In dNethack - not sure about behavior of other variants - I wielded
two weapons - which was possible despite lacking the two-weaponing
proficiency. When dropping the off-hand weapon and trying to wear
my shield again I got: "You cannot wear a shield while wielding two
weapons.". (The workaround to unwield all weapons, wear the shield,
and then wield the primary weapon again, worked as expected.)

Janis

Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> writes:

> In dNethack - not sure about behavior of other variants - I wielded
> two weapons - which was possible despite lacking the two-weaponing
> proficiency. When dropping the off-hand weapon and trying to wear
> my shield again I got: "You cannot wear a shield while wielding two
> weapons.". (The workaround to unwield all weapons, wear the shield,
> and then wield the primary weapon again, worked as expected.)

In dNetHack, anyone can twoweapon (even if restricted), and you can
twoweapon with no offhand weapon to use offhand bare-handed
combat/martial arts. This is not a bug. You should be able to use
#twoweapon (or X) to stop twoweaponing even if you have no offhand.

On 11.11.2023 23:11, Ron Nazarov wrote:
> Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> writes:
>
>> In dNethack - not sure about behavior of other variants - I wielded
>> two weapons - which was possible despite lacking the two-weaponing
>> proficiency. When dropping the off-hand weapon and trying to wear
>> my shield again I got: "You cannot wear a shield while wielding two
>> weapons.". (The workaround to unwield all weapons, wear the shield,
>> and then wield the primary weapon again, worked as expected.)
>
> In dNetHack, anyone can twoweapon (even if restricted), and you can
> twoweapon with no offhand weapon to use offhand bare-handed
> combat/martial arts. This is not a bug. You should be able to use
> #twoweapon (or X) to stop twoweaponing even if you have no offhand.
>

I understand what you say, but find it counter-intuitive that if you
drop your weapon you cannot wield a shield.

And the message "You cannot wear a shield while wielding two weapons."
is also highly misleading (actually wrong), since you aren't wielding
two weapons any more if one is dropped.

If the interface is explicitly asked that I want to wear a shield and
a free hand is available then the interface should follow the request
without requesting unintuitive and spurious actions from the player.

If it's not a bug (as you say it's as designed) I'd call it a design
flaw (and would anyway fix it). YMMV.

Janis

On Sat, 11 Nov 2023 23:34:44 +0100, Janis Papanagnou wrote:

>> In dNetHack, anyone can twoweapon (even if restricted), and you can
>> twoweapon with no offhand weapon to use offhand bare-handed
>> combat/martial arts. This is not a bug. You should be able to use
>> #twoweapon (or X) to stop twoweaponing even if you have no offhand.
>
> I understand what you say, but find it counter-intuitive that if you
> drop your weapon you cannot wield a shield.

There's more to that: If dropping an offhand weapon does not immediately
end two-weaponing, then the next (ungloved) offhand-hit to a cockatrice
may be deadly.

A combatant loosing an offhand weapon like a second long sword would
/not/ immediately switch to combined "primary weapon + martial arts"
combat. All concentration would be focused to the remaining primary
weapon.

Enabling twoweaponing for martial arts would imply, that any "normal"
bare handed combat would be done single-handedly. (Which of course it
is not supposed to be.)

Technically, it is really difficult to combine any weapon larger than
a dagger with martial arts moves. (In eastern/action/fantasy/...
settings as well as in real life .) The offhand can be used to block a
weapon arm and the like. (Which has to be also considered part of any
one-handed combat, if need be.) Using the offhand for attack moves while
wielding a long sword, club or the like is a whole different matter,
though. - This would need exceptionally body control on the level of
grandmaster. Nobody less trained could be expected to gain any kind of
advantage.

> And the message "You cannot wear a shield while wielding two weapons."
> is also highly misleading (actually wrong), since you aren't wielding
> two weapons any more if one is dropped.

Apart from this: A shield can be used better as attack weapon than a
bare hand. Some shields (real past as well as fantasy) were equipped
with sharp edges or even spikes for exactly this purpose. If dNethack
really is open for an extreme interpretation of two-weaponed combat,
it IMHO should permit shields as weapon, as well. (Not that this was
an approach, I'd like...)

BeAr
--
===========================================================================
= What do you mean with: "Perfection is always an illusion"? =
===============================================================--(Oops!)===

On 12.11.2023 08:57, B. R. 'BeAr' Ederson wrote:
>
> There's more to that: If dropping an offhand weapon does not immediately
> end two-weaponing, then the next (ungloved) offhand-hit to a cockatrice
> may be deadly.

