PDA

View Full Version : SWORD/Sword Fighting Discussion: Fencing was fun!



Mr. Perfect
15th May 2009, 02:02
I know that carrying around a tiny little dagger and back-stabbing people is terribly thiefy, but the sword fighting system in Thief 1 & 2 was a lot more fun.

You know, just saying. In case the devs where still deciding on what melee weapon to use. :whistle:

DarthEnder
15th May 2009, 02:05
It wasn't very...good though. The sword fighting in Thief was terrible.

Hypevosa
15th May 2009, 02:09
I agree with darth on that point... the sword fighting was terrible, but really it makes sense since you're a thief not a seasoned knight. I did like that I could defend myself better with a sword, but I could utilize a dagger better... so I'd go with the dagger. If I'm doing my job... I shouldn't need to defend myself often now should I?

DarthEnder
15th May 2009, 02:11
Maybe if the swordfighting in T4 was like the melee combat in Rid****: AoDA, which was awesome.

GmanPro
15th May 2009, 02:33
It was fun being able to parry sword swings in classic Thief games

Mr. Perfect
15th May 2009, 04:29
I'm sure they could make a better system for 4, but it was decent sword fighting at the time. You had left attacks, right attacks, overhead swings, and parry. Compared to TDS, that's a wealth of options. There you just pull out a dagger and say, "Hold up guys, I brought a knife to a sword fight!"

Hypevosa
15th May 2009, 04:35
I think a short sword would be a good middle... you can still block, and still have power attacks, maybe even the ability to hammy people if the team is feeling like more personal combat... but it's still more thiefly, because it's not a giant bulky unwieldy piece of equipment. All else fails, they could always just let us choose, maybe even switch them between missions. I know if the mission says mansion with guards, I want short sword or dagger, but if I'm going against a tunnel of buricks or a bunch of undead, I want the damned longsword...

ElizabethSterling
15th May 2009, 07:15
Constantine's sword is an important part of Thief canon and dropping it was a big mistake. Garrett doesn't even carry it for combat best I can tell, it's more for crate/door smashing should he need it, and that's certainly how it was primarily used in Thief 1 and 2.

GmanPro
15th May 2009, 07:22
Hrmmmm. Adds more fuel for a prequel story idea. Explain how me managed to lose the sword in between Thief 2 and 3.

Espion
15th May 2009, 14:55
Remember how in T1&2 you could use your sword to cut banners and tapestries down from the wall, sometimes finding hidden secret alcoves, or switches... That was cool.

Remember how you couldn't do that in TDS? That was crap.

Whatever blade you use (and I'd prefer a sword) it should be able to cut stuff down from the walls again.

DarthEnder
15th May 2009, 15:08
Hrmmmm. Adds more fuel for a prequel story idea. Explain how me managed to lose the sword in between Thief 2 and 3.He probably pawned it. Garrett doesn't seem to get attached to things much. Especially when he can have money instead.

Hypevosa
15th May 2009, 16:02
Remember how in T1&2 you could use your sword to cut banners and tapestries down from the wall, sometimes finding hidden secret alcoves, or switches... That was cool.

Remember how you couldn't do that in TDS? That was crap.

Whatever blade you use (and I'd prefer a sword) it should be able to cut stuff down from the walls again.

I agree, cutting tapestry was one of the cooler mechanics in T1 and T2... I loved dropping in on the guard in baffords manor from the rafters, blackjacking him before I hit the ground... :D

Nate
15th May 2009, 16:09
Fencing was fun, agreed!

Direlord
15th May 2009, 17:17
While i'm all for the cutting of tapestries i think the sword should stay gone. Having a big bow is one thing but carrying around a 3 foot long piece of steel seems odd for a thief not a murderer.

The sword also made fighting real easy when i can take on several guards at once and kill them with the sword also kind of breaks against being a thief.

Alex50
15th May 2009, 17:19
The Dagger best weapon thief. He light, small and is mortally stung from darkness. The Dagger will not stand firm against blade or the other weapons in open fighting, Garrett not knight, cutting through itself road in crowd enemy long blade. Let guard will perspire under armor and be muddled in belt and stumbles in long scabbard. The Thief needs lightness, speed and mobility.
But Constantine's sword let hungs on mantel. If you return sword, that let use his will such complex as T1

Hypevosa
15th May 2009, 17:30
I could actually understand that, and I agree. I think the best option is to let people choose what they want between missions. A thief not only needs to be light on his feet and agile, but he also needs the correct tools for the job. Most of the time, a dagger is the correct tool, able to be slid under the plates of any armor or under the chin of anyone who's unsuspecting... however, sometimes, a dagger is NOT the correct cool. So Constantine's sword is probably the best option, assuming you have to deal with some sort of beast/creature/undead, because damage is what matters IF you have to use that weapon, not stealthiness.

Direlord
15th May 2009, 17:45
True but isn't the whole point of Garrett being a master thief is to remain unseen? Even if you say yes dagger for stealth Garrett still has the massive bow on his back even with it being quiet-er less chance to move around and make noise metal would and is painted black even a short bow is what 2-3 feet long?

i think this is one of those gameplay > realism decisions i still prefer dagger.

Hypevosa
15th May 2009, 18:02
Like I said, a thief still needs the proper tool for the job, and to deny access to that tool is not necessary. If you knew you were entering a crypt with alot of undead and or alot of creatures, would you still rather have a dagger since there's nothing that would really be susceptible to the same techniques used to kill a guard? or would you rather have a weapon that could kill more easily?

At the very least I would say a short sword is permissible, as it can still defend and be used well in a fight, but it is also small enough to be used like a dagger, and not reduce your mobility by too much.

Iceblade
15th May 2009, 18:03
Ahh...you do remember that thieves in 1 and 2 use swords and are far more heavy handed in their thieving. Granted Garrett is no ordinary thief, but most thieves carry a sword (at least in TG/2). I don't remember many thieves in TDS, though. Aside of those two that were robbing the Hammers that one time.

Nate
15th May 2009, 18:54
and even they had swords.

I am still all for Garrett being able to choose his equipment/weapon loadout from a greater selection (with advantages and penalties).

Hypevosa
15th May 2009, 19:03
I just had an idea for a mission where you steal a magic blade from a thieves guild called "The Ace"

When all of a thief's other tools have failed, he always has The Ace up his sleeve. It could be a sword breaker dagger, where if you block a sword with it you can snap the blade in half. It's a little out there, but it would give Garrett the edge needed in a sword fight, but not infringe with the whole sneaky aspect of things.

OnionKnight
15th May 2009, 19:06
Sword fighting was fun in the earlier games because of the exceptionally bad animations the games had. It didn't surprise me they reused the guard swinging animation for the mutants in System Shock 2.

Yaphy
17th May 2009, 18:18
It would be fun if you could decide if you want to use a sword or a knife at the mission start.

The knife cant block and can only use one sort of attack. At the other hand, you can backstab guards with the knife.

The sword can block and do more damage. You can also perform different attacks depending in how long you press the attack button and how well you time your blows. If you time about 4 blows right, you can make an instant kill with a nice move.The sword cant backstab.

I might have gone a little to far, but you get the deal. This isnt really balanced, but its just a prototype...:nut:

ZylonBane
17th May 2009, 18:42
the knife cant block and can only use one sort of attack. At the other hand, you can backstab guards with the knife.
Get. Out.

Yaphy
17th May 2009, 18:56
Get. Out.

sry then. Just a thought of mine. No need to go mean. :hmm:

Hypevosa
17th May 2009, 19:23
Here's how I would write it...

