Fists

I have a question. If a character can wield a great big sword or battle ax that requires great strength without having to get a skill to do so, why must one be a monk or brawler to use fists? I really do not think it takes a very smart person to just hit someone and even if you were not trained to hit the right parts of the body or to punch someone correctly, everyone knows how to hit someone, especially if that someone is a great big warrior with large amounts of strength.

And even to raise further questions why must one have this skill twice to use both fists? Weapons is somewhat understandable in that you need to coordinate your hands and all that stuff, but what is the reason for this?

Simple balance, or atleast thats what I've always thought of it as. You can machinegun fists and they are the same size as daggers so if you need a skill to dual wield daggers you should need a skill to dual wield fists. Now I do think anyone shoul dbe able to swing a fist but not everyone should be able to get extra damage or perform non fist specific skills with a fist. In fact I could be completely wrong but can't anyone do 1 with 1 single fist?

Erik,

I agree, it is a balance issue. A fist can not be disarmed, which is a big advantage. Also, it is hard to say every one is trained enough to do the same damage with their fist as with a weapon.

Yeah, anyone can wield a single fist (though you can't block with it). First level monk allows dual fists (you don't need it twice). Doubling up on ambidexerity gives you a fist and a weapon.

Yeah, anyone can wield a single fist (though you can't block with it). First level monk allows dual fists (you don't need it twice). Doubling up on ambidexerity gives you a fist and a weapon.

So wait, is this the current rule or are you proposing this?

current according to my copy of the rulebook. Well, minus the anyone can use a single fist. That's been discussed and I'll need to investigate it.

With Ambidexterity a Monk may fight with a fist phys-rep in each hand. The Monk may call “1” damage while wielding fists, but they are unable to block blows (i.e. Getting hit in the fist phys rep is counted as damage). Fist phys-reps are considered 'Tiny' sized weapons for the purposes of construction, and should be made White with no hilt. See page 104 for information on how to make a Final Haven Safe Fist Phys-rep. Fists may not be disarmed and require no upkeep.
Characters who invest in two disciplines with the Ambidexterity skill may dual wield a fist and a small sized weapon.

After looking back, it was agreed that fists do not deal damage unless you have a skill due to the 1 damage of all weapons. They are like bows and thrown weapons. (this is back from may of 2005).

Mostly, this is due to a shield and a fist is better than a single sword. Now if we wanted to look at single fist no shield being allowed to deal damage, maybe, but it's a lot of wording for very little use.

However, there were a few suggestions:
- a fist does 0 damage, but can be increased via hero points and/or rage.
- a general skill added that anyone may do a 5 count charge to swing 1 with a fist once.
- anyone may enter unarmed combat via a 5 count. They can then swing 1 with a fist but takes crush while doing so. It takes an additional 5 count between each swing.

Maybe one of those might enter this year's changes.

Or you could have the target's armor factor in somehow. I know I wouldn't want to punch someone with plate on.

I'd really have no problem with a fist being treated exactly as a dagger is. It can't be disarmed but you also can't block with it without another skill, that balances the disarm part to me. Shield and dagger is better than a single weapon too. That would go with the original spirit of the game that people weren't completely defenseless just because they hadn't been trained to fight properly.

That's true.I always assumed everyone could have a single fist anyway, regardless of class or skills. I just never made one because I didn't want to get that close, although I had thought about it so I was never without a weapon, because I am assuming that fists and packets would be things that would have to be left on you if you got captured or somesuch, even if the NPC's took all your other weapons.

[GM-Mike]

I could get behind a fist officially doing 0 damage. Then you could rage or use a hero point to get it higher. I just have a problem from a realistic standpoint of a fist doing the same damage as a sword, all things being equal. It's a hangup I have

Now to open another can of worms from another thread.. if a Fist could do 0 damage and be increaed with other abilities.. Could someone swinging 0 with a fist interrupt someone's charge?

A while back I was advicating an unarmed combat rule for people who were not monks and got shot down. I know Mike has issues with unskilled punches doing as much damage as a sword, but I have simmilar issues thinking two guys could wail on each other all day long and no one gets even a bruise. I think that Taki, or anyone who has worked in a bar or an abuse shelter can attest that unskilled people could seriously injure with punches.

So, in a game where the defalt lowest real damage is 1 the only way to make unarmed attacks less lethal than blades is to either shorten reach (Which actually just got raised last year to equal daggers, but still what I think is best. But, people claimed that the shorter fist physreps were unsafe.), add a count to slow down blows and make machine gunning impossible (That would be disruptable, which people said felt weird and not like normal brawling, and such), making blocking impossible ie. all damage taken crush/vorpal, or you'd need some kind of complicated system.

I suppose I could support allowing everyone to use one fist for 0 damage unless they rage or use a hero point as an option better than nothing. But remember that only skilled characters can block with fists.

Now to open another can of worms from another thread.. if a Fist could do 0 damage and be increaed with other abilities.. Could someone swinging 0 with a fist interrupt someone's charge?

That would be up to the wording of the disruption rule. In the book it states "Because of the needed concentration, being struck while charging or prior to using the skill causes the skill to be lost and the charge-up time to reset." That says nothing of damage, so I'd say being struck with 0 is still being struck.

That was discussed in another thread. As of now, 0 interrupts you. Heck, just striking the person, their shield, or their weapon interrupts them without calling a number. This second form is actually pretty nice at keeping down unnecessary chatter so real calls can be heard clearly.

And by while, you mean two years ago. I had to go find and read that 12 page thread.