Going over the cmans lately I've come to the conclusion that not a lot of thought went into what CMans were given to a paladins. Dirt Kick, Groin Kick, Head Butt, Exsanguinate, Tainted Bond? Was it assumed that all paladins would be evil, dirty, underhanded fighters?
Why I was going through them is because I have a paladin who is a pure 2hander and when I play my dwarf he uses blunt/shield and I noted he's got a nice interrupt, Dizzying Swing or he can Shield Bash. So I was looking through the lists for my 2hander paladin and noted all his interrupt options are all rather dirty. He he was a follower of V'Tull that would be fine but he's not he's a follower of Koar and this just feels wrong.
Some years ago I read a historical article about how they've learned that weapons like two handed swords were used differently than what was once thought. That they've found this martial tech manuals basically from the medieval period and studied them then tried out the various forms etc. They noted that in the case of a two handed sword the more of the weapon was use than just the blade, that the pummel would be used when up close etc. It was a fascinating read anyhow I digress.
My point, it would nice if there was a two handed blade weapon/cman called Weapon Pummel that would work like an interrupt/daze ability and would be a possible choice for paladins. I am aware that there is currently a weapon Pummel ability but its blunt weapons only. Either that one could be adapted or something else could be coded like I'm talking about above. (Shrug) Anyhow thought I'd post because seeing my paladin of Koar using under handed abilities irks me.
ACMEGAMER
KRAKII
Re: Paladins and Cman's etc.
07/27/2022 01:52 PM CDT
That should totally be called the Pommel Pummel!
(Pommel is the counterbalance weight at the back end of the hilt, noun. Pummel is the verb you do when you're thrashing people about the head neck and shoulders. (Also gut-punches and so on, but yeah. General battery.) )
(Pommel is the counterbalance weight at the back end of the hilt, noun. Pummel is the verb you do when you're thrashing people about the head neck and shoulders. (Also gut-punches and so on, but yeah. General battery.) )
GS4-VIDUUS
Re: Paladins and Cman's etc.
07/27/2022 07:28 PM CDT
>>Going over the cmans lately I've come to the conclusion that not a lot of thought went into what CMans were given to a paladins. Dirt Kick, Groin Kick, Head Butt, Exsanguinate, Tainted Bond? Was it assumed that all paladins would be evil, dirty, underhanded fighters?
I don't agree with pigeonholing paladins into the goody-two-shoes trope. Paladins worshipping evil deities exist as do "evil" and neutral paladins. Two of the items you listed, groin kick and dirt kick, are cmans open to all classes. Paladins were excluded from using them for years because a subset of the class consider using those techniques as non-chivalrous. I consider that decision to be misguided. Much like you don't want your paladin be forced to use "evil" abilities, other paladins don't want to be forced to always fight fair. Cmans are great in that you never have to actually learn them if they don't fit your character. The decision to not exclude paladins based on a subset was to support all views.
Tainted bond is named so because it amplifies ensorcell, which is considered to have "evil" origins. I don't know that labeling ensorcel it as such as ever really added much to the service. I've also always thought tainted bond was a bit of an oddball cman, even though I use it on my guy.
I don't actually consider head butt to be fighting dirty. It's generally poor form in modern organized fighting because it violates rules. You're on the battle field, not in boxing ring. Unlike groin kicking it's really only "poor form" because it's unexpected and/or may do a great deal of damage to the head/face. Is your paladin also opposed to aiming at the head with his weapon? Same difference there.
It seems like the root of your complaint mostly centers around spell concentration breakers/delayers. That's more of a weakness of THW than a paladin-specific issue in my opinion. History aside, you sacrifice situational counters for more offensive power by choosing THW over sword/board.
THW Paladins have a pretty extensive, though not always obvious, bag of tools. Fighting dirty techniques aside.
General interrupts
feint, bull rush, staggering blow, disarm
You also have 1602 which is basically the dazed effect, and the cast version of 1615 which will knock down and apply RT.
If you need additional tools over those then a cast or infused 119 will zap a prepped spell, and 110/118 can be used situationally.
Lastly, and this toolbox tends to be overlooked by the vast majority of paladins. If you're trained for it, using spells off of scrolls will wreck casters. Several of them will work well even if your CS doesn't: 703, 607, 210, 212, 214, 1708 to name a few.
