[Varyon]

Originally Posted by Plane

MA122 only says hands, so I don't think we can do that for arms. I do like the idea though.

I see no reason not to extend it to arms (or feet/legs, for that matter). It follows logically, and isn't called out as a non-option. Note also that targets without fine manipulators lack hands, but can still punch, meaning their limbs are functionally weapons, so it follows they should be able to get out of the way - and why should having your hand removed suddenly make you better at getting your arm out of the way?

Originally Posted by Plane

I was thinking like if I did AOA:double to punch+kick a zombie with a fire aura that I'd take burning damage twice.

I think Aura is only able to affect each target once per second - after all, grappling somebody (such that they are in constant contact with your Aura) does no more Aura damage than slapping them in the face. Regardless, even if it's more a case of causing damage with each contact, I wouldn't treat a failed Parry as two contacts, as it was still just a single action. The only exception would be an edge case where someone tries an unarmed sacrificial Parry and fails, where I might be inclined to have both the would-be savior and original target get Aura'd.

Originally Posted by Plane

You think maybe it should be limited to situations resembling P144's "user can deliberately
attack others by flicking his blood around" for Acidic Blood?

I'm thinking it might not be a bad idea to just have it be for contact agents, or maybe even just for zombies. However, giving it further thought, it occurs to me that part of the concept behind it is "a failed Parry should never be better than a successful one." For both a headbutt from a touch-infectious zombie that doesn't get through the folded stop sign you are wearing on your chest and a lightsaber that fails to get through your Beskar steel breastplate, if a failed Parry means no contact, you were better off failing (on a success, you either have to roll to avoid infection from zombie slaughter or suffer severe damage to your hand from the lightsaber). That in mind, it may be best to treat a failed Parry in either case as involving as much contact (for determining the effect of Contact Agent and Destructive Parry) as a successful one.

In cases where having contact occur on a failed Parry would actually be to the defender's benefit (say, defender is blocking with a burning brand against the zombie, or something made of cortosis against a lightsaber), I'd have no such contact occur. If it would be to both the defender's benefit and detriment (unarmored hand that is magically surrounded by flame against a zombie, or a cortosis bracelet that will still have the character harmed by the lightsaber before it shuts down), I'd let the attacker decide.

Originally Posted by Plane

MA122:

Martial artists usually use the term “parry” to describe a defense that redirects or deflects an attack without absorbing much of its energy.

Intercepting an attack and safely dissipating its energy is called a “block.”

In GURPS, these terms have different meanings.

“Parry” refers to either kind of defense made with a weapon or a limb.

“Block” describes either type of defense executed with a shield.

[...]
Depends on what's meant by 'tank' I guess. You can absorb much (but safely dissipate) rather than deflect/redirect.

1 HP of injury is a fairly significant impact. A martial arts "block" works by one of a few methods. The first, for low-impact situations (where the hit wouldn't have caused injury in the first place), it doesn't do much other than avoid your opponent getting a point in a match or avoid Shock effects that GURPS doesn't cover (getting hit in the Face in GURPS does nothing unless it was sufficient to cause 1 HP of Injury, but can still be painful enough to cause short-term problems IRL). The second, more common, is to intercept an attack while it's still low-impact (a short distance into a strike, it usually has very little kinetic energy and won't damage much; there's a reason Bruce Lee had to specifically train for his "One Inch Punch"). A third, relevant to the zombie bite, is to intercept a low-impact attack that would have caused injury, by intercepting it at a location on the "striker" that doesn't cause injury (essentially having your arm tank a weak headbutt to keep the target's jaws from reaching your flesh). Finally, you may be able to block a medium-to-high impact hit by letting your arm act like a spring to absorb the impact, but that really works best if you've already got something else (like a shield or armguard) to spread out the impact. The first option is a failed GURPS Parry, but the target fails to roll enough damage to accomplish anything. The second and third (early/alternate intercept) I'd really count as redirecting the impact (you're markedly changing how it hits, forcing it to either hit too early or away from a striking surface). The fourth I'm not convinced is really an option when completely unarmed and unarmored, but is arguably a sort of redirection of the energy.

Originally Posted by Plane

I would say 'hand' specifically, unless it got broadened to arm/limb/leg/extremity/foot elsewhere. I don't think it's possible to use a 'Leg Parry' to pseudo-dodge an attack targetting your foot based on this, for example.

I'd be inclined to treat Martial Arts' mention of "weapon or hand" as not being exhaustive, and would therefore allow one to use it to get a hand, foot, arm, leg, wing, tail, tentacle, Striker, etc out of the way. Heck, letting you use it to get your head out of the way probably wouldn't be a horrible option. Just keep in mind you're still limited to what you can legally Parry (so using a Brawling Parry to duck a gunshot is a no-go).

Originally Posted by Plane

some day...

I've played around with similar options in the past, but never got anything I was entirely happy with.