Hey, does the Two weapon fighting maneuver work with unarmed attacks and defense? or is it limited -only- to weapons like clubs and blades?

That maneuver only works with a melee weapon of reach 0 or 1 in each hand. Off-hand training specifically says it cannot be taken for melee combat, so overall, I would say it is fairly clear that this is not intended for unarmed combat (which uses both hands normally).

Please don't be one of those people who asks the GM if he can take it with shock gloves or hardliner gloves. And please don't follow that question up with "Can they be weapon foci? Will my critical strike still work through them?"

Its worth noting that Unarmed Strikes DO have an entry in the Melee Weapons table as a weapon with reach 0

just wondering, since martial arts seems to be more of an "unarmed" combat form. that and I just wanted the ability to use full defense and then attack with my guy at the same time :/

me and a friend agreed, that unarmed combat should get those maneuvers for free and as an integral part of unarmed fighting. Hell, unarmed combat is at least Four-Weapon fighting, and that's just counting limbs.

When you're using unarmed combat (in my games at least) it's assumed you're already using all extremities possible.

That's exactly my point. I'm using both my arms, so I should be allowed the advantages as written in the "Two-Weapon-Fighting Maneuver".

I would just scratch that maneuver. Seriously. Ot's just too good. Especially at 4 karma. I mean, seriously...the author obviously didn't think that through.

Is it unbalanced compared to guns?

Because it seems to go a long way towards fixing that problem.

TWS is really the big selling point of melee combat [because there are a decent number of enemies, like several spirit types and a bunch of paracritters, that are very good at melee]. Without it (like in Missions, for example), melee really suffers and is even more niche.

If you allow TWS, but not unarmed TWS, unarmed pretty much just sucks in comparison to your other options for melee.

Nope. You are already using all extremities.





There's nothing to fix. I can kill you at range or I can kill you with my hands. This is the reason swords have gone the way side and guns are the dominant weapon of choice these days. I actually find it amazing how many shadowrunners carry swords(I wonder if this is an off shot of the players D&D days)



Melee does suck unless you know ways to use it. Not really try to compare R/L to game but it's that way. Compare the number of ppl who can shoot a gun and who can fight with their fists and I'm willing to bet the number of ppl who can shoot will win.
Or in my view; I have melee combat ability so I have an additional option when fighting or killing.



Sorry, the advanced martial arts rules not in use for missions.

So to each the own opinion but the rules are fine by me.

I know they are banned in missions. That's what I said.

People want to swordfight in Shadowrun because people use melee weapons in a lot of the source material, like Snow Crash or Johny Mnemonic. It's just a very niche skill in SR.

So it makes sense that an Unarmed Strike could be used as one weapon in Two Weapon Fighting.
Keep the attention focused on the big pig sticker while driving a surprise knee between the legs.
Or even as a surprise third option for some one with two weapons.

But I see that point that if you don't have at least one weapon, you couldn't do Two Weapon Fighting.

It would just be normal unarmed combat.

BTW Hardliner Gloves and shock gloves both fall under unarmed.

Counterpoint: Maneuvers already exist that utilize specific extremities better.

the Kick maneuver lets you use your legs better, and a kick is most definitely not a series of blows and moves that use punches. Its a feet only unarmed attack.
Which utterly contradicts your quote that YES, maneuvers CAN affect only specific parts of your body.

Therefore, two weapon unarmed fighting lets you use BOTH your fists.

You need to ask your GM. Some do it one way others another. As far as I'm concerned fists are weapons with reach 0 so they qualify. (pistols are clubs with reach 0).

But the rules are quite a bit grey on these points.
1. Are fists and unarmed to be considered valid?
2. For the maneuver, I need to make one attack with one hand and hold the other in reserve for two-weapon defense. Does that one attack need to be a melee attack? (IE: can I fire one pistol and hold the second in reserve for a gun adept).

Those are the questions you need to discuss with your GM... not the peanut gallery here.


I see no problems if someone wants to do it unarmed. It keeps them viable and gives them a needed advantage in melee (spirits and critters have huge edges there... so the two weapon defense helps out a lot). Also if they're doing unarmed and making 2 attacks at once... they lack for +dice modifiers to attack so they end up truly splitting their attack pool. And melee attacks are resisted with 2 pools not 1 like ranged... so sacrificing dice for a second attack means a good chance both miss.