Given those tools, I really question if you'd need yet another.
Viduus
I don't agree with pigeonholing paladins into the goody-two-shoes trope. Paladins worshipping evil deities exist as do "evil" and neutral paladins. Two of the items you listed, groin kick and dirt kick, are cmans open to all classes. Paladins were excluded from using them for years because a subset of the class consider using those techniques as non-chivalrous. I consider that decision to be misguided. Much like you don't want your paladin be forced to use "evil" abilities, other paladins don't want to be forced to always fight fair. Cmans are great in that you never have to actually learn them if they don't fit your character. The decision to not exclude paladins based on a subset was to support all views.
Tainted bond is named so because it amplifies ensorcell, which is considered to have "evil" origins. I don't know that labeling ensorcel it as such as ever really added much to the service. I've also always thought tainted bond was a bit of an oddball cman, even though I use it on my guy.
I don't actually consider head butt to be fighting dirty. It's generally poor form in modern organized fighting because it violates rules. You're on the battle field, not in boxing ring. Unlike groin kicking it's really only "poor form" because it's unexpected and/or may do a great deal of damage to the head/face. Is your paladin also opposed to aiming at the head with his weapon? Same difference there.
It seems like the root of your complaint mostly centers around spell concentration breakers/delayers. That's more of a weakness of THW than a paladin-specific issue in my opinion. History aside, you sacrifice situational counters for more offensive power by choosing THW over sword/board.
THW Paladins have a pretty extensive, though not always obvious, bag of tools. Fighting dirty techniques aside.
General interrupts
feint, bull rush, staggering blow, disarm
You also have 1602 which is basically the dazed effect, and the cast version of 1615 which will knock down and apply RT.
If you need additional tools over those then a cast or infused 119 will zap a prepped spell, and 110/118 can be used situationally.
Lastly, and this toolbox tends to be overlooked by the vast majority of paladins. If you're trained for it, using spells off of scrolls will wreck casters. Several of them will work well even if your CS doesn't: 703, 607, 210, 212, 214, 1708 to name a few.
Given those tools, I really question if you'd need yet another.
Viduus
ACMEGAMER
Re: Paladins and Cman's etc.
07/28/2022 11:14 AM CDT
That's just it, in my opinion the choices of those cmans are pigeonholing. They pigeonhole you into the role of dirty, underhanded fighters. The actual root was missed by you, that the tools available come off unchivalrous by and large. Headbutt being the least of those but again in my opinion it is dirty fighting. Personally my dwarf has no issue dirty fighting but that's him. Also, yeah I'm quite aware that I've limited my character to a less effective, less min max role by going pure two hander, that's me and its been a part of who I am as a player since I first started playing Gemstone back in the fall of 1992. So I fully understand the shortcomings and weaknesses of my choices. Say la vie as the saying goes.
Jim/Celtar
KRAKII
Re: Paladins and Cman's etc.
07/28/2022 02:41 PM CDT
Except some people say it, "C'est"...
<flee!>
Headbutt is dirty fighting because you play a dwarf, and that's just an extra benefit.
Spiked helm FTW!
.
(Me, I don't think Headbutt is terribly unchivalrous. Compared to Dirtkick--seems more immature, I see Calvin & Hobbes strips with them kicking up dust at home plate--or Groinkick--WWE, I hear "SSSSUUUUUNNNNDDDDAAAYYY!!!!"--I really have no issues with the other one.)
<flee!>
Headbutt is dirty fighting because you play a dwarf, and that's just an extra benefit.
Spiked helm FTW!
.
(Me, I don't think Headbutt is terribly unchivalrous. Compared to Dirtkick--seems more immature, I see Calvin & Hobbes strips with them kicking up dust at home plate--or Groinkick--WWE, I hear "SSSSUUUUUNNNNDDDDAAAYYY!!!!"--I really have no issues with the other one.)
GS4-VIDUUS
Re: Paladins and Cman's etc.
07/28/2022 06:25 PM CDT
>>That's just it, in my opinion the choices of those cmans are pigeonholing. They pigeonhole you into the role of dirty, underhanded fighters. The actual root was missed by you, that the tools available come off unchivalrous by and large.
