Hardliner Gloves, Hardliner Gloves question Options

[Mäx]

The critical strike power specifically states it can be used to increase the damage of unarmed attacks.

And you still haven't provided a rule quote stating that in the context of the rules "unarmed attack" is somethink other then using Unarmed skill to attack your enemy.
So instead of demenading rules quotes from others(quotes that where actually provided already) maybe you should man up and post some yourself.

[Ascalaphus]

Unarmed Combat (Agility)
Unarmed Combat skill (also known as hand-to-hand combat) governs
the use of combat techniques based solely on the use of the individual’s
own body parts. In addition to Boxing, this skill covers such combat
styles as Oriental martial arts and Brazilian Capoeira. It also covers the
use of certain cyber-implants, such as shock hands.

Happy now?
Unarmed Combat (with caps) is a skill, and unarmed combat (no caps) is combat without weapons. They're not the same. Generally, Unarmed Combat is only used for "only body" attacks. However, certain weapons use the Unarmed Combat skill to wield because the method of fighting is pretty much the same. That doesn't make those weapons "not-weapons" or anything like that, they're still weapons, which just happen to use a certain skill called Unarmed Combat to use. They extend the use of the skill, but don't rewrite the base definition of it.

Now, "unarmed combat" in the context of Critical Strike is not capitalized, and hasn't been defined explicitly in the rulebook as far as I've found. I'm pretty sure "unarmed attacks" haven't been defined.

So they use the meaning they'd normally have in English. After all, the books are primarily written in Natural English. And in English "unarmed" means "without weapons".

---

So much for arguments based on definitions. Those are always a little bit strained and shrill. You can really interpret that text anyway you like, that's why natural languages are so much fun. You can be convinced you're right; I'm convinced I'm right. You can't conclusively prove it based on the text, because it's just not precise enough to take away all doubt and opportunity for alternative interpretation.

---

Stacking a weapon focus, Critical Strike, Hardliner Gloves, BDA - oh joy. Seriously, that's ridiculous. I believe the intent of the game was to have different options, not a big list of things to stack.

BDA is there for mundanes, as are cyberspurrs.

Hardliner gloves could be a Weapon Focus - nice for Adepts and Magicians who want to save the precious Power Points for something else.

Critical Strike is very, very efficient in terms of Power Points to Damage. And with Killing Hands and Elemental Strike there's nothing you can't damage.


But if you can combine Critical Strike with a Weapon Focus, then all the weapon-oriented adepts would be left in the dust, unless you gave them access to Critical Strike too. Cue power creep.

If you can combine Critical Strike with BDA or a Weapon Focus, then mundane martial artists really have no way to be as good as adepts. Because anything the mundanes can do, the adepts can do better. Which I doubt was the intent of the writers.

[TheOOB]

And you still haven't provided a rule quote stating that in the context of the rules "unarmed attack" is somethink other then using Unarmed skill to attack your enemy.
So instead of demenading rules quotes from others(quotes that where actually provided already) maybe you should man up and post some yourself.

From the american heritage dictionary:

un·armed

–adjective
1.
without weapons or armor.
2.
not having claws, thorns, scales, etc., as animals or plants.
3.
(of an artillery shell) not armed.

Since SR4A is written in English, we assume it uses the English definition of words. An unarmed attack is therefor an attack without weapons. Since CS never says anything about it's ability to be used with a weapon, or makes any other references, English is all we have. Luckily, English gives us the answer.

EDIT: By the way, re-reading the thread, the only page numbers posted for the anti-RAW stacking argument where done by Ol' Scratch a)after he ruined his legitimacy by gross hyperbole(which is why I missed it), and b)citing references which all support HLG not stacking with CS. He even bolded the portions that damn the stacking arguments. So long as you understand that unarmed combat, that is fighting without a weapon, and Unarmed Combat, the skill that with special exceptions can be used with certain weapons are different(and skills are always capitalized), there is no argument for stacking.

[Mäx]

Post containing zero rules quotes,when you where asked to provide a rules quote.

Nice to see you can't produce a single rule quote to support your position.

[TheOOB]

Nice to see you can't produce a single rule quote to support your position.

I did, I posted the description of Critical Strike awhile ago, it really says all you need to know.

[Mäx]

I did, I posted the description of Critical Strike awhile ago, it really says all you need to know.

It says that it boost your damage in unarmed combat, using HLG is included in being in unarmed combat.

[TheOOB]

It says that it boost your damage in unarmed combat, using HLG is included in being in unarmed combat.

