Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Ref

Can you do Dual wielding unarmed?

Recommended Posts

Hello everyone, 

 

as I read in the book, it's a little bit confusing about the dual wielding. As I understood, you can do it with Melee, pistols and Brawl weapon. Is brawl weapon include urarmed?

 

Can you do a Dual Wielding when you are unarmed? It make sense you can but it's not clear in the book.

 

Thank you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Boxing is two weapon fighting with fists. every combo is a two weapon attack. Jab Jab Cross.

That does bring up a good point — TWC with fists is going to be tough.

Have you ever tried to throw two punches at the same time? Or two kicks?

You might want to ask the player to narrate how they’re going to do TWC in unarmed combat, based on this premise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Boxing is two weapon fighting with fists. every combo is a two weapon attack. Jab Jab Cross.

That does bring up a good point — TWC with fists is going to be tough.

Have you ever tried to throw two punches at the same time? Or two kicks?

You might want to ask the player to narrate how they’re going to do TWC in unarmed combat, based on this premise.

 

Actually, I see it all the time in boxing and MMA. Remember, a round isn't just a second or two in length. Plenty of time to punch with one hand and set yourself into a spinning kick for the second attack. Or any other combination you can think of.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Boxing is two weapon fighting with fists. every combo is a two weapon attack. Jab Jab Cross.

That does bring up a good point — TWC with fists is going to be tough.

Have you ever tried to throw two punches at the same time? Or two kicks?

You might want to ask the player to narrate how they’re going to do TWC in unarmed combat, based on this premise.

 

You have to remember a round is "About a minute". You don't throw 2 blows at the same time. You throw combos. As in Jab Jab Cross. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay, in that case maybe all Brawl attacks are inherently TWC built-in as written, and therefore you don’t apply the TWC rules on top of what is already there?

No, you'd still have all the pool building rules for TWC with fists and still need the Advantage to activate the second hit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay, in that case maybe all Brawl attacks are inherently TWC built-in as written, and therefore you don’t apply the TWC rules on top of what is already there?

 

The TWC rules would represent landing two blows. The nature of combat in this game is that each attack roll is a series of strikes. When you roll one attack with a blaster it's not representing just a single shot. It represents a series of shots one of which hits with enough force to do damage. The same is true with Brawl and TWC. The roll represents a series of punches and jabs that eventually land and do damage. 

 

Also ..... there is no logical reason to deny unarmed combat TWC. You get more bang for your buck TWC with blasters. By comparison Brawl is inefficient. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think there's a lot of over thinking, the devs said you can do it, don't have to, to each their own table, but it's doable.  It's mechanically harder with the Difficulty addition, narratively it's simply a more devastating attack with multiple possibilities and need not represent individual blows. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay, in that case maybe all Brawl attacks are inherently TWC built-in as written, and therefore you don’t apply the TWC rules on top of what is already there?

Nope. Devs. have said Two weapon fighting rules can be used with unarmed combat. It would be how you throw combos. the weapons are the same so you just increase the difficulty by one. Which would be a 3 difficulty. 2 adv and you land another blow with your off hand. Though technically in boxing it would be the other way around. first hit would be your jab, Second hit would be your primary hand or kick.. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello everyone, 

 

as I read in the book, it's a little bit confusing about the dual wielding. As I understood, you can do it with Melee, pistols and Brawl weapon. Is brawl weapon include urarmed?

 

Can you do a Dual Wielding when you are unarmed? It make sense you can but it's not clear in the book.

 

Thank you.

Keep in mind that all combat is abstract and although there are exceptions when the narrative requires it, such as a single sniper shot or a rocket or whatever, in general the Attack Roll represents multiple blows, swings, and shots. The result of that roll can be described as a single shot or the effects of many, it's irrelevant to the mechanic. The Two Weapon Combat rule however is used when a PC wants to gain the benefit of doing more damage with a second weapon (in this case another limb) with that single Attack Roll at the cost of increased difficulty. It still can represent two singular attacks or multiple blows/swing/shots/whatever, but again mechanically it's irrelevant.

there is also no penalty to Attack rolls while holding two weapons except the increased difficulty when choosing to include both in the roll. So you can hold two pistols or a pistol and knife, or whatever, and as long as you only use one per Attack roll you're golden, except for reasonable Setbacks to actions that a GM thinks would require a hand.

Edited by FuriousGreg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Okay, in that case maybe all Brawl attacks are inherently TWC built-in as written, and therefore you don’t apply the TWC rules on top of what is already there?

