Using 2-handed weapons with one hand...

[Omega Blue]

Right now my fighter doesn't have any decent 1-handed weapons, even the randart isn't up to snuff...

How about letting characters strong enough to use 2-handed weapons with only one hand? If a character's strength is 1.5x (or perhaps 2x) the required strength of the 2-handed weapon, he could use it with one hand.

[Final Master]

No, that absolutely destroys balance but it does again further show the bad gameplay design that the requirements system restricts and forces upon players.

[Sirrocco]

Eh???

FM, I'm not sure how you built your logic for *either* of those two statements.

- First, I'm pretty sure you could come up with some multiplier such that it wouldn't destroy balance. The multiplier would have to be pretty steep - you'd want to make sure that (for example) there wasn't any real feasible way for a player to one-hand a two-handed weapon that would beat out a standard voratun one-hander for raw power. You'd also want to make sure that at any given strength, the one-handed weapons you could qualify for would be dealing more damage than any two-handers you could wield one-handed, but it seems like it would be doable (4x, maybe? 5x? There is, in any case, some multiplier for which this is true.) Mind you, I'm not saying that that makes it a *good idea*. I'd much rather see it as a class feature or race feature - probably with a category point to unlock - for some particularly interesting class or race that was encouraged to do this thing and balanced around it, possibly with some associated to-hit, power, and/or defensive penalties (which would start out pretty savage, and decrease with skill points spent and possibly strength). Reavers, maybe? They seem the type.

- I fail to see what this does to "further show the bad gameplay design that the requirements system restricts and forces upon players". For that matter, I fail to see where you're coming from with declaring it bad gameplay design at all.

[Grey]

Right now my fighter doesn't have any decent 1-handed weapons, even the randart isn't up to snuff...

How about letting characters strong enough to use 2-handed weapons with only one hand? If a character's strength is 1.5x (or perhaps 2x) the required strength of the 2-handed weapon, he could use it with one hand.

Would lead to the ridiculous image of a halfling hacking away with a greatsword twice his height in his left hand...

Sometimes the game gives you a raw deal in drops. Keep playing till you find something better :P

[Zonk]

I'm not sure about this.
I think the reverse would be WAY easier to balance/justify - being able to wield say a mace or long sword in two hands(not a knife, obviously). Would help the Zerkers/two-handed talent users who have no use for shields anyway.

[Frumple]

*coughtiehandednesstosizecough*

Behemoth hide would suddenly become much more interesting. Halflings would be a bit hosed, though, since most one-handers would suddenly become two-handers for them.

Afterwards, you'd link talents that require two-handed weapons simply to weight instead of specifically to handedness. Would make those oddly-weighted one-handers much more interesting for normally two-hand-using classes and abnormally light two-handers of particular interest to normally one-hand-using classes, etc, etc.

Just an idea, heh. S'how at least two other RLs (crawl, incursion) handle the how-many-hands issue.

[yufra]

One option would be to adopt a per-hand damage modifier. For example, one-handed weapons could have a damage modifier of 1.2*STR for the first hand, and 1.1*STR for the second hand (if there is nothing in the off-hand then we assume we are using both hands). Two-handed weapons could have a reversed order, with the smaller modifier for the main hand and the larger modifier for the second hand. This would reflect the difficulty of wielding a larger, more awkward weapon in a single hand. If you argue that strength is enough and there is no increased awkwardness then you can keep the damage modifier in the same order (larger one first). The difference between weapons in this system would be how the damage modifiers are split between hands. Of course there should also be a flag for non-two-handed weapons... whoever heard of someone two-handing a knife that then allows them to Death Dance.

[Sirrocco]

I rather like the idea of tying handedness to size... to a degree. (eventually). Specifically, it might be cool to open up the number of kinds of things out there, and run it by halves.

Something like this...
- daggers are .5 hands.
- normal one-handed weapons are 1 hands.
- things like bastard swords - designed to be wielded in either one or two hands - are 1.5 hands.
- normal two-handed weapons are 2 hands.

for a normal character, mainhand is worth .5 to 1.5 hands, offhand is worth .5 hands
for a small character, mainhand is .5 to 1.0 hands and offhand is .5 hands
for a large character, mainhand is worth 1.0 to 2.0 hands and offhand is worth 1.0 hands
the reaver talent adds an optional +.5 hands to the offhand - thus small reavers are .5 to 1.0 in both hands

special cases: shields always consume the offhand, regardless of size. Staves always consume both hands, regardless of size. Their handedness is more a function of forms of usage than difficulty in wielding.

Effects, then:
- normal-sized characters function exactly as they are. hand-and-a-half weapons are introduced that can be wielded in one hand, but are somewhat more effective when wielded in two (ie, when the offhand is left empty).
- large characters are no longer able to effectively wield daggers - their hands are too large. Perhaps they could continue wielding them with a to-hit penalty. On the other hand, they can offhand normal one-handed weapons, and wield two-handed weapons in one hand (or two hands). If we ever do introduce a large race, we'd want them to have something of a dex (and perhaps cunning) penalty, to discourage rogues.
- Small characters cannot wield two-handed weapons at all (other than staves) and require two hands for hand-and-a-half weapons. Other than that, they're fine. Their ability to go weapon-and-shield, weapon-and-dagger, or twin dagger are all as normal. The halfling berserker is a bit limited here, it's true, but he was pretty silly to begin with. On the other hand, as long as he's packing a hand-and-a-half weapon, he should be fine - he's two-handing it, so all of his skills will still work.
- Large Cursed wielding one axe and one non-axe perform their class skills as if wielding the axe in one hand with the offhand otherwise occupied

Mind you, I'm not suggesting implementing this immediately - more as part of the change if we ever want to make size a big deal, and possibly include large-sized races.

For the moment, just including a hand-and-a-half sized weapon for each of the three major types might help a lot of the issues. Make it a bit unwieldy but powerful as a one-handed weapon (poor hit rate, poor crit rate, possible penalties to swing speed, but a lot of physical power for a one-handed weapon of that material type) and improve across the board when wielded in two hands to an accurate but otherwise moderately underpowered two-hander (good hit/crit rate, but lower physical power than other two-handers of its material type). It would give people some more interesting choices in weapon type, while making the fraction of the weapons drops that people could use higher for just about everyone (except for the dagger-wielders).