-
If a player is fighting hand to hand, and is not holding anything, then I think it should consider him to be dual wielding. After all, you have two fists. Doesn't seem right to only be able to fight with one hand if both are free.
-
Agreed.
-
the only thing i can see to post about this is, lets say you are holding a tuba. unless you are bashing the crap outta them with it, which isnt altogether uncomical, you wouldnt have both hands free. empty hands, sure..sounds like a winner to me then.
-
Beating someone with a tuba… Now that would be interesting... How about strangling someone with a flute?
But yes, Soth that's what I meant- if both hands were free.
Just seems flat out logical to me.
-
Indeed, this was said in the first post in the thread:
~~@Elmah:~~
> If a player is fighting hand to hand, and is not holding anything, …
-
And don't forget that there ought to be weaponry for hand to hand that can do things like every other weapon. Like, brass knuckles. Even give hand worn armor the ability to contribute to the hand-to-hand damage. :)
Not to leech this from the topic, but for exotic, perhaps allow for non-weapons to be used as "weapons", though I'd say make them blunt since I doubt there'd be a place to put a weapon type. This should also damage them possibly more. :) Imagine picking up a barstool and pounding someone on the head with it. :D
-
fyi, instrument no longer has to be held to be used. Just a side bar.
-
i was more referring to the fact of beating someone over the head with a classical instrument had a value to it.
and i've slept like shit the last week, so let it slide :)
soth