 

The TWC rules would represent landing two blows. The nature of combat in this game is that each attack roll is a series of strikes. When you roll one attack with a blaster it's not representing just a single shot. It represents a series of shots one of which hits with enough force to do damage. The same is true with Brawl and TWC. The roll represents a series of punches and jabs that eventually land and do damage. 

 

Also ..... there is no logical reason to deny unarmed combat TWC. You get more bang for your buck TWC with blasters. By comparison Brawl is inefficient. 

 

But if you're abstracting that a round is a series of strikes (and I agree with you, btw), then why should ordinary Brawl combat not be representing fighting with both hands already?

 

I've always considered dual-wielding in this system as something you want to do when you're using two weapons with different or stackable qualities. If rounds are abstract then that's the only scenario where it should make a difference. More or less.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Okay, in that case maybe all Brawl attacks are inherently TWC built-in as written, and therefore you don’t apply the TWC rules on top of what is already there?

 

The TWC rules would represent landing two blows. The nature of combat in this game is that each attack roll is a series of strikes. When you roll one attack with a blaster it's not representing just a single shot. It represents a series of shots one of which hits with enough force to do damage. The same is true with Brawl and TWC. The roll represents a series of punches and jabs that eventually land and do damage. 

 

Also ..... there is no logical reason to deny unarmed combat TWC. You get more bang for your buck TWC with blasters. By comparison Brawl is inefficient. 

 

But if you're abstracting that a round is a series of strikes (and I agree with you, btw), then why should ordinary Brawl combat not be representing fighting with both hands already?

 

I've always considered dual-wielding in this system as something you want to do when you're using two weapons with different or stackable qualities. If rounds are abstract then that's the only scenario where it should make a difference. More or less.

 

Or you are trying to increase your damage output. spending 2 advantage to get another hit in doubles your damage output.  It is about having more options. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

But if you're abstracting that a round is a series of strikes (and I agree with you, btw), then why should ordinary Brawl combat not be representing fighting with both hands already?

 

I've always considered dual-wielding in this system as something you want to do when you're using two weapons with different or stackable qualities. If rounds are abstract then that's the only scenario where it should make a difference. More or less.

 

 

You use TWC to do more damage. So in the realm of Brawl it represents not only a series of punches but punches that land and do damage. The same applies when using two blasters. Both blasters can have the exact same traits and qualities but the TWC rules assume that that second shot lands and does damage. Yes the rounds are abstract and all but TWC represents the actual damage from that second attack as opposed to just the second attack occurring in a narrative way.

 

TWC isn't about different weapons with different qualities and traits. It's just about doing damage with that second weapon. So while you don't need TWC to describe using two weapons at once, or fighting with both fists or punch and kick or what have you, it is needed for there to be damage from that second attack. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Normal Brawl is "one handed" so you can hold something in the other hand while you punch. If you're not holding something then you use TWC. If you're not very good at brawl and choose not to use TWC then you're not very good at brawl are you!

If Brawl had TWC already included then there would need to be other special rules for brawling with something in 1 hand.

FWIW I now want a Brawl specialist career with Talents designed for TWC Brawl, probably in a FaD career book (Mystic would be cool for that Bhudist Monk feel), unless they do something strange with a Pit Fighting Bounty Hunter Gladiator.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

But if you're abstracting that a round is a series of strikes (and I agree with you, btw), then why should ordinary Brawl combat not be representing fighting with both hands already?

 

I've always considered dual-wielding in this system as something you want to do when you're using two weapons with different or stackable qualities. If rounds are abstract then that's the only scenario where it should make a difference. More or less.

 

 

You use TWC to do more damage. So in the realm of Brawl it represents not only a series of punches but punches that land and do damage. The same applies when using two blasters. Both blasters can have the exact same traits and qualities but the TWC rules assume that that second shot lands and does damage. Yes the rounds are abstract and all but TWC represents the actual damage from that second attack as opposed to just the second attack occurring in a narrative way.

 

TWC isn't about different weapons with different qualities and traits. It's just about doing damage with that second weapon. So while you don't need TWC to describe using two weapons at once, or fighting with both fists or punch and kick or what have you, it is needed for there to be damage from that second attack. 

