Why Is There No Unarmed

Varicite

ZodiacDragon wrote: »

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

I saw someone post an unarmed build once that seemed pretty cool. He had made it into the VR levels, though I'm not sure if he still plays it.

Obviously it wasn't optimal for much, but he did "play his way" and made it work through class skills and buffs.

He was having fun, and I respect that. That's really all that matters in the end.

Still_Mind

seanolan wrote: »

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

Quite the opposite. There was an entire school of "anti-armour unarmed combat". In Medieval Europe, no less. Knights often dropped their swords and went bare-handed against fully armoured warriors. Got a copy of a book dating 1537, by Baron Fabian von Auerfwald.

Armour plates are easy to grab and the armoured person may be destabilized and thrown to the ground with relative ease.

Not even mentioning the Samurai who used armour against the wearer pretty creatively, like using tight-sitting helmets as leverage for neck-twisting\breaking.

Demeos

Or...they could just make unarmed another form of dual-wield since your wielding both of your fists. Base the damage off of the armor value of the gauntlets/gloves you have equipped if any.

This way the developers won't have to go make a whole bunch of weapons specifically for this addition or a new skill line that'll have to be balanced to everything else.

Neutronium_Dragon

I can think of an unrelated but still significant reason: too much overlap with the werewolf, which already has various unarmed combat shticks covered with its active powers.

sagitter

Unarmed skill line would be cool. When you are unarmed you get a % attack speed passive boost+ dodge chance % passive but no block mitigation on dx mouse hold block or very reduced, or dodge chance when you hold block.

golfer.dub17_ESO

Pros:
-Could add some nice variety to the game if done right.
-There's precedent in the lore (a certain orc in Rivenspire loves to punch things..)

Cons:
-If players could be effective without any sort of weapon, it hurts the already damaged economy.
-Related to the above, how would it be balanced against having actual gear?*
-Time spent that could be used developing other things.

Not too crazy about it to be honest.

*If fists are better, or even just as good as melee weapons, then what is the point in getting those weapons?

"But we could make Unarmed Weapons like special gauntlets and..."

Then it's not really unarmed is it?
Then it's just a reskin of dual wield, isn't it?

reagen_lionel

For unarmed skill line to work. I think its damage would be lower than weapon skills in general but benefit from being able to disarm and throw opponents (uppercut from two hand but without a cast time. Alot of the actual abilities use alot of stamina. Its passives could be for increasing unarmed damage, lowering the stamina cost of its skills and give a passive dodge chance when unarmed. The con being you cannot enchant your fists. (which I'd be fine with. )

Weapons will stay more powerful and reliable. While unarmed will be viable, albiet less powerful.

I run around unarmed sometimes on a character or two myself.

gurugeorgey

Yeah, I'd like to see unarmed as a mixed form, with wrestling, throws, punches and kicks - so it's almost a kind of melee crowd control type of thing (someone's thrown or joint-locked, disarmed, etc.) with some damage, but more just great CC.

And that does fit in with the old European manuals - wrestling seems to have been a foundation skill even for weapon-based European MA, just as its analogues have been in Eastern MA.

I hope that as games get better and better technically, with better animation, this sort of thing is going to be more possible going forward.

Code2501

Two-Dogs wrote: »

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.

Having played everything since Arena, Monks were a Class from Arena to Oblivion. Hand-to-hand was a skill in all games from Daggerfall up to Oblivion and I have played several of those games through from start to finish as an unarmed character.
In most of the games Hand-to-hand skill ranks granted bonus to damage and the chance to paralyze, often you could with high skill KO an enemy in one blow from stealth and when combined with touch based spells monk style characters were perfectly able to hold their own offensively. Re unarmed vs armed, Master H2H rank in oblivion could literally disarm foes.

It was only in Skyrim that hand-to-hand, like much of the diversity in ESO, was striped out for the sake of so called stream-lining. (along with a long list of things by that stage, unarmored, spears, mysticism, spell crafting, acrobatics, levitation, water walking, spell scrolls ....etc)

A fast, highly acrobatic, unarmored, unarmed monk-mage-assassin rocked in elder elderscrolls. They could leap over roof tops and across water, KO with a single punch and then set the unconscious body on fire with their touch all the while wearing nothing but a cloth robe and their bare hands.

Demeos

golfer.dub17_ESO wrote: »

Pros:
-Could add some nice variety to the game if done right.
-There's precedent in the lore (a certain orc in Rivenspire loves to punch things..)

