Two-handed Wielding of Light Weapons

[Supernova2000]

Very impressive videos on Kickstarter, even for a pre-alpha build. While watching the combat demonstrated in the videos, one question kept going through my mind though: In the release version, will we be able to toggle between one-handed and two-handed wielding with, say, a longsword? One reason I really like Dark Souls is because that game was smart enough to understand that a weapon doesn't necessarily have to be bigger than you to be classed as two-handed; just one button press and you can switch between one and two-handed wielding, something that most other games do not understand. So, like Dark Souls, will Sui Generis have this toggle feature?

Also, I assume that given the realistic physics-based gameplay, that we will actually have proper scabbards and so on as opposed to weapons magically floating behind your back/beside your hip when not in use?

 

[fluffydino2000]

I agree. My favourite aspect of skyrim was how it let you use both hands simultaneously but it annoyed me massively that you couldn't use a lighter weapon with two hands. I certainly hope Sui Generis utilises a character's full body, I want to be able to use both my hands for everything, including dual wielding and being a lefty.

 

[Wakko]

I dont see why not actually, maybe the handle is being too small to fit both hands?

 

[Supernova2000]

Naturally, it'd look quite silly if I could hold, say, a dagger with both hands in-game. I just mean for those weapons where it makes sense to have the option.

 

[Araxan]

I dont see why not actually, maybe the handle is being too small to fit both hands?

Well, there used to be lot of like one and half hand weapons. Even dagger can be used two handed. For example whe u are stabing someone, u can use other hand to add preasure on dagger so it goes trought armor.

PS: Sorry for my poor english...

 

[Psychomorph]

At first I was going to say "Yes", but then I thought about it. I can imagine that someone who isn't a fighter and didn't hold a (single handed) sword before, is not familiar with the weight and feel of the sword. To put more strength to the blow and feel more secure he or she might grab it with both hands (since ist's a single hand grip, the one hand would be wrapped around the other). A rather proficient sword fighter would probably not do this, because it is not only about strength, but also the technique and with a single hand he would put the lightness of a single hand sword to good use and swing it very fast. Holding it with both hands would rather limit him or her. However, sometimes you need to put all the strength you got into it and execute a precise blow, this is where I think using both hands would be an option for a proficient fighter.

So I basically thought that if you start as a skill-less nobody and discover a single handed sword, the character would hold the sword with both hands in combat, as a sign of insecurity and would use it rather slow and clumsy. Later, if he gains more skill, he switches to single hand, because he realizes that it is meant to be that way and is faster and better to control. But occasionally, when executing a very powerful strike, he might grab it with both hands and swing it extremely fast and hard.
In short: single handed sword = single hand use only (no option), except you're a total noob or execute an extra poweful attack.

As for two handed swords, these are meant to be used with two hands. A noob would naturally do it, because of the extra weight and size. A proficient fighter would get the most out of using it both hands. Exceptions (single hand use) would be if the other hand is busy (holding shield, other weapon, injured, etc).


I mean options are good and realistic, but things need to be applied most efficiently. A game forcing you to use the most rational way is not wrong either, with believable exceptions such as being a total noob, doing special attacks, or having a busy hand.

I am no expert on the subject though, so I could be wrong. I just try to approach it from a common sense view angle. Sort of.

 

[Komuflage]

At first I was going to say "Yes", but then I thought about it. I can imagine that someone who isn't a fighter and didn't hold a (single handed) sword before, is not familiar with the weight and feel of the sword. To put more strength to the blow and feel more secure he or she might grab it with both hands (since ist's a single hand grip, the one hand would be wrapped around the other). A rather proficient sword fighter would probably not do this, because it is not only about strength, but also the technique and with a single hand he would put the lightness of a single hand sword to good use and swing it very fast. Holding it with both hands would rather limit him or her. However, sometimes you need to put all the strength you got into it and execute a precise blow, this is where I think using both hands would be an option for a proficient fighter.

