(07-03-2013, 02:09 AM)Myal Wrote:1) Society would survive because not everyone "adventures" and does the super dangerous things our characters do. You can imagine cities full of people who do not go out and dungeon crawl. PCs (imo) are a small percentage of a small percentage of the population, the ones who actually survive dangerous encounters - aka above average warriors. I think the LotR analogy is getting too confusing for me... Frodo was perhaps more lucky than skilled, but was surrounded by the BEST warriors pretty much, no? Also, he didn't go out of the Shire by his own choice and when he did he had one specific "quest." I don't think most people play MMOs like that.(07-02-2013, 11:34 PM)Curtis West Wrote: 1) Seeing as how most of the activities have some sort of fighting involved when outside of the city, would many characters opt for "I am just an explorer" role that specifically excludes them from combat of any sort? I agree that a warrior of high ability will likely be all of those things you outlined, but they'd be foolish not to know how to kill somehow, with their life on the line and all. Given at how dangerous the world can be outside the city limits, an untrained or even a character of average fighting ability can get pwned for good. When I try to put myself in the shoes of my character, it's often a life or death situation (which is why he didn't rush off to fight the Empire like everyone else at the end of 1.0, afraid to die) when faced with the forces of Eorzea... I have had trouble putting away the fact that it's a game and my character can't really die.
Frodo was also a main hero of the whole story, which I'd argue probably doesn't apply to every character in XIV. Think of the side characters, or the other hundreds of people who died in those epic battles. That's likely a better comparison! lol
Sure, untrained people would have higher chances to die in this dangerous world, but I'm sure that the majority still survive. Else how could society persevere? Sure there are hundreds of people who died in epic battles, but surely hundreds survive, too? Does that mean that all hundreds of them are battle experts?
That's the point about Frodo, though. Our character is the main hero of our own story. There could be many reasons why a character could survive mortal, dangerous odds without resorting to "they're just a natural born warrior", just like Frodo. And anyway, Merry and Pippin survived, too.
(07-02-2013, 11:34 PM)Curtis West Wrote: With this in mind, a character wielding a knife is likely quicker than if he was holding an axe, but neither of those skills impair the other. Growing lean muscle doesn't equal being ridiculously slow with a dagger. Both of these activities (as well as any fighting in general) are short-burst, high intensity, and anaerobic. Basically as far as one's body, there is no difference. The only difference is in skill with the weapon... which we are not taking into consideration here, because this is about potential ability.
I'm not saying that he'd be ridiculously slow with a dagger. I'm saying that he'd be slower. And that he doesn't really have any reason to do so, considering that knives have served him well.
NFL players learn MMA to gain edge in the field, but would a skill in axe-swinging lend anything to a knife fight? You said that an MMA athlete outperform others who only train in one particular style, but aren't they all hand-to-hand combat? Wouldn't a person who is skilled in sword arts be better served in learning other various sword styles rather than suddenly picking up a lance?
Bear in mind that I have nothing against those who want a character that's proficient in multiple weapons, especially if it's related to their livelihood. I'm just explaining the rationale behind a character who prefer to just hone their skill with a single weapon.
2) I'd think there are plenty of reasons for developing skills outside of just the one, as others have mentioned. Also, the idea that he will get slower with a dagger is not really true... because both activities are the same as far as muscle use goes. Again, I am specifically NOT talking about skill here, or if the person's skill with the dagger will deplete due to focusing on the axe.
I'm pretty much disassociating any particular weapon or discipline, and focusing on the athletic ability of the characters. Skill is very subjective and can vary due to a myriad of reasons, there is really no point to discuss it. The idea that someone is "good" at Paladin but not good with a lance (in my opinion) is merely a fact of them not using a lance (less skill/experience). It's not that they are naturally worse at it, given they are talented and/or hard working warriors.
![[Image: d48Jrat.jpg?2]](http://i.imgur.com/d48Jrat.jpg?2)