Dagger Advantages:
-Ability to backstab quickly
-No change in visibility when wielded
-Can be shimmied into the plates of heavily armored foes if they are unaware
-Can be easily concealed (like if you are in a place that doesn't tolerate weaponry)
-Minimal blood spray, for less needed cleanup
-Very quick attacks
-Can be used to hammy aware enemies, if you are crouched and behind their legs, rendering them immobile and able to be dealt with
-Your health has no effect on its use

Dagger Disadvantages
-Backstab means muffling their mouth, so guards within 15 feet or so can hear the scream)
-Minimal damage during a fight
-Cannot block (It's Garrett, there's no way he could block a sword with it)
-Hammy means lots of screaming
-Short reach
-Cannot damage heavily armored foes in combat
-Backstab does not effect undead, they don't need their heart or blood thank you

Long Sword Advantages:
-Decapitation instead of back stab (meaning perfectly silent kills because of no screaming)
-Visibility increases one full shade when wielded
-Heavy damage in combat
-Can take off limbs
-Can block
-Has a far reach
-Can damage heavily armored foes
-Decapitation instantly kills undead and spirits

Long sword disadvantages:
-Decapitation means alot of cleanup (cleansing area of blood, finding and hiding head)
-Decapitation takes longer to ready and aim swing
-Swing slows as health decreases
-Not easily concealed
-Slower attacks
-More blood to be cleaned up

This way Both items have their times to be used, and both have situations where either is permissible. And it also allows for a few styles of play. Would you rather have silent kills you have to clean up alot after, or would you rather risk someone over hearing, but at least not have to clean up as much? Would you rather have to sneakily deal with nearly every enemy, or would you rather have the option to effectively fight back?

If you are robbing a standard place you probably want a dagger. If you are robbing a tomb, you probably want a sword. If you are robbing the Knights' Barracks, where alot of the enemies are in heavy armor... either is permissible.

Yaphy
17th May 2009, 19:42
I like it! Its really good stuff you've thought of here. :thumb:
Its really balanced, and people can choose just what they want.:)

johny2211
17th May 2009, 20:04
I think they should stick with the original sword. Just because it was more fun than using a dagger. and mainly because ITS JUST A GAME its not real and doesnt have to be lifelike, that will just make things boring.

ToMegaTherion
17th May 2009, 21:26
The player should have an inferior weapon to guards, this makes it easier to balance combat so it isn't a sensible option for the player. The sword in Dark Project and Metal Age was massively overpowered. I didn't fight much with the dagger in Deadly Shadows, but it seemed much harder. Part of this might just be because the guards fight much better in Deadly Shadows.

Yaphy
18th May 2009, 07:16
I liked the way the dagger was. It seemed much more stealthy with it. You could barely kill one guard. This helped you to concentrate on staying unnoticed. It was more of an "oh noes" feeling when a guard noticed you.

Alex50
18th May 2009, 09:26
Dagger is more convenient. The best block sword of the guard is flashbomb and prompt run. But if nevertheless will be returned sword, I do not want to see in game of dancing with sabers. Is like " Assassin's Creed " where begins with concealment in straw. And comes to end genocides of armies Saladin and crusades, just to talk to the king Arthur

WVI
24th May 2009, 07:58
Regarding Yaphy's idea: ...Sounded reasonable to me. Dunno what his problem is.

Anyway, I remember someone in another topic saying Thief's 1 and 2's sword fighting was "brilliant". I don't know what the bloody hell your standards are if you think that. >_>

ToMegaTherion
24th May 2009, 08:36
The sword was basically a cheat... the only limit to how many enemies you can kill is player fatigue.

ToMegaTherion
24th May 2009, 13:14
That's a nice argument, but it would only have validity if blocking with the sword was actually worthwhile. It isn't. Standing around blocking is never going to be as worthwhile as escaping, killing, or reducing your opponent to his flee level.

Given the number of lethal tools the player is provided with, it also seems a little absurd to suggest Thief wasn't supposed to make killing easy. You could one-shot an opponent from afar, blast them with fire arrows, auto-kill them with a mine, and if all else failed, beat them with the cheatsword. Perhaps you could argue that Thief was supposed to be about avoiding confrontation -- killing was meant only to be easy when your enemy was unaware of you. That would be fine, except the cheatsword makes this simply not true in practice.

Mikkowl
24th May 2009, 14:01
I thought the sword fighting in Thief 1-2 was really great - clever interface, real feeling, difficult, etc. If you hurt them just enough they'd retreat. But forget that if there's more than one.

The dagger in Thief 3 replacing the sword was.. just plain crap. Taking away an awesome, realistic, well working part of the gameplay (the bow suffered similar fates).

Platinumoxicity
24th May 2009, 16:10
The dagger in TDS was essentially a lethal blackjack. A silent kill.

No, it made a whole lot of noise. Garrett stabbed the victim in the upper neck, in the spinal column, not in the traceartes for a silent kill. I guess that this could be explained by the fact that Garrett is not an assassin so he doesn't know how to effectively use the dagger, but really, if you don't want to be labeled a murderer, and you can choose between "silently knocking an opponent unconcious", and "violently stabbing them to death creating a whole lot of noise", which method would you choose? Ion Storm thought that a dagger would be more suitable for a thief, but they failed to understand why so they forgot the "silent kill"-part completely and just made it a weapon for those who like to kill without thinking about the consequences.

ToMegaTherion
24th May 2009, 16:11
The dagger is not a silent kill, because if you backstab someone with it they scream just like they do if you backstab someone with the sword (although sometimes backstabbing people with the sword didn't cause a scream). The dagger has two uses: to backstab someone when you're worried they will turn round and so you don't want to risk having a blackjack out, and to fight something if you are caught and can't / don't want to escape. This is the same two uses as the sword in the first two games, but the dagger isn't an I-win-instantly cheat, which is good.

hexhunter
25th May 2009, 11:23
Just to note, Garrett's sword was an arming sword, you didn't really get any shorter swords in medieval Europe. I'd like if the player got the choice, even maces and hammers, ancient wakizashi style swords.

DarthEnder
26th May 2009, 06:13
I've yet to see any asian influences in any of the Thief games and I'd prefer it if it stayed that way.

In fact, the closest I've seen to any non-european influences in Thief is that some of the Hand Mages had Muslim names.

Vae
30th May 2009, 07:15
The dagger in TDS went against the spirit of the first two games. Maybe this is just something some fans of the first two games appreciated since it was part of the fabric of what made Garrett who he was. Killing was not meant to be as easy as they made it in TDS. The changes in TDS were an effort to 'action' up the game in order to make it cool for the average player. The studio head 'Warren Spector' said something to the effect of having to wait in the shadows being boring and that they wanted to make the game move faster and have more action. Yet, the very thing they changed was what made Thief..."THIEF". It wasn't about being an action hero, it was about avoiding conflict...by hiding and waiting in the shadows.

In Thief 1/2, you were not a Killer, you were not an assassin. If you were sneaking up on someone, chances are you had your blackjack in hand. Thief was one of the few games that actually tried to make the idea of killing another human being repulsive, yet people are on here talking about making it more convenient to do so. That is NOT what Thief was about and it really irks me that so few understand that. All everyone seems to focus on is making it easier to kill, when the very purpose of the first two games was to make it harder to kill..to be the opposite of all the games already sitting on the shelves.

The difference between the sword and the dagger? The dagger is primarily an offensive weapon...if you have it out, you're not likely to deflect much with it...well, you couldn't in TDS...all you do is stab, cut and kill with it.

The sword is a 'defensive' or 'offensive' weapon. If you so choose, you never have to land a single blow with it. You can simply use it for blocking. That's a 'real' gameplay choice, and a moral choice, much more so than choosing between an instrument primarily used for killing or one that allows us to choose between offensive and defensive moves.

If T4 is going to embrace the spirit of what Looking Glass Studios was brave enough to pioneer, the dagger should go. No choice between the two.


I agree. The sword is multi-purposed and adds a greater sense of freedom in THIEF. It can be involved in attack, defense, and various kinds of problem solving situations. It is a melee weapon and also a useful tool to interact with objects in the environment. This is one the elements that made you utilize your creative intelligence, which is so essential for the best THIEF experience.

a_taffer
4th Jun 2009, 19:02
I don't know if this is being discussed somewhere, and if it is, I am truly sorry. However... I feel this is pretty important to be discussing so here goes...

I am a die-hard Thief fan. Thief set me up for every other stealth game, especially Metal Gear.

