Why Is There No Unarmed

ZodiacDragon

Why is there no skill line in unarmed combat I wanted to make a monk I been trying to run a Monk but it's extremely difficult and I got a sorcerer and I use a spell like 4 times and magic is gone I don't understand this yes I put most points in magic and health

GoatKnuckle

Because that would have been fun, that's why. +1 for my first post.

Rosveen

Three armor types is too much for ZOS to balance, let's not try to add more for now.

GoatKnuckle

Rosveen wrote: »

Three armor types is too much for ZOS to balance, let's not try to add more for now.

Unarmed ... Not unarmored. He wants to punch Daedra in the face. I can't say I disagree.

Rosveen

GoatKnuckle wrote: »

Rosveen wrote: »

Three armor types is too much for ZOS to balance, let's not try to add more for now.

Unarmed ... Not unarmored. He wants to punch Daedra in the face. I can't say I disagree.

Oops, my bad. Unarmed would be fun, but instead of bare hands we'd have to use knuckles, special gloves or something. To keep enchantable weapon slots.

seanolan

Possibly because unarmed vs. full heavy armor = a ridiculous lose. Especially with no enchantments on your weapons (fists). Want to surrender two enchantment slots?

ZodiacDragon

Sean have you ever played the previous elder scroll games there use to be unarmed thank you very much and like he said above just use like claws or battle gauntlets it's entirely possible

ZodiacDragon

Brass knuckles or special gloves could work as we'll

seanolan

You would STILL give up a slot, since you already have a gloves armor slot. Which is what I meant. And unarmed never was as effective as armed, in ANY ES game, if you will recall. It did stamina damage, THEN did real damage, and was very frustrating to use. Probably because, historically, when a monk went up against a soldier, despite ninja movies to the contrary, it wasn't usually the SOLDIER who ended up worm food.

driosketch

I'm running a Whispering Fang build for fun right now. Rule is no weapons or skills that produce weapons, (I.E. silverbolts). Using a DK class as well as the added restriction of no long ranged damage or CC skills, everything has to be done in melee range. (Molten weapons takes me from 0 to 4 damage, but doesn't produce an actual weapon so I using it as a loophole.) I'm actually pretty effective bare handing it through the early levels so far. Only had trouble with the elite boss at the end of the first public dungeon so far.

ZodiacDragon

This is mid evil days dude and gladiators used the spike gauntlets in combat it could easily be put over armor added as a weapon or put I'm the weapon slot

ZodiacDragon

Nice Drio that's awesome

guybrushtb16_ESO

ZodiacDragon wrote: »

This is mid evil days dude and gladiators used the spike gauntlets in combat it could easily be put over armor added as a weapon or put I'm the weapon slot

Actually, nobody did ever use fist weapons in any actual combat, because, let's face it - merely punching an armed and armored opponent as your primary means of attack generally won't end well.

Asgari

Sorc - overload ult - dead

MrGhosty

I would love to see unarmed combat added in, you could add throws and other maneuvers to the "weapon" skill line. You could easily make it a second pair of gauntlets or brass knuckles as the weapon, and have it deal a bit less damage than daggers but be the fastest attack speed.

Of course if they added in unarmed, I would also like to see pike or staff combat added in as well that gave you some reach, you could add in cool perks to pikes in that one hit would drop someone off of their horse and stuff like that.

jamie.goddenrwb17_ESO

In Skyrim you got the "fists of steel" perk in the heavy armor line which gave bonus damage while wearing heavy gauntlets.

Could be an interesting synergy

ZodiacDragon

Wow no one knows history dude quit trying to argue with facts yes I'll say it again yes one more time yes the gladiators did in fact use fist weapons wow just wow brush up on history man they used gauntlets that had a long straight spike at the end it could in fact pierce thru armor you wanna argue we can but you won't be happy armor protects against slashing pretty we'll but driving a long sharp spike into armor would pierce right thru but it is possible it could protect from it but the point is yes gladiators did in fact use a hand gauntlet that had a long spike coming out from it look it up bro

Tigeracer

I think an unarmed skill line would be cool (since I am a khajiit with claws), but to those who are saying eso is set in medieval times, you are wrong. ESO is a fantasy game with nothing to do with those times. There were no cat or lizard people, no floating squids and a whole lot of other things in ESO are not medieval as such.

ZodiacDragon

Tiger the basis of it is based in mid evil times armor swords knights monsters and such is all mid evil properties so yes it is based in mid evil times but the conceipt is fantasy so it's both

Sav72

Is it not bad enough, that everything gets blocked or absorbed in this game,,,with weapons in pvp.

