Unarmed Fighting (and thoughts there of)

[Granville]

Right moving this into a separate thread so as not to clog up everything else.
My initial idea was to have unarmed fighting as a fleshed out and viable way to play the game, ideally inspired by real and practical forms of self defense (i'm thinking along the lines of Krav Maga).
Obviously there are a few draw backs to choosing the unarmed path, for one, there is no way to block an attack coming in from the striking part of a real weapon, this would mean that you would either have to dodge out of the way or dart in past the effective part of the weapon (for a sword this would be the blade, for a mace the baubly bit on the end). Both options would require timing and skill on the part of the player, and, inherently, choosing to fight without a weapon would be far more challenging for the player, but i believe it is important for the option to remain viable.

Another problem with using your fists would be punching an opponents armor, a way to get around this and retain realism would be the addition of so called 'unarmed weapons' such as knuckle dusters, spiked gauntlets, and toe knives.

Please let me know your thoughts on the matter.

 

[forest]

I mainly want fun grabby mechanics, so I can smash barstools on people, flip over tables, ram people into walls, with tables, break barstools by smashing people in them, or maybe even smash people with other people if I'm large enough (or if I decide to battle midgets.) And if players want to pursue unarmed combat, it should be a completely insane thing to do, but still possible. Also, a thaumuturgic based character may not have as much a need of weapons, but that is strictly speaking 'unarmed'

 

[Pantheon]

I mainly want fun grabby mechanics, so I can smash barstools on people, flip over tables, ram people into walls, with tables, break barstools by smashing people in them, or maybe even smash people with other people if I'm large enough (or if I decide to battle midgets.)

That's something I'd love to see. I can get behind the idea of "bar room fighting", when it involves grabbing everything around you and smashing it into enemies.

As I've already stated in the other thread I'm not a bigl fan of unarmed combat in this case, because no one in his right mind would try to attack someone who is wielding a weapon with his bare fists. Gauntlets and similiar things would make a bit more sense, but not much as they'd still have inferior power and reach compared to normal weapons.
In many other games unarmed combat is a viable option, because the devs chose to make it one, but I for one don't really want that. I want combat to feel real and beating up people that wield weapons doesn't feel that way.
Obviously no one is forced to use martial arts, if it should be added, but Bare Mettle should focus on the weapon-based fighting they already have, instead of spending development time adding something like unarmed combat.

What should be definitely added is some sort of kick (the ogre or whatever it is already seems to do that). With the physics-based combat a kick is a great way to make your opponent stumble, shove him back or kicking him down somewhere 300-style

 

[Rob]

As I've already stated in the other thread I'm not a bigl fan of unarmed combat in this case, because no one in his right mind would try to attack someone who is wielding a weapon with his bare fists. Gauntlets and similiar things would make a bit more sense, but not much as they'd still have inferior power and reach compared to normal weapons.
In many other games unarmed combat is a viable option, because the devs chose to make it one, but I for one don't really want that. I want combat to feel real and beating up people that wield weapons doesn't feel that way.

Just to add to that... my main issue with adding unarmed combat is the potential amount of time it would take to get it right... and it wouldn't be good if it wasn't implemented well.

Furthermore, as has already been said, unarmed combat shouldn't be a viable alternative to using weapons. Rather, they can co-exist in the same world for different purposes.

For example, suppose you've got two people fighting with swords, and one of them becomes disarmed. What's he going to do? Run away? (Possibly.) But what if he's backed into a corner? Then he's not just going to stand there and take it, is he? (Possibly.) Rather, he's going to try to get past the opponent's sword, in close quarters with the opponent, making the sword unwieldable thus irrelevant, and proceed to use unarmed combat techniques (or "martial arts"). Or alternatively try to disarm him and take the sword for himself. Risky maneuver, but it's a last attempt to save his life.

In summary... unarmed combat techniques should be a defensive last resort. Not an equal-matched alternative to weapons. But it would probably be hard to implement and get right.

The exception would be a stealthy person trying to slip through a castle, taking people out on the way but not killing them (like in The Witcher 2)...

 

[Granville]

I dunno, I'd love to see it as a viable, if infinitely more challenging alternative to traditional weapons. When done right unarmed fighting is just more fun.

 

[Pantheon]

In summary... unarmed combat techniques should be a defensive last resort. Not an equal-matched alternative to weapons. But it would probably be hard to implement and get right.

That would certainly make sense then.

 

[Psychomorph]

There must be at least fist fighting at the local tavern when a dispute comes up. Also drunk fist fighting, of course.

Speaking of which, there must be a drunk version of everything in this game.

 

[Rob]

Reminds of The Witcher again!!!

 

[forest]

There must be at least fist fighting at the local tavern when a dispute comes up. Also drunk fist fighting, of course.

Speaking of which, there must be a drunk version of everything in this game.

Beating around some drunkards in the local tavern would be marvelous. I feel like the main reason to not use a weapon is that weapon violence would be a high crime that could get you exiled from a town or put on death row, but getting into fist fights and no one really cares that much.