Uh-oh! - What a nasty situation (I didn't even think of).

>
> A combatant loosing an offhand weapon like a second long sword would
> /not/ immediately switch to combined "primary weapon + martial arts"
> combat. All concentration would be focused to the remaining primary
> weapon.
>
> Enabling twoweaponing for martial arts would imply, that any "normal"
> bare handed combat would be done single-handedly. (Which of course it
> is not supposed to be.)

So a one-arm-tied-at-your-back fighting option could be possible
as conduct (with reduced dexterity, to-hit, damage, etc.)? :-}

>
> Apart from this: A shield can be used better as attack weapon than a
> bare hand. Some shields (real past as well as fantasy) were equipped
> with sharp edges or even spikes for exactly this purpose. If dNethack
> really is open for an extreme interpretation of two-weaponed combat,
> it IMHO should permit shields as weapon, as well. (Not that this was
> an approach, I'd like...)

Don't recall which variant(s) that were but I seem to recall that
some variant I played had a shield-as-a-weapon characterization.
(Not sure what exactly it was.)

Janis

"B. R. 'BeAr' Ederson" <use.replyto@this.is.invalid> writes:

> On Sat, 11 Nov 2023 23:34:44 +0100, Janis Papanagnou wrote:
>
>>> In dNetHack, anyone can twoweapon (even if restricted), and you can
>>> twoweapon with no offhand weapon to use offhand bare-handed
>>> combat/martial arts. This is not a bug. You should be able to use
>>> #twoweapon (or X) to stop twoweaponing even if you have no offhand.
>>
>> I understand what you say, but find it counter-intuitive that if you
>> drop your weapon you cannot wield a shield.
>
> There's more to that: If dropping an offhand weapon does not immediately
> end two-weaponing, then the next (ungloved) offhand-hit to a cockatrice
> may be deadly.

This is not possible in dNetHack - if you try to attack a cockatrice
barehanded the attack will just not happen with the message "That would
be unwise."

>> And the message "You cannot wear a shield while wielding two weapons."
>> is also highly misleading (actually wrong), since you aren't wielding
>> two weapons any more if one is dropped.
>
> Apart from this: A shield can be used better as attack weapon than a
> bare hand. Some shields (real past as well as fantasy) were equipped
> with sharp edges or even spikes for exactly this purpose. If dNethack
> really is open for an extreme interpretation of two-weaponed combat,
> it IMHO should permit shields as weapon, as well. (Not that this was
> an approach, I'd like...)

The development version has a style that knights can use to hit with
their shield.

On Wed, 06 Dec 2023 21:51:00 +0000, Ron Nazarov wrote:

>> There's more to that: If dropping an offhand weapon does not immediately
>> end two-weaponing, then the next (ungloved) offhand-hit to a cockatrice
>> may be deadly.
>
> This is not possible in dNetHack - if you try to attack a cockatrice
> barehanded the attack will just not happen with the message "That would
> be unwise."

Shouldn't a player character (as well as an inexperienced player) only
be warned of known (= already experienced or really common knowledge)
dangers? - For me, dying because of accidentally touching a cockatrice
corpse without gloves belongs to the core elements of Nethack...
>>> And the message "You cannot wear a shield while wielding two weapons."
>>> is also highly misleading (actually wrong), since you aren't wielding
>>> two weapons any more if one is dropped.
>>
>> Apart from this: A shield can be used better as attack weapon than a
>> bare hand. Some shields (real past as well as fantasy) were equipped
>> with sharp edges or even spikes for exactly this purpose. If dNethack
>> really is open for an extreme interpretation of two-weaponed combat,
>> it IMHO should permit shields as weapon, as well. (Not that this was
>> an approach, I'd like...)
>
> The development version has a style that knights can use to hit with
> their shield.

Usually, when one class can do sth., the other classes can do it as well.
Just not as successful. Two-weaponing is one of (few?) exceptions coming
immediately to mind for vanilla NH. But I always thought of this to be a
wrong design decision. _All_ classes should be able to try two-weaponing
in combat. The ones currently restricted should just take /very severe/
penalties to the hit and damage properties, making two-weaponing on
average less efficient than single handed combat. (And without any chance
to advance that skill.)

Apart from all this: It seems I really have to make time one of these
days to give dNethack a shot. It sounds to be an interesting variant.
But not really having played Nethack for more than a year, by now, this
may take a "little" while... <Sigh>

BeAr
--
===========================================================================
= What do you mean with: "Perfection is always an illusion"? =
===============================================================--(Oops!)===