twilight change?

Archive of the Sojourn3 General Discussion Forum.
Posts: 80
Joined: Fri Feb 02, 2001 6:01 am
Location: San Luis Obispo, Ca, U.S.A

twilight change?

Postby turg » Tue Aug 28, 2001 12:06 am

I heard some people talking about why twilight should be a 1handed sword. At first, I thought nawwwww, its always been a 2her. After chatting I realized that it might not be that far of a stretch. I would assume that most thing the Black Longsword of Destruction is the optimal sword of choice, non artifact, that is. However, the change in code, with shieldblock/no room silence anymore, and the need of rogues for melee damage, has changed the game. For an item that should be the best in the game, shouldn't it better fit how the tanks are today? I had twilight each of last couple wipes and i tanked with them, but now i cant.

I'm asking for views for/against it because I have a lil biased opinion of course. I want you to also know id be open to downgrading it to 4/4 or something like that....

Posts: 593
Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Fairborn, OH, USA

Postby Zrax » Tue Aug 28, 2001 12:55 am

maybe if the hit/dam, damage dice, and proc effect were all cut in half, but that just sounds too powerful as a one hander otherwise to me.
Posts: 185
Joined: Tue Jan 30, 2001 6:01 am
Location: San Diego, CA,

Postby Blung » Tue Aug 28, 2001 1:36 am

Ogre can't wield 2h weapon as 1h, why should 2h weapon change to 1h for specific race to use it.

Blung take no prisoner.
Posts: 4732
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2001 6:01 am

Postby Ragorn » Tue Aug 28, 2001 1:41 am

Elf Ranger.
6 hits per round.
35 damroll.
Twilight proc.

I think it needs to stay 2 handed. All the best proc weapons are two handed.. it gives warriors a reason NOT to use a shield. Plus, two handed weapons give (Anti-)Paladins an advantage in damage over the one-handed classes.

I see nothing wrong in giving warriors an incentive to not use a shield Image

- Ragorn
Posts: 142
Joined: Wed May 09, 2001 5:01 am

Postby Dinggle » Tue Aug 28, 2001 1:44 am

the elf ranger hyphothesis is easy to get around..make it heavy. and make any other weapon that rangers can use in offhand like windsong too heavy to offhand with. that would balance it.

or just make it warrior only (as in !ranger, !pal, !anti)

shrug, i like turg idea
Posts: 26
Joined: Mon Jun 04, 2001 5:01 am

Postby Tanolm » Tue Aug 28, 2001 5:36 am

I think twilight is warrior/anti-paladin only so rangers using the weapon isn't an issue. I think the whole issue behind the weapon is that warriors tank like rangers when they wield one of these weapons. They can't shieldpunch with it either so twilight becomes a pretty useless weapon. Its ok for anti-paladins i guess, but unholy avenger is better so twilight, so eventually twilight goes back on the storage character.
Posts: 71
Joined: Fri Feb 16, 2001 6:01 am
Location: New York, NY

Postby thruar » Tue Aug 28, 2001 5:59 am

Originally I was vouching for Twilight being 1h when we first got it. I was a little hasty as to get my point through with very valid points which some god agrees and some did not. I had an extensive talk with Gargauth eventually he was able to convince me that Twilight should stay 2h backed up with valid points. Whether Twilight 1h or 2h is just as good of a weapon if used right.
Posts: 774
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2001 6:01 am
Location: New Orleans, La, USA

Postby Jurdex » Tue Aug 28, 2001 8:01 am


I disagree with Twilight being 1handed, unless it was modified to fit that realm (dice no longer 8d4, proc toned down, etc).

Ebony Bladed Longswords aren't too shabby, and there are tons of weapons out there to choose from. If I was a warrior, I would want more shields to choose from than weapons.

The class is very much based around the shield, not the sword. (bash, shieldblock, shieldpunch)

Galok Icewolf
Posts: 510
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2001 6:01 am

Postby Galok Icewolf » Tue Aug 28, 2001 8:19 am

Obviously it wouldn't be 8d4 :P

More like 4d4 3/4 or something as a one handed weapon.
Posts: 37
Joined: Thu Feb 15, 2001 6:01 am
Location: NYC

Postby Koric » Tue Aug 28, 2001 4:57 pm

Hafta disagree with makin it a 1h-er
As good as it'd sound, I think it's cool
to have this blade used in a berserk-ish
kinda style. WTH! U kill my brother!
rem shield
rem sword
wield twilight
Posts: 1578
Joined: Mon May 21, 2001 5:01 am
Location: santa ana, ca, usa

Postby sok » Tue Aug 28, 2001 6:09 pm

keep it 2h. 2h bashing isn't that bad we lived w/ it in previous incarnation of soj. yeah u get hit more often and u not primary tank but u can still be secondary tank. if u have cleric and dscales dont worry about dying and if u do. u can get ress Image
Posts: 22
Joined: Tue Aug 28, 2001 5:01 am
Location: San Diego

Postby Jethrus » Tue Aug 28, 2001 9:10 pm

Ok, here's my 1 cent, since I am now a dorf warrior instead of my monk of prior glory. I think twilight should remain a 2-handed weapon. I personally like having variety. I think if every warrior gets the same 1 handed weapon and the same shield the game becomes drab. I know that eventually every ranger will be wielding a windsong, or close to it. Also, all the paladins will have holy avenger. I personally feel that a warrior only weapon quest should be implemented as they are the only hitter class that doesn't have a quest weapon specific to their class. *Rogue daggers I suppose can be used by other classes but are primarily not*. I think if a 1-handed warrior only quest weapon were added it would make the game more exciting and diverse. But hey, I was a fisticuff monk so I probably don't know much.
-Jethrus Monk of Yore

Return to “S3 General Discussion Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 16 guests