First off...I'm posting here, because that's what this board is for. Polluting the spirit of Christmas is not cool

From Java:
This seems like it causes more harm than good. What about bards who want to use a shield and an instrument? Or mages who would rather have a shield and a held item? Or bards/shield pally's who want to hold an instrument/shield instead of a weapon if they get kot'd.

Bottom line is, every class doesn't want to use a weapon 100% of the time. Seems kind of silly to force them to. I thought CF was about variety and all that. Not to mention fun.


It seems like it causes more harm than good to two classes. To the rest of the classes who can actually dual wield, it's the beginning of a big improvement.

As for the rest of your statement...If you think this change has ruined all the fun of the game for you, I'd argue you've been looking for an excuse for far to long.

From DurNominator:The offhand circulation was good idea. As for main hand, I think it should allow for held and weapon both to allow held+shield. Shield can still be always worn in offhand.

I think it could work a bit like this:

-If main hand=weapon
Wear held item in offhand(the circulation of offhand items with wear command Zulg mentioned), autoremove offhand item.

-If main hand=empty
Wear held in main hand.
Wear weapon in main hand.

-If main hand=held item
Wear weapon in main hand, autoremove held item(or move it to offhand if offhand is empty).
Wear held item in main hand, autoremove other held item.

As for the dual wield problem, I haven't come up with a perfect tactic that would anticipate all situations well(being able to move item from one hand to another would give it some extra flexibility, though. Enough to be able to wield a weapon every time when one hand is empty(by moving the other weapon to offhand slot if it is lighter than the new one. No more wearing the axes in wrong order that way)). But this should get the held item in main hand as possibility but also in check should the player want to use a weapon.


I do understand what you are saying, and I'll say once again. The code that revolves around dual-wield is a ####ing nightmare. I know bards and mages want to have the best of both worlds. It's on my list, the problem is, it's way down at the bottom. I need to work out all the rest of the crap dealing with dual-wield before I even think about shield + instrument for bards, or shield + held for mages. And at that point...do you not get any attacks, because you're not even using a weapon and don't have a free hand? Why can't I just use two helds...or two shields...or two lights...

From TheFrog:
Perhaps it could be made part of an "auto" command ? That you could turn on/off ?


No. Just...No.

From BardicPlayer
As a bard, it either makes owning a shield not worth the weight, or making songs a lot less effective.

Shield/instrument = dodge + shieldblock + reduced-damage parry, but I lose a lot of melee power I could do with a weapon.

This seemed like a good trade-off. Also, what if I wanted to fight gnomes from here on out? Punching was a good alternative to using a mace, but it would be useless to now because I'd only be able to use a shield and forego using an instrument.

From the bard perspective, its annoying and still workable, but otherwise, why?


I wouldn't say "a lot less effective", but yes...less effective.

As for why? The code for dual wield sucks, and making it work for the 90% case (people with the dual wield skill) is more important to me than the 10% case (bards and mages) As I said above, I have it on the list, but it's below the rest of the dual wield stuff.

So long, and thanks for all the fish!