Snap Blades vs Cyber Spurs Options

[Hound]

Workin' on makin' my first 5th ed character, wantin' to go with a Physical Adept who uses unarmed, but I was hoping to have some kind of unarmed weapon. I saw earlier that cyber spurs still use the unarmed skill and are actually pretty good, but when I checked their non-implanted counterpart, Forearm Snap Blades, they were much worse and apparently use the Blades skill. Considering that the first line of the Snap Blade description compares them to spurs ("These are essentially like spurs, only they’re external—painless to install or remove.") I don't really understand why they are so much worse/different. Is there some factor I'm not seeing here? Would you, as a GM, allow a character to use the Cyber Spur stats on a similar non-implanted weapon?

[FuelDrop]

Workin' on makin' my first 5th ed character, wantin' to go with a Physical Adept who uses unarmed, but I was hoping to have some kind of unarmed weapon. I saw earlier that cyber spurs still use the unarmed skill and are actually pretty good, but when I checked their non-implanted counterpart, Forearm Snap Blades, they were much worse and apparently use the Blades skill. Considering that the first line of the Snap Blade description compares them to spurs ("These are essentially like spurs, only they’re external—painless to install or remove.") I don't really understand why they are so much worse/different. Is there some factor I'm not seeing here? Would you, as a GM, allow a character to use the Cyber Spur stats on a similar non-implanted weapon?

Okay, can we get a bit of a definition on what you consider to be an 'unarmed adept'? If everyone's clear on what you want then we should be able to help more effectively.
First thing I'd look into for an unarmed adept if I were going to sacrifice essence would be bone lacing. Increases your durability and unarmed damage in one fell swoop. Just a thought.

Also, isn't 'unarmed weapon' an oxymoron?

[Hound]

Okay, can we get a bit of a definition on what you consider to be an 'unarmed adept'? If everyone's clear on what you want then we should be able to help more effectively.
First thing I'd look into for an unarmed adept if I were going to sacrifice essence would be bone lacing. Increases your durability and unarmed damage in one fell swoop. Just a thought.

Also, isn't 'unarmed weapon' an oxymoron?

By "unarmed weapon" I mean a weapon that uses the Unarmed skill in combat, like Cyber Spurs. I hadn't thought of the bone lacing idea, I suppose that would accomplish my goal, but I'm hoping to avoid losing any essence with my adept, I want to go full magic. I'd also like the weapon to be able to be a weapon focus, so Bone Lacing is out for that. I didn't mean to imply with my original question that I was considering using cyber spurs on my adept. It just seems that forearm snap blades are almost exactly the same thing, yet their stats are quite different, most notably in the fact that they use a different skill and therefore have to have an accuracy rating, rather than just using the physical limit like "Unarmed Weapons" (Spurs) use. I realize "Unarmed Weapon" is an oxymoron, but I can't think of another phrase to get across what I mean.

[Faelan]

By "unarmed weapon" I mean a weapon that uses the Unarmed skill in combat, like Cyber Spurs. I hadn't thought of the bone lacing idea, I suppose that would accomplish my goal, but I'm hoping to avoid losing any essence with my adept, I want to go full magic. I'd also like the weapon to be able to be a weapon focus, so Bone Lacing is out for that. I didn't mean to imply with my original question that I was considering using cyber spurs on my adept. It just seems that forearm snap blades are almost exactly the same thing, yet their stats are quite different, most notably in the fact that they use a different skill and therefore have to have an accuracy rating, rather than just using the physical limit like "Unarmed Weapons" (Spurs) use. I realize "Unarmed Weapon" is an oxymoron, but I can't think of another phrase to get across what I mean.

Weapon Focus never works with Unarmed in SR5E.

[Hound]

Weapon Focus never works with Unarmed in SR5E.

Oh? Could you tell me where you read that? Either a page or a general area? The section on weapon foci (p. 320, SR5 core) just says it has "the form of a melee weapon." I would assume that something like Knucks would be considered a melee weapon.

[Umidori]

Yeah, I think a citation is kind of necessary, if only because I've heard this argument a thousand times back in 4E.

"Hardliner Gloves can't be weapon foci!" - cue circular logic and pedantry from all sides.

~Umi

[Faelan]

Yeah, I think a citation is kind of necessary, if only because I've heard this argument a thousand times back in 4E.

"Hardliner Gloves can't be weapon foci!" - cue circular logic and pedantry from all sides.

~Umi

I screwed up thought I read it somewhere.

[Hound]

I screwed up thought I read it somewhere.

