Why weapon appearance has to be.

Lethe5683 wrote:

Um, the people that are saying it would be to dificult are basing it off of DEVELOPER comments that stated that it would HAVE to be that way, if they allowed it. The only reason I can think of for it HAVING to be that way would be a coding one.
Lethe5683 wrote:

How wrong you are. Try Wielding a CRUSHING Quarter Staff in Primary and either no Weopon or Fist weopon in Secondary... Guess what it is NOT the same animation. Funny thing is if you Wield any Staff in Primary and 2-handed Staff in apperance, you get the one of 3 animations based on a) what you have off hand(normal), and b) the type of 2-handed Staff. If you have nothing or a fist weopon(that does not show) it either will show the Marcial arts style animation or the Usless mage with a big stick animation. If you have something that does show, then that Item IS showen an you hold the 2-handed staff like a Baton.
Flaye@Mistmoore wrote:

Any Swashy worth his/her salt carries that wich is most effective in battle, and sorry to break it to you but axes are far supieror in battle, especally in one on one fights then any sword or dagger.
As far as covering plate mail with dresses it has already been pointed out that people even IRL put cloth over the top of real armor. besides that was the Weakest (as I don't care about that point either) of the 4 points I made. Personally when it comes to appearance, if SoE could do it technically, I am all for any weopon you can wield being able to be showen when put in your appearance slot, even say the BBC over a mace and a shield, if you can ware them.

kela wrote:

Many people would be upset if you could NOT cover an axe with a sword.
Further, covering an (axe with a sword) or (sword with an axe) is NOT more "strange" or "unrealistic" than (sword - sword) or (axe - axe) etc.

Btw. The reason for the clumsy Troubadour axe is probably that it is meant to be an electric guitar somehow (by look).

Flaye@Mistmoore wrote:

Ke'la wrote:
Any Swashy worth his/her salt carries that wich is most effective in battle, and sorry to break it to you but axes are far supieror in battle, especally in one on one fights then any sword or dagger.
As far as covering plate mail with dresses it has already been pointed out that people even IRL put cloth over the top of real armor. besides that was the Weakest (as I don't care about that point either) of the 4 points I made. Personally when it comes to appearance, if SoE could do it technically, I am all for any weopon you can wield being able to be showen when put in your appearance slot, even say the BBC over a mace and a shield, if you can ware them.

Okay, for some reason quote isn't quoting you, so I just copy-pasted it. I could care less what is "effective" or "superior" in battle. My swashy uses either swords or daggers, prefferibly a cutlass or a rapier. Why? Because that's how I envision my swashy, and I won't stand by and let someone tell me otherwise. If you feel you want your axes... that's your choice, I have no problem with it. But if I find an axe that for one reason or another is somehow better than what I have? I'd very much appreciate the ability to cover that up. Does it go against "reality?" Hell yes. But then again, we're playing a game where you can also chuck fireballs at magical fire-breathing dragons in the middle of a cluster of flying islands tethered together only by bigass chains that hover over a land dominated by giant crabs, talking dogs, fay the size of shoes that can tank giants, hordes of the undead, etc. etc. etc.
Get my point?
I do see some point to moderating it a little. It should be limited to what you CAN equip, and I think for *some* continuity sake we could limit it to 1h vs 2h, but there's no real reason to limit it to weapon type. That would pretty much defeat the whole purpose of doing this in the first place.

Fayle@Mistmoore wrote:

You do realise that I agree with you... heck I go farther then you in appearance choice. If SoE can do it without causing Technical issues with the code. My first statment was an RP statment directed at Flaye's RP statement that "No Swashy worth his/her salt carries an axe." I was responding in charactor, that a real Swashy carries that wich is most effective, and axes are supirior weopons to swords by and large.

kela wrote:

Lethe5683 wrote:

Flaye@Mistmoore wrote:

The person who designed the visual abomination called Ayonic Axe for a troubadour should be drawn and quartered. Perhaps give a bard a nice rapier, eh? Instead of that ugly thing fit for either a lumberjack or a mass murderer?
Oh well, at least it has a bottle opener at the hilt, so I can pretend to be a drunkard.
Even though I usually don't give a bleep about appearance, this bugs me bigtime.