I don't think I missed it. You're complaining that 4 optional of your 27 total cman skills (68 if you also include shield and weapon skills) is forcing you to fight dirty. I'm saying you have the option to ignore those skills and use alternatives in your kit to accomplish the same results. If it were 27/27 dirty tactics then yes, you would be pigeonholed. Having the option to learn a dirty tactic doesn't somehow taint your character. From your character's perspective it's essentially knowing you can kick someone in the groin and choosing not to explore the tactic at all. Your character also has access to the pickpocketing skill, I doubt you consider him to somehow be a thief just because the skill is available to learn.
>>Also, yeah I'm quite aware that I've limited my character to a less effective, less min max role by going pure two hander, that's me and its been a part of who I am as a player since I first started playing Gemstone back in the fall of 1992.
Choosing THW isn't some kind of mutant off the wall build for paladins. It's also situationally the min/max build. All weapon choices tend to have some kind of tradeoff though. THW using brute force over style for some situations is the tradeoff.
Viduus
I don't think I missed it. You're complaining that 4 optional of your 27 total cman skills (68 if you also include shield and weapon skills) is forcing you to fight dirty. I'm saying you have the option to ignore those skills and use alternatives in your kit to accomplish the same results. If it were 27/27 dirty tactics then yes, you would be pigeonholed. Having the option to learn a dirty tactic doesn't somehow taint your character. From your character's perspective it's essentially knowing you can kick someone in the groin and choosing not to explore the tactic at all. Your character also has access to the pickpocketing skill, I doubt you consider him to somehow be a thief just because the skill is available to learn.
>>Also, yeah I'm quite aware that I've limited my character to a less effective, less min max role by going pure two hander, that's me and its been a part of who I am as a player since I first started playing Gemstone back in the fall of 1992.
Choosing THW isn't some kind of mutant off the wall build for paladins. It's also situationally the min/max build. All weapon choices tend to have some kind of tradeoff though. THW using brute force over style for some situations is the tradeoff.
Viduus
KANDOR
Re: Paladins and Cman's etc.
07/29/2022 11:22 AM CDT
It seems like more than a few paladins prefer lances or claids in the early game because they can't aim, anyway, and 1617 and 1625 both offer some pretty nice benefits for a weapon with real weighting. 1605 gives a decent benefit for smaller weapons, too.
I've found the PSM3 changes (weapon techniques and new maneuvers at lower costs) make a lot of things more viable for paladins sooner, especially once you get enough stamina to use them reliably and recover. One thing that isn't so viable now is using offensive spells at early levels, but I guess this was kind of a gimmick before. Mainly, I noticed it makes using 1602 as an opener less useful, but that's because I keep trying to fit in about 20 MnS spells, somewhere along the way.
As far as the issue with maneuvers, I think having choices is not a bad thing. Even some skills I pick up for defense I would never use. Picking pockets is a pretty good example of a skill from the old game where people trained it but never used it except in fun. Head butt, dirt kick, etc. all protect from bandits and others now - I think - and are useful to train even if my character would never use them. But if there's no real good option for a specific kind of disabler, then it might be worth creating a variant for it -- or modifying an existing one. Most of the paladin-unique stuff ended up as a spell instead of a maneuver, although quite a few of them are still probably fighting dirty - 1614 and 1615 are pretty good examples. Unless you just use them when retreating.
I've found the PSM3 changes (weapon techniques and new maneuvers at lower costs) make a lot of things more viable for paladins sooner, especially once you get enough stamina to use them reliably and recover. One thing that isn't so viable now is using offensive spells at early levels, but I guess this was kind of a gimmick before. Mainly, I noticed it makes using 1602 as an opener less useful, but that's because I keep trying to fit in about 20 MnS spells, somewhere along the way.
As far as the issue with maneuvers, I think having choices is not a bad thing. Even some skills I pick up for defense I would never use. Picking pockets is a pretty good example of a skill from the old game where people trained it but never used it except in fun. Head butt, dirt kick, etc. all protect from bandits and others now - I think - and are useful to train even if my character would never use them. But if there's no real good option for a specific kind of disabler, then it might be worth creating a variant for it -- or modifying an existing one. Most of the paladin-unique stuff ended up as a spell instead of a maneuver, although quite a few of them are still probably fighting dirty - 1614 and 1615 are pretty good examples. Unless you just use them when retreating.