 

Yes, but why if combat is so abstract - and I agree with you that it is - would you be representing "damage from a second attack" when the round is a minute long and represents a flurry of blows and attacks. If there's a minute of brawling going on that is not a minute of only one blow taking place. So why have something that represents a "second attack"? It confuses the levels of abstraction. On the one hand you have this abstract combat taking place representing this boxing that's going on for a nearly minute and on the other you have something that says "I try to hit him twice". The two are in contradiction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
But if you're abstracting that a round is a series of strikes (and I agree with you, btw), then why should ordinary Brawl combat not be representing fighting with both hands already?

 

I've always considered dual-wielding in this system as something you want to do when you're using two weapons with different or stackable qualities. If rounds are abstract then that's the only scenario where it should make a difference. More or less.

 

You use TWC to do more damage. So in the realm of Brawl it represents not only a series of punches but punches that land and do damage. The same applies when using two blasters. Both blasters can have the exact same traits and qualities but the TWC rules assume that that second shot lands and does damage. Yes the rounds are abstract and all but TWC represents the actual damage from that second attack as opposed to just the second attack occurring in a narrative way.

 

TWC isn't about different weapons with different qualities and traits. It's just about doing damage with that second weapon. So while you don't need TWC to describe using two weapons at once, or fighting with both fists or punch and kick or what have you, it is needed for there to be damage from that second attack.

Yes, but why if combat is so abstract - and I agree with you that it is - would you be representing "damage from a second attack" when the round is a minute long and represents a flurry of blows and attacks. If there's a minute of brawling going on that is not a minute of only one blow taking place. So why have something that represents a "second attack"? It confuses the levels of abstraction. On the one hand you have this abstract combat taking place representing this boxing that's going on for a nearly minute and on the other you have something that says "I try to hit him twice". The two are in contradiction.

I don't really see a contradiction. And I'm not sure why there's a problem when it's Brawl but no one thinks twice about TWC in regards to blasters, melee weapons,and lightsabres.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would heavily consider it as GM, as Its just more difficulty because you are using the same skill and not two different skills. Basically your fists become auto-fire quality :)

Edited by RusakRakesh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

 

But if you're abstracting that a round is a series of strikes (and I agree with you, btw), then why should ordinary Brawl combat not be representing fighting with both hands already?

 

I've always considered dual-wielding in this system as something you want to do when you're using two weapons with different or stackable qualities. If rounds are abstract then that's the only scenario where it should make a difference. More or less.

 

You use TWC to do more damage. So in the realm of Brawl it represents not only a series of punches but punches that land and do damage. The same applies when using two blasters. Both blasters can have the exact same traits and qualities but the TWC rules assume that that second shot lands and does damage. Yes the rounds are abstract and all but TWC represents the actual damage from that second attack as opposed to just the second attack occurring in a narrative way.

 

TWC isn't about different weapons with different qualities and traits. It's just about doing damage with that second weapon. So while you don't need TWC to describe using two weapons at once, or fighting with both fists or punch and kick or what have you, it is needed for there to be damage from that second attack.

Yes, but why if combat is so abstract - and I agree with you that it is - would you be representing "damage from a second attack" when the round is a minute long and represents a flurry of blows and attacks. If there's a minute of brawling going on that is not a minute of only one blow taking place. So why have something that represents a "second attack"? It confuses the levels of abstraction. On the one hand you have this abstract combat taking place representing this boxing that's going on for a nearly minute and on the other you have something that says "I try to hit him twice". The two are in contradiction.

I don't really see a contradiction. And I'm not sure why there's a problem when it's Brawl but no one thinks twice about TWC in regards to blasters, melee weapons,and lightsabres.

 

You don't see a contradiction between a round of brawl being an abstract minute of unarmed boxing / attempts to strike your opponent and specifically deciding you want to try and punch someone with each hand? The contradiction as already explained is that it is mixing a weirdly specific fighting move into the framework of something highly abstract. Whether you regard it as a problem is up to you, but it is a pretty clear statement and the contradiction is there.

 

As to why people might regard Brawl differently to say, two lightsabres, is because that would change how you fight significantly. It is easy to imagine that with a second lightsabre it is easier to block (defensive qualities stack, for instance) or that with two blasters you can walk forward raining down twice as many rounds even though your individual aim might be weaker. But it is bizarre to think that unless someone uses "dual-wielding" they are boxing with only one hand. That is why "no-one thinks twice" about the others - because dual-wielding reflects something other than the norm which we expect the rules to provide some special provision for; and conversely why people DO think twice about dual-wielding your fists.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...