Fist weapons

Vhaeyne wrote: »

@Noaani

Since it's fun to explore, I will keep going.

I still feel like you are still sacrificing range. Wolverine has to get in real close to fight. Which works well in a universe where most of the characters don't use weapons because it would make comics and movies much more violent.

Spider-Man is like "max dexterity". He would be much more powerful if he used a rapier to give him more range. I think because of the comic code of authority and the general idea that superheros only knock out the bad guys (with few exceptions like the punisher) superheros tend to use hand-to-hand for knockouts. The sacrifice in range is less of a big deal when almost everyone is hand-to-hand. Superheros should be using clubs or nightsticks to sap bag guys, IMO. I think people would be mad if every superhero was beating people over the head with clubs, but I think nearly any blunt interment is better than weapons. It seems like "the rule of cool" in full force for most comics.

In fantasy, most characters carry some form of melee weapon. Even the giga-chad archer Legolas carries a sword for melee combat. Things like wolverines claws and the katar or claws from Diablo 2 add some range, but I still don't think its super practical. It's like having a dagger that is locked into place. I also don't think daggers are super practical.

Like, most of these fist weapons offer no range. No extended leverage. Some of them may make your arm longer, but you lose the versatility of angles you can attack from with a held weapon. You lose the potential to amplify your strength with leverage as well. It just seems like a disadvantage at ever turn to me.

Given the choice, I would always choose what is the fastest and gives the most range in a real fight. Gun>Spear>Rapier>Long Sword>Dagger>Fist. This is just how I feel, though.

Where fist weapons make sense in a fantasy setting is in dexterity based tanks - or dexterity fighters in general.

Sure, you lose some range, but you also don't have a big thing you need to maintain control of that can become a point of weakness. With a sword, every time you swing, you are exposing yourself if you miss. This is something fist weapons don't really have.

Additionally, with a sword or shield, an experienced opponent can use the bulk you are attempting to control in order to throw you off balance.

There absolutely are times that fist weapons would be a disadvantage, but there is no single weapon (real or fantasy) that doesn't have disadvantages..

Noaani wrote: »

Where fist weapons make sense in a fantasy setting is in dexterity based tanks - or dexterity fighters in general.

Sure, you lose some range, but you also don't have a big thing you need to maintain control of that can become a point of weakness. With a sword, every time you swing, you are exposing yourself if you miss. This is something fist weapons don't really have.

Additionally, with a sword or shield, an experienced opponent can use the bulk you are attempting to control in order to throw you off balance.

There absolutely are times that fist weapons would be a disadvantage, but there is no single weapon (real or fantasy) that doesn't have disadvantages..

You do expose yourself when you go in with a fist weapon. I would argue its worst because you have to get closer to your opponent to attack. You spend more time in striking distance, going in for an attack. Ever millisecond you spend in striking distance of your opponent can be fatal. The more time spent in striking range, the more likely you are to get stuck.

The only advantage I could see with fist weapons is "if" you still have the use of your hands, you could possibly grab your opponent's weapon and negate some or all of their offensive capability. I would see this as extremely risky, but possible.

I would use like a spiked or bladed metal gauntlet of some kind if I had to go with a fist weapon. Most of the first weapons I see online are held, which takes away the versatility of grabbing a weapon or grappling. I mean, wolverine is particularly OP here because he can retract his claws at will, heal, and his bones can't really be broken. Unless he is fighting someone in melee with a lightsaber, he just don't care. Most melee guys go down when they start to bleed, and getting in close is a good way to get bled.

If I was going to do all that, though, I think I would still carry any other weapon and have the spiked gauntlet as a backup.

Vhaeyne wrote: »

Noaani wrote: »

Where fist weapons make sense in a fantasy setting is in dexterity based tanks - or dexterity fighters in general.

Sure, you lose some range, but you also don't have a big thing you need to maintain control of that can become a point of weakness. With a sword, every time you swing, you are exposing yourself if you miss. This is something fist weapons don't really have.

Additionally, with a sword or shield, an experienced opponent can use the bulk you are attempting to control in order to throw you off balance.

There absolutely are times that fist weapons would be a disadvantage, but there is no single weapon (real or fantasy) that doesn't have disadvantages..

You do expose yourself when you go in with a fist weapon. I would argue its worst because you have to get closer to your opponent to attack. You spend more time in striking distance, going in for an attack. Ever millisecond you spend in striking distance of your opponent can be fatal. The more time spent in striking range, the more likely you are to get stuck.