So I basically thought that if you start as a skill-less nobody and discover a single handed sword, the character would hold the sword with both hands in combat, as a sign of insecurity and would use it rather slow and clumsy. Later, if he gains more skill, he switches to single hand, because he realizes that it is meant to be that way and is faster and better to control. But occasionally, when executing a very powerful strike, he might grab it with both hands and swing it extremely fast and hard.
In short: single handed sword = single hand use only (no option), except you're a total noob or execute an extra poweful attack.

As for two handed swords, these are meant to be used with two hands. A noob would naturally do it, because of the extra weight and size. A proficient fighter would get the most out of using it both hands. Exceptions (single hand use) would be if the other hand is busy (holding shield, other weapon, injured, etc).


I mean options are good and realistic, but things need to be applied most efficiently. A game forcing you to use the most rational way is not wrong either, with believable exceptions such as being a total noob, doing special attacks, or having a busy hand.

I am no expert on the subject though, so I could be wrong. I just try to approach it from a common sense view angle. Sort of.

We don't have to compare it to proficient fighters

Anyway let's take an example, I trained my character to become really good with dual wielding swords, however while fighting, my opponent manage to disarm one of my swords, and since I don't have any extra weapon on me, I think I'll rather hold my last sword with two hands than one, since I'll get a better grip and more control.

And it's just fun to have to option to choose what you prefer ^^


Also, I would say that even two-handed weapons should be able to be wielded in one hand, however since the weight of it, you would not be able to hold it straight up, rather you would drag the sword around and have to use your whole body in order to swing it. Take Fable(1) as an example, even if you didn't have enough strength to wield a weapon properly, you could still "wield" it, however you would drag the sword after you, and as I said you would have to use your whole body in order to even swing it.

Think that would be awesome.

 

[Wakko]

Psycho may have a point. Have anyone watched the Narnia movie? He certainly dont know how to handle a sword. -.-

Would be a little annoying though if you switch from being a swordfighter to lets say a mace/hammer or whatever,And your character acts like a total noob with it. Sure he may not be as efficient, but one would think he'd know the basics of fighting and not hold the hammer with two hands

 

[Komuflage]

Psycho may have a point. Have anyone watched the Narnia movie? He certainly dont know how to handle a sword. -.-

Would be a little annoying though if you switch from being a swordfighter to lets say a mace/hammer or whatever,And your character acts like a total noob with it. Sure he may not be as efficient, but one would think he'd know the basics of fighting and not hold the hammer with two hands

But still, wouldn't it be more efficient to hold that hammer with two hands if you got nothing else to hold in you of-hand? Even if you're a skilled Swords/Mace/hammer (etc) fighter?


Also about that a skilled sword fighter wouldn't be a total noob with a hammer/mace, you're absolutely right, but i think this wont be a problem, since you train your character in Light or Heavy weapons, and Light weapons probably include all one handed weapons

 

[Psychomorph]

We don't have to compare it to proficient fighters

Anyway let's take an example, I trained my character to become really good with dual wielding swords, however while fighting, my opponent manage to disarm one of my swords, and since I don't have any extra weapon on me, I think I'll rather hold my last sword with two hands than one, since I'll get a better grip and more control.

And it's just fun to have to option to choose what you prefer ^^

I'm not sure if holding a single hand grip sword gives you more control or grip, because you are basically putting one hand on top of the other. I think you rather lose control by doing that, because having the other hand free allows you to counter balance the other arm if you try to swing the sword really fast.
Do not forget, that real sword fighting has alot to do with movement coming from the wrist, you rortate and tilt the blade all the time and lots of the force comes from the momentum (mass + movement = mass multiplied). Stabbing hard rather comes from the shoulder.
I mentioned both hand use actually only in relation with special moves, such as executing an opponen that is kneeling infront of you because you brought him down, so you raise the sword overhead and strike as hard as you can by using both hands. In actual combat, where you strike forth and retreat, this would be rather useless I think.