One thing that really disappointed me in Thief 3 was your knife. No longer can you efficiently stand toe-to-toe with a guard if it comes to it. You just sit there clickin, waiting for him to die. There's really no strategy to it, simply keep clicking and take damage until the guard is dead.

In Thief 1, you had a sword. Here are the benefits of a sword in a game like Thief.

-The best last resort-

When you've got nothing else, you've got the sword. Not only can you stand up to any one guard, but you can also take him down with no, or very little damage, once you are skilled enough with it. That one weapon has a lot of options to it when you're in a fight. Knowing when to block, swipe, and overhead-slash was essential, and could give you an effective edge over a single guard. Unlike Thief 3, where you are always at a disadvantage, and the fight is just a boring click-fest.

-A fun way to end it all-

When I HAD to take a guard in a sword fight, it was exciting. I'll make a comparison to MGS here. In the best of the MGS games, you have the option to fight. When you do, it's a great break from all that patient sneaking and planning, because it was a lot of fun. In Thief, you can do this as well. A good balance between planning, execution, and simple fun makes the game more than just "Plan, sneak, leave". It's the extra variables (a guard noticing you) that make the game spontaneous, exciting, and suspenseful. A surprisingly good strategy I found (not on expert mode), is to reveal yourself to a guard and get into a fight! If you're good enough, you can take him down without losing any health, but not always. Anyway, the point is that a sword-fight was FUNNN!!

-A balanced blade-

The above all works out because in Thief the weapons are balanced. Using the sword, comes at a consequence. Lugging it around slows you down, and you are more visible when you draw it. You are not the most skilled sword user, and your swings are naturally slower than a guard. If you are going to use your sword, you need to know when you will use it, how you will use it, and where you will use it. This is the spirit of the Thief games! Know what you're doing and why; a sword fight is actually pretty tactical. In Thief 3, there is no amount of skill that makes you much better with the dagger toe-to-toe.

Yes, I realize that a dagger makes more sense than a sword, especially when you are not there to kill.

However, I think that it is in the spirit of stealth games that the player be given the option to fight well, in a fun and effective way, when they wish, or when they have to. Besides, if Garrett is a guy who's prepared for anything - and he is - a sword is not an illogical choice, since he knows there's a chance he may be noticed and forced to confront a guard. In Thief 3, a flashbomb was a way out of anything. I could get noticed and just toss one of the 20 of those badboys I had on hand and its all fine. I like to have the sword as a last resort.

I personally don't think it's unrealistic. If it's too unseeming for a thief to be using a sword... how about a short-sword? If it's too big to be lugged around, why not strap it on his back? Ninjas do it...

I just felt that the sword was a fun, effective, and balanced way of dealing with certain situations. I felt that a piece of Thief was missing when we were handed the dagger.

Thoughts?

huzi73
4th Jun 2009, 19:31
I wholeheartedly agree, but as long as EM keep the sword as a tactical, easy to use, difficult to master, last resort.But not just ANY sword. It must be Constantine's sword! Which is magical, so, theoretically, could be durable, ultra light weight , high tech, cold pressed, hand crafted, stealth kill, backstab ready, titanium!

muteki13
4th Jun 2009, 19:33
A dagger makes more sense. It's concealable and catches the light less. I doubt that many people are mugged by criminals wielding weapons that couldn't be hidden, e.g. shotgun, bazooka...sword.
And it always seemed awkward for someone to be crouching and sneaking around with a sheathed sword sticking out behind him bumping into everything and scratching the walls.
People only don't like the dagger because it's so fashionable to bash TDS, but I suspect that when the developers were in the concept phase they probably said something along the lines of: "Why the hell would a thief carry a sword?". Maybe if the object of a mission was to steal a sword, he could use it since he would have to carry it regardless.

Corvin25
4th Jun 2009, 19:39
I missed the sword in TDS. :(

Yeah, I'd like for Garrett to carry a short to medium sized blade with him. A dagger just feels so... ineffectual.

kaekaelyn
4th Jun 2009, 19:43
They both have their ups and downs. I like the idea of being able to choose which one you want to carry before you start a mission. You could make backstabs very difficult or impossible with the sword, for some extra strategy before you go into a mission. If you expect there are going to be some Hammer Haunts, you'd better bring your dagger, but if you're afraid you might be forced to fight a guard head-on sometime in a guard-heavy mission, the sword's probably a better option.

jay pettitt
4th Jun 2009, 19:54
What I think I'd like to try is not carrying a sword, but being able to grab items, swords, hat stands, garden forks, etc from around the world and swing them about a bit.

Hypevosa
4th Jun 2009, 19:55
I made this post in the original sword thread. I personally think there should be choice between the 2. We're left to assume that when constantine died the sword disappeared, or simply garrett sold it out of need or wanting to get rid of the thing since it did not appear in thief 2.

Here's how I would write it...

Dagger Advantages:
-Ability to backstab quickly
-No change in visibility when wielded
-Can be shimmied into the plates of heavily armored foes if they are unaware
-Can be easily concealed (like if you are in a place that doesn't tolerate weaponry)
-Minimal blood spray, for less needed cleanup
-Very quick attacks
-Can be used to hammy aware enemies, if you are crouched and behind their legs, rendering them immobile and able to be dealt with
-Your health has no effect on its use

Dagger Disadvantages
-Backstab means muffling their mouth, so guards within 15 feet or so can hear the scream)
-Minimal damage during a fight
-Cannot block (It's Garrett, there's no way he could block a sword with it)
-Hammy means lots of screaming
-Short reach
-Cannot damage heavily armored foes in combat
-Backstab does not effect undead, they don't need their heart or blood thank you

Long Sword Advantages:
-Decapitation instead of back stab (meaning perfectly silent kills because of no screaming)
-Visibility increases one full shade when wielded
-Heavy damage in combat
-Can take off limbs
-Can block
-Has a far reach
-Can damage heavily armored foes
-Decapitation instantly kills undead and spirits

Long sword disadvantages:
-Decapitation means alot of cleanup (cleansing area of blood, finding and hiding head)
-Decapitation takes longer to ready and aim swing
-Swing slows as health decreases
-Not easily concealed
-Slower attacks
-More blood to be cleaned up

This way Both items have their times to be used, and both have situations where either is permissible. And it also allows for a few styles of play. Would you rather have silent kills you have to clean up alot after, or would you rather risk someone over hearing, but at least not have to clean up as much? Would you rather have to sneakily deal with nearly every enemy, or would you rather have the option to effectively fight back?

If you are robbing a standard place you probably want a dagger. If you are robbing a tomb, you probably want a sword. If you are robbing the Knights' Barracks, where alot of the enemies are in heavy armor... either is permissible.

Hypevosa
4th Jun 2009, 19:59
They both have their ups and downs. I like the idea of being able to choose which one you want to carry before you start a mission. You could make backstabs very difficult or impossible with the sword, for some extra strategy before you go into a mission. If you expect there are going to be some Hammer Haunts, you'd better bring your dagger, but if you're afraid you might be forced to fight a guard head-on sometime in a guard-heavy mission, the sword's probably a better option.

As you can probably tell by my suggestions for each, the sword is in my opinion the more undead fighting weapon... Do you really think a hammer haunt would care if you stabbed him in the heart he no longer needed, or if you cut him a little? I just think that losing their hammer arm or causing massive damage would be more effective.

DarthEnder
4th Jun 2009, 20:21
I posted in the Armory thread(which this is sure to get merged into) that for all your undead slaying needs, Garrett needs a magic hammer.

ToMegaTherion
4th Jun 2009, 20:24
Note that the sword allowed you to defeat every melee guard in the level simultaneously if necessary. Not to say that a sword is necessarily going to be unbalanced (the guards in Dark Project and Metal Age were just hopelessly inferior to the player, after all), but arguments in favour of a sword have to take into account the fact that, in the Dark Project and Metal Age implementations, the sword was basically a cheat.

