I've read SC, CC and SR3 and found no information (maybe I'm stupid ) about unarmed combat and ambidexterity. Does the default unarmed combat permit the use of both hands without penalty ? Or you need to buy the edge ? If no, so you can place 2 blow by round normally ?

And yes, done the "Search" function with "unarmed + ambidexterity"

Thanks a lot !

P.S : Damn ... that been a long time since I've got here ... just found that SR4 will be out.

For some strange reason (and prepare people to defend it), Unarmed Combat/Martial Arts cannot take advantage of the Ambidexterity edge at all because, and I sum up with a paraphse, "you're already using your whole body." It's only available with the use of weapons, and nevermind that it works just fine with Shock Gloves, which uses Unarmed Combat.

House Rule: Use it just like you do with melee weapons; it adds half your Unarmed Combat/Martial Art skill to your total dice thrown, with damage determined normally.

The problem with diching ambidexterity entirely is that a second weapon is an advantage, even to the modestly trained.

By way of evidence I will point out that there has never been a combat style which left your off hand empty when you had the option to put something in it. (so rapier duels don’t count, the rules said no other weapon)

Edward

Tai chi is the first style that comes to mind that uses a lot of singular one-handed weapons. A lot of the more pratical self-defense arts (like kali, most phillipino styles) also only work with one weapon if any weapon at all. And no, a second weapon is not always an advantage. Instead of having one shart pointy thing you're trying to stick in them, you now have two, and now you have to keep whichever one you aren't attacking with from cutting you up while you attack with the other one. Please Edward, don't make grand declarations like the one you made, its just stupid. (And frequent on the internet).

When I say that no fighting style advocates an empty off hand I carefully consider what I say.

Not all are an of hand weapon. And not all of hand weapons are used to attack, many are used to defend.

And martial arts focusing on unarmed combat come into the rules section, in competition you’re not allowed weapons and in practical terms you won’t always have one available.

Even with no formal and almost no informal training I found I could better defend myself with 2 short staves than one. Although coordinated attacks did elude me.

I admit I could be wrong and there could be a fighting style that aim’s to be in a position where you have one weapon held in one hand and the other empty but nether I nor any of the people I have talked to can think of it. This includes a long thread on the subject on this very board.

Do you have an example to the contrary? Do your examples include the use of defensive or distracting implements (shields, cloaks, handfuls of sand)in the off hand)

Edward

I did include shields and things of that nature, handfuls of sand aren't exactly special to any one style. Just like a kick to the groin didn't originate from one. Any style (including open hand) could benefit from throwing sand in their face, but how many actually teach its use? Very few, if any.

As seen here under sword, there is only one sword, and its primarily used one-handed. Since you said there has never been any combat style that promotes this, it now refutes your blanket statement.

The question really isn't about armed melee and ambidexterity. It's about unarmed combat and amidexterity.

Now, I don't claim to be very knowledgable about martial arts, but can anybody name a single unarmed combat style where you don't use your off hand at all?

As Doctor Funkenstein mentioned, the rules say you're already using your whole body, therefore ambidexterity has no effect.

So, for a short conclusion, unarmed combat get 2 attacks per round normally ? And if you want to make use of ambidex in unarmed, you can use a house rule like the one M. Funk said.

That's a good final ?

No. Unarmed gets one attack per complex action normally. You can choose to attack multiple people within that round at +2 TN per each person, provided they're all in range.

Unarmed is a very abstract give&take roll. There are feints, blocks, counters etc during the time it takes to do that, whoever wins the check then manages to get a good shot in.

Weapon fighting shows you are using only that sword to attack with.

As a side note to support the unarmed is your whole body, there are rules in M&M for leading with a cyberlimb, (usually because it has increased strength).

What it boils down to is that there is an unfair advantage to armed combat when it comes to ambidexterity in the SR rules. Realistically you should be making more attacks unarmed than armed, but as we've noted before, very few RPG's make many nods towards realism in combat, and SR among the least.

You can use unarmed/martial arts in your off hand too.

Personally, I'd just apply the cyber-implant combat strength bonus to martial arts, it makes more sense to me. I've never seen a martial art that's trained with just one hand, or one foot.. it's always both. You can use them with one, but it's half your skill, not a bonus to your skill for using both..

I would suggest that, just like unarmed combat uses the whole body (both arms, legs, head butts, biting, body checks, etc.), armed combat uses the whole body as well, even though the weapon your holding is more effective than the others. Even in the Tai Ji videos Tarantula posted, the demostrator is using his off hand to strike and block.

If we insisted that Tai Ji guy should get a second attack roll for strikes with his off hand, though, we'd have a whole separate set of numbers to calculate (different reach, etc.) and the target would have to roll a separate body roll against a new damage code. It gets to be too much of a pain to accomplish anything if we insist on too much realism; it's better if they just abstract it to a single role.

Melee Combat is best described as a complex give and take between the combatants taking the majority of the combat phase it initiated in.

Personally I'd view it as during the x period of time the combat is going on the combatants are using whatever they can to attack and defend and that an weapon armed combatant isn't neccesarily making all attacks with that weapon (a successful hit could be with a kick or eye poke with the off hand) but that the presence of the weapon and it's increased damage profile represents the increased likelihood that any given damaging attack during that time period is made with that weapon.

Of course I'd be in favor of having close combat take a whole combat phase and that additional initiative passes that any given combatant should have be used as a modifer to the melee combat test (akin to the reach bonus).

Breaking out of melee would be a combat tactic (similar to full attack etc) that way you don't have incidents of hyperfast melee monsters being able to jump in and out of melee multiple times in a combat round.

Folks learning hand to hand tend to favor one side over others for certain actions. For example, most people can hip throw well on one side but not on the other, or a person has a solid right roundhouse kick but if they switched stances their left is a noodle.
Overcoming this tendancy takes a lot of practice.

Ever heard some martial arts guy say something like "No, try to grab me with your other hand!" That's what I'm talking about.

I'd imagine that an ambidextrous person would have an easier time training to use both sides. It would be somewhat advantageous to have that extra degree of versatility. However, for the sake of game balance, I'd probably ignore it. At best, I'd provide a -1 target number.

But that can already be reflected in higher unarmed and armed combat skills: a guy with less than 3 skill could be relying almost entirely on thier primary hand, as thier skill increases they start using their other limbs more effectively.

IMNHO ambidexterity is a stupid munchkin concept that doesn't belong in shadowruns highly abstract melee system. Reach & damage power bonuses already make armed combat sufficiently superior to unarmed.

If unarmed combat is so puny, then why is it that a Troll physad can deal 10S damage or more in melee combat? With improved reflexes II and a few extra dice in unarmed combat, you're looking at deadly damage against anything not wearing security armor, and counterattacks so absurdly powerful that they make attacking more likely to kill you than your opponent. Although this ability works best with stealth-oriented or silent killers (Delayed damage: Silent + killing hands = the ability to kill someone at the time of your choosing without doing more than tapping them on the shoulder.) Actually, a ninja-style character who can infiltrate enemy complexes and eliminate all the guards without visible injuries. And remember, KH can be treated as stun damage, so it's possible to silence an entire security detail without killing anyone.

i never read that killing hands can be treated as stun

You could just not use Killing Hands and deal Str(M)Stun.