Hardliner Gloves, Hardliner Gloves question Options

[Yerameyahu]

As mentioned, I'm not disputing the RAW. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

[TheOOB]

As mentioned, I'm not disputing the RAW. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

RAW is really all that matters in this forum, and RAW clearly states that HLG are weapons, and critical strike and it's ilk must be used unarmed. Thats the end of the argument. HLG say nothing in their description that could imply that they are usable with CS and other adept powers, so unless you are going to argue the wording of the description of CS, there is no counter argument. This thread starting asking if HLG and CS stack, they don't, and unless there is rules text I'm not aware of saying otherwise, that's the end of the argument.

Now if there was another thread discussing whether or not making HLG usable with CS would be a good houserule, that would be fine, but anything other than RAW is turning the topic into something it is not.

[Fatum]

RAW is really all that matters in this forum, and RAW clearly states that HLG are weapons, and critical strike and it's ilk must be used unarmed. Thats the end of the argument. HLG say nothing in their description that could imply that they are usable with CS and other adept powers, so unless you are going to argue the wording of the description of CS, there is no counter argument. This thread starting asking if HLG and CS stack, they don't, and unless there is rules text I'm not aware of saying otherwise, that's the end of the argument.

And as mentioned, the rules never say that those powers only work with bare body parts. Only that they only work in unarmed combat, which the rules regard as the use of the Unarmed Combat skill, which in turn includes things like Hardliner Gloves and various implanted weaponry.

[Adarael]

Sometimes I feel like Dumpshock exists in the same headspace as Exalted arguments on RPG.net... It's like the goddamn twilight zone in here.

[Ol' Scratch]

RAW is really all that matters in this forum, and RAW clearly states that HLG are weapons, and critical strike and it's ilk must be used unarmed.

No. The rules specifically state that these adept powers only work in unarmed combat, which the rules use when referring to the Unarmed Combat skill. Nothing in their descriptions state that one must be naked or only using bare fists.

[Fatum]

More like pointless bickering over minutia zone am I right or am I right?

[Yerameyahu]

The statement that RAW is all that matters on this forum is preposterous. Maybe you're ignoring all the threads about fixing X, Y, or Z, just for starters? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

[Garvel]

I think the main problem in this discussion is that some people think that the Devs wrote "This power uses magic to increase the Damage Value of your unarmed attacks, as you strike with more proficiency and power" especially to prevent Critical Strike and Weaponfocus-bonus-dice from ever being used together. They think that this was a deliberate ballacing decision. They think that people, that use hardliner gloves as weaponfoci with Critical Strike, try to circumvent this decision in good old munchkin fashion.
They claim that "unarmed attacks" excludes anything weaponlike from being used while attacking.

Other people say that "This power uses magic to increase the Damage Value of your unarmed attacks, as you strike with more proficiency and power" only wants to tell you that Critical strike ins't thought for blades and clubs. Its no deliberat decision for incompatibility with weaponfocus-bonus-dice.
They orientate at common sense and say: "you strike with more proficiency and power" really sounds like its should work fine together with a Hardliner Glove, just like having more strength works fine together with a hardliner glove too. There is no rational reason why it shouldn't work.
The interpretation of the "unarmed attacks" is fare too nitpicky, because it might also just mean an attack with the unarmed combat skill. That might be a little stretch when interpretating RAW, but better a stretch in RAW interpretation than abandoning common sense.

[Adarael]

More like pointless bickering over minutia zone am I right or am I right?

RAW doesn't define Zone or pointless, therefore YOU ARE WRONG! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

[Mäx]

Well, if you want to use HLG weapon foci, you either have to get 2 foci's or go with some very elobrate set-up that connects gloves in both of your hand together with out getting in to way of using them to fight, or fight with only one glove.

[Makki]

Well, if you want to use HLG weapon foci, you either have to get 2 foci's or go with some very elobrate set-up that connects gloves in both of your hand together with out getting in to way of using them to fight, or fight with only one glove.

unless I have Ambidextrity, I will technically not hit with my offhand anyways.

