Change Rapiers

Rapiers, while two handed, should still be held in one hand, simply the player puts away their offhand.

Then from there, the block would be a quick parry, which does not actually parry the player, but has a huge partial parry, and the L2 should have a parry.

Interesting. What about the attacks? Any modifications to those that you would like to see?

acarnatia read the entire post!

I like the hand behind the back and the ability to parry with your right hand but partial parry while holding block. No thanks. I would actually like the block removed from two handing a rapier and replaced with a unique move, like the sword push back from Demon's Souls.

lol i don't think any one in real or fictional life can parry a great sword with or without a gauntlet without that hand being broken or severed LUL but good idea

mr_no_face wrote:lol i don't think any one in real or fictional life can parry a great sword with or without a gauntlet without that hand being broken or severed LUL but good idea

Are you implying that parrying should behave like real world physics, in a game that allows you to swing 8 foot stone clubs and cast magic?

steveswede wrote:I like the hand behind the back and the ability to parry with your right hand but partial parry while holding block. No thanks. I would actually like the block removed from two handing a rapier and replaced with a unique move, like the sword push back from Demon's Souls.

True. Perhaps if the partial parry animation could be interrupted at any point for a quick counter attack that isn't a riposte.

It would make the rapier a fast counter weapon, that doesn't simply rely upon full parries.

But I'm not sure what the block should be replaced with, I'm just spitballing.

I always found it weird that someone would wield an rapier two-handed... it just feels...wrong, so this could be a nice addition indeed.

Acarnatia wrote:In regards to that, realize that the character who is wielding an 8-foot long rod is also strong well beyond what is normally humanly possible. Given the strength of a man who has been invigorated by absorbing hundreds or thousands of souls, is that paltry increase in physical strength really so off? And having magic doesn't mean 'throw realism out the window.' Even with such things as the Dragon's Tooth and Soul Arrows, Dark Souls is among the most realistic games there are. If magic did exist in a Midievel/Renaissance world, it won't just change the nature of society and everything will be named after it; (such as Pokemon. Do we call our watches AnimalWatches?) it will be absorbed, turned mundane (to a point) and just become another part of it, like gunpowder and firearms did. Considering that, Dark Souls IS pretty realistic. Sorcerers aren't gods among men; they became scientists, scholars and soldiers, standard weapons and armor, as they are to a point in Dark Souls, even while keeping the minimum amount of mystery and specialness to it.
There are a few parts that do function unrealistically, yes; it's perfectly reasonable to ask the creators to make those elements more realistic. Attacking anyone who asks for realism in a game that's already famous for it's honesty (if subtlety) is rude, unkind and logically backwards. Furthermore, your manner of stating this has repeatedly been lacking in respect, seemingly unaware of other points of view and hostile. You're quite capable of being a kind, respectful and innovative person; please be so.

I don't really disagree with you on any of your points but please please please please please use normal colored text. It is harder to read colored text. The only time that should really be used is in an rp thread to distinguish characters or if you want something in particular to especially stand out. Obviously I can't make you stop using it and I am not presuming to demand it. I am however asking you as politely as possible.

I do hope I caused no offense with this.

Acarnatia wrote:In regards to that, realize that the character who is wielding an 8-foot long rod is also strong well beyond what is normally humanly possible. Given the strength of a man who has been invigorated by absorbing hundreds or thousands of souls, is that paltry increase in physical strength really so off? And having magic doesn't mean 'throw realism out the window.' Even with such things as the Dragon's Tooth and Soul Arrows, Dark Souls is among the most realistic games there are. If magic did exist in a Midievel/Renaissance world, it won't just change the nature of society and everything will be named after it; (such as Pokemon. Do we call our watches AnimalWatches?) it will be absorbed, turned mundane (to a point) and just become another part of it, like gunpowder and firearms did. Considering that, Dark Souls IS pretty realistic. Sorcerers aren't gods among men; they became scientists, scholars and soldiers, standard weapons and armor, as they are to a point in Dark Souls, even while keeping the minimum amount of mystery and specialness to it.
There are a few parts that do function unrealistically, yes; it's perfectly reasonable to ask the creators to make those elements more realistic. Attacking anyone who asks for realism in a game that's already famous for it's honesty (if subtlety) is rude, unkind and logically backwards. Furthermore, your manner of stating this has repeatedly been lacking in respect, seemingly unaware of other points of view and hostile. You're quite capable of being a kind, respectful and innovative person; please be so.

I'm gonna have to debunk this thread a bit because this has not only missed the point I made but makes the accusation that I did it to be hostile.

My point:

To use a realism argument on something where elsewhere it's excepted the impossible can exist makes it a null argument, not because I have a personal dislike on anyone's idea but the term realism implies that stuff abides by the laws of physics of our world. Saying that (as an example) your wrist would break parring a great sword would also imply that you would except greatswords would break your wrists when swinging furiously at a shield or a stone wall, or even falling from a great height would bring the risk of breaking your wrists when landing. This isn't an hostile attack on someones idea but to bring to light the practicality of implementing this, as I'm sure everyone will agree broken wrists in a Souls game isn't practical. Your whole "yes they can do this unrealistic stuff doesn't mean we should throw out realism" point isn't even addressing what I said, pure assumption there. Also with what I said earlier wasn't an attack it was a question.