Yaphy
4th Jun 2009, 20:29
Why not give him a chainsaw when youre at it! :mad2: I actually think that the dagger was one of the things that was inproved in Thief Deadly Shadows! It moved the gameplay from killing to stealth, and that is one of the BIG main reasons of the game. Its not an assassins creed superhero fighting game. Dont you remember what happend when you master the sword, blade or any weapon in assassins creed?! You aint an assassin anymore. You are an unstoppable killingmachine! So please keep the dagger!

Hypevosa
4th Jun 2009, 20:30
Note that the sword allowed you to defeat every melee guard in the level simultaneously if necessary. Not to say that a sword is necessarily going to be unbalanced (the guards in Dark Project and Metal Age were just hopelessly inferior to the player, after all), but arguments in favour of a sword have to take into account the fact that, in the Dark Project and Metal Age implementations, the sword was basically a cheat.

Yes, hopefully with new AI and maybe a little fine tuning the sword wouldn't be as overpowered....

My standards are this:

Normal difficulty with just his sword, Garrett can fight 3 guards full frontal successfully. On Hard, that's 2 guards, and on Expert that's one guard, with MAYBE one health left at the end of it.

Hypevosa
4th Jun 2009, 20:36
Why not give him a chainsaw when youre at it! :mad2: I actually think that the dagger was one of the things that was inproved in Thief Deadly Shadows! It moved the gameplay from killing to stealth, and that is one of the BIG main reasons of the game. Its not an assassins creed superhero fighting game. Dont you remember what happend when you master the sword, blade or any weapon in assassins creed?! You aint an assassin anymore. You are an unstoppable killingmachine! So please keep the dagger!

The game play was never focused on killing unless the player made the conscious effort to master fighting in the game. I agree that Garrett should never be so efficient as to be able to full frontal assault every guard in a level, but if he gets cornered he needs to be able to defend himself. The dagger is a weapon that you use just to kill people, it has absolutely 0 defensive capabilities, and murder is against the heart of the game. The sword is a weapon where if you're backed into a corner you can at least block and defend yourself. It's supposed to be there for if you screw up and don't want to just puss out and reload an old save. There are some who'll keep going after getting spotted, and the sword at least allowed them to either scare someone away, or defend themselves. The game isn't supposed to end every time you're cornered, that's why it's "Don't kill people" and not something else. At least the sword is a weapon used to defend against people who attack you first, where the dagger is only viable for MURDERING the unaware.

kaekaelyn
4th Jun 2009, 20:41
I don't know, I just think of backstabbing as the traditional way to dispose of Haunts. We could change that, perhaps, but I'm hesitant to rethink that. And that horrid scream...

Anyway, I like your list for the most part, but I fear your list runs the risk of being too much about personal preference/skill in one or the other than actual prediction about the mission ahead. The sword's stealth kills are silent, but messy. In a way, that makes the sword sort of a stealth weapon too. That makes the decision needlessly complex in my opinion. It should be stealth vs. melee, so that you can focus on what you need for the mission at hand rather than on "which do I like better."

Yes, I know the dagger is loud. It should be, because it's like a close-range broadhead. Most people probably do not backstab unless they have to, so we'd probably have to work out some other advantage to bringing the dagger (if we're not going to use Haunts as an example)--but I want it to be stealth/finesse/thievery related rather than combat-related.

Maybe you could cut ropes with the dagger--the sword is much too clunky to do that cleanly or quickly enough. If the AI is smart in Thief 4, and I sure hope it is, guards could follow you up ropes from rope arrows unless you cut the rope. And if a guard happens to be on that rope, and the ground happens to be a long way down, well, all the better. Although that seems a little too specific to warrant bringing the dagger for that reason alone, I could see some interesting utility functions a dagger could give a thief. Maybe you could jam it in a lock when you're being pursued by a guard in order to quickly seal off a door, even if the key is held by a guard. It might take a while, but the guard's eventually going to bust his way in anyway. By then you could have made an escape or found some shadows to hide in. You'd lose the dagger if you didn't pull it out again, of course.

I'm not so good with specific ideas, and those are probably a little wacky, but I think a clever thief could come up with a dozen uses for a dagger. That way it isn't just a redundant, less useful blackjack type thing.

Yaphy
4th Jun 2009, 20:41
Dont say you just block with the sword, they will die just as much as when you stab the with the dagger! After you block; you attack. The dagger was exactly enough to kill one guard. The sword on the other hand could take out at least two or three at the same time. And if you just want to escape, you always have flashbombs. If you just use one single flashbomb, you can escape like the thief should do instead of take out a troop of guards whenever you get detected.

DarthEnder
4th Jun 2009, 20:44
Are you saying you don't think you should be able to KO blinded guards?

ToMegaTherion
4th Jun 2009, 20:46
The concept of just blocking with the sword is quite cute, but it doesn't actually achieve anything. Eventually you have to run away, why not save time and do it immediately?

a_taffer
4th Jun 2009, 20:50
Hmm these are all really good points.

A big thing for me though, is the fun factor. Of course playing on expert you can't do it, but a battle should be an exciting event! I never considered fighting a guard in TDS. First of all because you have virtually endless tools to deal with them otherwise and it didn't make sense to kill someone in a fight when you've got 20 flashies, and second because you CAN NOT fight a guard with the dagger without taking significant damage. Like, there was literally no point in a confrontation in TDS. In thief 1 or 2, if you're out of tools, you fall back on the sword and fight. Every stealth game has an element of fighting to it at one point or another... it's very important to make the time when you DO need to fight, a whole different challenge all together, in my opinion.

Another interesting thing to bring up is the visibility of having a sword out. You could backstab but it was a little more risky. I think that's an important thing to note.

And again, it doesn't have to be a Longsword. It can be a short sword, or it can be light sword with a thin blade...

I do not like the idea of BOTH weapons, unless there is a solid fulfilling duty for each. So far, I haven't seen anything done with a dagger that a sword can't do.... or the other way around. To me, it should be either dagger, OR sword.

Don't get me wrong, a dagger is fine too, but you need to have an element of fun in combat and I don't see how a dagger could do that as well as a sword.

And yeah, you could cheat with the sword... which is why in expert mode you are not allowed to kill. If they add the sword back they should make it effective for 1 on 1s only, with more draw backs the more people you are facing.

Yaphy
4th Jun 2009, 20:54
Are you saying you don't think you should be able to KO blinded guards?

No, or...you should be able to hit them with regular blows. They will die but they will scream loudly. But they wount get unblinded. No KO like cut their head of. I dont want Thief to become a gore game. I dont want to go search for guards heads and stand and use up all my water arrows just to clean up the mess. When i screw up I just want to get the punishment of laudness and loss of health that the dagger gives you.

Hypevosa
4th Jun 2009, 20:55
You don't have the luxury of always being equipped when cornered, and the sword/dagger is the one thing that you never "use up".

I said in another post I have standards for what garrett's potential fighting capacity should be, and really not exceed. 3 guards in normal, 2 in hard, one with one health left in expert... no matter what weapon he's using.

As for ideas Kaek, daggers could be used to open locked doors instead of lock picking, much like using a credit card to open doors today. They can also be slid under pressure plates in the floor and used to disarm traps. Daggers are far more a "Tool" than the sword, but there are still situations that call for both weapons. A master thief in my opinion is also a master of tools. He knows when to use what, where to use what, and realizes that even the most useless thing can indeed serve as a tool, like playing cards in T2 could be used to distract a guard by throwing them against the wall. I don't think Garrett would rid himself of either of his most important tools, his dagger or his sword.

ToMegaTherion
4th Jun 2009, 21:00
Are you saying you don't think you should be able to KO blinded guards?

I think having flashbombs act effectively act as cheap gas arrows was a bit of a bad idea from a gameplay perspective.

MasterTaffer
4th Jun 2009, 21:03
I think having flashbombs act effectively act as cheap gas arrows was a bit of a bad idea from a gameplay perspective.

Ditto on that. It made encounters with guards far less threatening in Thief 1 & 2. But it also shouldn't magically restore their sight like in Thief 3 when you bop them ont he head. Perhaps if you catch them unaware with the flashbomb, it might work to knock them out. But an alert guard who isn't caught by suprise would probably wave his sword around trying to get lucky.

