Just an FYI, no you can't use two fists and call "2" via Grenadier. You would be using Ambdexterity for the two fists, which prevents you from using Wield Fist.
Edit: Eric is a dumbass
Fist Phys-Reps
Moderator: Admin
Last edited by dier_cire on Mon Mar 31, 2008 3:29 pm, edited 1 time in total.
My posts in no way reflect that of anyone else nor are they in any way official.
I just realized what it is (should look things up before i post). I really would like to know the reasons behind taking fists and limiting their use? No shield?
Newbie charater A advances on 100 level warrior B. A has only a long sword, B is using all his warrior skills, and a shield... and a fist (no Brawler or Monk skills). Instant VORPAL on A's attacks to the fist phys rep, right? B can't make any attacks with out opening himself up to life point damage. Where is their any advantage for B?
Newbie charater A advances on 100 level warrior B. A has only a long sword, B is using all his warrior skills, and a shield... and a fist (no Brawler or Monk skills). Instant VORPAL on A's attacks to the fist phys rep, right? B can't make any attacks with out opening himself up to life point damage. Where is their any advantage for B?
Maybe it should be the other way around. A fist cannot deliver a packet driven skill unless it says other wise. I personsally think that would easier. Or maybe under the grenadier discipline heading it should state that these skill cannot be delivered through a fist as it does not keep with the "spirit" of the discipline (thrown objects).
For that matter, you only need 1st level grenadier to do one damage with a fist, which probably shouldn't be that case.
But it skill does not address the question of blocking with a fist. ANY time B attacks, no matter for how much, 9 critical from Rogue, 30 from an Empath, without 2nd level Brawler/Monk, he opens himself up to vorpal damage and in the latter cases, disruption of the charged skills.
For that matter, you only need 1st level grenadier to do one damage with a fist, which probably shouldn't be that case.
But it skill does not address the question of blocking with a fist. ANY time B attacks, no matter for how much, 9 critical from Rogue, 30 from an Empath, without 2nd level Brawler/Monk, he opens himself up to vorpal damage and in the latter cases, disruption of the charged skills.
Yeah, packet means packet, even if you hold that packet in a hand, it's till not a fist and you can't have a fist and a packet in the same hand and use both. Why would you be able to deliver a packet driven skill with a fist? I would think that if you tried to say do a channel with a fist you should take the damage too, unless you had a way to resist it and chose to use that resist. Either way, you shouldn't be able to deliver packet things with a fist, that's rather silly to me. otherwise youcould do archer stuff with a fist, that's just stupid.
I also don't see the reason not to be able to use a fist and a shield. Unless you have the skills to block with a fist you can't and you can't do any damage with it, you could however deal ko blows, if you can get them off without getting disrupted.
A fist should work like every other weapon except that you can't do damage(or block) with it without a skill. And personally I don't like that part but the GM's think it's neccesary. The only difference there should be in a fist to me is that you can't BLOCK without a skill. If you have ambidexterity and want to wield 2 fists you can't block with more power to you.
I also don't see the reason not to be able to use a fist and a shield. Unless you have the skills to block with a fist you can't and you can't do any damage with it, you could however deal ko blows, if you can get them off without getting disrupted.
A fist should work like every other weapon except that you can't do damage(or block) with it without a skill. And personally I don't like that part but the GM's think it's neccesary. The only difference there should be in a fist to me is that you can't BLOCK without a skill. If you have ambidexterity and want to wield 2 fists you can't block with more power to you.
Death=Adder
One of these days...I'm going to cut you into little pieces...
~Pink Floyd~
One of these days...I'm going to cut you into little pieces...
~Pink Floyd~
If you can't use a packet driven skill with a fist, then only sages, rogues and warriors can deal damage without a weapon. Take away an empath's packets and they can't deal any damage. This allows them to do something. Plus, being at that range and getting a single charge off with no way to block damage matters little in the long run.
As for using a fist with a shield, using a fist should never be a good idea. It's a last resort. Allowing shields and such make it a marginal use based upon your attack strategy.
And no an Archer can't use a fist since the Archer must hold the bow which violates the Wield Fist rule.
Grenadier dealing 1 damage with a single fist is the same cost as ambidexterity but you only get one fist and cant block for a few more points. It's not a very good option. As for making sense, they are basically hitting you in the face with the rock while holding it. Consider them early brass knuckles.
As for using a fist with a shield, using a fist should never be a good idea. It's a last resort. Allowing shields and such make it a marginal use based upon your attack strategy.
And no an Archer can't use a fist since the Archer must hold the bow which violates the Wield Fist rule.
Grenadier dealing 1 damage with a single fist is the same cost as ambidexterity but you only get one fist and cant block for a few more points. It's not a very good option. As for making sense, they are basically hitting you in the face with the rock while holding it. Consider them early brass knuckles.
My posts in no way reflect that of anyone else nor are they in any way official.
First, I want to say, I'm (personally) not argueing against the "packet -driven-skill-through-a-fist". I like the idea on a limited basis. If archers, both by the rules and concept, cannot use a fist pysrep to deliver damage, I don't think grenadiers should be able to either. That was one of my main points. An empath delivering a channel through a fist phyrep needs to hold the physrep up, like they would a packet to represent the channel being charged. That's great with me.