[Garvel]

Only one of your two gloves would be a weapon focus. That wouldn't be the problem.

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

unless I have Ambidextrity, I will technically not hit with my offhand anyways.

Really? Ever watched a Boxing Match? Happens all the time...

[Mardrax]

Well, if you want to use HLG weapon foci, you either have to get 2 foci's or go with some very elobrate set-up that connects gloves in both of your hand together with out getting in to way of using them to fight, or fight with only one glove.

Monowire!
...
What? Not a good idea? I thought monowire made everything better.

[Makki]

Really? Ever watched a Boxing Match? Happens all the time...

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

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

fluffwise I want to. but raw-wise I loose two dice!

Heheh... Okay then... (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)

[Ascalaphus]

Unarmed Combat and unarmed combat aren't the same thing. Unarmed Combat is a skill, unarmed combat is an activity: fighting without weapons.

Interestingly, Arsenal lists HLGs as Exotic Weapons (that's right, weapons), which happen to use Unarmed Combat to wield.

[Mäx]

Unarmed Combat and unarmed combat aren't the same thing.

As far as shadowrun rules are concerned they are.

[Mardrax]

As far as shadowrun rules are concerned they are.

While I'd tend to side with your general conclusion; no, they aren't. Capitalised terms refer to either a skill, action, spell, or piece of gear. In this case, a Skill. Non-capitalised terms can refer to pretty much anything. In this case, a mode of combat.
Skill != mode of combat, like Pistols != pistols.

[Ol' Scratch]

Unarmed Combat and unarmed combat aren't the same thing. Unarmed Combat is a skill, unarmed combat is an activity: fighting without weapons.

Nope. The rules refer to unarmed combat as the use of Unarmed Combat. Doesn't matter if you're hands are bare, you have Bone Lacing, or you're using Hardliner Gloves. It's all unarmed combat as far as the rules are concerned. The rules for Unarmed Combat say so. The table listing Melee Weapons says so.

The burden is on those of you who claim that the rules say otherwise to show exactly where the rules say otherwise. I'll save you the trouble, though: The rules never declare that unarmed combat is anything other than the use of the Unarmed Combat skill. You won't find anything saying that "unarmed combat" is a game term that means "bare handed punch" or anything even close to it.

[TheOOB]

No. The rules specifically state that these adept powers only work in unarmed combat, which the rules use when referring to the Unarmed Combat skill. Nothing in their descriptions state that one must be naked or only using bare fists.

The first line of critical strike does, it says that it must be used on an unarmed attack. It only mentions the unarmed combat skill in the last line, but only in the context of when you must declare critical strikes use. The rules are there, written in black and white(or black and kinda blue/white), people just seem to be ignoring them.

The statement that RAW is all that matters on this forum is preposterous. Maybe you're ignoring all the threads about fixing X, Y, or Z, just for starters? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

True, but this isn't a thread about ficing X, Y, or Z. This thread was asking if HLG work with CS, and by RAW they don't. Read the first post please. If you want to talk about houserules, make a thread for that.

Nope. The rules refer to unarmed combat as the use of Unarmed Combat. Doesn't matter if you're hands are bare, you have Bone Lacing, or you're using Hardliner Gloves. It's all unarmed combat as far as the rules are concerned. The rules for Unarmed Combat say so. The table listing Melee Weapons says so.

The burden is on those of you who claim that the rules say otherwise to show exactly where the rules say otherwise. I'll save you the trouble, though: The rules never declare that unarmed combat is anything other than the use of the Unarmed Combat skill. You won't find anything saying that "unarmed combat" is a game term that means "bare handed punch" or anything even close to it.

Wow, you're wrong...and ignoring everything everyone else has stated in this thread. The critical strike power specifically states it can be used to increase the damage of unarmed attacks. No where does it say the power can be used with the unarmed combat skill, or any weapons. Right in the first sentence of the power it makes it dead clear. Hardliner gloves are a weapon, they are listed as a weapon, placed on the weapon tables and everything, you can turn them into a weapon focus, heck by the rules you can even put weapon mods on them, since you are using a weapon, you are armed, and thus cannot use CS. Just because HLG have rules that say you can use them with the unarmed combat skill does not make them unarmed. If I made a punching dagger weapon that could use the unarmed combat skill we wouldn't even be having this argument.