Hypevosa
4th Jun 2009, 21:05
Gas arrows are for distance, you see a guard down a lit place or overlooking you and you can't reach him without him noticing too early. Flashbombs are for close quarters, and mainly multiple people I think. I would like if flashbombs only worked on unaware opponents though, because I know I wouldn't be looking directly at anything that a thief just threw at me, and probably would side step it, or just put up my arms to protect my face for a second. Curiousity kills with unaware people, their eyes being drawn to the thing that just rolled around from behind them or landed between them.

EDIT: And I like the waving their sword around idea.

huzi73
4th Jun 2009, 21:10
A dagger makes more sense. It's concealable and catches the light less. I doubt that many people are mugged by criminals wielding weapons that couldn't be hidden, e.g. shotgun, bazooka...sword.
And it always seemed awkward for someone to be crouching and sneaking around with a sheathed sword sticking out behind him bumping into everything and scratching the walls.
People only don't like the dagger because it's so fashionable to bash TDS, but I suspect that when the developers were in the concept phase they probably said something along the lines of: "Why the hell would a thief carry a sword?". Maybe if the object of a mission was to steal a sword, he could use it since he would have to carry it regardless.

Except that Constantine's sword was magical, (for crying out loud, it floated ffs!). Which probably meant it weighed very little if not nothing at all.But thats not canon, just speculation.
Anyhow, what is canon, is the fact that its invisible to everyone besides the one who weilds it.
(Which is why it is the only item that hasnt been taken from Garrett at the start of the Escape! Mission, since it couldn't be seen)
Besides, the dagger required me to get so close behind a guard, i usually ended up using the blackjack instead.
The only difference between the dagger and blackjack, was that the dagger killed, while the blackjack didnt. Compared to the sword, both couldnt block,or do significant damage.
As far as undead go, it would be retarded to allow you to kill zombies with a sword. It would completely remove the thrill in undead levels.

DarthEnder
4th Jun 2009, 21:15
I think it should simply be that the blackjack will always work if you hit a guard from behind, and never work any other way. But as long as a guard can see you, it should be impossible to get behind them.

If you flash bomb a guard, you have to circle around behind him without making any noise in order to knock him out. If you just flash bomb, then try and circle strafe around him on a tile floor, he'll just turn towards the sound of your footsteps and no KO for you.

So you have 3 guards on you, you drop a flash, then it's either shoot a moss arrow on the ground, which probably won't cover all the guards backs, or shoot something behind them that makes noise that makes them turn around, then *BOF*.


I would like if flashbombs only worked on unaware opponents though, because I know I wouldn't be looking directly at anything that a thief just threw at me, and probably would side step it, or just put up my arms to protect my face for a second. Curiousity kills with unaware people, their eyes being drawn to the thing that just rolled around from behind them or landed between them.Great, so you've trained yourself to not look at anything an opponent tosses at you, and now that mine he just tossed at your feet has killed you. You have to remember that Garrett is not the only person in the city that these guards ever go up against. Most thugs probably don't even use flashbombs.

Hypevosa
4th Jun 2009, 21:26
Great, so you've trained yourself to not look at anything an opponent tosses at you, and now that mine he just tossed at your feet has killed you. You have to remember that Garrett is not the only person in the city that these guards ever go up against. Most thugs probably don't even use flashbombs.

Again, side step and or shield face for protection, staring at it won't protect me from it at all. Plus, everyone knows that mines take at least 3 seconds to arm

MasterTaffer
4th Jun 2009, 21:34
Again, side step and or shield face for protection, staring at it won't protect me from it at all. Plus, everyone knows that mines take at least 3 seconds to arm

Considering most self defense disciplines teach you to throw whatever is in your hands at your opponents so the shield themselves/catch it as a distraction, you jsut left yourself opening a strike to the throat or balls.

Terr
4th Jun 2009, 21:39
Dagger > Sword.

Thief's strength is the stealth, misdirection, and exploration.

Taking on multiple guards in some sort of CQB block-attack flow or button-mashing powerhouse has since become is the forte of other game series. Thief should stick to it's strengths and do those very well.

If you find yourself needing the sword rather than a dagger, odds are you screwed up on the stealth aspect.

jay pettitt
4th Jun 2009, 22:16
I've changed my mind. Twice.

Palmberg
5th Jun 2009, 01:32
I dont really use the dagger or the sword, well I use the sword to break in doors some times but not very often. And there was this one time at some Pagan level in TDS where I was forced to kill someone for some blood sacrifice or something like that, which sucked btw (forced killing, what were they thinking?!). The sword can be used for more things than fighting so I guess that makes it better than the dagger in these games. And as for a sword not being stealthy, ninjas uses swords!! Nuff said ;)

Hypevosa
5th Jun 2009, 01:54
I dont really use the dagger or the sword, well I use the sword to break in doors some times but not very often. And there was this one time at some Pagan level in TDS where I was forced to kill someone for some blood sacrifice or something like that, which sucked btw (forced killing, what were they thinking?!). The sword can be used for more things than fighting so I guess that makes it better than the dagger in these games. And as for a sword not being stealthy, ninjas uses swords!! Nuff said ;)

There's a dead body you can use instead of killing someone... it's already been discussed somewhere.

DarthEnder
5th Jun 2009, 04:39
Again, side step and or shield face for protection, staring at it won't protect me from it at all. Plus, everyone knows that mines take at least 3 seconds to armIf you sidestepped and shielded your face, then there's now a mine on the floor behind you that you didn't see that's going to kill you in 3 seconds.

Hypevosa
5th Jun 2009, 05:55
I'm not deaf, I can certainly hear one of those heavy things land and at least make a jump out of the way... unless you hit me with a thunder arrow and I'm now deaf? XD

DarthEnder
7th Jun 2009, 19:35
I've been thinking a lot about the concept of melee combat in Thief and the argument of sword or knife and I've come to the conclusion that it should be both, and I don't mean either or. I mean simultaneously.

Essentially, Garrett should use the fighting style made famous by those of his type, Cloak and Dagger. I know most people believe that Cloak and Dagger is a synonym for spycraft, but it's actually a fighting style.

Essentially the wielder uses a sword in their main hand, basically fencing with the enemy meanwhile, in your offhand, you would have a dagger in your hand, hidden under(or sometimes even wrapped up in) your cloak. You would essentially use your sword to move your opponents sword out of position, then lunge in at a vital point with the knife.

In Thief it would basically work like this. You have the sword in your hand, that functions pretty much like it did in the first two Thief games. You could hold down the block button to parry attacks, you could slash with it, from different angles depending on how you were moving. But now, in addition, if you timed a block perfectly against an incoming attack, you'd basically be able to unbalance them by knocking their weapon to the side, and then if you immediately attack while they're still unbalanced, instead of slashing with the sword Garrett would stab the dagger into some vital organ.

This is essentially the same system Rid**** uses as far as controlling is concerned(which I think is the best use of first person melee I've played), but visually, its much more suited to Garrett.


And Sneak attacks would be context sensitive. Against guards, Garrett would backstab with the knife for a quieter, more precise kill. Against monsters and undead, Garrett would use the sword for maximum destructive force.

Hypevosa
7th Jun 2009, 20:07
See but now the game becomes more like AC because of the counter attack system, and you can actually take on every guard in a level successfully. Garrett is supposed to be as unexperienced in real combat as a kid with a wooden stick in the street, as he has not been in enough combat to develop a style or technique. At least that's how I see it.

Vae
7th Jun 2009, 20:20
Me like sword. Sword attack. Sword parry. Sword cut fabric. Find treasure. Find secret. Sword cut wood. Sword good. Sword Superior.

Hypevosa
7th Jun 2009, 20:37
Me like sword. Sword attack. Sword parry. Sword cut fabric. Find treasure. Find secret. Sword cut wood. Sword good. Sword Superior.

list off all the uses you can find for the sword outside of combat and I'll list all the uses for a dagger I can come up with.