 

[The Hedge Knight]

Fists should never be the alternative, players should be punished if they run around punching heavily armored brutes; not rewarded.

 

[Luckeux]

In summary... unarmed combat techniques should be a defensive last resort. Not an equal-matched alternative to weapons. But it would probably be hard to implement and get right.

The exception would be a stealthy person trying to slip through a castle, taking people out on the way but not killing them (like in The Witcher 2)...

As it was mentioned before, grappling could work. Except I don't see it as fancy as they did... a simple tackling action (american football style though) when unarmed would do the job and would probably work rather well with how the game is so much physic based as well... The effectiveness of the tackle could be influenced by the strength/momentum of your character via the weight/size of the enemy. And since it's in a straight line it's risky enough to put off most people from doing it, and truly impossible to use as a tactic against an enemy who's fast. Could see different outcomes out of it as well:

Fails:
1. Get hit by weapon before reaching the opponent. *get killed*
2. Opponent is to heavy/big. *Tackle does nothing, get slapped for foolishness, get killed*
3. Try tackle from too close. *Does not have enough momentum to tackle opponent, get killed*
4. Have enough momentum and strength. *Topple him over, stay to long, opponent push him aside, get killed*
5. Have enough momentum and strength. *Topple him over, get massacred by surrounding opponent's pals*

Success:
1. Have enough momentum but not enough strength. *Push him aside, run away.*
2. Have enough momentum and strength.

• 2.A) *Topple him over, get back up, run away.*
• 2.B) *Topple him over, punch him in the face, steal his weapon/run away while he is stunned*
• 2.C) *Topple him over, punch him in the face, strong enough to make damage? GROUND POUNDING!*

3. Have more then enough momentum and strength. Opponent is really light. *Ram him into a wall if nearby. Run away*

I have no clue how the control work, but I'd see it this way:
-Main attack is replaced by tackling action (when unarmed)
-When successfully tackling an opponent, keeping the main attack button held down would resullt in player keeping his tackled position until said button is released.
-Secondary attack button would be used to hit the opponent when tackled.

Hopefully it make sense...

Bringing back dead thread from the grave FTW!

 

[Bibidibop]

European Medieval combat training wasn't exclusive to swords, no more than Asian martial arts. You could expect to learn swords, poll arms, daggers, shields, and son on, as well as punching, kicking, and wrestling; those last three were part of sword combat... sometimes they're just the right move regardless of what is in hand.

I believe combat skill should be pretty simple, with an over all melee skill which works into all melee combat. Realistically there would be some specialization from using a particular weapon type more than others, but I believe the skill crossover in real life is pretty strong, and would make for a better game than loads of specialties. The only place I think there should be a split is in ranged weapons.

Bows, crossbows, gonnes (if they get in the game), javelins, darts, throwing knives, etc should have their own ranged accuracy skill. It could be made more complicated, by having thrown weapons either working off melee or have a third skill, but I think that's redundant.

In regards to unarmed combat being viable, it really isn't, especially against more than one armed enemy. With full armor, and gauntlets your punches can land like hammers against someone unarmored, but without a mace or war hammer those blows aren't going to do anything against someone who is armored. With wrestling, you can incapacitate exactly one opponent, but leave yourself extremely vulnerable. Anyone with the right anti-armor weapon is going to out range your by several feet, and have a better chance of knocking you around. To really make unarmed combat viable, it would need a disarming system, where you can immediately take an enemy's weapon, and equip it for use in one seamless move.

Being able to disarm opponents, to take their weapons for your own, and just to disarm them to make them easier, could be an amazingly useful and fun mechanic.

 

[Mello]

I believe combat skill should be pretty simple, with an over all melee skill which works into all melee combat. Realistically there would be some specialization from using a particular weapon type more than others, but I believe the skill crossover in real life is pretty strong, and would make for a better game than loads of specialties. The only place I think there should be a split is in ranged weapons.

This really isn't true. Different types of weapons handle incredibly differently. Someone incredibly skilled with piercing swords would be useless with a longsword, and they're both swords.

This has a lot of good information in it http://www.thearma.org/essays/nobest.htm

 

[Bibidibop]

This really isn't true. Different types of weapons handle incredibly differently. Someone incredibly skilled with piercing swords would be useless with a longsword, and they're both swords.

This has a lot of good information in it http://www.thearma.org/essays/nobest.htm

That has more to do with ignorance of what the weapons are for, and assumption that one style works for everything without variation. Someone properly trained would recognize differences and where skill does and does not cross over, as well as better handle novel weapons.

 

[Rob]

Someone properly trained would recognize differences and where skill does and does not cross over, as well as better handle novel weapons.

Stepping sideways, this reminds me very much of an idea that was discussed in November, regarding how such mechanics could be implemented in Sui Generis in a sensible way. Rather than re-writing, here's a link:
http://www.baremettle.com/sg/forums/index.php?threads/unnecessary-mechanics-youd-like-to-see.66/#post-803

 

[Luckeux]

In regards to unarmed combat being viable, it really isn't, especially against more than one armed enemy. With full armor, and gauntlets your punches can land like hammers against someone unarmored, but without a mace or war hammer those blows aren't going to do anything against someone who is armored. With wrestling, you can incapacitate exactly one opponent, but leave yourself extremely vulnerable. Anyone with the right anti-armor weapon is going to out range your by several feet, and have a better chance of knocking you around. To really make unarmed combat viable, it would need a disarming system, where you can immediately take an enemy's weapon, and equip it for use in one seamless move.

