[Martial Arts] What GURPS Maneuver Is This?

[Gigermann]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zxKklcP-jkE

I'm referring to the "pushing the arms aside at the elbow, collapsing the opponent's structure, momentarily preventing further attack/defense." (Primarily seen as the "counter" in the video examples.) It probably has a proper name that I don't know off the top of my head. This particular technique isn't unique—I've seen it many times in other styles, I'm certain. But what is it, mechanically, in GURPS?

• I wouldn't call it a "defense," but a counterattack with the off hand to set up the "real" attack—though it would seem to require a successful Parry by one party or the other
• Feels similar to a Beat—but Beat has requirements that aren't met in this circumstance, and this appears DX-based rather than ST-based
• It's not a "grab"—so not a grapple, really. The case could be made for a "loose" grapple that is immediately let go afterward, but a grapple usually requires two Maneuvers (the grab, and the contest)
• Realistically, it should affect both the opponent's subsequent defenses and attacks, but I can't think of a GURPS example of this (grapple, maybe?), so I'd expect it to only affect one or the other.

Maybe I'm just seeing this from the wrong angle and missing the otherwise obvious solution. My temptation is to use the standard Feint rules here, and treat the arm-location-attack as a special effect, much like the Sweep.

[Kromm]

That looks like either Counterattack (Martial Arts, p. 70) or Riposte (Martial Arts, pp. 125-125).

[DouglasCole]

Originally Posted by Gigermann

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zxKklcP-jkE

I'm referring to the "pushing the arms aside at the elbow, collapsing the opponent's structure, momentarily preventing further attack/defense." (Primarily seen as the "counter" in the video examples.) It probably has a proper name that I don't know off the top of my head. This particular technique isn't unique—I've seen it many times in other styles, I'm certain. But what is it, mechanically, in GURPS?

• I wouldn't call it a "defense," but a counterattack with the off hand to set up the "real" attack—though it would seem to require a successful Parry by one party or the other
• Feels similar to a Beat—but Beat has requirements that aren't met in this circumstance, and this appears DX-based rather than ST-based
• It's not a "grab"—so not a grapple, really. The case could be made for a "loose" grapple that is immediately let go afterward, but a grapple usually requires two Maneuvers (the grab, and the contest)
• Realistically, it should affect both the opponent's subsequent defenses and attacks, but I can't think of a GURPS example of this (grapple, maybe?), so I'd expect it to only affect one or the other.

Maybe I'm just seeing this from the wrong angle and missing the otherwise obvious solution. My temptation is to use the standard Feint rules here, and treat the arm-location-attack as a special effect, much like the Sweep.

This is one possible example of what spending control points looks like if you're using Technical Grappling or Fantastic Dungeon Grappling. It can, in the long view, be one of several things...

Dagger's Turn

Dagger attacks

Unarmed does a Judo Parry, probably a Grabbing Parry because choosing to retain contact. They parry the ARM, not the DAGGER, with a Grabbing Parry. Success means 1 CP is scored ("you have a grapple, but that's all").

Unarmed's Turn

Unarmed does a Combination or Rapid Strike. If it had been untrained, they could do the same thing with AoA Double.

First, they do a grapple of the arm. It seems to be Wrestling-based but could easily use the Judo skill. It doesn't appear to be a traditional pain-compliance lock, so we'll just call it an attack, targeting the arm (no location penalties b/c the arm is already grappled!). Control Points accumulate, which brings with it DX penalties for Dagger, hopefully impacting Parry. It's also now in Close Combat...but who cares because it's a dagger.

They follow with stepping even farther into close combat with a targeted attack to the face. Dagger tries to parry but cannot overcome the momentum of the blow (a good case for "spending CP to lower other party's defense). They can also spend control points to do any or all of lowering the hit location penalty or increasing the damage of the punch. Or they can just retain the grapple and the penalties it gives. Hopefully this stuns the foe.

The Counter

This is a bit rough, but I think it works. It relies on GURPS being only resolvable after the fact.

To me, it looks like Unarmed used a Wait to interrupt a Step. Unarmed grapples the upraised arm.

What Dagger does then is force a position change (in the parlance of Technical Grappling, forces a change in Relative Facing). To me, this looks like the use of a Sweep, but instead of knocking the person off their feet, the margin of victory in the Quick Contest instead goes to spinning the person around. 2 points required to rotate to attack a side, 6 points requires to rotate all the way around to the back.

Done as a Sweep-and-Attack Combination Technique, I think that works.

It requires that we consider the first motion a Wait-and-Attack that interrupts Dagger's Step, but that's what the video looks like to me.

[DouglasCole]

Originally Posted by DouglasCole

Dagger's Turn

Dagger attacks...

Thinking about the first one, I'm going to also suggest that the way this starts out, with Dagger in high guard, doing a step-and-attack, that Unarmed was in fact executing a Wait following an Evaluate, and stepping in with a practiced Combination of Grapple (arm) and Punch.

