You cannot argue that a Hardlined Glove is not a Weapon, it most definitely is. The only benefit is that you get to use the Unarmed Combat skill to attack with it. It is essentially a weapon that requires no skill to use; you may use it retlativly unskilled, as it were.
Just because you use Unarmed Combat does not make it a Non-Weapon.

Are Brass Knuckles a Weapon? According to the Police, they are...
Are Karatand (HLG's) a Weapon? According to the Police, they are...
Are Fistloads a Weapon? Again, according to the Police, they are...

Incidentally, in game, you would use Unarmed Combat when using any of these weapons... Amazing... THEY ARE STILL WEAPONS.
ANd yes, yuou could make the HLG into a weapon Focus... they are a weapon after all...
And yes, you could make a Brick a Weapon Focus, but guess what, IT IS AN IMPROVISED WEAPON when used to harm someone, not a building material. It becomes a pooor man's club.

Hitler invented Hardliner Gloves, summoned his Ally Spirit ("Lebensraum") into the gloves, and ordered it to use Death Touch every time he struck an enemy.

Is a trained martial artist, especially one who received that training in the military, considered to be using a deadly weapon? According to the Police, they are...

Now what?

Indeed, which puts him in a Pickle...
Unarmed Combat can be deadly, especially if you have been trained. BUT, if you augment that ability with a weapon, well it is still a weapon.

The percentage of people who are considered "Deadly Weapons' in their own right is vanishingly small. Anyone can grab a fistload and be charged with Assault with a Deadly Weapon. If you cannot differentiate between the two, well, I am not sure what more to say. The fact that Such things are considered WEAPONS should be telling, though, regardless of what "Skill" is being used.

So... Again, you cannot use the Hardliner Gloves as both a Weapon and a Non-Weapon for game purposes. You should pick a classification and stick with it. If they are Weapons, then Adept abilities do not apply, but they can be used as Foci. If they are not Weapons, then Adept abilities apply, but cannot be Foci. You cannot have your cake and eat it too...

HLG's are a weapon, but by the rules it's still unarmed combat if you attack someone with them and as such adept powers work just fine.

In this I disagree... as do a lot of others apparently.

You missed the point completely.

According to your argument, that makes anyone who's trained in a martial art (or pretty much any training of the Unarmed Combat skill) completely unable to do any damage at all with adept powers because, you know, they're using a weapon -- namely themselves. Or in other words, your argument doesn't work whatsoever.

The problem with 4th Edition's Hardliner Gloves is that they didn't think it through (shock shock) and gave it a Damage Code rather than simply adding a point or two of damage to Unarmed Combat like they did previously. It's a flaw in the rules, plain and simple.

Of course I think its stupid that most of those adept powers only work with unarmed combat to begin with. Talk about shoehorning players into narrow little boxes. Unarmed Combat should have one or two powers that make it competitive with weapons, but that's about it. Most of those powers should simply be limited to melee combat instead, especially considering that most of the concepts associated with them in fiction are. Ie, flaming swords, hammers that can smash through walls, etc.

Agreed: mistakes were made, unarmed is harsh, and the powers are possibly wonky.

However, if someone's going to use those basic rules, weapon focus hardliner gloves with all the fixin's completely break it. Maybe it's fine if you're the only unarmed person in the group, and you're being compared to armed characters. I dunno.

Well, Doc.. Ummm Old Scratch, as always, you bend things so out of shape that they are unrecognizeable. Unarmed combat, at its core, is a weaponless system. Unfortunately, we, as humans, have figured out ways to use the core skills, and yet weaponize it to some extent. The extent that an Adept (or higly skilled Martial artist) becomes a weapon unto itself is BECAUSE of the Adept abilities (Martial Arts IRL), not because of something they use in conjunction with it. The Adept (or Martial Artist) himself, becomes a weapon (whic is the whole point of the Adept abilities), he does not WIELD a weapon. Huge Difference. Sheesh...

Whether you agree with the rules is completely irrelevant, the book indicates that the Hardliner Gloves are WEAPONS (You cannot even argue that distinction), so they should not gain the benefit of the Adept abilities. They will, however, gain the benefioot of being a Weapon Focus. Now, if you do not like that, you may reverse that idea (it is only a single extra point of damage after all) and allow them to be cumulative with the Adept abilities, but if you do, you should not allow them to be Weapon Foci. The Reason that the Adept abilities do not woprk with weapons is because Weapons can have their own bonuses through the application of the Foci rules.

As for your final comparisons.
Flaming Swords are possible in the game, no need for adept abilities to make it work.
Wall Smashing Hammers as well, if I remember correctly (though I prefer a judicious application of explosive force over just pounding away with a hammer, nothing like alerting your opposition to the fact that you are there).

The goal of unarmed Adept abilities is to allow them to compete with teh armed melee capabilities, and yet not wield a weapon. I think that they do this pretty well. Of course, an Unarmed combatant can do things a Melee Weapon specialist cannot, but I would hold that it works both ways.

Anyways...

No, you just have your head stuck in the sand.