You still haven't convinced me about the fist/shield thing. You wield a shield and no weapon. You just block with the shield. Trying to then attack without the skill to do so (for 0 damage) opens you up to attack and damage by anyone against said fist. I would do that if I thought I could disrupt a charged skill or spell, but it really gives you no benefit. If anything it negates the benefit of the shield.
You still haven't convinced me about the fist/shield thing. You wield a shield and no weapon. You just block with the shield. Trying to then attack without the skill to do so (for 0 damage) opens you up to attack and damage by anyone against said fist. I would do that if I thought I could disrupt a charged skill or spell, but it really gives you no benefit. If anything it negates the benefit of the shield.
It's only a non issue when dealing 0 damage. This isn't what will happen. You'd either rage, use a hero point, some special item/skill, or some combination of those. If you want to use a shield, take Ambidexterity.
And I never said Grendiers should be able to. It honestly was an oversight that will get fixed next year (at least for the 2 damage skill, the first level, I really don't see as that big of a deal since Ambidexterity is better and the same level). I'm just saying you can.
Wield Fist is not suposed to be a useful skill, ever. It's there so people when ask if they can do anything when completely disarmed there is an answer.
And I never said Grendiers should be able to. It honestly was an oversight that will get fixed next year (at least for the 2 damage skill, the first level, I really don't see as that big of a deal since Ambidexterity is better and the same level). I'm just saying you can.
Wield Fist is not suposed to be a useful skill, ever. It's there so people when ask if they can do anything when completely disarmed there is an answer.
My posts in no way reflect that of anyone else nor are they in any way official.
(as Adam beats a dead horse...)
I'm not talking about doing more damage with the fist. There are ways to do that. But all you have to do with my above example (A=newbie warrior with long sword, B=multilevel warror, with shield and fist, no Ambedexterity) is attack the fist. Even with Ambedexterity , no Iron Fists means B can't block with the fist and you take damage if it gets hit. So basicly, you're back to being better off to just use the shield and not open yourself up to counter attack from A, unless you are trying to disrupt something. I still see no benefit.
I'm not talking about doing more damage with the fist. There are ways to do that. But all you have to do with my above example (A=newbie warrior with long sword, B=multilevel warror, with shield and fist, no Ambedexterity) is attack the fist. Even with Ambedexterity , no Iron Fists means B can't block with the fist and you take damage if it gets hit. So basicly, you're back to being better off to just use the shield and not open yourself up to counter attack from A, unless you are trying to disrupt something. I still see no benefit.
-
General Maximus
- Town Member
- Posts: 1004
- Joined: Thu May 04, 2006 6:25 am
being able to use a fist and shield grants a person to have a disarm proof dagger sized weapon that can be machine gunned. With a shield, you would never use the fist to block incoming attacks, just the shield. By allowing you to use a shield and a fist, you get a weapon that is disarm proof. Thats all.
We've already gone over the uber cheese of attacking a weapon phys-rep to deal damage in previous topics.
And if you aren't using the fist to deal damage in some form then why bother using Wield Fist? Just use the shield. Btw, you do not need to call any damage at all to disrupt a charged skill (ie ckeck the charged skill section to see). It's covered under intentional prodding.
And if you aren't using the fist to deal damage in some form then why bother using Wield Fist? Just use the shield. Btw, you do not need to call any damage at all to disrupt a charged skill (ie ckeck the charged skill section to see). It's covered under intentional prodding.
My posts in no way reflect that of anyone else nor are they in any way official.
Attacking a manufactured weapon to deal a surging attack (i.e. crush) is cheese and I wouldn't condone nor do it myself. But you are using a fist... part of your body. IMO, I think it's different. There's a reason why there are different colored tape for different types of weapons. I see a red/white physrep comming towards me, I know it can't be disarmed. If you (the character) are throwing your fists around without trainning, I'm going to hack them off, with or without a shield.
PS (I've never said you do need to deal damage to disrupt a charge)
PS (I've never said you do need to deal damage to disrupt a charge)
Holding a phys-rep is different than using the skill.
If I hold a fist phys-rep and use a shield and never call damage, I'm not using Wield Fist, however I can still disrupt a charge. It's a pretty fine line but it's there. I guess if you really want to get the person's attention you could call "0". But as soon as you use any skill that would fall under the Wield Fist then you are taking Crush to the shield.
Is that what you are talking about?
If I hold a fist phys-rep and use a shield and never call damage, I'm not using Wield Fist, however I can still disrupt a charge. It's a pretty fine line but it's there. I guess if you really want to get the person's attention you could call "0". But as soon as you use any skill that would fall under the Wield Fist then you are taking Crush to the shield.
Is that what you are talking about?
My posts in no way reflect that of anyone else nor are they in any way official.
Ok I think we're getting somewhere here, but clarify what you mean by "as soon as you use any skill that would fall under the Wield Fist then you are taking Crush to the shield?"
To me "0" is doing no damge, and is intended to let the reciever of it know that that is what you are doing, disrupting a skill.
To me "0" is doing no damge, and is intended to let the reciever of it know that that is what you are doing, disrupting a skill.