Quote:
Originally Posted by DouglasCole
If I grab you, and score (say) 4 CP, you're at -2 to DX, -1 to parries, and no penalty to dodge.
Now it's your turn, and your options are to either grapple a new hit location (at the usual "half" penalties), or add control to the thing grabbing you - you don't suffer location penalties to increase control on something you've already grabbed (see the note on p. 21 under Attack maneuver for that tidbit).
|
Cool, I use it as follows,
A grabs B's Torso with both hands.
B Grabs one of A's arms with both hands with no location penalty (as a prelude to a joint lock)
If A wants to specifically break free of B's grapple on his arm he'll have to disengage that arm from it's own gapple to A's torso, and attempt to break free (or maybe try and shift his grip and/or get more CPs and have enough to win the joint lock QC)
It's just the suggestion you just made seemingly removes Break free as a thing (why would you ever specifically do it when you can just grapple more and allocated the CP as either positive CPs for you or negative CPs for your opponent).
Which wouldn't matter apart for the fact that currently part of breaking free is that you have to disengage any location your trying to break free with which tends to automatically weaken your own Grapple.
I.e before If I wanted to break free of you grappling my arm which I'm using to grapple you, I have to stop using that arm to grapple you (thus reducing my grapple/CP on you)
But with your suggestion it would seem that I can now not only keep that arm grappling you but grapple more with it in order to break free of your grapple of it?
That said I always had the option to grapple more and try and get more CP and active control
Not saying this is a bad thing, but just checking that this is how it would work?
(I may have misread or miss applied it though)
That all said I do see how this suggestion fits in with CPs being a balance that shifts between grapplers