[Yerameyahu]

TheOOB, I certainly didn't present my comments as RAW, nor at all until well after the original question was repeatedly answered. If you're expecting threads to remain rigidly on-topic, you'll be disappointed 100% of the time. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) That's all. I wasn't claiming that the RAW answer didn't exist, or anything.

I agree with your weapon/not-unarmed position, as well.

[Ol' Scratch]

The first line of critical strike does, it says that it must be used on an unarmed attack. It only mentions the unarmed combat skill in the last line, but only in the context of when you must declare critical strikes use. The rules are there, written in black and white(or black and kinda blue/white), people just seem to be ignoring them.

Ah, so you're one of those people who like to ignore anything that doesn't fit your argument. That's cool, a lot of people around here are like that. But you're still wrong. That last line you want to ignore is the actual rule (as is the other rule-based line midway through the description), as opposed to a fluff description that you're clinging to. Nevermind that "unarmed attacks" is used when talking about unarmed combat and Unarmed Combat throughout the rules (which, incidentally, are the same thing as per the rules).

Wow, you're wrong...and ignoring everything everyone else has stated in this thread.

Nope. Just because you and a handful of others think you're right, that doesn't actually make you right. I've quoted actual rules, numerous times in fact. All you have on your side is "uhm, I've decided that 'unarmed combat' means bare handed attacks." All the while ignoring that unarmed combat (and melee combat in general) includes the use of one's full body, meaning you're constantly hitting people with clothed/protected/armored/weaponized parts of the body.

Beisdes, how exactly does a thin layer of densiplast in a glove render a power unable to work, but a think iron-tipped boot does not? Or an Armored Jacketed elbow to the face? Or any of the myriad other examples of unarmed combat? I've yet to see any of you answer that.

The critical strike power specifically states it can be used to increase the damage of unarmed attacks. No where does it say the power can be used with the unarmed combat skill...

SR4A, p. 195, Critical Strike: "Each level of Critical Strike increases the character’s Damage Value in unarmed combat by +1. [...] The use of Critical Strike must be declared with the Unarmed Combat attack."

You were saying?

Right in the first sentence of the power it makes it dead clear.

Only if you're an ostrich and stop reading after that bit of fluff and ignore the actual associated rules.

Hardliner gloves are a weapon, they are listed as a weapon...

So are typical unarmed strikes. So is Bone Lacing. So is every other melee attack, of which unarmed combat is a subset. Feel free to take a look at the various tables listing melee weapons if you don't believe me. I'd quote them, but it's hard to quote a table without access to Table commands.

Just because HLG have rules that say you can use them with the unarmed combat skill does not make them unarmed. If I made a punching dagger weapon that could use the unarmed combat skill we wouldn't even be having this argument.

Yes we would, since by the rules, unarmed combat is the use of the Unarmed Combat skill. Nevermind that the problem here would be your completely inappropriate decision to use Unarmed Combat with such a weapon, which is clearly Blades as per the description of the Blades skill. But that makes sense, so feel free to ignore that, too.

It's perfectly fine to use house rules to your heart's content. God knows I do, extensively. But if you're going to try and say that the rules as written states something, you might actually have to prove it rather than turning red in the face with jack squat to back it up.

[TheOOB]

Ah, so you're one of those people who like to ignore anything that doesn't fit your argument. That's cool, a lot of people around here are like that. But you're still wrong. That last line you want to ignore is the actual rule (as is the other rule-based line midway through the description), as opposed to a fluff description that you're clinging to. Nevermind that "unarmed attacks" is used when talking about unarmed combat and Unarmed Combat throughout the rules (which, incidentally, are the same thing as per the rules).