Your argument, at least the one I quoted, was that Hardliner Gloves, Brass Knuckles, and etc. were considered "weapons" by "the Police," thus they didn't qualify for the various adept powers that are restricted to unarmed combat. Unfortunately for you and said argument, the same holds true for trained martial artists; they're considered "weapons" by "the Police," thus they don't qualify for the various adept powers that are restricted to unarmed combat.

Take note of the underlined text and how they're, you know, identical.

But those powers boost unarmed combat and using HLG's is still unarmed combat, so by the rules nothink stops them from working together.
Them being weapons have absolutely nothing to do with the adept powers working with them.

Except you obviously miss the point. The difference is that in one case the WEAPONS are wielded BY the Individual, they are EXTERNAL to the character. In the other, the character IS the WEAPON, they are NOT ARMED with any WEAPONS at all, and in fact ARE UNARMED. ALL the Adept qualities demand is that the Adept be UNARMED to use his abilities. Equip[ping Hardliner Gloves no longer satisfies that condition, because they now have a Weapon in Hand. even if the skill used is still unarmed combat.

Talk about someone with their head in the sand...

No, I didn't miss the point. You just offered a really bad argument and I called you on it. Note that my responses have been directed solely at that specific argument, which was that since "the Police" consider something a "weapon," it cannot be used with unarmed adept powers.

Again, you use the argument... "Somthing"... not Someone...
Regardless, my point stands. HAadliner Gloves are a Weapon, and you cannot deny this line of reasoning.

I didn't say HLG aren't weapons. They are weapons, in the sense they they increase the damage potential of an attack.
But, you make an Unarmed Attack with them. HLG are an Unarmed Weapon.

If you hit a guy in the face with your bare fist, that is an unarmed attack.
If you hit the same guy with your fist, while wearing gloves, that is also an unarmed attack. Weather you consider the gloves a weapon or not.
If you hit the same poor guy with a Blade or Club that if entirely different, especially in terms of technique.

In Unarmed Combat, generally, you use you fists (or whatever) to do the damage.
If your armed with a club/blade, you use your hands (with other things) to maneuver the deadly instrument into doing the damage.

In SR4 Unarmed damage doesn't mean, not using a weapon, it means using your Hands/Legs/Head/Whole Body etc. to make the attack.
Perhaps, as someone else mentioned, Unarmed is a little misleading a name for the skill.

There no need to deny that, as it being a weapon has nothing to do with the adept powers working with them.

Not by RAW.

Indeed... Which is the ultimate point here... RAW...

Yes by RAW there nothing stopping you from using HLG's with adept powers that boost unarmed combat damage.
You absolutely right about that.

Hmm.

SR4A p.122: "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."

SR4A p. 157, Melee Combat Summary: "Weapon skill + Reaction (parry), Unarmed Combat + Reaction (block), Dodge + Reaction (dodge)" [Note that this is how how they distinguish between unarmed combat and the use of weapon skills in the actual rules; it's based solely on the skill being used.]

SR4A p. 195, Critical Strike: "This power uses magic to increase the Damage Value of your unarmed attacks, as you strike with more proficiency and power. Each level of Critical Strike increases the character’s Damage Value in unarmed combat by +1."

SR4A p. 196, Killing Hands: "This power uses magic to turn unarmed attacks into lethal, physical damage. When participating in unarmed combat, you may do normal Stun damage or declare the use of Killing Hands and inflict an equal amount of Physical damage instead. Killing Hands may be used with Critical Strike (p. 195)."

Arsenal p. 39: "Hardliner Gloves: These stylish leather gloves provide an extra bit of punch when the chips are down. Each glove contains a thin layer of densiplast set into the knuckles and along the ridges of the hand. A character wearing these using Unarmed Combat to attack."

Strange. I don't see anything in any of these quotes that says one must be literally unarmed, but instead say they only work in unarmed combat. Nothing at all like "only bare fists work." Which, as both the text for Unarmed Combat skill and Hardliner Gloves points out, the use of Hardliner Gloves is. In fact, I can't find a single rule that actually says one must be weaponless to engage in unarmed combat. As pointed out in the second quote, and the related text, it's all about the skill being used, not the weapon (whether it be a bare fist, a gloved fist, a helmeted head butt, a clothed knee, a booted foot, or a Hardliner Glove). They're all the same as far as the rules are concerned.

I don't view RAW as the correct answer, personally, except by the occasional coincidence.

This.

Because saying:

"I'm sorry Ironman you can't use unarmed combat to fight with that supervillan, as you are wear gauntlets as part of your armor and therefor count as armed."

Is silly.

It's really a quite different situation. The adept abilities only give you the extra power when you are fighting without your arms. Let them hang limp from your shoulders, then kick someone to death. Unarmed = no arms

No one is saying you can't use 'Unarmed' with gloves. The question is very specifically 'should Adept powers (Crit Strike, etc.) work with gloves?'.

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.

As mentioned, I'm not disputing the RAW.

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.

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.

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.

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

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?

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.

RAW doesn't define Zone or pointless, therefore YOU ARE WRONG!

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.

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

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

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

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

Heheh... Okay then...

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.

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.

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.

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.



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.



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.

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. 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.

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.

You must have missed a few posts.


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


Yeah, terribly weak. It's much better to just make stuff up and be done with it. I'll have to try that.


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


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.


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