Two-Dogs

ZodiacDragon wrote: »

Wow no one knows history dude quit trying to argue with facts yes I'll say it again yes one more time yes the gladiators did in fact use fist weapons wow just wow brush up on history man they used gauntlets that had a long straight spike at the end it could in fact pierce thru armor you wanna argue we can but you won't be happy armor protects against slashing pretty we'll but driving a long sharp spike into armor would pierce right thru but it is possible it could protect from it but the point is yes gladiators did in fact use a hand gauntlet that had a long spike coming out from it look it up bro

I believe you might be trying to refer to the myrmex, the roman version of the cestus, a punch weapon that can be described as a heavy glove with various arrangements of spikes attached.

Regardless, they were not used in actual warfare*. They were weapons designed for entertainment as much as killing power, used by gladiators in staged fights. Most gladiatorial weapons were designed not to kill efficiently and protect effectively but to kill bloodily' and prolong suffering/prolong the fight while giving the audience a bloody spectacle.

Even 'monk's as people refer to them - and I have to assume they're refereeing to some cultural mish-mash of Shaolin monks - made sure they used actual weapons in actual warfare.

The fact is, striking with limbs and grappling against an opponent of similar skill, yet armed with weapon that grants reach - such as a sword, spear or heck, a bow, is good way to ensure a quick death. Kudos for trying tho.

I'm not going to touch your claims of spikes being able to penetrate armours because we'd have to define the type of armour and the context of the fight. For example, a stiletto is thought to be great at piercing armour and can be described as a 'big spike with a handle'. However, this big spike was a weapon of surprise/opportunity rather than a weapon of war, not capable of penetrating metal armours and instead being used to exploit the exposed areas, such as under the arm.

We might argue that a 'monk' could be just that - an attacker who makes use of surprise and opportunity to destroy their foes, using nothing but their limbs. Which is fine and I would very much like a spoon as my next weapon - with surpise and opportunity, a spoon can kill.

Actually, I'd like a class built around spoons. New class, I dub the, 'The Spooner'.

::

Now, within the context of ESO - to my knowledge, Morrowind was the only real version that supported 'monks' and tho I do dimly recall stamina draining attacks in, what, Dagger Fall? A poster above mentioned the Heavy Armour skill line in Skyrim so there's also that. Really tho, compared to the rest of the fighting styles, monks seem to have been a minor addition to the world/games.

As a result, I doubt they're a priority and wouldn't expect them introducing them anytime soon.

Faulgor

driosketch wrote: »

I'm running a Whispering Fang build for fun right now. Rule is no weapons or skills that produce weapons, (I.E. silverbolts). Using a DK class as well as the added restriction of no long ranged damage or CC skills, everything has to be done in melee range. (Molten weapons takes me from 0 to 4 damage, but doesn't produce an actual weapon so I using it as a loophole.) I'm actually pretty effective bare handing it through the early levels so far. Only had trouble with the elite boss at the end of the first public dungeon so far.

Does increased weapon damage actually increase fist damage? If so, how high could you get your damage? I think Hunding's Rage + Ravager set + 3 increase physical harm glyphs on jewelry could take you at about 80 weapon power, 140 when the ravager set triggers. The new Agility passive adds another 12%. Not sure how much spells like molten weapons and surge could add to that, but it doesn't sound too bad.

GoatKnuckle

For the love of Skooma ... the term you are looking for is "medieval". And of course people have used some sort of fist weapon ever since there has been people and there has been fists. We even use them today. Brass knuckles?

Venriz

they cant balance stuff thry have, and you wana a new one?

seanolan

GoatKnuckle wrote: »

For the love of Skooma ... the term you are looking for is "medieval". And of course people have used some sort of fist weapon ever since there has been people and there has been fists. We even use them today. Brass knuckles?

Thank you...the center-naughtiness spelling was killing me. But on your other point...yes, we can see brass knuckles used today. But...most people aren't wearing full armor either today. As a participant in the SCA and a fencer, please, please rest assured...unarmed or fist weapons vs. armor = armored victor. You couldn't "throw" a heavy armored opponent most of the time...the armor was upwards of an additional 60-80 lbs, and they weren't usually small men inside it. It would be like deadlifting 250-300 lbs - possible, but hardly common. And then what? These suits were not designed to defend against edges, primarily. They were designed to protect against BLUDGEONING weapons...maces, flails, etc. If I can survive a mace hit, I won't even NOTICE your brass knuckle covered fists.

driosketch

Faulgor wrote: »

driosketch wrote: »

I'm running a Whispering Fang build for fun right now. Rule is no weapons or skills that produce weapons, (I.E. silverbolts). Using a DK class as well as the added restriction of no long ranged damage or CC skills, everything has to be done in melee range. (Molten weapons takes me from 0 to 4 damage, but doesn't produce an actual weapon so I using it as a loophole.) I'm actually pretty effective bare handing it through the early levels so far. Only had trouble with the elite boss at the end of the first public dungeon so far.

