Steve Jackson Games - Site Navigation
Home General Info Follow Us Search Illuminator Store Forums What's New Other Games Ogre GURPS Munchkin Our Games: Home

Go Back   Steve Jackson Games Forums > Roleplaying > GURPS

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 09-14-2016, 08:00 AM   #1
Gnome
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Cambridge, MA
Default [Martial Arts] No defense against Backbreaker?

MA: "If your opponent fails to break free on his turn, roll against Backbreaker on your next turn. Success means you lift up your victim, drop to one knee, and smash his back across your other knee."

The book doesn't mention defense! Does that mean no active defense is possible against a Backbreaker? That makes this kind of the ultimate move for a big, strong wrestler.
Of course he has to successfully grapple the opponent, but then he only has to succeed on Wrestling-3 (or better if he can improve the technique) to utterly annihilate the enemy with sw crushing to the spine.

Am I interpreting this correctly? Why would I ever use Bear Hug, Wrench Spine, Piledriver, or any other damaging wrestling move if this is so utterly dominant?
Gnome is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-14-2016, 08:21 AM   #2
Phantasm
 
Phantasm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: On the road again...
Default Re: [Martial Arts] No defense against Backbreaker?

Backbreaker seems to imply that you've got him grappled already, which means the only real defense against it is breaking free... which won't happen on the attacker's turn. That said - and I don't have my copy of Martial Arts handy, it being dead tree - does it explicitly say "no active defense allowed"? If not, I would probably allow a Dodge or - in some cases - a Roll With Blow technique

The other techniques you've mentioned are alternative attacks, some specifying how you're grappling your opponent. I can easily see a Bear Hug followed by a Backbreaker, for instance.
__________________
"Life ... is an Oreo cookie." - J'onn J'onzz, 1991

"But mom, I don't wanna go back in the dungeon!"

The GURPS Marvel Universe Reboot Project A-G, H-R, and S-Z, and its not-a-wiki-really web adaptation.
Ranoc, a Muskets-and-Magery Renaissance Fantasy Setting

Last edited by Phantasm; 10-10-2016 at 12:53 PM.
Phantasm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-14-2016, 08:30 AM   #3
Tomsdad
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Brighton
Default Re: [Martial Arts] No defense against Backbreaker?

It's one of those moves that kind of benefits from Technical Grappling, which makes it harder to do at all as you use HT as the base attribute not ST (with a further penalty based off the targets weight and your BL* so your ST it still a factor) your target can still use their ST in the contest, and it has worse repercussions for you if you fail. Of course in TG Control Points might well reduce the target's chosen stat for the contest


*as opposed to the version in Martial Arts that just has a hard and fast threshold for who you can do it to set at BLx4. So say for example your target is 160lb and has 30lb of kit on them you'll need a ST (or lifting ST) of 14 to attempt this. (EDIT no I'm wrong you'd need ST15)

Last edited by Tomsdad; 09-14-2016 at 02:14 PM.
Tomsdad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-14-2016, 08:52 AM   #4
Tomsdad
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Brighton
Default Re: [Martial Arts] No defense against Backbreaker?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Phantasm View Post
Backbreaker seems to imply that you'veee got him grappled already, which means the only real defense against it is breaking free... which won't happen on the attacker's turn. That said - and I don't have my copy of Martial Arts handy, it being dead tree - does it explicitly say "no active defense allowed"?
It doesn't (but do any techniques?)



Quote:
Originally Posted by Phantasm View Post
If not, I would probably allow a Dodge or - in some cases - a Roll With Blow technique

The other techniques you've mentioned are alternative attacks, some specifying how you're grapplling your opponent. I can easily see a Bear Hug followed by a Backbreaker, for instance.
Looking at Campaigns and MA I think such moves that follow a successful grapple (and potentially an unsuccessful break free) that are quick contests seem not to involve active defences as well. The targets roll in the QC is their defence?


But yeah I think I'd allow break fall in this instance as it would seem to fit (TG allows it to mitigate the falling damage the target may receive in some instances)!

Last edited by Tomsdad; 09-14-2016 at 09:59 AM.
Tomsdad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-14-2016, 10:23 AM   #5
evileeyore
Banned
 
evileeyore's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: 100 hurricane swamp
Default Re: [Martial Arts] No defense against Backbreaker?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Phantasm View Post
Backbreaker seems to imply that you'veee got him grappled already...
Not just implied, Backbreaker out right states: "To attempt this, you must first grapple your foe with two hands around the torso."


Quote:
Originally Posted by Tomsdad View Post
It doesn't (but do any techniques?)
Wrench Spine is a Quick Contest. As is Arm Lock, Neck Snap, etc. That is the 'defense' against those techniques.


I agree, as Backbreaker is completely cinematic, I'd allow Roll With Blow or Breakfall to mitigate damage.
evileeyore is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-14-2016, 10:28 AM   #6
Railstar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Default Re: [Martial Arts] No defense against Backbreaker?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gnome View Post
Am I interpreting this correctly? Why would I ever use Bear Hug, Wrench Spine, Piledriver, or any other damaging wrestling move if this is so utterly dominant?
Is it so utterly dominant? Or are you assuming certain conditions.

First assumption is a cinematic campaign, you need Trained By A Master to improve it above base level.

Second assumption is really high skills, because skill 13-14 is professional-level, so unless the genre is one that specifically encourages really high scores (Dungeon Fantasy, Action, Supers, Monster Hunters) then your Backbreaker is unlikely to have a skill higher than 12. Also, since it's a ST based move, you don't get the usual DX based benefits from All-Out Attack.