Vae
7th Jun 2009, 20:46
The sword is better overall. Come on Hypevosa, are you just a contrarian by nature?

DarthEnder
7th Jun 2009, 21:06
Garrett is supposed to be as unexperienced in real combat as a kid with a wooden stick in the street, as he has not been in enough combat to develop a style or technique. At least that's how I see it.I have NO idea where you get that from. Considering Garrett chews through guards in the first two Thief games. It's not until Haunts and Ratbeasts enter the first thief game that enemies start kicking your ass in sword combat.

You keep bringing up the whole "On expert, Garrett should only be able to beat one guard, and then only have one health left." Basically, your saying a players skill shouldn't amount for anything in sword combat, that in melee, your just supposed to trade blows with the guard.

If a player is actually really skilled at melee combat, there's no way a single guard should pose a threat to them on any difficulty. Simply because if the player is better than the AI, the AI should be landing hits.

This immediately goes out the window once a second guard is thrown in thought because trying to fight in more than one direction at once quickly becomes impossible.

Hypevosa
7th Jun 2009, 21:08
The sword is better overall. Come on Hypevosa, are you just a contrarian by nature?

I'm just trying to make a point. The sword is so much better in the previous games not because it was the cheatsword that allowed you to rectify any mistake you made while sneaking by killing everyone in a level, but because of the fact that it was also utilized as a tool.

If in TDS the dagger had been used as more of a tool than only being there as a weapon, it would have been alot more tollerable. Really, a dagger has many more instances where it can be used as a tool than the sword can, and that's the only point I'm really trying to prove. For a primary weapon in thief 4, I'd rather have my sword, but for purpose as a tool I'd rather have a dagger.

I'm promise I'm just trying to emphasize the NEED for whatever the primary weapon is to utilized often as a tool since there are alot of us who will never use it as a weapon.

I'll admit I do play devils advocate alot though... I like to make people actually think their views over, and I like to make myself think as well. Attempting to put on the other side's shoes usually makes my views stronger since I understand both sides.

"It's more thief like" is the dumbest argument, but the most common for the dagger.

"It's stealthier and quicker" is the next dumbest (in my oppinion) for the sole fact that if you're wielding your weapon your stealth should already be compromised, so why bother with a stealthy weapon.

I'm bringing the best argument I can to the table, which is if they use it as a tool like how the sword was used in the first 2 games it would be a better because of the vast number of uses it would serve that the sword couldn't. But on the same coin there are things the sword can do that the dagger cannot as well. It's why I think that Garrett, and intelligent and rational thief, would probably carry both on his person at all times.

Hypevosa
7th Jun 2009, 21:14
I have NO idea where you get that from. Considering Garrett chews through guards in the first two Thief games. It's not until Haunts and Ratbeasts enter the first thief game that enemies start kicking your ass in sword combat.

You keep bringing up the whole "On expert, Garrett should only be able to beat one guard, and then only have one health left." Basically, your saying a players skill shouldn't amount for anything in sword combat, that in melee, your just supposed to trade blows with the guard.

If a player is actually really skilled at melee combat, there's no way a single guard should pose a threat to them on any difficulty. Simply because if the player is better than the AI, the AI should be landing hits.

This immediately goes out the window once a second guard is thrown in thought because trying to fight in more than one direction at once quickly becomes impossible.

Master thief, never caught and rarely seen. That's where I get it from mainly. The problem that I see with your argument, is that if the player is supposed to be Garrett, then Garrett's maximum capacity should limit the player's. Your argument is forcing Garrett to take on the skills of the player.

Vae
7th Jun 2009, 21:15
Hypevosa, Garrett trained with the sword with the Keepers in T1 training. Plus your not going to backstab a spider...

Vae
7th Jun 2009, 21:19
The sword just "felt" right. It's Garrett's personal sword. It felt a part of him. It felt good. Dagger felt wrong and compromised.

DarthEnder
7th Jun 2009, 21:20
I always shoot spiders in the back. It's pretty much the only thing I use broadheads for besides hitting out of reach elevator buttons.

Hypevosa
7th Jun 2009, 21:29
Hypevosa, Garrett trained with the sword with the Keepers in T1 training. Plus your not going to backstab a spider...

hehehe, yeah the whacking of the wooden dummy. Actually, being trained as a keeper and actually having used a sword was probably why Garrett had it in the first 2 games. I agree it does feel more like a part of Garrett as well, but we played from the first 2 games, so we have a bit of bias. I just can't help but see the number of things a dagger could be used for and want to see those too.

I always stabbed spiders, I found it more frantic and fun to dance with them.

lefty
8th Jun 2009, 18:26
I'm not deaf, I can certainly hear one of those heavy things land and at least make a jump out of the way... unless you hit me with a thunder arrow and I'm now deaf? XD

Are you one of those people who watches movies and goes on about how he totally would have survived and not made any mistakes and whatnot...

fraten
8th Jun 2009, 21:37
Remember how in T1&2 you could use your sword to cut banners and tapestries down from the wall, sometimes finding hidden secret alcoves, or switches... That was cool.

Remember how you couldn't do that in TDS? That was crap.
.

But you can do that in TDS Fanmissions. I think it's "Starting from Scratch".


A dagger makes more sense. It's concealable and catches the light less. I doubt that many people are mugged by criminals wielding weapons that couldn't be hidden, e.g. shotgun, bazooka...sword.
And it always seemed awkward for someone to be crouching and sneaking around with a sheathed sword sticking out behind him bumping into everything and scratching the walls.
People only don't like the dagger because it's so fashionable to bash TDS, but I suspect that when the developers were in the concept phase they probably said something along the lines of: "Why the hell would a thief carry a sword?". Maybe if the object of a mission was to steal a sword, he could use it since he would have to carry it regardless.

That's certainly true. Plus: Garrett should always be weaker than his opponents. I was unhappy with the sword ever since. And I didn't use it in fight.

Hypevosa
8th Jun 2009, 23:01
Are you one of those people who watches movies and goes on about how he totally would have survived and not made any mistakes and whatnot...

No, but I know if I was a guard and someone threw something at me while I was pursuing them I wouldn't be staring at it...

nydusordos
8th Jun 2009, 23:03
I know that carrying around a tiny little dagger and back-stabbing people is terribly thiefy, but the sword fighting system in Thief 1 & 2 was a lot more fun.

You know, just saying. In case the devs where still deciding on what melee weapon to use. :whistle:

Bring back constantine's sword!!! I also enjoyed the sword, why can't you carry a sword and a dagger?

As for the sword play being terrible, I was actually quite good at it by the end of Thief 1 and could defend myself against multiple foes (with a couple gashes, of course).

- NO

lefty
9th Jun 2009, 04:07
No, but I know if I was a guard and someone threw something at me while I was pursuing them I wouldn't be staring at it...

That just reinforces what I said... You're only claiming that because you know the discussion at hand is about flash bombs that blind you when they go off and you look at them. You can't honestly say a trespasser throws something at your feet and you completely ignore it.

Anyway my first post was prompted by your claims you would be able to successfully dodge any attacks someone would throw at you while you were blinded because you have some knowledge of the game... You have no idea how you would react in that situation.

Hypevosa
9th Jun 2009, 04:43
That just reinforces what I said... You're only claiming that because you know the discussion at hand is about flash bombs that blind you when they go off and you look at them. You can't honestly say a trespasser throws something at your feet and you completely ignore it.

Anyway my first post was prompted by your claims you would be able to successfully dodge any attacks someone would throw at you while you were blinded because you have some knowledge of the game... You have no idea how you would react in that situation.

I didn't say I'd dodge blows while blinded, I'm saying I wouldn't be blinded to begin with... And yes, if someone throws something at me and I'm a guard, I am going to ignore it, and not stare directly into it. Why? My job requires that I capture criminals, not that I recover every article that they drop.