Nope. Just because you and a handful of others think you're right, that doesn't actually make you right. I've quoted actual rules, numerous times in fact. All you have on your side is "uhm, I've decided that 'unarmed combat' means bare handed attacks." All the while ignoring that unarmed combat (and melee combat in general) includes the use of one's full body, meaning you're constantly hitting people with clothed/protected/armored/weaponized parts of the body.

Beisdes, how exactly does a thin layer of densiplast in a glove render a power unable to work, but a think iron-tipped boot does not? Or an Armored Jacketed elbow to the face? Or any of the myriad other examples of unarmed combat? I've yet to see any of you answer that.


SR4A, p. 195, Critical Strike: "Each level of Critical Strike increases the character’s Damage Value in unarmed combat by +1. [...] The use of Critical Strike must be declared with the Unarmed Combat attack."

You were saying?


Only if you're an ostrich and stop reading after that bit of fluff and ignore the actual associated rules.


So are typical unarmed strikes. So is Bone Lacing. So is every other melee attack, of which unarmed combat is a subset. Feel free to take a look at the various tables listing melee weapons if you don't believe me. I'd quote them, but it's hard to quote a table without access to Table commands.


Yes we would, since by the rules, unarmed combat is the use of the Unarmed Combat skill. Nevermind that the problem here would be your completely inappropriate decision to use Unarmed Combat with such a weapon, which is clearly Blades as per the description of the Blades skill. But that makes sense, so feel free to ignore that, too.

It's perfectly fine to use house rules to your heart's content. God knows I do, extensively. But if you're going to try and say that the rules as written states something, you might actually have to prove it rather than turning red in the face with jack squat to back it up.

Actually, aside from bringing up the description of critical strike, very very little reference to the actual rules of the game, page numbers and whatnot, have been brought up. I appreciate that you're actually trying to argue back using the rules text, even though that last sentence in CS doesn't mean what you think it means. It mentions at what point the use of critical strike must be declared, and it has no statements within it that would determine what kind of attacks it can be used on.

Furthermore, saying something is used "throughout the rules" is a weak defense of your position. So me page numbers, quoted text, something to back up your point if you have one, and keep in mind that HLG didn't even exist when CS was made part of the rules, but CS existed when HLG was made...if the weapon worked with CS unlike every other weapon in the game, shouldn't it say so?

You're bizarre arguments about clothes exploding and whatnot really just weakens your point, and it's kind of why people are ignoring what you say on the matter because it ruins you as a credible source. No one is saying that CS cannot be used through clothes or armor...heck no one is saying it can't even be used with gloves. It just can't be used with a weapon. You are bringing up things that are in no way related to the rules, any previous examples, or reality to try to make a point, which means your point is just as worthless as your example.

HLG does not work with CS as the per RAW, and no one has quoted any rules text to say another otherwise. This point is supported by RAI, as the developers would not want CS to be used with weapons that can be enhanced with upgrades and magic, thus creating a clearly broken scenerio.

[Ol' Scratch]

Actually, aside from bringing up the description of critical strike, very very little reference to the actual rules of the game, page numbers and whatnot, have been brought up.

You must have missed a few posts.

I appreciate that you're actually trying to argue back using the rules text, even though that last sentence in CS doesn't mean what you think it means. It mentions at what point the use of critical strike must be declared, and it has no statements within it that would determine what kind of attacks it can be used on.

And again you're ignoring the rest of the text. Again, see the first part of the rule I quoted.

Furthermore, saying something is used "throughout the rules" is a weak defense of your position.

Yeah, terribly weak. It's much better to just make stuff up and be done with it. I'll have to try that. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

You're bizarre arguments about clothes exploding and whatnot really just weakens your point, and it's kind of why people are ignoring what you say on the matter because it ruins you as a credible source.

Again, you must not have read the thread very well. My response about that silliness comes from other posters. Kind of like this post.

No one is saying that CS cannot be used through clothes or armor...heck no one is saying it can't even be used with gloves. It just can't be used with a weapon.

Unfortunately, "unarmed" is a weapon. It's listed on the various tables of melee weapons, under the category "Unarmed," which also includes things like Bone Lacing and Stun Gloves.

HLG does not work with CS as the per RAW

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