That actually gives the highest fidelity of "Unarmed does All the Things while Dagger just stands there."

[Gigermann]

Originally Posted by Kromm

That looks like either Counterattack (Martial Arts, p. 70) or Riposte (Martial Arts, pp. 125-125).

Yeah, I thought about Counterattack, but the fluff there doesn't quite agree—but then the fluff doesn't always tell the whole story, hence the "What Is A…?" sidebars in Martial Arts.

There is precedent in the entry for Wing Chun on MA203 that includes "This sometimes follows a parry that drags down the opponent’s guard to open him up for the combo; model this as a Counterattack." I also thought the -2 Parry was a little weak given the (no doubt, exaggerated) results. But if you combine the Riposte and Counterattack…

Originally Posted by DouglasCole

This is one possible example of what spending control points looks like if you're using Technical Grappling or Fantastic Dungeon Grappling.

I did consider TG and I can see the potential. But is it a grapple if you don't actually "close your grip" or otherwise "trap" the limb? Or does TG change "grapple" to mean any hostile control applied, whether trapped or not?

(That first exchange in the video probably isn't the best example of the technique I'm examining here.)

[DouglasCole]

Originally Posted by Gigermann

I did consider TG and I can see the potential. But is it a grapple if you don't actually "close your grip" or otherwise "trap" the limb? Or does TG change "grapple" to mean any hostile control applied, whether trapped or not?

(That first exchange in the video probably isn't the best example of the technique I'm examining here.)

https://gamingballistic.com/2020/11/...eep-technique/

I go into detail in the post...but the move that is being done as part of the "counter" is VERY much "Shoving People Around," done as an attack part of a Rapid Strike, from Martial Arts p. 118.

"If you win, you may move behind him (your facing
changes), spin him to put his back to you (his facing
changes), or force him to take a step in any direction with
you – all without letting go."

This assumes a grapple, but there's precedent for not requiring one - Sweep.

What Technical or Fantastic Dungeon Grappling would do is say "grapples are mutual," and that contact that Unarmed Guy did to intercept the dagger counts as one, so Shoving People Around applies.

[DouglasCole]

Originally Posted by Gigermann

does TG change "grapple" to mean any hostile control applied, whether trapped or not?

Just to comment on this. I'm not sure if it's stated outright in either TG or Fantastic Dungeon Grappling...but that's precisely how I think of it. FDG even has shield and blade "binds" being non-persistent grapples you can break free of simply by backing up. I think treating a grapple as any move to restrain the foe's available options and movement, persistent or not, makes for pleasing gameplay and subsumes a LOT of fun things into a core of simple concepts.

[Gigermann]

Originally Posted by DouglasCole

This assumes a grapple, but there's precedent for not requiring one - Sweep.

I also thought about Sweep—which I discounted due to the usual result that the failed opponent ends up prone/supine. But if it's modified to cause other conditions—like Shoving People Around—then that's a really good match. I do kinda wonder if it should be a separate Technique—but what the hell is this thing called? :P

Having said that, I wonder if Sweep (et al) should have an allowance for "partial success"? Precedent: "Knocking a Weapon Away" (B401); If your foe wins or ties, he keeps his weapon, but it will be unready unless he won by 3 or more.

[DouglasCole]

Originally Posted by Gigermann

I also thought about Sweep—which I discounted due to the usual result that the failed opponent ends up prone/supine. But if it's modified to cause other conditions—like Shoving People Around—then that's a really good match. I do kinda wonder if it should be a separate Technique—but what the hell is this thing called? :P

In TG it's called "Change Position" or the more detailed "Change Relative Facing," but that's very particular.

"Reposition" isn't horrid.

Even so, the end result of Shoving People Around is pretty clear: Step (which is what I mostly focused on prior), change your facing, change his facing. I"m somewhat embarrassed I didn't keep the facing changes in my mind, but since I'm pretty sure most of the manipulation that isn't Posture is based on Shoving People Around, perhaps I didn't forget as much as I thought.

Having said that, I wonder if Sweep (et al) should have an allowance for "partial success"? Precedent: "Knocking a Weapon Away" (B401); If your foe wins or ties, he keeps his weapon, but it will be unready unless he won by 3 or more.

In the blog post I originally had some degree of partial success, where if you made it at all, you could rotate foe one hex-side. Made it by 2 was two hex-sides, and make it by 4 was three.

I think "rotate one hex side" is mostly fairly useless since you can mostly do whatever you want to any of the front hexes. So "win by 2" is the minimum case to be of typical use (I have moved to his flanking hex), and "win by 4" (or if you use the TG model, win by 6 because side-to-rear was -4 stacking with front-to-side being -2) is the case you see in the video.

[Plane]

Originally Posted by Gigermann

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zxKklcP-jkE

I'm referring to the "pushing the arms aside at the elbow, collapsing the opponent's structure, momentarily preventing further attack/defense." (Primarily seen as the "counter" in the video examples.)

having trouble understanding which point in long vid you're referencing, how many minutes/seconds in?