Let's say I'm a city watch... assuming I haven't been murdered yet, and actually been on the job for more than 2 weeks I probably have been flashbombed, gassed, seen a mine go off, or at least heard about them (the merchants had infinite supplies of those items, Garrett is NOT the only one to employ them...). My personal reaction to the knowledge, would be to never look at anything that was thrown at me by someone I was pursuing, and side step it assuming it was a mine. I don't know if I would be successful, because I wouldn't be looking at it, but mines take time to trigger so I'd be counting on that too. I would probably hold my breath after hearing a HISSS as well. I would keep pursuing the criminal until I couldn't physically bear it anymore, or until I would be compromised if I had to fight him. In all that armor, I'd probably be compromised after chasing him for about 30 yards, and I'd stop, thinking it a lost cause.

The problem is that I'm not a city watch, or a guard. I'm alot smarter than the people from that era. Maybe alot of them would be stupid enough to look at the flashbomb while they were pursuing you, but assuming there's one guy who is smart and or experienced in the group of 5 guards you're fleeing from, or at least one who's such a die hard that he is basically in the zone while pursuing you, someone would keep coming until they couldn't find you or until you put them down.

What I was trying to suggest, was that not all guards be complete idiots, and that people have diverse reactions to situations. If I throw a flashbomb at someone who's pursuing me, what I would like to see more diverse reactions:

60% of guards (benny style guards): "What's that?" or some other indicative phrase of curiousity, and they stare straight at it as it hits the ground, then wrench back and grab their eyes and stare up. Then afterwards they wouldn't look at it if you tried again (why you hung around, I don't know).

20% of guards (berserker/paladin style guards): "WREAAAAAAAAAH" they have entered the zone... they have tunnel vision, they see you and only you, they have their sword raised, they don't give a damn who's in their way (shoving aside citizens in their bull rush), they have a blood lust or maybe a more divinely inspired sense of justice that must be fulfilled. They are the guards that will pursue you non-stop (don't run out of breath) until they cannot find you, and they are always the last to give up looking (maybe by persuasion of the other guards). As you hide in the shadows they will call you out, nostrils flared with heavy breathing, screaming as normal people look on in somewhat perplexed and frightened glances.

10% of guards (Experienced/intelligent guards): Whether its 5 years on the force, or direct experience as a thief, they actually know the tactics. They know every piece of equipment you use and how to deal with it. Assuming they are not caught unaware, they don't look at flashbombs, they hold their breath at gas bombs, they jump over oil puddles, they pick up mines and click the button to stop them from arming if you throw them at them, and will notice the mine's little red dot on the ground if it's already armed and warn others not to step there. All Captains of the guard fall into this, and most officers. These guards will actually probe shadows, and need to be avoided. After they retire, they'll always manage to find the exact spot you're sitting in and stare at it as they sheath their sword and walk away (it would just be cool).

This post is more fit for the individual personalities thread for guards...

fraten
10th Jun 2009, 19:33
I didn't say I'd dodge blows while blinded, I'm saying I wouldn't be blinded to begin with... And yes, if someone throws something at me and I'm a guard, I am going to ignore it, and not stare directly into it. Why? My job requires that I capture criminals, not that I recover every article that they drop.

But that's a (kinetic) reflex. You cannot help your eyes moving. You cannot control that.

Hypevosa
10th Jun 2009, 20:43
But that's a (kinetic) reflex. You cannot help your eyes moving. You cannot control that.

I admit I almost always look at things I see out of the corner of my eye, but if someone's thrown it at me I can ignore it so long as it isn't about to hit me in the face XD

Secondary
1st Sep 2009, 01:44
swordfighting always felt messy and out of character to me, i avoided it whenver possible except when dealing with the undead. i think giving the player a sword makes him (or her, no bias here:D) more likely to engage in violence rather than just use a flashbomb and escape. id rather have a dagger or maybe a short sword or dirk, something i can use as a tool and a weapon if i've no other options. give me a tool first, weapon later

Hypevosa
1st Sep 2009, 03:42
The sword in the first games is a short sword, or at least it seemed to be less than 3 feet long... that or garrett is like 7 feet tall...

Yaphy
1st Sep 2009, 10:23
60% of guards (benny style guards): "What's that?" or some other indicative phrase of curiousity, and they stare straight at it as it hits the ground, then wrench back and grab their eyes and stare up. Then afterwards they wouldn't look at it if you tried again (why you hung around, I don't know).

20% of guards (berserker/paladin style guards): "WREAAAAAAAAAH" they have entered the zone... they have tunnel vision, they see you and only you, they have their sword raised, they don't give a damn who's in their way (shoving aside citizens in their bull rush), they have a blood lust or maybe a more divinely inspired sense of justice that must be fulfilled. They are the guards that will pursue you non-stop (don't run out of breath) until they cannot find you, and they are always the last to give up looking (maybe by persuasion of the other guards). As you hide in the shadows they will call you out, nostrils flared with heavy breathing, screaming as normal people look on in somewhat perplexed and frightened glances.

10% of guards (Experienced/intelligent guards): Whether its 5 years on the force, or direct experience as a thief, they actually know the tactics. They know every piece of equipment you use and how to deal with it. Assuming they are not caught unaware, they don't look at flashbombs, they hold their breath at gas bombs, they jump over oil puddles, they pick up mines and click the button to stop them from arming if you throw them at them, and will notice the mine's little red dot on the ground if it's already armed and warn others not to step there. All Captains of the guard fall into this, and most officers. These guards will actually probe shadows, and need to be avoided. After they retire, they'll always manage to find the exact spot you're sitting in and stare at it as they sheath their sword and walk away (it would just be cool).


So it would only be 90% guards?

Vae
1st Sep 2009, 11:12
Just for fun.....short swords are between 21/2 and 31/2 feet in length...........................:o:):D

Secondary
1st Sep 2009, 16:20
Just for fun.....short swords are between 21/2 and 31/2 feet in length...........................:o:):D

3 and 1/2 feet is a massive sword, thats more like a claymore. 2, feet is a little closer to the mark

Davehall380
1st Sep 2009, 16:24
Lol Garrett with a claymore - like a mule with a spinning wheel

Secondary
1st Sep 2009, 16:58
just had a mental image of Garret sneaking around with a claymore

is that a lightning rod sneaking around over there?

Hypevosa
1st Sep 2009, 18:11
is that the whole sword or just the blade?

Secondary
1st Sep 2009, 18:19
whenever one refers to the length of a sword they refer to the blade. the handle (the tang) is a seperate measure and is often refered to as such, they use two measures so they can calculate a good ration between the two, making a balanced sword.

on a 3 and 1/2 foot blade, the handle would be long enough to fit both hands with 4 or 5 inches between them (for leverage, making a blow faster and more powerful)

so when i say 3 foot sword, its really more like 4


and on shorter swords and knives the length of blade and handle are seperate because the handle is roughly the same lenght on all models. if only one hand is needed it handle is roughly the lenght of the hand. so its measurement is not provided. when i say i have a 6 inch pocket knife, i refer to the blade.

Hypevosa
1st Sep 2009, 18:19
So it would only be 90% guards?

Ah, those numbers I had when I was thinking 10% being experienced and 10% being ex thieves. now I'll just leave the 10% as leeway depending on the difficulty level you choose. Normal nets you 10% more newb guards, hard nets you 10% more berserker guards, and expert nets you 10% more experienced guards.

My question about sword length was aimed at JTR when he said it was 28 inches long.

Vae
1st Sep 2009, 21:15
3 and 1/2 feet is a massive sword, thats more like a claymore. 2, feet is a little closer to the mark

Incorrect. A claymore sword averages 4 1/2' in length. Garrett uses a short sword, which is well suited for him.

Vae
1st Sep 2009, 22:56
whenever one refers to the length of a sword they refer to the blade. the handle (the tang) is a seperate measure and is often refered to as such, they use two measures so they can calculate a good ration between the two, making a balanced sword.


Untrue. The standard and proper way to refer to the length of a sword is by the length of the sword (object), which includes the hilt and blade. If one wishes to refer to the length of the blade (without the tang or hilt), you would say the blade is a certain length.