Cons:
-If players could be effective without any sort of weapon, it hurts the already damaged economy.
-Related to the above, how would it be balanced against having actual gear?*
-Time spent that could be used developing other things.

Not too crazy about it to be honest.

*If fists are better, or even just as good as melee weapons, then what is the point in getting those weapons?

"But we could make Unarmed Weapons like special gauntlets and..."

Then it's not really unarmed is it?
Then it's just a reskin of dual wield, isn't it?

Alright then, unarmed equipment that goes into the weapon slots, has no visuals when worn or used, is just a nice little bracelet icon in your equipment window. These bracelets you equip as weapons envelop your fists with magika allowing them to do more damage. No fuss, no muss, still uses Dual Wield skill line.

I just want to punch stuff...effectively.

beautycutie87

When this topic mentioned monk style with bare hands, my first thought was how, previously, our hands would be equipped with fire, or ice, or scrolls etc. I think addition of those spell techniques would add something to the magic building classes.

My second opinion on bare hands/melee fighting, is how it would effect fighting some races. For example Khajit or Argonian which have claws or talons. This would be lore based and enhance some fighting techniques with passives and an additional active.

However, on a humanoid character to combat the addition of claws or talons, the character may need somewhat of a fighting style glove whether with spike or bulkier to suit the performed action and allow the fight to have some balance.

Finally this will probably never occur because it would need a lot of balancing and change time which just is not in the picture currently.

umagon

I would like to see them make brawling gauntlets and boots that came in light/med/heavy that way you can still mix the armor types around. Unarmed could use damage values from those, while useing a passive to make up for losse in armor value. I imagine they would include spikes and/or blades on the gauntlets. Unarmed combat line is my number one request for the combat system. I would love to see antotmical take downs like spine breaks and joint reversals.

milesrodneymcneely2_ESO

I've played monks - like many of you - from Daggerfall to Oblivion. And did my dead-level best to "monk" it out in Skyrim.

I would love an Unarmed skill line, or a Monk class, or even brass knuckles, etc. added to the Dual Wield line. I would personally love to see Unarmed as a Magicka-based weapon (using sigils or fist wraps in the weapon slots so mechanics wouldn't have to change) that would synergize with Light Armor.

But regardless of how we might feel individually about the issue, can we PLEASE stop arguing about the realism of a weapon style in a game where you can resurrect yourself from the dead because you have a shiny magic rock in your inventory?

OKRRRRR?

Necrelios

I could even see an unarmed skill being part of the Fighter's Guild abilities. Maybe you could fight other opponents at the guild halls, or get into drunken brawls in taverns with trouble making NPC's. That was one of favorite things in Skyrim. Or fist fighting a frost troll was always good fun and a good way to level your skills too.

Panda244

Plate Armor.

/thread


If they ever add what @Necrelios suggest sure. If they add it as a legitimate fighting style, it should do absolutely zero damage to anyone wearing plate armor, and anything physically bigger than your character. Otherwise you don't just break immersion, or gameplay, or mechanics.. You break simple intelligence in more ways than one.

Don't bring your fists to a sword/magic fight.

Varicite

Panda244 wrote: »

Plate Armor.

/thread


If they ever add what @Necrelios suggest sure. If they add it as a legitimate fighting style, it should do absolutely zero damage to anyone wearing plate armor, and anything physically bigger than your character. Otherwise you don't just break immersion, or gameplay, or mechanics.. You break simple intelligence in more ways than one.

Don't bring your fists to a sword/magic fight.

Sure, exactly like daggers do absolutely zero damage to anyone wearing plate armor currently in game.

Wait a sec....

ShadowMage

Panda244 wrote: »

Plate Armor.

/thread


If they ever add what @Necrelios suggest sure. If they add it as a legitimate fighting style, it should do absolutely zero damage to anyone wearing plate armor, and anything physically bigger than your character. Otherwise you don't just break immersion, or gameplay, or mechanics.. You break simple intelligence in more ways than one.

Don't bring your fists to a sword/magic fight.

Have you ever watched the show Dragonball Z? The sayans fight with fists/feet and their form of magic. And they fight anything, no matter the armor or size. Granted they also possess superhuman strength, but there's also no reason that fighters in ESO couldn't be "magicka-enhanced" to be able to harm armored or very large foes. Maybe their normal light/heavy attacks don't do much (or anything), but an active ability could enhance their unarmed damage. Or they could rely entirely on powerful abilities for those types of foes.