Actually it says it makes unarmed attacks more powerful, then goes into more detail saying it gives +1 damage in unarmed combat(not the lack of capitalization, skills are always capitalized in SR). The only reference to the skill Unarmed Combat(which is capitalized natch), is in the last sentence which just explains the timing of Crit Strike and isn't descriptive as to when the power can be used.

Furthermore, the Unarmed Combat skill specifically states it is for use with no weapons, with the only exceptions noted being certain cyber-implant weapons(which goes along with the idea that if you paid essence for it, it's you). Hardliner gloves are a weapon, just like any other, listed as a weapon and whatnot, the only notable quality is that you use the Unarmed Combat Skill to make attacks with them.

The wording of CS is pretty clear that you can't use weapons, and HLG says nothing about it being a weapon. RAW is quite clear.

RAI is fairly clear too, as has been mentioned, critical strike makes for a very powerful character who can do a ton of damage with one attack. Allowing it to stack with a weapon that can be enhanced with weapon mods and made into a weapon foci(and duel wielding for that matter), would make for such a powerful character that no other melee adept would be able to compare in power. That is obviously not the intent of the rules as they have several examples of swordsmen adepts being just as good if not better then unarmed adepts, which would not be the case if HLG stacked with CS.

[Mäx]

Actually it says it makes unarmed attacks more powerful, then goes into more detail saying it gives +1 damage in unarmed combat(not the lack of capitalization, skills are always capitalized in SR). The only reference to the skill Unarmed Combat(which is capitalized natch), is in the last sentence which just explains the timing of Crit Strike and isn't descriptive as to when the power can be used.

I din't make any references to Unarmed combat in my post, only unarmed combat.
By the rules of the game unarmed combat is using Unarmed combat to beat the crap out of your opponent.
You still havent provided a rule quote that says using HLG's to beat up your opponent isn't unarmed combat, it is after all using the Unarmed to beat the crap out of you opponent.
There is no rule distinction between unarmed combat while wearing HLG's and when not wearing them.

[Inncubi]

fluffwise I want to. but raw-wise I loose two dice!
there should be a bonus for being able to hit with both hands, because I am less predictable, instead of a malus for a weaker hand.

Using off-hand -2 unpredictable +2 =0
ambidextrous and unpredictable = +2

maybe a maneuver of some sort

This was a long time ago in this thread. I couldn't resist.

The truth of the matter is:
Makki, the reason you get a penalty is a fully justified one. I makes scimitar-weapon focus, black-furred, rebel mystic adept night-ones, with purple eyes, who summon an ally spirit into a panther. The group includes a grumpy dwarf samurai and a female human... face?

The Dev's were right on that one, sacrifices were made, no fluff for cool boxing matches but on the plus side we get no certain undesirable's clones.

Prove it with something other than heresy and voluntary ignorance/refusing to read an entire paragraph.

The correct term is "Hearsay", as in "just rumours", "speculative". Accusing someone of "heresy" nowadays is kinda... démodé.

Also, please, its "per se", or by itself, in Latin. Now I am not an expert in languages, and I certainly wouldn't be able to discuss it with some of you guys who actually did take Latin as a course, but I just see too many English speakers making the mistake of fonetically writing it.

[Fatum]

The correct term is "Hearsay", as in "just rumours", "speculative". Accusing someone of "heresy" nowadays is kinda... démodé.

Unless you're playing something Dark Heresy-related!
Hell, actually, Shadowrun has Pope death squads, too.

[Makki]

This was a long time ago in this thread. I couldn't resist.

The truth of the matter is:
Makki, the reason you get a penalty is a fully justified one. I makes scimitar-weapon focus, black-furred, rebel mystic adept night-ones, with purple eyes, who summon an ally spirit into a panther. The group includes a grumpy dwarf samurai and a female human... face?

The Dev's were right on that one, sacrifices were made, no fluff for cool boxing matches but on the plus side we get no certain undesirable's clones.

I was wrong at all. there is no off-hand malus for unarmed combat. the text only refers to wielding a weapon.

[Yerameyahu]

That's because there's no such thing as on- or off-hand with Unarmed. It's 'a series of actions' resulting in the attack DV. However, it does seem like there should be something like that if you're literally using specific body parts. I seem to remember a thread about Hardliner weapon focus *boots*, in order to munchkin out an extra 1 Reach. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)

[Ol' Scratch]

But if you can combine Critical Strike with a Weapon Focus, then all the weapon-oriented adepts would be left in the dust, unless you gave them access to Critical Strike too. Cue power creep.