Secondary
1st Sep 2009, 23:11
Untrue. The standard and proper way to refer to the length of a sword is by the length of the sword (object), which includes the hilt and blade. If one wishes to refer to the length of the blade (without the tang or hilt), you would say the blade is a certain length.

i stand corrected, thanks:D

Vae
1st Sep 2009, 23:30
i stand corrected, thanks:D

My pleasure...:)

jtr7...I understand...:)

Zahr Dalsk
2nd Sep 2009, 02:40
I know that carrying around a tiny little dagger and back-stabbing people is terribly thiefy, but the sword fighting system in Thief 1 & 2 was a lot more fun.

Why are you killing NPCs in the first place?

Hypevosa
2nd Sep 2009, 04:23
Don't tell me you never just felt like having a fun time feckin around and never tried the swordplay Zahr? I was pretty hardcore about not being seen, but I know sometimes I got so frustrated I wanted to just kill everything in the level... so I attempted to role play Garrett finally losing his cool *twitch*.

negative_len
6th Nov 2009, 18:08
I wouldn't mind some defensive fencing, throwing guards off balance and pushing them back with good, well-timed parrying, giving you some time to make your escape once you'd been discovered. That could actually work very well. You could even give Garrett an outside chance in a one-on-one swordfight -- though of course, other guards would quickly come running.

darkmagicasorseer
6th Nov 2009, 18:56
Fencing was fun, agreed!

Do you mean like Zorro? it will be fun if Garrett managed to undress a guard using a sword, making them disabled to fight and shout for help to another guard due to embarrassment.:D

DF-HellFier
6th Nov 2009, 19:59
We neeed a option to buy a mele weapon at shop!
Option's:
1) sword
2) dagger
This will allow for many players to play Thief 4 at their way and add some replayability. What important is - ONLY ONE TIPE OF SWORD and ONE TIPE OF DAGGER! Perhaps limitation for only one tipe of weapon (I dont see rreason why Garrett cant carry both of them - a small dagger & one handed sword)

GhostStealth
6th Nov 2009, 20:02
This dilemma with sword Vs dagger, I would find sword more funny, not just only for the size or the combat system, but that I could crack up wooden doors and any entrance sealed with wooden planks, that was the most fun for me to explore, dagger weak for that.
Makes me think of something like short sword, that was mentioned before, countless of times as a subject to talk about. :whistle:

esme
7th Nov 2009, 10:48
fencing may be fun but I avoid situations where I need to fight with the sword as I prefer to sneak or use it to deal with zombies, so sword by all means but please don't force confrontations where I have to fight head on

Thugo
10th Nov 2009, 23:18
I really like the idea of different guards having different reactions/fighting styles.

esme
11th Nov 2009, 11:25
I really like the idea of different guards having different reactions/fighting styles.but when are you going to witness these different reactions and fighting styles ?

Namdrol
11th Nov 2009, 11:41
When you're slaughtering all and sundry. :(

esme
11th Nov 2009, 12:22
in my sole ... sad .... lonely little mission to date (I will do another I promise) I spent aaaaaages coding in what I thought were sensible post alert behaviours, alerted civilians flee to guards and alert them, alerted guards search and then instead of returning to rest they go on patrol so you made the situation worse by alerting them, one poor guy ran to the watch station when alerted but if you completed one of the side objectives first they would treat him as a bad guy and kill him

little things like that

I discussed some of the problems this caused with one of the betatesters and they basically said that most thief players will take out an AI if it so much as blinks at the wrong time so all this work probably isn't going to be seen

so different reactions and fighting styles may not add much to the game

Vae
11th Nov 2009, 12:27
I could see some value in mixing things up a little...but then again the priority of combat is low and so unless easy to implement, I would say no.

Vae
11th Nov 2009, 12:40
Yes. This could create more of an interest and challenge for the player as a whole...and this good, seeing that Garrett has been overpowered in the previous games.

Nate
11th Nov 2009, 13:06
It would be nice to see Garrett have a more realistic health/hit point total in Thief4. And if they could somehow avoid the infinite loot/equipment that TDS had, Thief4 would have a more challenging Garrett to play.

xAcerbusx
15th Nov 2009, 03:33
Yeah, I loved fencing. Lugging about a big broadsword while you're jumping from rooftop to rooftop never struck me as very practical, though. The dagger from TDS is a bit more Thiefy.

Namdrol
15th Nov 2009, 07:12
Yeah, I loved fencing. Lugging about a big broadsword while you're jumping from rooftop to rooftop never struck me as very practical, though. The dagger from TDS is a bit more Thiefy.

But it wasn't a broadsword, it was a shortsword.

Namdrol
15th Nov 2009, 07:24
The magic loot bag, but we don't care about that because we're getting things.
MINE ;)

ClashWho
15th Nov 2009, 10:49
in my sole ... sad .... lonely little mission to date (I will do another I promise) I spent aaaaaages coding in what I thought were sensible post alert behaviours, alerted civilians flee to guards and alert them, alerted guards search and then instead of returning to rest they go on patrol so you made the situation worse by alerting them, one poor guy ran to the watch station when alerted but if you completed one of the side objectives first they would treat him as a bad guy and kill him

little things like that

I discussed some of the problems this caused with one of the betatesters and they basically said that most thief players will take out an AI if it so much as blinks at the wrong time so all this work probably isn't going to be seen

so different reactions and fighting styles may not add much to the game

What's the name of your FM? I'd like to play it.

esme
16th Nov 2009, 13:17
pm'd you

glyph07
17th Nov 2009, 12:28
And since it was mentioned again. Why is a bow and quiver, and a huge loot sack full of precious metals, and long, rolled-up tapestries and paintings, and carrying an arsenal of 300 lbs. of gear, not an issue, but the poor sword is?

Hold on jtr7, u don't have Garrett walking slowly because of any weapon, tool, or stolen goods but the sword. At least, this happens in TDP, I can't remember if it's the same in TMA now...but still, if the sword were light as the other objects I don't think there would be any issue related to its size.

Although, as I have mentioned on a different thread, I think it's cool to actually have a tool that slow down Garrett (see Sword vs Dagger for reference) instead of a Dagger.

esme
17th Nov 2009, 13:48
the sword slows him down in TMA as well

Hypevosa
17th Nov 2009, 14:08
See, but the reason the sword slows him down in the old games is because it's out of its sheath. That I understand, and it's not because it weighs so much that he can't run any longer, it's just that when you draw the sword the game assumes your in conflict, so Garrett moves as if he was in combat... carefully, deliberately... few things would be as embarassing on the epitaph of a master thief as "fell on his own sword". If he's truly wielding a short sword he could run normally with it, as they aren't as unwieldy as a long sword or hand and a half, but I'd say he keeps his deliberate pacing that he has while walking.

Vae
18th Nov 2009, 00:56
Which is about right when moving with a sword in hand. This provides game balance with the appropriate penalties whilst drawn (movement, visibility)...you never want to keep the sword drawn unless you really need it.

Vae
18th Nov 2009, 01:15
Yes...the sword is defensive in this manner. The sword is reflective of the mind...;)

ChaosLad
7th Nov 2011, 04:22
It would be fun if you could decide if you want to use a sword or a knife at the mission start.

The knife cant block and can only use one sort of attack. At the other hand, you can backstab guards with the knife.

The sword can block and do more damage. You can also perform different attacks depending in how long you press the attack button and how well you time your blows. If you time about 4 blows right, you can make an instant kill with a nice move.The sword cant backstab.

I might have gone a little to far, but you get the deal. This isnt really balanced, but its just a prototype...:nut:

u said nothing wrong :)

Vae
7th Nov 2011, 04:34
The knife cant block and can only use one sort of attack. At the other hand, you can backstab guards with the knife.


u said nothing wrong :)

No...nothing at all...:whistle:

Hypevosa
7th Nov 2011, 05:04
I still see no reason why (if both the dagger and sword are included in the game) why someone who would take the sword along wouldn't ALSO take the knife along. They each have their uses, and the extra knife in the boot doesn't exactly take up alot of space.