Flying Tackle - does that not Grapple the opponent anymore?

[Icelander]

Originally Posted by Kromm

Giving out position for free as a result of a flying tackle, a sweep followed by a dive into close combat, etc. wouldn't be game-breaking or unbalanced; giving out grapples and pins definitely would be.

Given that

a) You think that a small bonus to grapples following flying tackles would be justified and a small bonus, to me, means maybe a +2 or so

and

b) A flying tackle is at +4 relative to other slams

and also

c) A Rapid Strike attack is at -6

would you think it was balanced, realistic and elegant to allow the character making a Flying Tackle to select at the time of attack whether he wanted to make a single Slam at +4 to hit or one Slam and one Grapple, both at no modifier?

[Gold & Appel Inc]

Originally Posted by Icelander

would you think it was balanced, realistic and elegant to allow the character making a Flying Tackle to select at the time of attack whether he wanted to make a single Slam at +4 to hit or one Slam and one Grapple, both at no modifier?

Nah, I'd just apply the bonus to the chance to hit with the initial tackle (for a net -2 to tackle and -6 to grapple if you also intend to grapple on a Rapid Strike) to keep it a maneuver that a normal person wouldn't even consider without an AoA, but which an highly skilled Sumo Wrestler could pull off without sweating it.

[Ultraviolet]

I think maybe I'll try to add the House Rule of 'Position':

If you bring an opponent to the ground and go down with him, you have the upper hand for the following actions, though he is not Pinned nor even Grappled. This happens with Flying Tackles, with a Takedown where you Dive down with him, a Sweep where you Dive*. The effect of the Attacker having Position is that the following Grapple is at a +2 bonus. But both parties must still factor in Ground Fighting. The effects on the Defender is that he can't Change Posture, unless he wins a ST/DX contest If he wins the Attackers bonus of Grapple is void. Remember he is not yet Grappled, and does not suffer this penalty.

*) I need to think whether a Sarcifce Throw does this as well, or a regular Judo Throw where you Dive in. The wording of Sprawling (MA119) sounds like you get Position, if you win the contest.

So in effect, the Attacker has a small advantage. If he doesn't Grapple until his next round, the Defender has a final chance to annull this. If the attacker makes an AoA:Diuble or a Rapid Strike in order to Grapple right away, the Defender does not get this chance.

[Tomsdad]

Originally Posted by Hellboy

Kromm regarding the full move reduction to half move on MA99. This is in the context of "can launch another melee attack before he slams".

So that covers punch-then-slam or grapple-then-slam. Maybe kick-then-slam, hard as it is to visualize. What about slamming first then grappling as second attack?

I'd certainly allow a AoA (dbl) Slam & grapple but with the half move.

If you wanted the full move I'd rule it would have to be an AoA (S or D) to get the Full move slam and then if you wanted to tack a grapple on the same action I'd make it a rapid strike. I'd certainly allow combinations that buy off the rapid strike penalties, (I've seen, done and felt enough of those on the Rugby pitch!).

What I would say is if you were doing a slam followed by an immediate grapple you'll need to keep an eye on relative postures, as the slam might well have your target on his back!

One thing though if you really wanted to get a bit of extra range I would allow a AoA (Dbl) Flying tackle & grapple. But I have to look at how the grapple interacted with you ending up prone from the flying tackle (as well as the target potentially). I've seen this kind of move as an attempt to drag the target down, but also to keep you self upright! I.e I'd look at the forced posture change and mass based moves rules in TG

[Ultraviolet]

Wow, that is a *really* old post which has resurfaced! I can't recall asking this question, or even why. Not even after re-reading it.

I can tell that in the meantime my regularly played Cliffhangers campaign has had none of these problems. And I have yet to houserule 'position' into the game.

I can't even recall if we use AoA for Slams or just Move-and-Attack. I spuuose the +2 dam for Strong is nice, but AoA only gives halv Move while Move-and-Attack gives full. If you calculate impact speed for yards run rather than simply speed at the time of impact it can be a mathematical exercise to figure out which is better.

I Slam a great deal with my character, using Increased HP, moderately high Move, and Sumo at DX+2. I don't think I've ever made a Flying Tackle.

[jason taylor]

Originally Posted by Verjigorm

If I'm not mistaken, a flying tackle is a slam, which does not grapple. If you want to make a flying tackle + grapple, you need to All-out Attack(double) or a Rapid-Strike. If the Rapid Strike option is possible, then you can learn a combination that would be Flying Tackle(Torso) + Grapple(Torso).

I'd be leery of letting the Flying Tackle do too much on it's own: Slams are already VERY effective, and when I think of the reality check: I see too many missed tackles in football. There's plenty of times a linebacker will perform a flying tackle, hit a running back or receiver, but fail to grapple him.

When I was more into football long time ago I paid attention to the intellectual side of it and read handbooks. They tended to advise making a tackle primarily by turning oneself into a projectile and secondarily by grappling. If I remember keeping one foot at least on the ground at the point of impact was also advised, so "flying" may not be the word. Certainly once you are in the air you have turned off your internal guidance before the warhead goes off so to speak.

[Tomsdad]

Originally Posted by Hellboy

Since you slam with torso (presumably) and grab with hands, could that be done as a Dual Weapon Attack instead of a rapid strike?

If you like go for it.

I think we moving away from the Usual dual weapon attack here, and I see a slam as more whole body thing than just the torso, but ultimately if you like the idea than go for it

[The Benj]

Originally Posted by Hellboy

Since you slam with torso (presumably) and grab with hands, could that be done as a Dual Weapon Attack instead of a rapid strike?

I like the idea. It seems like a natural combo, so making it a little easier to pull off (and a little harder to defend against) seems apt.

[Tomsdad]

Originally Posted by The Benj

I like the idea. It seems like a natural combo, so making it a little easier to pull off (and a little harder to defend against) seems apt.

In some way it make things easier to do it as a dual attack (don't need to worry about the posture the slam leaves your target in for one thing).

But I guess it raises the question what happens if the slam/flying tackle half of the dual attack misses?

I.e the grapple to me seems to be dependent on the slam/tackle landing.

FWIW from MApg127 Dual weapon attacks:

"This option is allowed for two unarmed attacks with different hands."

So strictly by RAW neither slams or two handed grapples qualify.


But that said a combination of slam and grapple seems natural enough to justify making it -4/-4 without losing sleep over it!

For me it's really going to depends on what the slam/tackle looks like. If its an open armed one (so say a rugby tackle where your trying to lead with shoulder and then scoop them up in a grapple*, as opposed to a NFL spear) I have no issue allowing it at -4/-4. But I may rule the slam is slightly less powerful.


*some of these are interesting because in GURPS terms in some rugby slams the slammer is not moving very fast but the velocity is being supplied by the target coming on to them! Some good high speed TG stuff there actually (also nasty clothesline at 2.11!)

[Tomsdad]

Actually despite what I said above I guess I could see a missed slam but a successful grapple! (you'd just have to ignore the stuff about travelling on past the target)