the roles, causing a higher variety of items. If this proposal passes and several new role-specific items are made, then I would suggest making the items have attributes that tell what classes can wield them. But before additional restrictions are made on the existing weapons, there should be new weapons in order to balance the attack power of different roles.
Bucky:
*Tourists and Rogues get the shaft hard here, and they don’t need to get any weaker than they already are.
*The restrictions should be in a subrule.