Does increased weapon damage actually increase fist damage? If so, how high could you get your damage? I think Hunding's Rage + Ravager set + 3 increase physical harm glyphs on jewelry could take you at about 80 weapon power, 140 when the ravager set triggers. The new Agility passive adds another 12%. Not sure how much spells like molten weapons and surge could add to that, but it doesn't sound too bad.

You know what, I just assumed it did. Even at 0, fists still do damage, so they are doing so based on something, but what affects it I have no idea. Looks like it's time to do some testing. Though I'm not a numbers guy, so I can only see about the relative impact and not the hard numbers.

jamie.goddenrwb17_ESO

seanolan wrote: »

GoatKnuckle wrote: »

For the love of Skooma ... the term you are looking for is "medieval". And of course people have used some sort of fist weapon ever since there has been people and there has been fists. We even use them today. Brass knuckles?

Thank you...the center-naughtiness spelling was killing me. But on your other point...yes, we can see brass knuckles used today. But...most people aren't wearing full armor either today. As a participant in the SCA and a fencer, please, please rest assured...unarmed or fist weapons vs. armor = armored victor. You couldn't "throw" a heavy armored opponent most of the time...the armor was upwards of an additional 60-80 lbs, and they weren't usually small men inside it. It would be like deadlifting 250-300 lbs - possible, but hardly common. And then what? These suits were not designed to defend against edges, primarily. They were designed to protect against BLUDGEONING weapons...maces, flails, etc. If I can survive a mace hit, I won't even NOTICE your brass knuckle covered fists.

I realize that this might not be the most universally accepted source of truth but this article basically refutes everything you just stated about plate armor.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plate_armour

To quote: "A complete suit of plate armour made from well-tempered steel would weigh around 15-25 kg(33-55 pounds).[2] The wearer remained highly agile and could jump, run and otherwise move freely as the weight of the armor was spread evenly throughout the body."

And with regards to its protective value:

"The evolution of plate armour also triggered developments in the design of offensive weapons. While this armour was effective against cuts or blows, their weak points could be exploited by long tapered swords or other weapons designed for the purpose, such as pollaxes and halberds. The effect of arrows and bolts is still a point of contention in regards to plate armour. Longbows and crossbows could also pierce plate armour up to ranges of 200 metres (660 ft) with a lucky shot, notably in battles such as the Battle of Visby. The evolution of the 14th-century plate armour also triggered the development of various polearms. They were designed to deliver a strong impact and concentrate energy on a small area and cause damage through the plate. Maces, war hammers and the hammer-heads of pollaxes (poleaxes) were used to inflict blunt trauma through armour."

So whether or not a fist weapon could be either piercing or heavy enough to do damage would be a matter of debate but given it would be quite possible to add a weighted variety or one containing a spike, "unarmed" could be considered viable.

Again, see my above post that shows that in Skyrim you got damage bonuses for unarmed when wearing heavy gauntlets and put points into the heavy armor line. This at least gives precedent for it to be realistic in the Elder Scrolls world.

Two-Dogs

Generally speaking - as between a knife and a gun - range was king. Range not being restricted to missile weapons.

Within a favourable context a spoon can kill.

Most of the time we don't get to define our contexts and, in such circumstances, being able to strike before your opponent grants the user an advantage.

While a gauntlet can kill a man/woman/misc, a sharp stabby peice of metal mounted on a gauntlet-arm+50cm is generally a better option than a gauntlet, due to the range advantage.

Again, this is a computer game and there are example from previous titles of the developers attempting to incorporate 'unarmed'-esque character builds.

Again, said builds have been a minority at best and, as a result, I wouldn't expect them to be introduced anytime soon, unless of course such an introduction was proven to ZOS's investors to net a reliable financial return,

Edit: Removed a 'king'.

Yusuf

Put a weapon in your Off-Handed weaponslot. You will benefit from it's weapondamage and a punch should deal something like a 100 dmg.
That's what i do when i'm bored in Cyrodiil, running around without a shirt and punching enemies xD

Solariken

I would LOVE an unarmed skill line. Personally, I think it would be cool to focus it a little less on "punching" and more on a balanced monk approach; so it could include things like efficient spell-slinging and agility-based moves and evasive maneuvers. Blocking could be a ward (consumes magicka, like Skyrim). Also, bad-ass star wars-esque force pushes/explosions

Some of the passives could be things like

1. faster running (no heavy weapon to slow you down) with reduced cost
2. faster dodging with reduced cost
3. reduced spell cast times

Those are just some thoughts, but I think it would be cool.

GoatKnuckle

seanolan wrote: »

Thank you...the center-naughtiness spelling was killing me.

No doubt. Irks me as well. Calling out someone for not knowing history and then spelling that period of history wrong, and claiming that the Romans were a part of the middle ages just really irks the Goat.

The Goat likes history. The Roman Empire did not exist in the Middle Ages. No gladiators, no centurions, and no Caesars. There was the Holy Roman Empire, however. But they were not Holy, and they were not Roman. They were Germanic.