Rair.Kitani

I just got intrested, and started liking the idea...
Then I read:

shadowmage016b14_ESO wrote: »

Have you ever watched the show Dragonball Z?

And now...
/thread

milesrodneymcneely2_ESO

Panda244 wrote: »

Plate Armor.

/thread


If they ever add what @Necrelios suggest sure. If they add it as a legitimate fighting style, it should do absolutely zero damage to anyone wearing plate armor, and anything physically bigger than your character. Otherwise you don't just break immersion, or gameplay, or mechanics.. You break simple intelligence in more ways than one.

Don't bring your fists to a sword/magic fight.

But you're okay with fireballs, lightning bolts, and glowing sticks that heal injuries the moment they occur? And you're aware that three Elder Scrolls titles have had MONK CLASSES and UNARMED/HAND-TO-HAND skills? Can you suspend your disbelief just an inch further and accept that maybe - just maybe - someone in the Mundus just might have figured out how to channel Magicka into their physical form, turning their body into a weapon by itself?

Your "doesn't make sense" argument is the worst argument in the history of arguments.

And I say that with love.

Evandus

The issue with unarmed combat could be looked into. Be nice if they did do this in the future.

Not really fruitful imo to get into a heated debate regarding the realism of a disciplined unarmed fighter vs an armored one with a weapon. Nearly endless scenarios can be cited that benefit either argument. Effectively creating a wash. But it was done in many of the TES games and actually was a balanced playstyle compared to others available.

Citing Dragonball Z lore is completely over the top imo. But whatever to that...

Anyway, when I played Skyrim, I used a mod that was a ton of fun. I had to change the inner workings though as it proved to be really overpowered with it's baseline variables. 10% chance down to 6%, things like that...

Actually found the video for the mod release that hooked me in. Wouldn't something akin to this be fun in ESO? I think it would. Of course, there would be a nightmare involved in balancing things out:

https://youtu.be/pzU9vUxctMY

RainfeatherUK

The Western Roman Empire ended in around 476 AD and prompted the beginning of the middle age. For the following 100 or so years, there were plenty of ex-empire Centuries roaming around. As equally there were gladiatorial traditions carried forward long after, that being despite much of the Roman aspect dying out at the christian conversion. So to say there were none around is incorrect entirely.

Unnarmed combat was relatively common in fact. The principle aim of many fighters was to disarm, just as readily as it was to kill. Its a simple principle of threat assessment. If you cant immediately dispatch your opponent, disarm is the best method. Reversely you must know what to do if you yourself are disarmed. We still practice that in martial arts today. Its quite fun, although I admit I dont like having my knuckles whacked when I mess it up lol.

Heavy armor, presents just as many challenges as it does benefits at times. There are still mobility restrictions. That's simple physics/logic ofcourse. Its not necessarily the flaws, but the advantages in not being tied down by certain equipment or having to train with them that matters. This had a large effect on its deployment and role on the field.

Hoplites, for example; who were arguably one of the first forms of specialized heavy soldier; still adopted formations to best utilize its advantages (whilst avoiding the various downsides.) You'll know this category as 'phalanx' most likely, from the many films of recent years. Heavy armor was of course formidable. It was eventually multi-layered, making it resilient to a good manner of attacks (puncturing/bludgeoning/slashing). But it wasn't the best equipment for all situations. Heavy soldiers fatigued rapidly and were often cut down, flanked by lighter soldiers. Most of the time if they were forced out of formation, they were routed or destroyed.

On a individual basis then, from what we are discussing here (perhaps 1v1 / gladiatorial?) you equip yourself with whatever means you find necessary to defeat your adversary in that environment. In combat the most important aspects are individual skill and being fit for purpose, everything else follows on from it.

Having done various reenactments with my father (who is a historian of some note) for the BBC, it put into perspective just how very different warfare looked from what we see in the movies.

Can an unnarmed opponent defeat a knight? Quite certainly. I've seen a few professional duelists do exactly that. Its quite easy to not only utilize the weight of heavy armor to your advantage against your opponent but also so puncture vital areas and joints.

A high level of skill is needed in any discipline of warfare. This is very poorly shown in games. Archers for example were often quite well trained in hand to hand combat, given side arms to defend against light skirmish units and cavalry who would try and break their lines. Its important to take into account that what works in formation doesnt always in a duel, as you've noted with staged combat. The same applies to open warfare. The person best able to utilize his tools and exploit the shortfalls of his enemies will win.

We should certainly see unarmed in the game. For its the foundation of martial combat, weapons are merely an extension of it.