Meelee combat in RPGs (unarmed combat related)

[Wyrmlord]

A while ago, mondblut and a few others said that unarmed combat is too silly and anime-like to be taken seriously in RPGs, because the whole point of having weapons is to be stronger than someone who is not armed.

But doesn't the same apply to meelee combat in modern-ish or futuristic RPGs?

Why should people use 'vibroswords' in KotOR?

Why should people use cattle prods, crowbars, sledgehammers, spears, and even power fists in Fallout?

Why should vampires in Bloodlines use bush hooks and katanas for anything other than sneak attacks and stealth kills?

Well?

 

[Excidium]

Why should people use 'vibroswords' in KotOR?

Because some vibroswords are made of cortosis which can counter lightsabers, so it's your only option when fighting a Jedi as they'll just reflect your blaster bolts (Of course they'll just force push and slash you anyway, but at least you didn't die by your own shot).

Why should people use cattle prods, crowbars, sledgehammers, spears, and even power fists in Fallout?

Because it is a post apocalyptical world and bullets don't grow on (dead) trees?

Why should vampires in Bloodlines use bush hooks and katanas for anything other than sneak attacks and stealth kills?

Because normally, bullets just tickle vampires in the VTM setting. They don't bleed (as they can control their blood flow) and don't care if their organs get perfurated. Plus when you can have superhuman strenght and speed, melee weapons are a lot more attractive. Of course a shotgun or heavier weapons are still scary, as Jack mentions.

 

[ArcturusXIV]

My Sensei told me weapons are just an extension of the arm. With grappling, this starts to make sense. Opposable thumbs generally are better than any way, though man, though Katana's are sharp...

I would like to see more focus on oriental combat in RPG's, anyway. I don't see why it wouldn't fit...

We have one Earth. Several continents. Several cultures... Diversify, people, diversify...

An RPG doesn't need to be "western" or "oriental" or "arabic" or fucking "pollock" themed, it can include all of the above, just centered around different regions, and it will be more authentic in the long run anyway.

 

[Johannes]

Games tend to be silly either way so I don't really give a fuck. If you want to strive for realism then yeah, unarmed (or any melee in a modern-day setting) combat should be inferior to properly armed opponents in raw strength. But there could be some advantages in that you can start a fistfight where you can't carry a gun or don't have time to draw it, easier to knock someone out non-lethally, etc.

But fully unarmed combat is a bit boring because you don't get to choose any weapon, which makes the loot aspect of things a bit duller.

 

[Awor Szurkrarz]

Why should people use cattle prods, crowbars, sledgehammers, spears, and even power fists in Fallout?

Because the vast majority of people in the Fallout setting can't afford guns or there wouldn't be enough functional guns for them.

Unarmed combat would be pretty important in any sensible setting where you can't just kill people left and right and where you need to deal with people in heavy armour which may require immobilizing before stabbing them into eye with dagger.

Then you have actual meelee combat happening in modern times too.

 

[ArcturusXIV]

Then again, you could just make weapon degradation & dulling over time a huge factor in combat, so players had to go unarmed part of the time, and learn fistcuffing.

 

[deuxhero]

Why should people use 'vibroswords' in KotOR?

Because some vibroswords are made of cortosis which can counter lightsabers, so it's your only option when fighting a Jedi as they'll just reflect your blaster bolts (Of course they'll just force push and slash you anyway, but at least you didn't die by your own shot).
.

Much as I hate the game, this one IS explained right in the intro, the shields that are common can't stop a blade like they will a blaster or lightsaber. Plus the game takes place entirely in cramped coridors with guns that can't do any damage that matters

 

[Excidium]

And that is coupled with the fact that most blasters are innacurate as hell.

 

[Baron]

Weapons are nice and all, but sometimes it's just really satisfying to knock an opponent down and kick them to death.

That's one of the many reasons I play Mass Effect.

 

[laclongquan]

Environment: a spaceship is no place to throw bolts or bullets about. Ricochets, dontchaknow? So in that case melee work well. Same thing in tight corridors. In tight corridor you can and will shoot your allies in the ass or tit, whatever. So melee for tight quarters.

Scarcity: basically all melee and empty-arm arts are just limitless close range guns. With weapon's degradation and ammo scarcity, you can see more of them in use than guns.