Well, except for that whole "Reach" thing, not to mention that many melee weapons do more inherent damage in and of themselves. Nevermind the potential perks of Ambidexterity and the various martial arts maneuvers like Off-Hand Training, Two Weapon Style or half of Multi-Strike since, you know, Hardliner Gloves doesn't change the fact that the adept is still using Unarmed Combat which doesn't benefit from two-weapon combat techniques.

I'm also assuming you guys don't allow cybered adepts, particularly those possessing cyberlimbs, to use these same adept powers, eh? Because they gain similar benefits to Hardliner Gloves, particularly in the way of being able to be enchanted as a focus. Fear that +1 point of damage (as opposed to a free Killing Hands from a cyberlimb)! Boogity boogity! Gonna gitcha. Also, at which point does this mysterious inability to benefit from adept powers begin? A regular glove? An insulated glove? A glove with an Armor rating? A glove from a suit of Security armor? A glove from Milspec armor? I mean, if a thin piece of densiplast is all it takes...

If you can combine Critical Strike with BDA or a Weapon Focus, then mundane martial artists really have no way to be as good as adepts. Because anything the mundanes can do, the adepts can do better. Which I doubt was the intent of the writers.

Sure, if you ignore every other option in the game and just rely on tunnel vision to justify this tragic misreading of the rules. Or, you know, actually believe that a mundane martial artist has any hope against an adept martial artist even if you do house rule this. Because, clearly, adepts weren't supposed to be better than mundanes in their chosen field. (???)

[Ol' Scratch]

This was a long time ago in this thread. I couldn't resist.

The truth of the matter is:
Makki, the reason you get a penalty is a fully justified one. I makes scimitar-weapon focus, black-furred, rebel mystic adept night-ones, with purple eyes, who summon an ally spirit into a panther. The group includes a grumpy dwarf samurai and a female human... face?

The correct term is "Hearsay", as in "just rumours", "speculative". Accusing someone of "heresy" nowadays is kinda... démodé.

Also, please, its "per se", or by itself, in Latin. Now I am not an expert in languages, and I certainly wouldn't be able to discuss it with some of you guys who actually did take Latin as a course, but I just see too many English speakers making the mistake of fonetically writing it.

It's generally not a good idea to make such a monstrous blunder when trying to act like a grammar or spelling Nazi. No one ever makes typing mistakes or accidentally jumbles words. Ever

Also, it's "incubi" not "inncubi." If, you know, we're going to be nitpicky jerks.

That said, I'm confused by how you think a lack of using two-weapon techniques in unarmed combat stops someone from making a Drizzt clone. How, exactly, does that work?

[Sephiroth]

Let's all take a deep breath and calm down, everyone. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/extinguish.gif)

TheOOB, I'd like to remind you that there is precedent for not taking the fluff line of a given spell or power super-seriously from a mechanical point of view. In multiple cases, the beginning description and the subsequent mechanics of a given spell or power do not mesh well or are otherwise problematic. For example:

Invisibility (Realistic, Single-Sense)
Type: M • Range: LOS • Duration: S • DV: (F ÷ 2)
Improved Invisibility (Realistic, Single-Sense)
Type: P • Range: LOS • Duration: S • DV: (F ÷ 2) + 1
This spell makes the subject more difficult to detect by normal visual
senses (including low-light, thermographic, and other senses that rely
on the visual spectrum). The subject is completely tangible and detectable
by the other senses (hearing, smell, touch, etc.). Her aura is still
visible to astral perception.
Anyone who might perceive the subject must first successfully
resist the spell. Simply make one Spellcasting Test and use the hits
scored as the threshold for anyone that resists at a later point. Even
if the spell is resisted, the subject might remain unnoticed if she wins
a Shadowing or Infiltration Test. An invisible character may still be
detected by non-visual means, such as hearing or smell.
Attacks against invisible targets suffer the Target Hidden modifier
(p. 150) if the attacker is unable to see or otherwise sense the subject
of the spell.
Invisibility affects the minds of viewers. Improved invisibility creates
an actual warping of light around the subject that affects technological
sensors as well.