Also, I would say that even two-handed weapons should be able to be wielded in one hand, however since the weight of it, you would not be able to hold it straight up, rather you would drag the sword around and have to use your whole body in order to swing it. Take Fable(1) as an example, even if you didn't have enough strength to wield a weapon properly, you could still "wield" it, however you would drag the sword after you, and as I said you would have to use your whole body in order to even swing it.

Think that would be awesome.

Interesting thing is, that European long swords have a thinner blade and are generally lighter than the Japanese sword, which due to it's massive blade thickness is heavier and is really meant to be used both handed, while a European long sword is technically usable one handed, though you get much more out of it using it both handed.
Do not forget that a long, two haded sword relies on continuous motions, like swinging and rotating and you can only do this from the wrists, which why using a sword both handed does not limit the flexibility and if the grip is long enough the other hand does not only support the weight, but also allows to increase the speed rotation (like when chopping), it's effortless. That increase in rotation would not be given if your sword has only a short, one handed grip and you just wrap the one hand around the other.
A real zweihänder (huge long heavy sword) would be probably unusable with only one hand. A longsword, or also known as bastard sword, is actually a slightly elongated sword, so it's light enough but has a long grip.

I can imagine when fighting a drunk guy, the character could deliberately hold the long sword with one hand to show that he does not need to fear and isn't serious about it.

But still, wouldn't it be more efficient to hold that hammer with two hands if you got nothing else to hold in you of-hand? Even if you're a skilled Swords/Mace/hammer (etc) fighter?


Also about that a skilled sword fighter wouldn't be a total noob with a hammer/mace, you're absolutely right, but i think this wont be a problem, since you train your character in Light or Heavy weapons, and Light weapons probably include all one handed weapons

As I say, basically it depends on the design of the weapon. If it is a small hammer, no point in using it both handed. If it is a larger hamemr, heavier with a longer shaft, you not only need to use hands because of the weight, but also can do it because both hands fit on it. It all about the circumstances, design defines usage.


I don't mean to sound like I know it all, so I apologize for that attitude, it's just the information I recall on the subject matter. Someone who knows more could prove me wrong though. It's just that while options are cool, things should be used the way they make sense and the character would know what the right thing to do is based on his state of skill (noob knows less than a pro). I really don't mind options though, they just need to fit in.


Edit: Found a sword fighting vid, can't watch it from this machine though, so I hope it gives an idea:

 

[Komuflage]

As I say, basically it depends on the design of the weapon. If it is a small hammer, no point in using it both handed. If it is a larger hamemr, heavier with a longer shaft, you not only need to use hands because of the weight, but also can do it because both hands fit on it. It all about the circumstances, design defines usage.


I don't mean to sound like I know it all, so I apologize for that attitude, it's just the information I recall on the subject matter. Someone who knows more could prove me wrong though. It's just that while options are cool, things should be used the way they make sense and the character would know what the right thing to do is based on his state of skill (noob knows less than a pro). I really don't mind options though, they just need to fit in.

But as I said, we don't have to compare it with proficient fighters ^^
If I hold a small hammer with 1 hand and hit a wall.
Then I hold the same hammer with 2 hands (both hands over each other) I will be able to hit the wall with greater force.

Same thing goes for just about any object.

So a simple mechanic that increases your force while two handing a weapon would imo make sense.

 

[Subhu Man]

If I hold a small hammer with 1 hand and hit a wall.
Then I hold the same hammer with 2 hands (both hands over each other) I will be able to hit the wall with greater force.

Same thing goes for just about any object.

So a simple mechanic that increases your force while two handing a weapon would imo make sense.

I reject your premise; when swinging a hammer, even once the nail is already most of the way in, it is very rare to see somebody using both hands. Similarly spears and javelins, and even shot puts and discus are thrown one handed. This is not because that is "the rules," but because with a held light object you can swing one arm faster than both together, usually, and speed is proportinal to force.