The only advantage I could see with fist weapons is "if" you still have the use of your hands, you could possibly grab your opponent's weapon and negate some or all of their offensive capability. I would see this as extremely risky, but possible.

I would use like a spiked or bladed metal gauntlet of some kind if I had to go with a fist weapon. Most of the first weapons I see online are held, which takes away the versatility of grabbing a weapon or grappling. I mean, wolverine is particularly OP here because he can retract his claws at will, heal, and his bones can't really be broken. Unless he is fighting someone in melee with a lightsaber, he just don't care. Most melee guys go down when they start to bleed, and getting in close is a good way to get bled.

If I was going to do all that, though, I think I would still carry any other weapon and have the spiked gauntlet as a backup.

If you are in range of your opponent, and they have a sword (or similar sized weapon), you are too close to them for them to be able to do anything to you. This is a similar issue that polearms of all types have. As soon as your opponent closes in past the end of your weapon, you can't use it any more - one of the key fundamentals of polearm combat is keeping your opponent at just the right distance.

To me, this is the exact type of matchup that fist weapons would excel at. You have a polearm and so want to keep me at range, I have fist weapons and training on how to get past your polearm. As soon as I manage that, you are unable to either attack or defend.

While this does indeed require getting in to that close range, that is why these weapons are not for the inexperienced.

@Noaani

"keeping at the right distance" that is the key. I feel like it's much easier for a polearm user to maintain range than a fist weapon user to even get into range.

The fight with Oberyn vs The Mountain from GOT comes to mind. Even though The Mountain used a sword in that fight, he still had trouble even getting into range well. Oberyn would have killed him if he did not get into close range to gloat.

I just don't see it being easy to get that close without getting tore up. Unless you have an insane speed advantage and could move circles around your opponent.

Vhaeyne wrote: »

@Noaani

The real world "meta" has almost always been about who could "open" their opponent the most and the fastest.

Bludgeoning damage is no joke, but it's way more survivable than a cut or stab.

I would also take a hammer or mace over a fist. A hammer and mace allow for more range than a fist. Fists also wear out faster.

I have never really thought of the fireballs damage being from explosions. It has always been from just the fire in my mind. If getting hit by a fireball is like getting hit by a grenade the way you explain it, then nothing will help you. Not even full plate. In this case, the blunt force would be devastating.

I still think nearly any weapon is and advantage over hand to hand.

ok so to preface i havent read past this comment because i came back to this thread after literally like a day and theres fuckin 12 NEW COMMENTS and they are all moderatly long so forgive me if what i say has been adressed but im not saying add the ability to fight BAREHANDED, im saying add a fist type weapon like for example the fist weapons that vander used in the netflix show arcane or perhaps with the more world of warcraft style weapons that Vi used in the same show. im thinking like big hunks of metal that would be used in a brawler style and their massive size and being constructed of metal allowing for deflects of blades as well as with Vi's fist weapons, the atlas gauntlets that she gets later in the show you could even feesably grab and break your opponents blade. thats what i was suggesting and on the front of "why would anyone ever use these?" its a matter of in our world with our limited stength and capability i would agree that at best weapons like vanders gauntlets would probably result in you getting yourself killed especially against a faster smaller weapon like a dagger or knife that can get around your slow moving gauntlets but in a world where as i mentioned, a fuckin 6 ft dude with a fucking basic mace can hit a 100 ft dragon so fuckin hard that it actually deals mesurable damage and feesabley could kill it that way so in a world like that gauntlets like this would be hard to disarm and not too over encumbering especially when you also have metal apparently strong enough to take a slash from the same 100 ft dragon and come out with only scrapes so stop with this "ReAlY!? A gUy FiGhTiNg A gUy ShOoTiNg FiReBaLlS wItH hIs FiStS!?!?!?!"

Indeed it is easier. That is why training is required.

The problem with the fight you are referencing here is that The Mountain isn't exactly fast. Strong, but slow.

Another fight in GoT that doesn't use fist weapons yet shows the usefulness of them would be Arya sparring with Brianne. Arya was able to hold her own because she was more mobile. She had smaller weapons with shorter range, but could move more freely.

Fist weapons are just a more extreme version of that.

Vvess wrote: »

i came back to this thread after literally like a day and theres fuckin 12 NEW COMMENTS and they are all moderatly long so forgive me if what i say has been adressed

They aren't that long, and due to using proper paragraph and sentence structure, they are all easier to read than your posts.

And yes, I did go over the difference between fist weapons and unarmed fighting.