Shapechange (Physical)
Type: P • Range: LOS • Duration: S • DV: (F ÷ 2) + 2
(Critter) Form (Physical)
Type: P • Range: LOS • Duration: S • DV: (F ÷ 2) + 1
Shapechange transforms a voluntary subject into a normal (non-paranormal)
critter, though the subject retains human consciousness. The
subject can only assume the form of a critter whose base Body rating
is 2 points greater or less than her own. Consult the Critters section,
p. 292, for the subject’s Physical attributes while in critter form. Add 1
to the critter’s Base attribute Ratings for every hit the caster generates.
Her Mental attributes remain unchanged.
This spell does not transform clothing and equipment. Magicians
in critter form can still cast spells, but cannot perform other tasks requiring
speech.
Critter form works like the Shapechange spell, but only allows the
subject to change into a specific non-paranormal animal. Each critter
form is a different spell (Eagle Form, Wolf Form, and so on).

[Garvel]

Critical strike + HLG weapon focus isn't stronger than normal weapon foci.

-Normal weapons get bonus dice though reach and Personalized Grip.
-They have damage codes up to (STR/2+5) and you can poison the blade if that isn't enough.
-Then there is the already mentioned option for Two-Handed-Weapon-Style, that really would be broken, if meele could be broken in SR.
-And of course there is the advantage that you don't have to spend KI-Points for critical strike.

Critical strike + HLG weaponfoci aren't stronger than blade weaponfoci. They only allow unarmed combat adepts to compete with blade adepts. But only if they spend KI-points for Critical Strike. I don't see what is wrong with that.

[Garvel]

And by the way:
Nothing keeps you from turning a silk-glove into a weapon-fokus.
Just put it on and punch your opponents with it, and nothing keeps you from using Critical Strike, because it definitely is an "unarmed attack".
So we are not talking about the general compatibility of Critical Strike and weaponfocus here. We are talking only about the one bonus DV that the HGL gives, and maybe the fact that an adept with HGL looks less ridiculous than an adept with silk-gloves

[Semerkhet]

I don't like Hardliner Gloves, because they restrict me to boxing. But ellbowing, kicking and headbutting are so much more fun...bonelaced skull anybody?

I let the adept in my game commission a custom Hardliner-style set that covers all the striking surfaces for his brand of martial arts. That way there is no question that he gets the bonus for his unarmed attacks.

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

And by the way:
Nothing keeps you from turning a silk-glove into a weapon-fokus.
Just put it on and punch your opponents with it, and nothing keeps you from using Critical Strike, because it definitely is an "unarmed attack".
So we are not talking about the general compatibility of Critical Strike and weaponfocus here. We are talking only about the one bonus DV that the HGL gives, and maybe the fact that an adept with HGL looks less ridiculous than an adept with silk-gloves

Maybe it is just me, But I would never allow someone to make a Weapon Focus, out of something that is not a Weapon... Maybe you are a bit more lenient on that, though... (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wobble.gif)

[Garvel]

Maybe it is just me, But I would never allow someone to make a Weapon Focus, out of something that is not a Weapon... Maybe you are a bit more lenient on that, though... (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wobble.gif)

You wouldn't allow someone to make a Weaponfocus out of a Chainsaw? How boring. Thats even an example in the FAQ. (Ok FAQ doesn't count here much).

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

You wouldn't allow someone to make a Weaponfocus out of a Chainsaw? How boring. Thats even an example in the FAQ. (Ok FAQ doesn't count here much).

My Comment: How Stupid...

Differnt Strokes for Different Folks...

[Garvel]

Well fact is:
By RAW its allowed. (I haved waited long for saying this (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif) )
Your decision is a houserule.

[Mäx]

Maybe it is just me, But I would never allow someone to make a Weapon Focus, out of something that is not a Weapon... Maybe you are a bit more lenient on that, though... (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wobble.gif)

You are as always free to house rule anyway you like, but by RAW absolutely anythink can be made into a weapon focus.
There is no limit on what item can be made into what kind of foci.

[Ol' Scratch]

The last line in the description of Weapon Foci in the main sourcebook implies that it has to be a weapon. Though the actual rules for how they work can easily be said to work just like any other foci.

Of course, that last line is written in lower case, so the same people arguing in this thread that "unarmed combat" and "Unarmed Combat" are completely different things, and that "unarmed" is to be taken ambiguously, should be in full agreement that this use of "weapon" is equally ambiguous and thus calling a ring or a glove a "weapon" -- which they do in the case of Hardliner Gloves -- is perfectly acceptable. (But something tells me they won't.)

[Yerameyahu]

Garvel, you seriously underestimate people. The hardliner-focus-adept will certainly be claiming Personalized Grip (it's a weapon, it's a weapon mod), and toxins. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)