Unarmed combat and one weapon fighting

[Rhyden]

I was just pondering whether one has the ability to specialize in the area of fighting with your fists and/or fighting with only one weapon. I'm guessing this is a 'no' as there's only combat skills for two handed, dual-wield and shield use. But I may be wrong. I just thought it may be neat if there could be a combat skill unarmed fighting and/or single-weapon (meaning only using one weapon). This would allow some players to only use one weapon of their choice instead of having their hands full, or just use no weapon at all. Comments? Suggestions? Stale Cheese?

-Rhyden

[Agent_137]

why would you want to fight onehanded when you could at least use a buckler or a parrying dagger?

How could you do damage against an armored and armed opponent with only your hands?

You can get better at unarmed, but you'll never be able to do the damage you could with a weapon. Maybe, eventually, you could take an unskilled armed opponent . . . but . .. eh . . .it just doesn't make sense.

As far as fighting one handed goes . . . you -can-. It just isn't practical. There's no coded penalty to fighting onehanded except that you are -not- using any of the available advantages.

I don't think these two options would even make a sensible character choice because of the lack of good answers the first two questions. But then, i'm sure some one will suprise me or pull something out of their ass to answer them.

[Rhyden]

Just adding realism here, Agent, this world is supposed to be realistic, it's not about the fact that not having both hands occupied will lessen your combat ability, it's about pure realism.

I'm sure templars, nobles usually only use one weapon and it's perfectly realistic for others to do the same: less weight, only have to worry about one hand, good feel. Plus, not every character is a true fighter...assassins, burglars, pickpockets and merchants may rely on only one blade...it may be fashionable and less weight. I just think adding the option would add realism as people can get better with one weapon/unarmed fighting than another style of fighting.

[Agent_137]

no, i'm saying you -can- do those two options.

It's not as effective as using a shield, another weapon, or two hands, but you -can- if you want. Which i think is just right. Because one handed or barehanded isn't as effective, realistically.

[mansa]

It's already considered into the code.

[John]

It's not as effective as using a shield, another weapon, or two hands

I think a whole slew of nakkies who use such a style would disagree.

[Agent_137]

It's not as effective as using a shield, another weapon, or two hands

I think a whole slew of nakkies who use such a style would disagree.

Due to the possibility of an obsidian weapon shattering, most southern fighters have taken to wielding two weapons rather than wielding a weapon in conjunction with a shield. The most common pairing is a larger weapon, primarily for offense, with a smaller weapon, primarily for defense. If a weapon breaks, the fighter then still has another weapon ready with which to present a threat to the opponent whilst a replacement is drawn. This tactic might be less effective against a more heavily armored opponent, who might be willing to risk his/her armor against the penetrating power of an off-hand weapon, but as southerners favor lighter armor, even a small weapon can present a significant threat to someone attempting a rush.

A few styles utilize one weapon only, with the body turned so as to present a minimal target to the opponent. The off-hand is then free to draw another weapon if needed, or else be employed for striking or grappling if the combat enters very close quarters. The wristsheath hidden beneath a sleeve is a common tactic here, for a previously empty hand might suddenly have a knife or dagger in it, at a most inconvenient moment for the opponent. Exponents of this one-weapon style usually spend a lot of their time on extremely quick footwork.

I think that's a fine point, John.

[FiveDisgruntledMonkeysWit]

Using a single, one-handed weapon and using only your fists are useful already, and I don't think we need to make them hard coded skills.
If you want to take on a single-handed style like the one you described, I don't think it would be unreasonable for your character to 'etwo' the weapon, then simply EMOTE out that you're switching it between your two hands frequently, or using your empty hand to balance yourself.
If you find that twinky, then you can just ep it. As already stated, there are no coded disadvantages to do so. Who knows? There might be coded advantages you're not aware of.
I also agree with Agent_137 that, in most situations, facing an opponent unarmed is not ideal. Think about it. Let's say you were a martial arts master, but were surrounded by six burly men with M16s. Some one walks up to you and offers you a pistol. Would you politely decline and say, "No, thank you, I'd rather just see if I can dodge bullets", or would you snatch that pistol and use your martial arts skills as only a last resort?
Anyways, I assure you that using a single weapon and using only your fists have their coded advantages, even if they aren't skills. Experiment with them in game, if you think it's something your character would do.
And besides, I believe it was AC who said: "It doesn't matter what weapon you use, you still won't beat the game".