Incidentally, the post where I went over the difference; 146 words, 763 characters.

The post where you did; 313 words, 1,681 characters.

It seems odd to complain about the length of posts in a post that is more than twice as long - don't you agree?

Noaani wrote: »

Indeed it is easier. That is why training is required.

The problem with the fight you are referencing here is that The Mountain isn't exactly fast. Strong, but slow.

Another fight in GoT that doesn't use fist weapons yet shows the usefulness of them would be Arya sparring with Brianne. Arya was able to hold her own because she was more mobile. She had smaller weapons with shorter range, but could move more freely.

Fist weapons are just a more extreme version of that.

EXACTLY! and dont forgot most fistweapons are designed in such a way that they are hard to disarm someone of

Noaani wrote: »

Vvess wrote: »

i came back to this thread after literally like a day and theres fuckin 12 NEW COMMENTS and they are all moderatly long so forgive me if what i say has been adressed

They aren't that long, and due to using proper paragraph and sentence structure, they are all easier to read than your posts.

And yes, I did go over the difference between fist weapons and unarmed fighting.

Incidentally, the post where I went over the difference; 146 words, 763 characters.

The post where you did; 313 words, 1,681 characters.

It seems odd to complain about the length of posts in a post that is more than twice as long - don't you agree?

well im very lazy and honestly at this point im convinced that everyone saying no to fist weapons in this thread is just fucking saying it both because they misunderstand my points and i honestly dont feel bad in assuming anymore that they dont want to understand my points and are set in their own opinion the same way a fundamentalist preacher aint ever gonna listen to an atheist pointing out the flaws in their arguments. when thats the case and i suck at reading and writing big time cause i have adhd and cant still still unless im super focus'd im kinda basically done here now that i feel i at least got my point across

Vvess wrote: »

cause i have adhd

So do I.
It's not an excuse - for anything, ever.
You are stuck with it for life.
Figure out how to get things done regardless.

Noaani wrote: »

Vvess wrote: »

cause i have adhd

So do I.
It's not an excuse - for anything, ever.
You are stuck with it for life.
Figure out how to get things done regardless.

and i tried to make things easier to read and im not using it as a excuse. that implies i feel im in the wrong and want to try to get out of punishment for it. no im simply giving you an explaination as to why my posts on this specific thread deteriorated and why im done with this post. thats it. think of me what you will but i will leave it here unless a member of staff makes a comment i am intrested in and feel i have something to either add to or discus about with them since i do know the defenition of insanity that albert einstien put forth and tend to agree with that defenition.

Vvess wrote: »

and i tried to make things easier to read and im not using it as a excuse. that implies i feel im in the wrong and want to try to get out of punishment for it. no im simply giving you an explaination

If you are giving ADHD as an explination, you are using it as an excuse.

@Vvess @Noaani

I go away to run a few dungeons and come back to this?

The thread has been derailed!

Congratulations, we all have ADHD. I am pretty sure anyone who wants that diagnosis or has been under the age of fifteen and male can get it at some point in their life.
That aside.

@Vvess

The reason why people are so wordy on here is that it takes time and effort to distill an argument down to the fundamental points and maintain precision. It is easier to just be lengthy. That means anyone who wants to participate has to read a little more. You have been starting a lot of threads, which must mean you want to hear other people's opinions. I don't dare think you started conversations on the internet expecting everyone to just agree with you?

When it comes to your points about fist weapons being big hunks of metal like in warcraft. I am not a fan. As someone who has player a lot of Demon Hunter I always thought their default fist weapon "the war glaive" was stupid. I always transmog swords over it because it looks better and makes some sort of sense. The other fist weapons in wow mostly look just about as stupid to me. This is all just my opinion, though. I am not preaching it at you. I am just stating a preference to not have stuff like that in Ashes because I think it's stupid.

I am still going to play FFXIV and WOW(maybe if it gets good again) even though both games have monk and I think the fighting style and aesthetic is stupid.

@Noaani

If Arya was using a fist weapon against Brianne I think she would have gone down way faster. Disregarding the fact that Arya has extremely low Strength compared to Brianne. Brianne moves her sword fast enough to be able to hit Arya so long as Arya does not parry with her sword. Brianne also can just kick Arya across the floor as she does. I think the only reason Arya can get anywhere with Brianna is the distance advantage she gets from her rapier. I mean, the rapier was a game-changing weapon that made heavy armor and swords less popular.