And anyway regarding being hostile, rude and unkind, again assumptions. I have in the past made the point that my wording can be blunt with people reading the context wrong. I have never made a personal attack on anyone in this forum, ever. If anyone brought forward an idea that wouldn't work or it's done better elsewhere in my mind then I would show them. I have given reasonable arguments and points on many people's ideas to show the flaws in them, not to stop them from bringing fourth those ideas but to improve them. I have the right to speak in this reasonable manner which I do and shouldn't be told that I have a lack of respect when I don't present points and arguments with cream and a cherry on top. Making comments that are blunt or have satire elements in them is not against the forum rules and it also doesn't mean that my intention is to be a ©unt.

Arcarnatia change your color away from red! i have zoom in to your posts. I am tempted just ignore them all.

on topic:

we arent fencing in darksouls as that would be silly.

A different move set for "2 handing" would be nice but putting away your shield to parry faster? No.

Instead:

Perhaps allow 2 handing to yes, put away your shield but instead of parying faster to acheive partials or full depending on trigger allow you to parry using the off hand rapier parry animation and kick instead of feint.



Idea above is terrible but dont make it just to partial fast!

Acarnatia wrote:... I already changed the color to dark red from bright red at everyone's request and I do just use white for my really long posts. I'm keeping it this way.

Your choice. I stated my opinion and that's all I can do.

tinypantha wrote:Arcarnatia change your color away from red! i have zoom in to your posts. I am tempted just ignore them all.

on topic:

we arent fencing in darksouls as that would be silly.

A different move set for "2 handing" would be nice but putting away your shield to parry faster? No.

Instead:

Perhaps allow 2 handing to yes, put away your shield but instead of parying faster to acheive partials or full depending on trigger allow you to parry using the off hand rapier parry animation and kick instead of feint.



Idea above is terrible but dont make it just to partial fast!

I didn't understand your middle sentence.

Commas, my good sir!

Sloth9230 wrote:

This picture says it all. When 2 handing rapiers, you should just put one hand behind your back. The L1 and L2 should just be extra moves with the rapier.

But we arent Fencing!

and buggy i am typing using a GUI its very bulky.

Rapiers weren't used like that (or for long) in battle! They really were like swords, only used as a last resort.

I do not know the proper way to 2h them but i feel 2h would be better then Mr.Fencer

According to wikipidia, rapiers were also used for fencing and duels. They aren't used in the exact same way as an epee, but the they were used for fencing.

Speaking of small swords though... I'd like me some smallswords, along with sabres, in the next game.

Rapiers were handled differently from arming swords. (a standard longsword in the Souls games) Rapiers had very little to no cutting power and were primarily used for thrusting whereas arming swords were very versatile and used for both.
Fencing comes from one less practical and realistic dueling style after. Modern fencing essentially started with versions of smallswords and epees that were never popular with actual soldiers and mercenaries; rather, they were used by civilians and nobles in duels. Furthermore, the technological level that the Souls series has taken place in thus far is just too far before smallswords. If there is small swords and sabers of that era, full-plate armor will be nearly or completely obsolete, (depending on the general year) rifles will be present anywhere from slightly uncommon to en masse and light and medium armors will be much improved, as will infantry tactics. Dark Souls is a Midieval/Renaissance setting that mirrors our own world pretty accurately from the 1300's through the 1400's with a few elements from the 1500's. Adding in too many weapons, though, from the late 1500's and 1600's such as smallswords, sabers and so on will create an Early Modern/Modern Period setting with a lot of obsolete weapons and a mix obviously different cultures. Considering what we've already seen of Dark Souls 2, including the arms, armor, clothes and so on, I think they're definitely not to the point that they're using arquebus's.

In regards to two-handing smallswords-that actually messes up a lot of the point of using a rapier at all. Rapiers are very fast, light and mobile weapons; holding it in two hands requires that the wielder change to a stance that doesn't suit a rapier wielder to present a larger target, greatly narrows the potential areas of attack, and doesn't actually present much any significant advantage. Rapiers don't function off of strength; they pierce right through most armor (including plate armor) and flesh and damage a body based on where they hit, rather than cleaving apart. A needle (this is essentially what a rapier is) does not deal extra damage when it pierces based on how strong it is; (unless moving at supersonic or beyond speeds, for example) it just goes through. While it is from an incorrect date and for duels rather than true combat, the stances of the fencers in the pictures above are a lot more plausible.

I just wanted a cutlass
Edit: I just noticed you're text wasn't red lol


Also, the class isn't the "rapier" class guy's. It's the "thrusting sword" class, and in Demon's it was the "piercing sword" class or something. Rapiers just seem to make up the majority.

Actually, something just occurred to me. Taking Buggy's idea and applying it too other weapons. Instead of there being a 2 hand button, there should be a stance button. Katanas could have an Iaijutsu stance or one where the saya also gets used, weapons might even have multiple stances. Choosing a stance would be like shifting through spells.

tinypantha wrote:But we arent Fencing!

and buggy i am typing using a GUI its very bulky.

Rapiers weren't used like that (or for long) in battle! They really were like swords, only used as a last resort.

I do not know the proper way to 2h them but i feel 2h would be better then Mr.Fencer

/

Where did you learn your history of 1600-1800 noble sword play?

Sloth9230 wrote:According to wikipidia, rapiers were also used for
fencing and duels. They aren't used in the exact same way as an epee,
but the they were used for fencing.

Speaking of small swords though... I'd like me some smallswords, along with sabres, in the next game.

Yup.
Traditional Polish saber is fancy.