[RunningMountain]

I think the two-handed style would be what you want to use, when you're using a weapon in just one hand you wouldn't just attack like that.  If I had just a sword I'd naturally grasp it with both hands, it's a natural instinct, and a skill devoted to a single weapon fighting style would be feasible but I still believe you would take two-handed swipes at your opponent, and not just attack with one weapon, however with that said, I feel that a single wepaon fighting skill would be nice to have, and someone who disciplines themself into that kind of a style would be very devastating (such as a rapier) BUT I think you'd use both hands since most weapons on zalanthas are very middle-ages, it would be funny to see:

Turning his body to the side, the powdered, ivory-skinned noble plants his left hand on his hip, lifting an iron rapier with a haughty smirk.

[Hicksville Hoochie]

I personally figure one-handed fighting to be the -in between- of styles.

For the different styles, there are coded advantages, as well as disadvantages. When doing the one wepaon deal, there tends to be none of the advantages of the other styles, but there is also none of the disadvantages of them.

[House Rising Sun]

The "industry standard" for handling dual wielding in rpgs, no matter the format of the game, is that using two weapons is always harder than just one. Most games will give you a penalty in some way or another to your attack, your defense, or both, if you attempt it.

I don't think anyone will confirm whether armageddon does this or not, but I assume that it does by default, since the game that it's based off of does, and it makes sense anyway.

[jhunter]

SKILL_DUAL_WIELD  (Combat)  


This automatically-used skill is invoked whenever your character fights with a weapon in his/her secondary hand (see help es). It represents your character's proficiency in fighting with two weapons.


Notes:


It is somewhat easier to parry using two weapons.

No shield can be employed when using two weapons, and your character is
thus somewhat easier to hit.

[Sephiroto]

I wouldn't mind seeing some form of unarmed combat skills to represent martial arts with punching, kicking, throwing, and grappling moves.  Maybe for assassins only.  I know that in the docs that fighting style is not part of the game, but I'd like to see some sort of adaptation.  I'd like to see a martial style and respective weapons implemented such as claws, knuckles, and a crossbow-only skill.  If the backstab skill was made harder to increase, I think this new fighting style would make assassins a much more desirable guild to play.  A Zalanthan ninja would be fun.  They could seriously creep out of the shadows and screw some things up, but they'd be little match against an armed target, except for when it comes to evasion.  I've got more to add, if anyone is interested.

-Seph

[Armaddict]

Why not use a shield or another weapon?

Look at swashbuckling.  It's like light infantry.

[halfhuman]

I agree that it would totally make my day to see some form of pugilism in Armageddon.  I think it could be effective if you were, say, wearing a gauntlet of some sort with spikes, or studs on it.  I saw a punching dagger in the Allanak bazaar once, but that's about as close as I've seen for hand-to-hand fighting weapons.  

Unarmed fighting could be effective if you made precise strikes such as to the face or throat.  And wearing gauntlets around your forearms could be a good way to win back most of the penalties you suffer for not being able to parry, at least against smaller swords... I think it could work out, even if it was a slow-to-acquire skill like backstabbing.  It takes forever to get good enough to even land a hit with backstab.

[InsertCleverNameHere]

I had a recent character who was fairly decent at unarmed fighting, or at least in her own opinion, and she had a lot of those :wink: . Admittedly, she didn't use this for anything outside of her training; hunting down polka-dotted dragons with your bare hands IS a bit useless.  :roll: However, there are some nice little thingies she had, and wore, so that IF she was ever caught without her weapons, her punch still held a lot of ouch. And in fact, wearing said items while using weapons was even more of an up. I'd say what, but I imagine someone would jump on me for something supposed to be found out IG.. And y'know. I wouldn't want to have to kick their ass and all.  :roll:

[elvenchipmunk]

I've seen a gloved cestus before. If I'm not mistaken, a  cestus is just something you wear on your hand, and punch at people with. I think that's pretty close to unarmed combat. Although, yes, I do tihnk there should be more ways to fight unarmed, it would give a whole new role to play, which would be neat.

[halfhuman]

THAT'S what a cestus is.  I was being beaten down by a guy and he pulled out a cestus.  It said he got if from a sword belt, so I just thought he'd drawn it and it was a type of dirk or something.

*jovially whipping open his dictionary, conveniently placed on the computer desk*
Cestus: a contrivance of leather straps, often weighted with metal, worn on the hand by boxers in ancient Rome.

Ooo. I need to get me one of those. This picture looks soo wicked.  

