Blade combat, and multiple attacks Options

[Raiden]

Ok, so I cannot find it in the melee combat rules but I assume if you are wielding two melee weapons you can make two attacks. (due to martial arts allowing for multiple strikes, now are you splitting your dice pool between the two if you attack the same target? I can kinda see arguments both ways just curious if anyone knows RAW from this or their own rule for it.

[RHat]

Basically, you can attack a target once with a single weapon - so, twice with two weapons. You can, however, attack any number of targets with a weapon by splitting your dice pool. See SR4A 158 and Arsenal 163.

[Umidori]

When one weapon isn’t enough, a character can always wield two. As noted in SR4 (see Attacker Using a Second Firearm,p. 141, SR4), any attempt to use two weapons at the same time requires the character to split her dice pool between the two attacks. Several other factors may apply, as noted below.

...

When wielding two weapons in melee combat, it is assumed that a character only uses one weapon at a time, and so the appropriate skill for that weapon is used for attacks and parries. If a character wishes to attack with both weapons simultaneously (with the same Complex Action), then she must split her dice pool between the two attacks. If two separate skills are being used (such as Blades and Clubs), use the smallest dice pool. Split the pool before applying modifiers. The character may suffer a modifier to one attack for using an off-hand weapon (unless she has the Ambidextrous quality).

Someone who is simultaneously attacked with two weapons suffers a –1 defense modifier. Note that the defender is also forced to defend against two attacks with this rule, so also he receives a –1 modifier on the second Defense Test for already defending against a previous attack (see pp. 150–151, SR4). This means, in total, the defender suffers –1 against one attack and –2 against the other.

A character wielding two melee weapons does receive a bonus when parrying: apply a +1 dice pool modifier for melee parry Defense Tests and Full Parries. In order to use two weapons in melee combat, each weapon must have a Reach of 0 or 1.

Important bits bolded.

~Umi

[TomPliss]

this makes me wonder :
Is it possible for an unarmed fighter to attack 2 targets in the same action ?

[RHat]

SR4A, 158

MULTIPLE TARGETS
Characters may attack more than one opponent in
melee with the same Complex Action, as long as
those opponents are within one meter of each other.
The attacker’s dice pool is split between each attack,
and each attack is handled separately

[Umidori]

Of course, that being in the corebook, it is talking about using a single melee weapon.

Presumably, if you're willing to split your dice pool yet again, you could use two weapons to make 2 attacks against 2 targets in melee for a total of 4 attacks, but by then you're running low on dice.

Oh, and don't try to use two stun weapons at once and Incapacitate, or attack to Knockdown, or even just knock out/kill an opponent with the first attack, etc. There technically aren't actually any rules on how to handle the second attack with the second weapon if the first does any of those things or similar.

~Umi

[RHat]

Not sure if you can actually count yourself as using two weapons while unarmed.

But splits like that work best for armed adepts, as a Weapon Focus is a pool modifier, and thus applied after the split.

[Umidori]

Personally, I've yet to see a practical argument for disallowing unarmed to follow the same rules as melee. The only reason people even contest it is because the rules are worded such that they talk about "weapons", and that invites some parties to become needlessly pedantic.

~Umi

[SpellBinder]

Yeah, not like fists haven't been used as weapons before Shadowrun was dreamed up....

[Nal0n]

And remember: the split of the dice pool has not to be even! You can split the pool any way you like.

[Dakka Dakka]

And remember: the split of the dice pool has not to be even! You can split the pool any way you like.

And don't forget all dice pool modifiers are added after the split. Yes, that includes Specializations, regardless of what the FAQ says.

[RHat]

Personally, I've yet to see a practical argument for disallowing unarmed to follow the same rules as melee. The only reason people even contest it is because the rules are worded such that they talk about "weapons", and that invites some parties to become needlessly pedantic.

~Umi

In terms of things like weapon foci? There's the fact that there's powers specifically designed to compensate unarmed adepts for not having that benefit - it would, for example, be completely unbalanced to let an unarmed adept combine the benefits of Critical Strike, Elemental Strike, and a Weapon Focus.

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

In terms of things like weapon foci? There's the fact that there's powers specifically designed to compensate unarmed adepts for not having that benefit - it would, for example, be completely unbalanced to let an unarmed adept combine the benefits of Critical Strike, Elemental Strike, and a Weapon Focus.

Except that that is not what he is saying... (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

[Udoshi]

Personally, I've yet to see a practical argument for disallowing unarmed to follow the same rules as melee. The only reason people even contest it is because the rules are worded such that they talk about "weapons", and that invites some parties to become needlessly pedantic.