No worries, happens. I think it makes a lot more sense in SR4 when most of the adept powers didn't apply to non-unarmed attacks and so weapon foci were kind of a way to buff sword-adepts and such. But in SR5, from my fairly cursory knowledge of it so far, it seems like most adept powers have been expanded to include all melee attacks and even sometimes ranged attacks.

But yeah, how about those Snap Blades am I right?

Do you know if cyberweapons can be foci? Seems to me that the blade part of a spur for example would be able to be a focus. I assume there's no written rules in the books governing this I guess.

[Rubic]

No worries, happens. I think it makes a lot more sense in SR4 when most of the adept powers didn't apply to non-unarmed attacks and so weapon foci were kind of a way to buff sword-adepts and such. But in SR5, from my fairly cursory knowledge of it so far, it seems like most adept powers have been expanded to include all melee attacks and even sometimes ranged attacks.

But yeah, how about those Snap Blades am I right?

Do you know if cyberweapons can be foci? Seems to me that the blade part of a spur for example would be able to be a focus. I assume there's no written rules in the books governing this I guess.

In 4e, iirc, it was possible to enchant the blade of a spur as a weapon focus. It had to be enchanted prior to implantation, and could not be substantially changed when implanted. I haven't heard or noticed anything different in 5e (granted I've not payed much attention to this route, personally).

[Umidori]

It's a shame that the Snap-Blades are so bizarrely different and inferior to cyberspurs in 5E.

It's kind of like how in SR4, there were 3 different forms of Fangs (Vampire, Changeling, and Cyber), and none of them matched in terms of Damage Code, Reach, and Weapon Skill.

*shakes head sadly*

~Umi

[Hound]

It's a shame that the Snap-Blades are so bizarrely different and inferior to cyberspurs in 5E.

It's kind of like how in SR4, there were 3 different forms of Fangs (Vampire, Changeling, and Cyber), and none of them matched in terms of Damage Code, Reach, and Weapon Skill.

*shakes head sadly*

~Umi

Yeah this seems like a case where I'll probably just house rule it. Cause there seems to be zero reason for them to be that completely different.

[Manunancy]

If you trace the things back to their 'street samourai catalogue' origin (not sure if it's really from that supplement, but it's that time period), there's a good reason for the snap blade being worse off : the weapon's 'suer comment section' metioned (not textually but close' 'sure thy look good, but without the spur's strengthening of the arm's bones, be cautious about lever effects if you don't want to break your forearm'.

[Umidori]

Surely that's already reflected in the slightly reduced DV? As I recall, Spurs in 4E always had an extra point of damage over snap blades.

Also, surely having one operate as Unarmed and the other as Blades makes no sense, even operating off that bit of fluff? They used to both use the Blades skill in SR4 (unless a spur was installed anywhere other than the wrist, in which case it became a god awful Exotic Melee Skill for some reason).

~Umi

[Stahlseele]

How many characters did you seriously consider going for built in weaponry over their external counterparts?
That's why that was changed i guess. The ONLY thing SPURS do BETTER than Forearm Snap Blades is that they can not be taken from you.
You can probably see how that's a problem if people are trying to subdue you and know you can not be disarmed.
"Is it worth the hassle? No? He was resisting arrest, shoot him 'till he drops, then slap some handcuffs on him and see if he survives"

Everything can be a focus. Yes, even Cyber-Limbs.
The advantage of the cyber-spur there is the fact that after the implantation, swapping the blades should be a quick and easy procedure.
No need to wire everything up completely new, just detach blade from mount and re-attach after you are done with whatever you needed to do to them.

[Umidori]

The ONLY thing SPURS do BETTER than Forearm Snap Blades is that they can not be taken from you.

Well, actually, they do more damage, they're more concealable while retracted (the snap-blades still are visible as externally worn objects), and they go from full concealed to fully visible much quicker (in that you'd have to unequip the snap blades for the same level of concealability, then re-equip them to use them).

Then of course, there's the fact that now in 5E for some reason spurs use the Unarmed Skill instead of the Blades skill, which could be either a benefit or a hindrance depending on the rest of your build due to having to split skills.

As for your points about "disarming" someone with cyberspurs, there are specially made restraints for use against cyberlimbs - or at least there were in 4E. And in either case, if someone is trying to disarm you and take you alive, you're going to resist just as hard either way, so I don't really think it's much of a factor. In fact, the stealth aspect of the spurs probably works in your favor.