Even if an unarmed fighter wouldn't do as much damage as an armed one, the subdual damage would be wicked.  I've been attacked by blunt objects before, and they take your stun out a hell of a lot quicker than other weapons.  I'd imagine the way that an unarmed fighter could take an armed one would be to knock them out with massive subdual beatings.  OR you could get good at disarming and knocking down if you wanted to fight unarmed.  Knock down or disarm your opponent and they'd suffer terribly as most people can't fight without their weapons.   It'd still take a lot of skill, but it'd totally be worth it to whip up on an armed opponent who underestimates you.

What would be cool is a skill for deflecting blows with a gauntleted arm. From lighter weapons at least.

[jstorrie]

Old thread resurrection!

Here is what I would like to see for skill one_handed:

Skill One-Handed

 This automatically-used skill is invoked whenever your character fights with a light weapon in one hand and nothing in the other (see "help ep"). It represents your character's proficiency in light one-handed fighting styles.

 Having this skill makes it significantly easier to dodge attacks, as the stance is defensive overall.

 Having this skill makes it somewhat easier to parry attacks, but note that it this may be counteracted by the significant difficulty of deflecting heavier weapons with a lighter one.

 Keeping a hand free makes it significantly easier to perform combat maneuvers that require a high degree of precision.

The last clause alludes to how I think it should be easier to backstab and sap with a hand free. Some other skills might be affected as well, maybe. As it stands, there's what I feel to be an unusually high number of dual-wielding shady types. Assassins that use a single blade are put at what I feel is an unrealistic coded disadvantage; the advantage should be the other way around, that focusing on a single weapon and keeping the other hand free to grab or balance would aid in landing a fatal strike or perfect rap to the head.

I'm not sure if there is a coded disadvantage to parrying heavy weapons with a light one, but this assumes that that is or will be coded in as well.

Finally, the distinction of light weapons is important - assess or view should return another string, along the lines of "This weapon is light enough that you feel you could strike with precision, if your other hand was kept free."

[spawnloser]

This is in reponse to jstorrie's suggested one_handed skill.

It should not increase chances of parry.  That's what other style skills give.  Dodge?  I could agree with that.

I would suggest a slight bonus to combat maneuvers...be they kick, bash, backstab or what-have-you.  This would represent the additional balance that results from having an open hand, as well as the ability to use that hand to aide in grabbing on to something while using the attempted skill.

I would also like to see a slight bonus to subdue.  Yes, you can't subdue with something in your hands, but it would provide defense against subdue when someone tries to get you.

[jstorrie]

I think it would actually reduce your chance to parry overall, if the weight of the weapon was taken into account. I just think that a high level of skill with that style should mitigate the penalty somewhat, basically.

The easiest way for it to affect other combat skills would be for it to reduce the recovery time on those moves. The higher your one_handed skill, the less time it would take you to recover from a kick. Don't offer a huge bonus, but enough to somewhat mitigate the penalty the character is taking for not getting a higher number of attacks ala two_handed or dual_wield.

I don't think one_handed should start out of the box as good as two_handed or dual_wield, but I do think it should have specific uses (and certainly be attractive to backstabbers) and I do think that someone who'd got the skill to a decent level ought to have some specific bonuses given. A master of a quick, one-handed fighting style ought to be a hard-to-hit, impressive-footwork-using duelist with maybe not as much punch but good tactical options.

[creeper386]

Why not use a shield or another weapon?

Well, because a shield is mostly for defensive purposes. It can get in the way, and even a buckler can be an annoyance.

As for another weapon? Well, it takes alot of skill to use two weapons. Unless Zalanthan humans are truly drastically different, I honestly wouldn't imagine most of the populace would be ambidextrous enough to use two weapons consistantly. Even using a light parrying dagger requires a fairly good amount of cordination when combined with another weapon.

There are many benefits to just using one weapon and not predominatly using it two-handedly. Over all there is MUCH less to focus on, you have your own weapon and your opponent to worry about, as opposed to two weapons or a weapon and a shield as well as your opponent. Less moving parts equals more efficiency.

I don't think it's coded this way though. Although with a high weapon skill, a person can be quite dangerous with a single weapon, it's not even close to comparable as to with two weapons, it's why skilled fighters tend to only fight with a single weapon when fighting against someone with less skill.

I personally would love to see more coded support to single weapon use, OR more penalties on two weapon fighting, but I do think that shield use if fairly well implemented as it is.

Creep