No one has talked much about two handed weapons lately so I'll throw in a little idea.

Remember in D2, two handed weapons were awfully unfavorable. They were like 1 less set of stats that you could have with a shield, and one handed weapons were just as fast if not faster than two handed weapons.
Visually, two handed weapons are pretty awesome but game wise, they were not so great.

My idea is that two handed weapons should have a chance to block. It's the same idea as 'Weapon Block' skill from the assassin, as the character is parrying attacks with the weapon.
Shields should always have a higher chance of blocking than two handed weapons
(EX. Shield = 40% block - Two Handed Sword = 20% block)
,but this would make two handed weapons a bit more useful than before.

I think that this is a way that could make two handed weapons a bit more popular.


What do you think?

edit - spelling errors

 Try to say "BRITISH SOLDIER".    

I'm not entirely certain that this is the best way to do it (though I can't think of something better off the top of my head). But, I completely agree, something needs to be done to make two-handers an effective choice.

i like your idea.
but i would make it different that block, were %100damage was negated(although i think i remeber they may have already changed how block works in DIII), make it less valuable than a full block.
different 2hand weps could have diff chance's to block/parrie just like diff shields do. could even be added to 1handers but with a much lower chance/damage reduction than 2handed.

as for 2handers not being useful, any non BVB whirlwind barb worth his salt used a 2hander(in classic) and it was really player choice, 2handed or duel wield, in LoD.
i have even seen many player have fun with spear zons, 2handed melee sorcs, charger pali, ect. but you are right in that most builds required a shield.

PS i think it is a shame that sorcs had no incentive to use a staff at all, rather that add orbs in LoD they should have add'd a chance to block on staff's.

I think the best way to do it is to simply increase the damage to 2.0-2.5x that of a single handed weapon, and make no sacrifices to the speed of the weapon either.

In D2, the damage was only about 1.5x that of a single handed weapon which was counteracted by it's speed, making the overall bonus only about 20% over a single-handed weapon. Of course that 20% damage boost was then far overshadowed by the ability to block as well as the additional stats the second item provided.

With a big enough damage bonus, losing the ability to block should be a fair trade-off.

This same line of thinking should also apply to two-handed staffs, have 2.0-2.5x the stat bonuses that a single-handed wand/orb would provide.

Passives are bleh. I am thinking that the special affixes seem pretty sound.

Special affixes!

---

Q u o t e:
Passives are bleh. I am thinking that the special affixes seem pretty sound.

---

indeed passives are a slightly less than exciting way to handle things. especially if they both offer the same benefit IE. +damage/crit/chance to hit. it would be slightly more interesting if say 2handed specialization offered +damage/crit were 1hand might offer +parrie/hit. any way the matter is in able hands and thatis good to know they are aware of the issue.

oh and the affixes idea sounds cool.

---

Q u o t e:
Funny enough right now two-handers on the barbarian are much stronger than dual-wielding because most of his skills are based on weapon damage and the game doesn't add up the damage on both weapons while dual-wielding (yet). So actually we're trying to make dual-wielding better right now, but, that of course means two-handers will probably then fall by the wayside and we're back in Diablo II's shoes. The witch doctor and wizard don't really apply, the monk has specific skill support for his weapon choices, and the ... *mumble mumble mumble*.

Off the top of Wyatt's head there's a few ways it could be addressed. One potential way would be to have passive skills that allow someone to specialize in two-handers or dual wielding, and we can stat and tweak those however we need to make them effective. We could also make special affixes that can only be rolled up by two-handers that overcome the innate issue of it only being one item.

Bottom line though is we intend for two handers to be as viable as any other weapon choice and we'll do what we need to to make sure that happens.

---

Special affixes seem like much more fun!!!! please, it would make gameplay feel much more fun if different types of weapons had vastly different types of affixes.

---

Q u o t e:
Special affixes!

---

Yeah. Even something like a berserker-type where there's X% chance to automatically counter-attack an enemy. Best defense is a good offense, and all that.

---

Q u o t e:
Well the affix idea was more along the lines of having something like the highest strength affix a two-hander could roll would be 100 points, and the highest a one-hander could roll would be 50. So everything would even out. Of course that doesn't offset things like block, but it's just sort of a half-hatched solution anyway.

---

What does the team think about "innate" affixes, such as block to shield or extra damage to undead on maces? It seems that there is an untapped amount of player value between items (ie, 2h weapons being undesirable in D2).

I won't bring up weapon switch otherwise, but this would make great use of such items.

---

Q u o t e:
Well the affix idea was more along the lines of having something like the highest strength affix a two-hander could roll would be 100 points, and the highest a one-hander could roll would be 50. So everything would even out. Of course that doesn't offset things like block, but it's just sort of a half-hatched solution anyway.

---

Meh. Nobody expects perfect balance, as long as there are upsides to every build. Maybe one is better at killing bosses, another will be better at killing massive groups of smaller enemies, another will be good VS Wizards in dueling, the other in Mirror matchups. I seriously hope you guys don't overthink balance so much so that crazy unique items will be thrown to the wayside. I'd love to see items with +200str, -75 dex, +25 vita, -move speed, etc. The more crazy affixes on given items are, the better.

Personally, my favorite items were the ones that could make you shapeshift, or give you a cool aura, etc...it would be great if they made a big splash in d3....I really don't care if characters are "stronger" than mine, as long as I can have off the wall builds and smash hordes of enemies.

Another idea:
Greater weapon range is something I've usually associated with 2-handers (longer swords, long spears, long pole-arms...). When using AoE skills, the extra range helps you do more total damage per swing (because your weapon can reach / hit more mobs).