Basically most games dont deal with those two factors well and compensate unarmed and melee fighting with ridiculous bonus.

 

[Excidium]

In the end it's just a mattter of melee/unarmed being justified in the setting (as I pointed out) or contributing to gameplay as increased combat options.

Don't try to apply real world "logic" on every little thing, as the vast majority of RPGs are set in fictional worlds and all of them need to abstract stuff through a rule system.

 

[sea]

I guess it's one of those cases where, so long as it's balanced and makes a reasonable amount of sense, I see no reason to limit the player's options. You want to play as a monk or whatever, there should be a benefit to doing so... and even if not, well, more ways to fight is never a bad thing provided it doesn't throw the rest of the game mechanics off balance.

Of course, one thing most RPGs don't really bother with is trying to distinguish unarmed/melee combat from the rest, not just in terms of play-style but in terms of narrative effects as well. The option to, say, knock out enemies and then recruit them or get information out of them that you would have otherwise missed could make for a compelling way to get through a story, especially if that information leads to unique plot points, quests, encounters, etc. I guess it's probably too much to hope for, but even a little "hey, you didn't kill anyone, good work" sort of line can go a long way towards affirming your decisions in character building and play style.

 

[Destroid]

Weapons are beneath my fists.

 

[Raghar]

A while ago, mondblut and a few others said that unarmed combat is too silly and anime-like to be taken seriously in RPGs, because the whole point of having weapons is to be stronger than someone who is not armed.

But doesn't the same apply to meelee combat in modern-ish or futuristic RPGs?

Why should people use 'vibroswords' in KotOR?

Why should people use cattle prods, crowbars, sledgehammers, spears, and even power fists in Fallout?

In current military an identification is important. A person in a mud coated uniform looks like another person in a mud coated uniform. With exception of ACU of US army which looks like a sore thumb anywhere than certain location in US, where they can't be deployed anyway because of theirs constitution. Thus combat ranges can be quite small.

As for vampires in bloodlines. Do you know a bullet for a high end sniper rifle costs from 300 $ to 2400 $? Killing few cops by a blade can be much cheaper and you can use theirs weapons when situation calms down, which means they can't be tracked to you.

 

[G.O.D]

Why should people use cattle prods, crowbars, sledgehammers, spears, and even power fists in Fallout?

Because the vast majority of people in the Fallout setting can't afford guns or there wouldn't be enough functional guns for them.

Unarmed combat would be pretty important in any sensible setting where you can't just kill people left and right and where you need to deal with people in heavy armour which may require immobilizing before stabbing them into eye with dagger.

Then you have actual meelee combat happening in modern times too.

True, if you would view it in realistic terms.
But not only that.. Unarmed and Melee also get obsolete soon in virtual terms as soon as guns get involved (F1/2).
Its rediculous in NV where a melee build is quite effective against armed groups though.

 

[DraQ]

Ahhh, the glorious aftermath of misguided attempts to balance non-equivalent shit.


Unarmed and armed combat should play different roles in game, same as with pistols and rifles.

Unarmed can be nonlethal, can be useful when unexpectedly attacked in melee range, not killing people left and right can be beneficial to one's relations with the authorities and so on.

Unarmed shouldn't be a valid substitute to a gun, but neither should a gun be a valid substitute for unarmed skill.

 

[Excidium]

Unarmed shouldn't be a valid substitute to a gun, but neither should a gun be a valid substitute for unarmed skill.

Why not?

If my character is a super powered cyborg or a 3 meters tall werewolf, I'm pretty sure my unarmed combat is a damn valid substitute for a gun, even unskilled.

Like I said before :"In the end it's just a mattter of melee/unarmed being justified in the setting (as I pointed out) or contributing to gameplay as increased combat options."

 

[DraQ]

Unarmed shouldn't be a valid substitute to a gun, but neither should a gun be a valid substitute for unarmed skill.

Why not?

If my character is a super powered cyborg or a 3 meters tall werewolf, I'm pretty sure my unarmed combat is a damn valid substitute for a gun, even unskilled.

A super powered cyborg can also fire a minigun or an M2 from the hip - you need to take into account

Werevolves, while naturally appealing to my inner furfag, tend to have this pesky vulnerability to silver bullets.