 

[Komuflage]

I reject your premise; when swinging a hammer, even once the nail is already most of the way in, it is very rare to see somebody using both hands. Similarly spears and javelins, and even shot puts and discus are thrown one handed. This is not because that is "the rules," but because with a held light object you can swing one arm faster than both together, usually, and speed is proportinal to force.

Guess I need to do some research then, because I honestly don't believe for a second that if I hold a spear with one hand, and striking a target of some sort, I'll get just as much force as if I would hold it with two hands.

However, about the discus, I think that's just about technique, trowing a discus with two hands seems rather difficult (if you accentually are trying to hit something at a distance)

But as I said, I'll do some research, and see what I can find. ^^

 

[Subhu Man]

Guess I need to do some research then, because I honestly don't believe for a second that if I hold a spear with one hand, and striking a target of some sort, I'll get just as much force as if I would hold it with two hands.

Force is one part of the equation, Mass is another. It is easier to get your weight behind a spear or shiv holding it two handed, which puts a lot more pressure on the target and therefore will penetrate better, which is where a pointy object does its damage from. With a hammer, the damage is done by dumping kinetic energy rapidly, which needs speed, which with a hammer is one handed.

Take a steak, if you have a cleaver you can either slice it by pressing down with both hands, or by, well, cleavering it. With a meat tenderiser you will have a lot more luck hammering it than pressing down on it. Some kit will be stronger but slower two handed, some kit could be weaker and slower, especially hammers as they rely on speed.

 

[Komuflage]

So then, two handing a spear generates more force than one handing it, but not with the hammer.

Good thing that's settled . However, I still think, from a game play perspective, that I should be able to two hand any weapon. Being restricted from two handing some specific weapons would imo seem kind of dull.

 

[Subhu Man]

One vs two handed is a subtler distinction than just more arms on weapon therefore more power. Some weapons may be distinctly more effective one handed (nunchucks, foil, stiletto) two handed (zweihander, pole axe) some could be fairly similar in difference between one and two handed effectiveness (bastard sword, axe) and some may have distinct trade offs one vs two handed (spear is the best i could think of, though maybe flails could fit here.) Sometimes a free hand and more range of motion is better than being able to hit harder, especially if you have a shield or cloak in the off hand. I kind of liked how dark souls handles one and two handed stances, different weapons do act differently between the stances, and it is not just a number increase in strength, but also affects recovery times and attack speeds. That being said by all means allow people to duel wield greatswords or two-hand shivs. Just make sure the results are as could be reasonably predicted.

 

[Komuflage]

One vs two handed is a subtler distinction than just more arms on weapon therefore more power. Some weapons may be distinctly more effective one handed (nunchucks, foil, stiletto) two handed (zweihander, pole axe) some could be fairly similar in difference between one and two handed effectiveness (bastard sword, axe) and some may have distinct trade offs one vs two handed (spear is the best i could think of, though maybe flails could fit here.) Sometimes a free hand and more range of motion is better than being able to hit harder, especially if you have a shield or cloak in the off hand. I kind of liked how dark souls handles one and two handed stances, different weapons do act differently between the stances, and it is not just a number increase in strength, but also affects recovery times and attack speeds. That being said by all means allow people to duel wield greatswords or two-hand shivs. Just make sure the results are as could be reasonably predicted.

Demon and Dark souls system was just what I had in mind, you could one and two hand every weapon, however, two handing a certain weapon gave some benefits while one handing the same weapons gave another benefit, however it was all (with a few exceptions) viable.


And this "Sometimes a free hand and more range of motion is better than being able to hit harder" is just what I mean, two handing a spear = greater force, one handing it = greater range and more moveability.
Ofc this is just an example of potential benefits.
However, like I said, give me the option to choose between two-handing a weapon or not, and give me some advantages, and some disadvantages for doing so.