"Okay, the target is in sight and is visibly armed with a pair of fore-arm snap blades. Wait for backup."
...versus...
"Okay, the target is in sight and is not visibly armed. Move in and grab them before they can slip away."

~Umi

[RHat]

Yeah, I think a citation is kind of necessary, if only because I've heard this argument a thousand times back in 4E.

"Hardliner Gloves can't be weapon foci!" - cue circular logic and pedantry from all sides.

~Umi

The argument was to do with whether they'd work with the unarmed exclusive powers, like Critical Strike. This argument is not a thing for SR5, at present.

You CAN have Knucks/Hardliner Gloves as Weapon Foci in SR5, and have it stack with your one damage from Critical Strike.

[Umidori]

The argument was to do with whether they'd work with the unarmed exclusive powers, like Critical Strike. This argument is not a thing for SR5, at present.

You CAN have Knucks/Hardliner Gloves as Weapon Foci in SR5, and have it stack with your one damage from Critical Strike.

Excuse me if I read "Weapon Focus never works with Unarmed in SR5E" to mean that Faelan thought you can't make a Weapon Focus out of an Unarmed Weapon in 5E. Ambiguous phrasing plus the ubiquity of that argument in the last Edition made it seem the obvious reading. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)

That said, we appear to be in complete agreement. If you want to have a Weapon Focus + Adept Powers and whatever else in 5E, it doesn't matter if the weapon is Unarmed or Melee.

~Umi

[RHat]

Excuse me if I read "Weapon Focus never works with Unarmed in SR5E" to mean that Faelan thought you can't make a Weapon Focus out of an Unarmed Weapon in 5E. Ambiguous phrasing plus the ubiquity of that argument in the last Edition made it seem the obvious reading. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)

That said, we appear to be in complete agreement. If you want to have a Weapon Focus + Adept Powers and whatever else in 5E, it doesn't matter if the weapon is Unarmed or Melee.

~Umi

Now, Street Grimoire or whatever may reintroduce that argument - if things like Elemental Strike work only while unarmed, the argument exists; the balance reason behind that restriction doesn't exist anymore, however, so having Blast, Fire, and Light on a Combat Axe might be a thing.

[Umidori]

Now, Street Grimoire or whatever may reintroduce that argument - if things like Elemental Strike work only while unarmed, the argument exists; the balance reason behind that restriction doesn't exist anymore, however, so having Blast, Fire, and Light on a Combat Axe might be a thing.

There was a balance reason? Really? What was it? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)

Because for as long as I can remember, it was smarter in pretty much every way for a Melee adept to go Unarmed than to use a weapon.

Want to do more damage? Put away that sharp piece of metal and just magically punch harder! What's that? You say that if you can punch harder, you should also be able to stab harder with your sword? Silly adept! Magic doesn't work that way!

Want to inflict special Elemental damage? Magically envelop your hands in Fire, Ice, Lightning, or any other Elemental damage type you like! Works on hands, doesn't work on things held in your hands! Why? Who knows! If you want a Fiery sword, go play a goddamn Mage and teach yourself [Element] Aura, you self-entitled freeloader!

Want to turn your melee attacks into ranged attacks? Don't expect to be doing any of those stylized samurai sword swings that cut the enemy with a blast of air or with a shockwave! That'd be silly! No, instead you just need to throw Dragonball Z punches which work "because magic"! You're uh... "projecting your aura" or some shit! Yeah, that's the ticket! Nevermind that attacking this way is based entirely on your Physical Attributes, and therefor it makes no sense that you can't do the exact same thing with a sword!

So what's the point of using a melee weapon? I'm glad you asked! There is none! They don't do as much damage as Magic Fists, they don't let you deal Elemental damage, they don't let you make ranged melee attacks, and they aren't automatically -Infinity Concealability! Even bonus dice from Weapon Foci aren't exclusive to melee weapons, because Unarmed get weapon foci too! They're literally worse in every single way imaginable!

4th Edition - Fair and Balanced! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/rotfl.gif)

~Umi

[RHat]

There was a balance reason? Really? What was it? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)

Accuracy - weapons gave you Reach and Weapon Focus bonuses, while being unarmed gave you the various effects of the unarmed specific powers. It was easier to hit with, say, a Weapon Focus Claymore - especially if you were attacking multiple enemies, because you'd get the Reach and Focus bonuses onto each individual attack - but your unarmed attacks had things like elemental effects and Critical Strike.

