Backstab, Marksman, Berserk - Abilities or Weapon Specials ?

[Darn Penguin]

I know, why shouldn't someone be able to backstab with a two-handed sword or a halbard if they can do it with a dagger. Or better yet, a ballista*!

Because your opponent would hear the ballista creaking as it fired and would be able to dodge out of the way, making you kill your own teammate.

Ooh! how about a weapon special called "WMD (Weapon of Mass "D'oh!")" where if you miss with it, it'll hit the hex behind your opponent!

[turin]

I think this is a useless argument over semantics.

Word.

[joshudson]

I have seen melee marksman before. Quite useful for assassinating leaders that are still in their keeps (since said unit had 9 or 10 mp).

[Ultimatum479]

It should have a different name. That's not what "marksman" means.

I think I know the unit to which you're referring. I've seen it once before. Isn't it in Extended Era? I suppose it's excusable there; lots of units there have pretty horrible grammar.

[catwhowalksbyhimself]

Plus this would make Wesnoth LESS flexible and LESS sophisticated.

Right now, you can give any of these three to all a units attacks, or some of them, or use them in ways no one expects.

You can make a sword-wielding marksman (even if the name doesn't quite fit) or all sorts of other things. You can also create a unit that has an axe and dagger. He is trained to go berserk with the axe but take precise, careful blows with the dagger. Not that you'd actually do this, but the point is, unit creators have that option. With this proposal, you'd be taking that away from them.

[Ultimatum479]

Not with Zookeeper's suggestion of making everything work as both a weapon special and a unit ability. I'd have to second that, considering the annoyance I was having earlier with trying to make a unit ability that acts like steadfast but doubles dodging instead of resistance.

[PingPangQui]

I think that's the right time (not only because I promised to do so) to give zookeepers idea a separate thread and to discuss this matter there (see here).

[irrevenant]

PingPangQui,

Catwhowalksbyhimself has hit the nail on the head.

Though these are skills/aptitudes of the unit in question, they are skills that apply to use of that specific weapon.

- The thief has learnt to backstab with his dagger. He doesn't know how to do it with (eg.) an axe.
- The Elvish Ranger has learnt great accuracy with the bow. He doesn't have that accuracy with (eg.) a slingshot.

Making the abilities weapon specials gives you the flexibility to create a unit that's best at particular attacks.

With Berserk, you have a point re: the Ulfserker line, but Wesnoth should be flexible enough to allow a unit that can launch a berserk attack or a regular attack. In that case "Berserk" needs to be associated with the particular attack rather than the unit.

Note: I'm pointing out here why the weapon specials mentioned shouldn't be recategorised as Abilities for existing units. I'm not arguing against the idea that 'powers' could be made generally available for use as either weapon specials or abilities - I think that's rather a good idea, actually.

[Ken_Oh]

Exactly, but I'd be all for it if it made coding WML easier. But, as someone who has coded a fair amount of abilities and weapon specials in his day, I don't understand how this would be any advantage. I think it would complicate matters.

[catwhowalksbyhimself]

Note: I'm pointing out here why the weapon specials mentioned shouldn't be recategorised as Abilities for existing units. I'm not arguing against the idea that 'powers' could be made generally available for use as either weapon specials or abilities - I think that's rather a good idea, actually.

As that makes the game more flexible still for creators, I'd have no problems with that.