~Umi

From a rules standpoint, the main thing getting in the way is that you only have ONE weapon that meets the criteria for two weaponing. One I've solved, with my most recent character.
Unarmed combat has an entry on the weapons table that qualifies it.
My second weapon is my Natural Weapon. Being wielded by a free spirit with mutable form, its shape often changes into actual weapons, though the mechanics of using it don't.

And that's how I ended up two-weaponing unarmed.

However, I agree with umidori here. You can force the issue by two-weaponing shock gloves, or two-weaponing unarmed and a single shock glove, or even a cyber shock hand.
This is legal, as they are seperate Weapons with reach 0.
It just drives the point home that its super dumb you can two-weapon by putting on a glove, yet some people disallow it when you take the glove off.

[Umidori]

Things also get weird with non-arm appendages. Not just kicks and headbutts, but also things like the Thagomizer tail for Changelings (had some "fun" arguments over that one) and Fangs (there are three entirely different kinds, with different damage codes and linked combat skills - Cyberware Fangs, Changeling Fangs, and Vampire Fangs).

~Umi

[RHat]

Except that that is not what he is saying... (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

It's actually connected, because in general you're either using a weapon or you're not. There is also the oddity that comes up in terms of gaining additional attack methods. For that matter, how many weapons would you want to count a normal metahuman as having?

[Umidori]

TJ was quite right, I wasn't talking about weapon foci at all, and to be honest, that is almost entirely unconnected to what I was talking about. That said...

Every single physical method of attacking an enemy in Shadowrun counts as using weapons, except for Unarmed. From a game mechanics standpoint, that's bizarre. It should be unified unless there is some rational reason to treat unarmed attacks radically differently than any other attacks. (And there isn't.)

But putting aside game mechanics, it doesn't even make plain old common sense, because it complete fails to account for some pretty normal sorts of situations that it ought to be able to cleanly resolve without discrepancies. For example, I can stab twice with a knife in each, but I can't punch twice with just my hands? I can somehow use cyberspurs implanted in my ankles to make two attacks at once, but I can't just kick someone twice?

So long as the pool is split, what does it matter whether you make the attack with a held (or implanted) physical object, or with the limb that would hold (or house) that object to begin with? I honestly don't get why people are so against it.

Want to make two attacks, one with your head and one with your left leg? Go nuts! They of course should be modified logically - for example, the headbutt should probably be at -1 Reach, akin to Fang or Horn attacks, and shouldn't gain any bonuses from most Martial Arts, as headbutts are usually not part of that training. The kick, of course, would still benefit from most martial arts training, and would also benefit from the Kick Attack maneuver for +1 Reach. But it makes just as much sense and is no more overpowered than doing the exact same thing with weaponry.

~Umi

[RHat]

I find it strange enough that you can't stab a guy twice with the same knife, really.

[Umidori]

Well, it's not like you can shoot someone twice with one gun with the same action.

Likewise, making two melee attacks with one weapon with one action doesn't work.

~Umi

[RHat]

I'm just saying, there's more weirdness in the melee multiple attacks rules than just that.

[Umidori]

Like trying to reconcile attacking with two weapons AND with a Thagomizer tail all at once. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nyahnyah.gif)

And that doesn't even get into the question of since a Thagomizer counts as Prehensile, can you use it to wield a weapon? Would be a lot nicer to just have three swords and split the dicepool between them than to have to also have Exotic Melee Weapon: Thagomizer, forcing you to diversify your skills, denying you a specialization, and making you use the lower of the two pools. (Considering the costs associated with this Surged Quality, this seems reasonable.)

~Umi

[SpellBinder]

I find it strange enough that you can't stab a guy twice with the same knife, really.

You could look at it this way. If the attack roll generated an insane number of hits (like 8 hits on a DP of 10) without using Edge, and the victim didn't manage to roll as well, the extra damage you dealt from your extreme luck resulted from being able to stab the victim several times in rapid succession. Particularly if you happened to kill the person with this attack.

Just a thought.

[RHat]

And yet somehow, it probably deals less damage than stabbing him twice with two knives?

[Dakka Dakka]

On its own it is not weird that you can't stab one guy twice with the same knife in one action. What makes it weird is that you can stab two or more different guys with the same knife in a single complex action. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/silly.gif)

[Umidori]

Think less "stabbing" and more "sweeping" and it becomes easier to reconcile. Making a broad sweep with a blade and hitting two goons next to each other is doable, while stabbing is less so because, ya know, blades get stuck in people that way.

It's an abstracted system anyway, remember.

~Umi