Actually, a Force 6 Weapon Focus Nodachi in the hands of a Troll with an applicable Specialization, Agility 5(7), and Blades 6(9) would be able to attack, say, 8 guys with a dice pool of 13 against each of them (Attribute+Skill being split, modifiers being applied after the fact).

[Umidori]

No weapon I am aware of ever statted out had a reach greater than 2.

Since Hardliner Gloves could serve as Weapon Foci, no melee weapon ever could have more than 2 extra dice on an attack test (or 2 fewer dice on the enemy's defense test) compared to unarmed.

So your Nodachi Troll could just as easily use Weapon Focus Hardliner Gloves to attack those same 8 guys with a dice pool of 11 against each of them, but deal an extra 3DV against each of them thanks to Critical Strike.

And with Distance Strike, the enemy defends as if against a Ranged Attack, so they don't get to roll Dodge of their Melee weapon skill unless they go on Full Defense. That means on average anyone you attack is going to lose more dice than the 2 dice they would lose from reach - and remember, that's net reach.

So your Nodachi Troll could use his Reach against guys with knives to reduce their Defense pools by 3 (counting the Troll's natural Reach modifier), but he could just as easily use Hardliner Gloves to reduce their defense pools to just their Reaction (which means the more skilled they are at Melee or Dodge, the more dice they lose), all while still doing more damage.

And with Elemental Strike, the enemy defends against the special Elemental -half AP. Sure, you can't combine it with Distance Strike, but it means that on top of dealing an extra 3DV compared to a friggen +6 concealability Claymore or Combat Axe, you're also beating out the piddling -1AP they have by a huge margin. Oh, and you also get the benefits of an Elemental Secondary Effect. Ah, and since the Element you choose also determines the damage code, you could use something like Electricity to overwrite the Physical damage of your weapon and change it to mere Stun as needed!

So yeah, melee weapon adepts can get +2 to hit compared to unarmed adepts. But they pay so very much for it that it's absurd.

~Umi

[RHat]

No weapon I am aware of ever statted out had a reach greater than 2.

Since Hardliner Gloves could serve as Weapon Foci, no melee weapon ever could have more than 2 extra dice on an attack test (or 2 fewer dice on the enemy's defense test) compared to unarmed.

So your Nodachi Troll could just as easily use Weapon Focus Hardliner Gloves to attack those same 8 guys with a dice pool of 11 against each of them, but deal an extra 3DV against each of them thanks to Critical Strike.

And with Distance Strike, the enemy defends as if against a Ranged Attack, so they don't get to roll Dodge of their Melee weapon skill unless they go on Full Defense. That means on average anyone you attack is going to lose more dice than the 2 dice they would lose from reach - and remember, that's net reach.

So your Nodachi Troll could use his Reach against guys with knives to reduce their Defense pools by 3 (counting the Troll's natural Reach modifier), but he could just as easily use Hardliner Gloves to reduce their defense pools to just their Reaction (which means the more skilled they are at Melee or Dodge, the more dice they lose), all while still doing more damage.

And with Elemental Strike, the enemy defends against the special Elemental -half AP. Sure, you can't combine it with Distance Strike, but it means that on top of dealing an extra 3DV compared to a friggen +6 concealability Claymore or Combat Axe, you're also beating out the piddling -1AP they have by a huge margin. Oh, and you also get the benefits of an Elemental Secondary Effect. Ah, and since the Element you choose also determines the damage code, you could use something like Electricity to overwrite the Physical damage of your weapon and change it to mere Stun as needed!

So yeah, melee weapon adepts can get +2 to hit compared to unarmed adepts. But they pay so very much for it that it's absurd.

~Umi

I'm sorry if it wasn't clear, but my argument is specific to the context that Elemental Strike, Distance Strike, Critical Strike, and so on do not function with Hardliners. Since it is, you know, an argument regarding the balance reason for those powers not working with Hardliners.

In that context, a Weapon Focus Hardliner was clearly outclassed by other melee weapons; it may have provided more flexibility than unarmed adepts were really due, however. What you've done is amply demonstrated why no reasonable GM should be ruling Hardliners would work with those powers - even if they think the rules permit it, they should houserule it out.

[Umidori]

Except they... do... work with Hardliners?

*head scratch*

Moot point, let's not go down that road, that was 4E. In 5E it doesn't matter, because the powers apply equally to any kind of melee attack, armed or not, as do weapon foci.

~Umi

[FuelDrop]

Monowhip: Reach 4.

[RHat]

Except they... do... work with Hardliners?

... Except that the whole discussion started with a reference to the argument as to whether they do or don't?