In general, when considering viability of unarmed VS melee VS ranged you need to take into account stuff in character's own "weight category".

Like I said before :"In the end it's just a mattter of melee/unarmed being justified in the setting"

Well, duh.

 

[Excidium]

True, but the thing is that guns damage is fixed while melee or unarmed damage is generally based on the character's characteristics, so the more superhuman a character is, the more appealing melee and unarmed are.

 

[Azrael the cat]

Games tend to be silly either way so I don't really give a fuck. If you want to strive for realism then yeah, unarmed (or any melee in a modern-day setting) combat should be inferior to properly armed opponents in raw strength. But there could be some advantages in that you can start a fistfight where you can't carry a gun or don't have time to draw it, easier to knock someone out non-lethally, etc.

But fully unarmed combat is a bit boring because you don't get to choose any weapon, which makes the loot aspect of things a bit duller.

I've been decked once or twice when cane/stick sparring, when I managed to wrap the other guy's cane to disarm him, only for him to drop the weapon and hit me with a couple of hooks to the head (ouch - fencing helmets aren't really designed to weather impact damage from punches). But yeah, 9 times out of 10 you can just take a step back and adjust what you're doing so they can't get close enough to hit you.

Realistically, if you have a weapon - any weapon frankly - you actually have to screw up in order for an unarmed guy to stand a chance. I've seen tons of martial arts guys from various styles claiming that they can beat a knife or a cane/bat, but every time it's based around the weapon-guy being a complete retard and taking a big swing. I've never seen anyone convincingly counter someone who just uses conservative thrusts to keep the guy at range, small defensive cuts to the hand etc - not to mention the kind of psycho speed-stabbing you see in prison documentaries. Maybe against that kind of psycho speed-stabbing stuff you could take the guy out at the same time, but you're still going to be plugged full of stab-wounds.

 

[DraQ]

True, but the thing is that guns damage is fixed while melee or unarmed damage is generally based on the character's characteristics, so the more superhuman a character is, the more appealing melee and unarmed are.

True, but you then you can also pick up and fire much bigger guns. And unless your character is a singular bundle of awesome outclassing everything else in given setting, there are going to be weapons designed to take him down.

 

[Raghar]

Have you forgot how expensive and heavy is the ammunition for these heavy guns? Not to mention when you will use small guns, they can't use these guns against you. (Considering you'd be able to use better armor.)

 

[Johannes]

Realistically, if you have a weapon - any weapon frankly - you actually have to screw up in order for an unarmed guy to stand a chance. I've seen tons of martial arts guys from various styles claiming that they can beat a knife or a cane/bat, but every time it's based around the weapon-guy being a complete retard and taking a big swing. I've never seen anyone convincingly counter someone who just uses conservative thrusts to keep the guy at range, small defensive cuts to the hand etc - not to mention the kind of psycho speed-stabbing you see in prison documentaries. Maybe against that kind of psycho speed-stabbing stuff you could take the guy out at the same time, but you're still going to be plugged full of stab-wounds.

But people do screw up, even if they're not retards. If you're just plain better than your opponent, you just might live until he makes some mistake you can capitalize on, at least if his weapon isn't that good. Even if you will probably have to sustain some hits, you do have some chance if you're more skilled/bigger than your opponent.

Though I'm not fully sure what you were trying to point out - of course having a weapon is an advantage, but that should be pretty obvious to everyone.

 

[J1M]

Why should people use cattle prods, crowbars, sledgehammers, spears, and even power fists in Fallout?

Because the vast majority of people in the Fallout setting can't afford guns or there wouldn't be enough functional guns for them.

Unarmed combat would be pretty important in any sensible setting where you can't just kill people left and right and where you need to deal with people in heavy armour which may require immobilizing before stabbing them into eye with dagger.

Then you have actual meelee combat happening in modern times too.

True, if you would view it in realistic terms.
But not only that.. Unarmed and Melee also get obsolete soon in virtual terms as soon as guns get involved (F1/2).
Its rediculous in NV where a melee build is quite effective against armed groups though.

My first play through of fallout was done entirely with melee combat. My only companion was dogmeat, who also used unarmed combat.

 

[Mastermind]

Because it is a post apocalyptical world and bullets don't grow on (dead) trees?

Have you even played Fallout?