Third assumption is massive ST, because BLx4 (needed to lift the target) is quite demanding. ST 14 is BL 39 lbs, 39 x4 = 156 lbs. I would say most opponents, especially in armour, will be much heavier than that.

Fourth assumption is your damage is high enough to reliably inflict a major wound against a location with bonus DR 3 - unless you inflict a major wound, the only difference hitting the spine makes is giving the opponent extra DR.

Under those conditions, maybe Backbreaker can be useful, but those are very narrow conditions. It is a very specific campaign where all 4 assumptions can be reasonably expected.

Armourless, weaponless, high-skill fights are where Backbreaker has an advantage.

-if fighting armour then Arm Lock (+Throws From Locks), Choke Hold (really crank that high ST) or Piledriver can at least target places less likely to be armoured.

-if fighting weapons then Arm Lock or Wrench Limb would at least stop them from using the weapon on you.

-if low skill then you'd be better off using attacks with less harsh penalties (if your skill is low) or entering Quick Contests (if their skill is low).

But, for an armourless, weaponless fight... remember that the police will find "self-defence" more plausible if you just broke his arm than if you picked the guy up and broke his spine over your knee.
Railstar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-14-2016, 10:49 AM   #7
Gnome
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Cambridge, MA
Default Re: [Martial Arts] No defense against Backbreaker?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Railstar View Post
Is it so utterly dominant? Or are you assuming certain conditions.

First assumption is a cinematic campaign, you need Trained By A Master to improve it above base level.
Wrestling-3 is not too hard to pull off.
Quote:
Second assumption is really high skills, because skill 13-14 is professional-level, so unless the genre is one that specifically encourages really high scores (Dungeon Fantasy, Action, Supers, Monster Hunters) then your Backbreaker is unlikely to have a skill higher than 12. Also, since it's a ST based move, you don't get the usual DX based benefits from All-Out Attack.
I was thinking about this because in a DF game a PC may get into a brawl with an Ogre. The Ogre has Wrestling-14, high enough to succeed more often than not on Wrestling-3.
Quote:
Third assumption is massive ST, because BLx4 (needed to lift the target) is quite demanding. ST 14 is BL 39 lbs, 39 x4 = 156 lbs. I would say most opponents, especially in armour, will be much heavier than that.
Ogre.
Quote:
Fourth assumption is your damage is high enough to reliably inflict a major wound against a location with bonus DR 3 - unless you inflict a major wound, the only difference hitting the spine makes is giving the opponent extra DR.
Again, Ogre. I think I said in the OP that I'm afraid it's dominant for a big, strong wrestler.
Quote:
Under those conditions, maybe Backbreaker can be useful, but those are very narrow conditions. It is a very specific campaign where all 4 assumptions can be reasonably expected.
DF with an Ogre, while narrow, seems like it applies to many, many games.
Quote:
Armourless, weaponless, high-skill fights are where Backbreaker has an advantage.
Yes, I was specifically talking about unarmed combat of course.

Quote:
But, for an armourless, weaponless fight... remember that the police will find "self-defence" more plausible if you just broke his arm than if you picked the guy up and broke his spine over your knee.
Good point. The encounter will be in the city, so that's a reason the Ogre might think twice about using such a violent move.
Gnome is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-14-2016, 10:53 AM   #8
Gnome
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Cambridge, MA
Default Re: [Martial Arts] No defense against Backbreaker?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Phantasm View Post
Backbreaker seems to imply that you'veee got him grappled already, which means the only real defense against it is breaking free... which won't happen on the attacker's turn. That said - and I don't have my copy of Martial Arts handy, it being dead tree - does it explicitly say "no active defense allowed"? If not, I would probably allow a Dodge or - in some cases - a Roll With Blow technique

The other techniques you've mentioned are alternative attacks, some specifying how you're grapplling your opponent. I can easily see a Bear Hug followed by a Backbreaker, for instance.
Other techniques specify what defense, if any, is applicable. This one says nothing about it: hence my post! A QC would be fine (a different way to defend), but the book doesn't mention a QC. Yes you have to grapple the opponent, but that's also true of Bear Hug, Wrench Spine, all Locks, etc.
Gnome is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-14-2016, 11:18 AM   #9
evileeyore
Banned
 
evileeyore's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: 100 hurricane swamp
Default Re: [Martial Arts] No defense against Backbreaker?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gnome View Post
DF ... Ogre... Ogre ... Ogre... Ogre... Ogre... Ogre might think twice about using such a violent move.
All thing considered my DF Barbarian Ogress Wrestler (skill 16) goes for Neck Snap (faster, less muss and fuss in combat) or Limb Wrench (if we really want the foe alive and disabled).

Backbreaker is one of those... "looks good on paper and sounds cool and is totes a heel move" but is surpassed by simpler techniques in a 'real combat'* situation.



* For various levels of Elf Eared Reality.
evileeyore is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-14-2016, 11:28 AM   #10
Ulzgoroth
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Default Re: [Martial Arts] No defense against Backbreaker?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gnome View Post
Ogre. Again, Ogre. I think I said in the OP that I'm afraid it's dominant for a big, strong wrestler.
Ogre covers a bit, but I don't think 'big strong wrestler' clearly conveys 'superhuman'...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gnome View Post
DF with an Ogre, while narrow, seems like it applies to many, many games.

Yes, I was specifically talking about unarmed combat of course.
Combat where neither side is armed is a bit of a niche in DF, though.
__________________
I don't know any 3e, so there is no chance that I am talking about 3e rules by accident.
Ulzgoroth is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Fnords are Off
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:01 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.