This effect can be increased with a 2-hander only affix: increased attack range.

---

Q u o t e:
Funny enough right now two-handers on the barbarian are much stronger than dual-wielding because most of his skills are based on weapon damage and the game doesn't add up the damage on both weapons while dual-wielding (yet). So actually we're trying to make dual-wielding better right now, but, that of course means two-handers will probably then fall by the wayside and we're back in Diablo II's shoes.

---

Tweak some of the skills so they're more reliant on weapon speed and hit more often with dual-wield.
I'm sure whirlwind's hit rate is increased when you have two weapons equipped right (it should)?

Or maybe have the one-hit attacks hit twice, and update the animations a bit. Ex. Barb will do "cleave" slashing with both weapons.
Ex. He'll the the ground quake by smash both weapons to the ground and sending two quakes side by side.

Or yeah, just have some of the off-hand damage tacked onto the skill I guess.

---

Q u o t e:
The witch doctor and wizard don't really apply, the monk has specific skill support for his weapon choices, and the ... *mumble mumble mumble*.

---

and the ... *mumble mumble mumble*? Bash, are you indicating something about the fifth class?

---

Q u o t e:
and the ... *mumble mumble mumble*? Bash, are you indicating something about the fifth class?

---

Yes! The 5th class mumbles! Thus it can only be a reserved Ranger class. He mumbles to all but his animal companions.

Yes 2-handed weapons should have basically double the stats.

For weapon-based skills it would be awesome if you based them off of 1 weapon; make them cost twice as much for 2-handers since they should be doing 2x as much damage. Say you have a skill that does (F x [Weapon DPS]) damage and costs 1 ball of fury (or whatever it's called): for 2-handers make it still do (F x [Weapon DPS]) because it should have 2x the weapon dps, but cost 2 balls of fury. For dual-wielding, I'm not sure whether or not it's feasible to let the player choose between the 2x as much version (swing both weapons), or maybe have it be the 1-weapon version but half the cooldown since you have a second weapon (likely exploitable with weapon swapping, unfortunately) or something.

Anyways, the reasoning behind this suggestion is that I don't want dual-wielding and 2-handers to feel like some arbitrary decision where you end up with all the skills being exactly the same so the choice doesn't actually matter, but I also don't want builds limited by skills that only work when dual wielding. And one more thing is I don't want sword&board to be only 1/2 the dps of dual-wielding & two-handers; very few people would use it. A different possible fix would be 2-handers are 1.N x 1-handed damage and have the offhand weapon penalized to 0.N damage for dual wielding so sword&board isn't so far behind.

I think you guys are too much stuck on balancing everything to exhaustion.

And with that what you accomplish is taking all meaning from weapon choice. If the game gets to a point where all weapons are completely and utterly balanced then there is no reason to choose one over the other. It becomes only a matter of taste.

What I think should be done in order to give meaning to all weapon choices is to think about playstyles.

Two-handers should increase damage dealing, dual-wield should be based on speed and one-handers+board on protection.

So lets say a two-hander gives huge amounts of damage, it is perfect for a boss fight however it will consistently deal overkills to lower mobs thus losing efficiency on that regard.

The dual-wielding enables the shortening of downtime between attacks while also allowing a more efficient use of damage on weaker mobs, its dps however is not as powerful as two-handers so not as effective in boss-fights.

The one-hander+board would be a half-way stance, good n damage mitigation and against projectiles and it could even be implemented a +skill on shields to be able to bash enemies with it to cause stun.

By giving all the weapon types their strengths and weaknesses I believe that the game gets much more "balanced" and choice driven than to forcefully balance all weapon types to be able to do the same.

As someone also mentioned it can be used the attack range to further differentiate sub types such as staves (that could allow some blocking capabilities too) and spears (with dealing more damage than staves but without block).

---

Q u o t e:
I think you guys are too much stuck on balancing everything to exhaustion.

And with that what you accomplish is taking all meaning from weapon choice. If the game gets to a point where all weapons are completely and utterly balanced then there is no reason to choose one over the other. It becomes only a matter of taste.

What I think should be done in order to give meaning to all weapon choices is to think about playstyles.

Two-handers should increase damage dealing, dual-wield should be based on speed and one-handers+board on protection.

So lets say a two-hander gives huge amounts of damage, it is perfect for a boss fight however it will consistently deal overkills to lower mobs thus losing efficiency on that regard.

The dual-wielding enables the shortening of downtime between attacks while also allowing a more efficient use of damage on weaker mobs, its dps however is not as powerful as two-handers so not as effective in boss-fights.

The one-hander+board would be a half-way stance, good n damage mitigation and against projectiles and it could even be implemented a +skill on shields to be able to bash enemies with it to cause stun.

By giving all the weapon types their strengths and weaknesses I believe that the game gets much more "balanced" and choice driven than to forcefully balance all weapon types to be able to do the same.

As someone also mentioned it can be used the attack range to further differentiate sub types such as staves (that could allow some blocking capabilities too) and spears (with dealing more damage than staves but without block).

---

yes, i think that is basically the point. not to make every item equal, therefor only being a matter a visual taste, but to make more items viable. rather than a small hand full of useful weapons out of a plethora of choices, were the rest are useless to any class regardless of how good the mods are, but to allow More options and further customization to the player.

of course some items are going to be better than others for a given character or task, other wise there would be no point in variety , and they must differ giving meaning to making the conscience choice of what to use. i think what is important is that there not be one obvious right answer in weapon selection per build or in general.

otherwise we get what we got in d2, if a 1handed axe isnt a berserker....its useless, if its any kind of spear...its useless , if its any kind of mace...its useless. (oversimplified a bit to make a point.)