Why the heck do so many people quote a quote that has been quoted? Nobody can read that anymore properly. There is also a plain button "reply".
Another reason why I hate axe-axe etc and would prefer slashing-slashing etc is because I wield an ugly supertanker propeller axe in mainhand (mythical) and a sword in off hand. I want to get rid of that and want to wield weapons that optically match each other.

Mytilma wrote:

(sorry for quoting the quoted quote)
The Troubadour mythical is an axe because it should look like a guitar or lute (you may have noticed it). The shape of an axe grants the look of an instrument. Troubadours play on instruments. There's more behind it than just "oh, we give troubs an axe because we have nothing better to do".
So given that 1 + 1 = 2 thats the only way to go.

Linuky@Valor wrote:

In all fairness, it bears no resemblance. And I have seen a guitar and a lute before. Not even the mythical shineys shaped like strings make it look like a guitar. They make it look like an axe with strings.
Perhaps it is because rock singers call their guitars "axes" (as in "One Of My Turns" by Pink Floyd).
Linuky@Valor wrote:

Looks more like "Umm... we have several swords, hammers, staves, an odd looking axe... What was meant for which class? The art designer won't help, he was fired last month. Let's draw lots."

The restrictions are beyond rere and make apperance slots useless. Mystic have 1 handed mace as mythical. how many cool 1 handed maces do you ever see. 1 handed crushing restriction would be fine imo. . woot for t1 hunk of wood mace for apperance. Casters are gona get hosed too, since there are maybe 2 1 handed staff weapons that look cool.

kela wrote:

A weapon is better if it has a country named after it...? That's completly rediculous. They used axes because first of all they were easier to make since they are such crude weapons and second because many countrys didn't have completly professional fighting forces and often parts of their army was just peasents with whatever they ahd on hand to use as a weapon... like an axe. Oriental farmers fought with kamas, does that mean they are good effective weapons? Not really unless you are fighting someone who's unarmed.

Fighting with a sword and shield vs an axe while still superior isn't ideal. Saying that something works better in a game and therfore works better IRL is also rediculous. Two handed weapons are terrible in game cause dual wielding is better. Guess what, in real life 2 handed weapons are almost always superior to dual wielding except in close quarters combat. And axes don't need to be blocked, any sword of decent length will out range and axe allowing you to kill them before they can so much as touch you. Also, try parrying with an axe... see how well that works.

Cusashorn wrote:

Stupid looking epics are exactly the reason why some of us have wanted weapon appearance slots since Epics were introduced. Mtn Dew Bottle of Doom is ohhh such an attractive weapon and I'm soooo proud to be the wielder of it. /gag
I use my epic simply because I have not got access to anything better. Since they put in such tight restrictions I might have to see if I still have the doomhammer thing from Labs... I'd much rather use my prismatic weapon, but since that's not going to be allowed, I'll have to find something, even if I have to resort to a tin hammer.

I think there SHOULD be a restiction, but it should just limit you to weapons your class can really use. So sorry, no piercing appearance for your templar, or no hammer for my bard. But there is no reason not to overwrite an axe with a sword if I can use both.
Another restriction I could think of is limiting wield style, but that is optional. So no twohander if you use sword+board, or no dual wield over a twohander. But as I said, I wouldn't insist on that.

Lethe5683 wrote:

Mytilma wrote:

The thing is based on dev statments the reason for the restriction is NOT lore, and not appeasing Cusashorn it is do to technical limitations with the game.

Mytilma wrote:

I don't know the first time I saw it I thought it looked like a Bass Guitar:

kela wrote:

I'm not certain if the Ayonic Axe looks like a guitar, but this guitar for sure looks like an axe.
Run to the bedroom
In the suitcase on the left
You'll find my favorite axe
Don't look so frightened
This is just a passing phase
One of my bad days
Would you like to watch TV?
Or get between the sheets?
Or contemplate the silent freeway?
Would you like something to eat?
Would you like to learn to fly?
Would ya?
Would you like to see me try?
(Pink Floyd - One of my turns, a scene from The Wall, where a groupie sneaks into the room of the completely drugged Pink)

kela wrote:

Slightly off topic: The reason why the Troubadour epic looks inappropriate is because even though it is meant to be an music instrument by look somehow, it is wielded like a weapon. The meant-to-be-elegant Troubadour does not wield it like a guitar, but like an ogre warrior wielding his butcher axe. (Also oversized for most races.)