Well that's exactly the idea! I wasn't suggesting an actual unarmed style but a way of trying to survive in case you lose your weapon. My suggestion wasn't supposed to be viable, it's meant to be risky. I wouldn't recommend anyone to use it as an actual fighting style. That's why there's more way to fail it in my explanation then there is of success. It's a last resort kinda thing, but I'd still enjoy getting the chance of doing a ground pound though... hehehehehe

 

[Mello]

That has more to do with ignorance of what the weapons are for, and assumption that one style works for everything without variation. Someone properly trained would recognize differences and where skill does and does not cross over, as well as better handle novel weapons.

"Someone properly trained" would mean they'd have to have training specifically in the kind kind of weapon they are wielding, even if that training was only basic, which was kind of my point. You can't be properly trained just by understanding what a weapon is for. Bar basic attributes (body shape/size, fitness, cognitive ability etc.) the skills are not transferrable from one weapon to another, or indeed from armed to unarmed combat.

 

[the0thMonkey]

If every weapon skill was represented separately (blunt, long blade, short blade, etc.), a similarity attribute could be introduced linking the skills together. For instance, mace handling is 60% similar to short sword. This would prevent the problem Rob described where a master of swords is terrible with a mace. This would only be necessary and possible if weapon skills were represented individually though.

An alternative is to make the skill attributes more general to start with. So instead of skills for mace and short sword, there would be general attributes that could be applied to achieve the same effect. For instance, high strength would add to mace wielding ability. This system, if done right, would also avoid some of the problems the other system would have when dealing with improvised weapons and/or customized weapons that might not fit into a predefined weapon category so neatly.

On a slightly different note, other factors such as modding could be accounted for. Did you ever use a modded weapon in Skyrim and you were surprised when it fell into a category that you think it didn't fit in to? Like a spear that is actually based on longsword mechanics. It was really awkward, unrealistic, and immersion breaking. I think the second system would handle this scenario better unless the first one allowed for custom weapon classes or another workaround.

 

[SergeDavid]

I for one and completely for unarmed combat, mostly in a domestic setting in cases of...

• Brawl - Most notable case being in a tavern before people start pulling out knives.
• Arena - Such as a one on one duel with a ring of people around you with the goal of hurting instead of killing
• Flipping a table - Such as when you lose a game of cards or whatever they play followed by a brawl

Picture if you will a foggy night, everyone in town is hanging around the Drunken Mage Inn for the free fire and a nice stout. The front door swings open as a shadowy figure strolls in with the mist curling around his ankles as it seeps into the room giving the stranger a sense of mystery and menace. His steady pace takes him to the bar as the patrons fall silent in their cautious gaze as they take in the details of the intruder. The man orders a milk straight from the cow and sits down, one of the more inebriated patrons with a scar upon his face walks up to the man and tells him "My friend doesn't like you, and I don't like you either." As the strong smell of his inebriation flows towards the stranger. The stranger answers back that he doesn't want any trouble, yet the scarred faced man continues his assault by launching an ill placed swing at the man.

Like a panther the half full glass the scarred face man was drinking collides with the side of his face followed by a punch to the spleen by the stranger as he stands upon the bar stool ready to launch another attack in all his midget glory. Dazed the scarred face man backs off as his friends come to assist him against the short stranger who fights valiantly against the greater opponents using strength uncommon for one his size to launch objects at the assaulting drunks. Finally they close in and fists start flying as the midget backs off. Just before our hero is overwhelmed the imperial guards who patrol the town show up to make a quick end of the brawl with their own brand of justice. The next morning the brawlers find themselves in the stockades as their punishment of being humiliated in the wrenched things and the bruises from the night before serve their purpose to dissuade them from repeating the performance.

 

[Marc]

I like the idea of unarmed combat being more of a last resort thing as well, except for the instances when you might not want to use lethal force, i.e. brawls, fist fighting tournaments or to possibly intimidate/harass people into compliance (not that I condone bullying hapless peasants mind you). I imagine you're quite likely to be killed by an armed opponent if you've lost your weapon so maybe your first priority if you choose to continue the fight would be to disarm the opponent and either take his weapon or turn it into a fist fight. This would probably be asking for a lot since a whole hand-to-hand combat system would need to be developed, so maybe itd be best to have just one or two simple punches and kicks that are applicable when the combatants are standing or when theyre tussling on the ground. Plus a chocking move for those who want to play with some stealth Maybe some ideas for the combat can be taken from Overgrowth. If a very basic unarmed combat model is present in the game at launch then maybe we could see a full implementation of it as time goes on since the devs will continue adding to the game, if they choose to include it? just a thought.