I try to visualize what it would be like to fight anything with those sorts of fist weapons, and keep coming back to the idea that it's way less risky just use nearly any other weapon type. The reward for using such risky fist weapons is that they are less effective.

I don't think there is any balance to weapons IRL. To the point that we constantly have to keep making rules for things not to use in wars. I am pretty sure sending robot dogs with turrets on them is next on the list of things nations agree not to use.

In MMOs we come up with reasons for each weapon to be "fair" because we want the game to be "fair". I just think some things are too stupid to even try. I mean, this used to be a fantasy MMORPG that was somewhat respected in its day:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HoUMsVtIPNg

Fist weapons are not this bad, but they are a step in that direction for me.

Noaani wrote: »

Vvess wrote: »

and i tried to make things easier to read and im not using it as a excuse. that implies i feel im in the wrong and want to try to get out of punishment for it. no im simply giving you an explaination

If you are giving ADHD as an explination, you are using it as an excuse.

no... flat out i was explaining why i was done with this thread of im bad at not just writing things especially in a cohesive and understandable manner but that i suck at reading things to where for me the words literally blur to-fuckin-gether if im not intently very focus'd on em and so i was simply saying because of that im done. explainations and excuses are used for different reasons like i said with an excuse is used to try to pardon yourself and say why its not your fault where as a explaination is used to well, EXPLAIN why you either did something or are going to do something. as such i put forward again that im done reading this unless someone piqs my intrest with a new point against my initial point because i feel like i have now made my opinion clear and as it stands i still see no reason why anything i said should be considered invalid and nor have i seen any good reason to convince me that fist weapons are a bad idea.

McMackMuck

I think we have to suspend realism when dealing with fantasy environments, otherwise several Archetypes aren't viable. However, Ashes weapons are well defined. Scope creep delays release. No thank you.
https://ashesofcreation.wiki/Weapons

McMackMuck wrote: »

I think we have to suspend realism when dealing with fantasy environments, otherwise several Archetypes aren't viable. Ashes weapons are well defined. Scope creep delays release. No thank you.
https://ashesofcreation.wiki/Weapons

I see suspending realism as something on a spectrum. Ranging from real-life to beyond wacky like that painter class video I linked. Aion lost me long before adding that class to it, but something like that class makes me want to take the game less seriously than I already do.

You are right, though. Scope creep is not a point I was not thinking about with this issue, and I think it's actually a bigger deal than my personal distaste for fist weapons.

They can always add it in later to piss me off. I put up with a lot of stupid crap in FFXIV, and it never stopped me from playing.

McMackMuck

The additional animation requirement delays kills it for me long before I even think about where Streetfighter "hadōken" fits on my sliding scale of gritty medieval realism to neon butterfly wings with roblox accessories.

McMackMuck

@Vvess I have politely disagreed with you. I don't "hate your shit" as that would take more emotional investment than I'd advise giving any internet forum of random people. I'm glad you have acknowledged that the extra time required for a new set of animations is an adequate reason for the devs not to consider your idea. At no point did I say that your idea was bad, I said that I hadn't considered it because of the associated development delays. If you gem up on all of the wiki, ashes101 and asheshq content you will quickly realize that the game has a huge number of interrelated systems to design. I believe most of the community thinks that scope creep is something that can be considered after the game releases, which is still years away.

Vhaeyne wrote: »

I don't think there is any balance to weapons IRL. To the point that we constantly have to keep making rules for things not to use in wars. I am pretty sure sending robot dogs with turrets on them is next on the list of things nations agree not to use.

In MMOs we come up with reasons for each weapon to be "fair" because we want the game to be "fair".

If we were to balance things in game based purely on how they work irl, then the game would have very few weapons. Completely agree there.

The reason we can happily have many weapons in an MMO is because we all accept that they can be in the game in a manner that isn't a direct translation of how they would be used irl.

In terms of how we could look at fist weapons in an MMO, this is simple. They allow you to deal slashing, piercing or bludgeoning damage based on the specific item you are using (and perhaps even different damage on each hand), they have the shortest range of any weapon in the game, they deal only moderate damage, but they are the fastest weapon in the game.

As to the video you posted, all I can say is "wtf is that?".

At least with fist weapons, there are actual real world examples of these, examples that are actually used in fights (brawls more than anything - as one of the other advantages of fist weapons such as brass knuckles is that they are easy to sneak in somewhere you shouldn't have weapons). So, regardless of your distaste about them, there is an actual real world analogy for them - as opposed to pulling some random object and deciding to turn it in to a weapon.