Unarmed vs. Knife

[vicky_molokh]

Originally Posted by Tomsdad

Hang on, the post I responded to said CA,

CA (from a Wait) for the first two hexes of movement into his rear-left hex (alternatively, rear-right). Still need your own turn to get into CC from the rear arc.

Originally Posted by Tomsdad

Thats for the grappler, what about the grappled, it's also after the grapple has been established what about just being in CC

Well, if a grappler needs to Shove People Around, surely the grappled needs it too?
As for just being in CC, it seems to care from what are the entry occurs.

Originally Posted by Tomsdad

right (but only after wait allowing you to string both together without allowing the target a chance to move) and he can still retreat against your step/grapple to CC.

Yes, he can, getting +1 with his Knife Parry.
As for stringing together - that's only fair, for our Wait allowed the opponent to also effectively string together two manoeuvres.

Originally Posted by Tomsdad

yes but at lower skill (sweep is skill -3, trip is skill parry -1) and actually since is expressly says you can attack with trip, I wouldn't allow you to feint with it (offensive trip is basically sweep)

Surely Feint doesn't take the penalty for the attack which it imitates? After all, it doesn't make a weapon Unready for weapons that do after an attack.
Even if you rule that it does, a Feint against 13 vs 12 seems better than nothing.

Originally Posted by Tomsdad

Only how does that make the left hand punch not wild?

Apparently it does (I missed that on first read), unless the enemy has Peripheral Vision. Though I wonder if a Side Kick technique is included in Back Kick; probably not.

Originally Posted by Tomsdad

To be fair I'm not sure I really care how two speedsters with ATR works out, it not really my level of play. I was just pointing out that given the premise of GURPS combat is concurrent action in 1 second cycle, Wait in this scenario risks being abused to an extant that breaks that basic premise.

If Wait doesn't let one still act at one's next turn according to combat sequence, Wait becomes a very poor choice.

Originally Posted by Tomsdad

Only if you Wait-CA double step into his rear left hex, he'll retreat as a response to you penalised attack, ruining you position tactic, he'll then complete his attack (benefiting from the potential chance in position) and you'll be hit with CA defence penalties.

Hmm?
"Wait-CA double-step into his rear-left hex, then Attack into his rear into CC before he gets his turn. "
So he doesn't get to do anything against our CA (we're Feinting), and when we Attack (with a step into CC), he gets his usual runaround Active Defence from a rear arc, trying to Retreat. If he retreated successfully, he can now make his attack, at which point we're in an Attack state, not CA state.

We're still discussing the primary Wait-and-flank double-action tactic? If we went off on the single-action tactic to the fullest, then my answers are indeed off.

Originally Posted by Tomsdad

Thing is to get two attacks in row you still have to be in CC range twice, and you can't do that and get round to flank hex.

And you can't be in CC twice with the double-action tactic; I shouldn't've went on this tangent.

Originally Posted by Tomsdad

Because you can't grab any arm from his back hex, you can only grab in CC.

we seem to constantly talking past each on this one so lets restate.

We need a picture. By 'step into his rear' I meant stepping towards him, into the rear arc of his CC hex. To reiterate:
First hex of movement is from his front hex into his left-front hex.
Second movement from his left-front to his rear-left hex.
Next turn, step into his rear, within his hex, which meets criteria for both 'Close Combat' (same hex) and his rear arc. You're no longer in his side hex, you're behind him, close enough to choke, or to grab his either arm. I'm not sure if my post is enough to visualise it.

Really, this forum needs a standardised way of naming hexes by letter and number, like squares in chess. How about this?

Originally Posted by Tomsdad

And again facing penalties apply for attacks form the back hex(es), where are the rules (other then in TG) for facing and CC?

I'll try to find them eventually.

Originally Posted by Tomsdad

I'm happy to look at all of them But I suggest we do one at a time, because I think were confusing each other because we're not sure which set up we're referring to at each point of the the back and forth here.

Sure we do. Especially with longue-ish posts of ours.

Originally Posted by Tomsdad

That seems reasonable, or course the QC will be based off your Sweep or trip skill, which makes sense its harder to believably pretend to sweep than pretend to punch.

That seems counterintuitive to me. If so, people would never feint-pretend making anything other than the Attack they have the highest level in (e.g. Arm Locks for close combat grappler, Spinning Attack with Technique Mastery for strikers etc.)

[Rockwolf66]

Originally Posted by Tomsdad

TBH that to me is the difference between MA's that include weapons training and thus techniques to fight with and defend against knives, and treat knives as continuation of the MA. And those that default to unarmed and only train to defend against knives. (and basically treat knives as an out of context problem).

Plus you have to look at how a knife is used in that society. With the Japanese they use a knife primarily as a thrusting/stabbing weapon. If you watch videos on Tantojitsu you will see lots of stabbing and very little slashing.

I posted the first in a series of Jujitsu drills as it seemed closest to some of the possible scenarios that people were talking about. Now do the techniques work. Yes they do and they have kept a knife out of my guts. Do I ever want to have to use them again outside of a dojo. Not in 1,000,000 years. If I ever have to deal with someone looking to stick a knife in me I would much rather deal with them using a .300 Winmag sniper rifle at 1,000m.

Still as Tomsdad has pointed out most martial arts view weapon training as secondary to empty hand training.

[BraselC5048]

Why is everybody assuming Judo is the best option? From the standpoint of somebody using Karate, the options almost seem a lot better. Low odds of disarming, but good odds of wining the fight by simply beating him up enough.

Why not a simple Kick to the weapon hand, using Karate? If you've spent the 3 points to buy off the -2 for kicking, it's a 14 or less roll to hit (assuming skill 18). The target, assuming Knife-12, has Parry 9. If he fails, you've pretty much gotten rid of the problem, since now the knife in on the ground and his hand is broken. If he doesn't give up, then just start beating him up. If he passes his Parry, he gets an attack roll against 8 or less on your leg, a 25% chance, and hopefully something that won't happen. A -1 deceptive attack might be worth it then. If he has Knife-10, then it's Parry 8 and an attack roll against 6 if he passes.

Alternately, if you want to go for a good fight-ender on a regular basis, buy off the Skull location. For 5? points you're rolling against 15 or less as above, but if it hits (especially kicking), then you've likely knocked him out.

Or you could go for a Sweep, it'll likely work, although he's at no penalty to parry, which could be bad. Next turn he's at -2 to defend. A jump kick to the torso he'll be defending against at -4, or 5 or less at Knife-12, not good odds, you'll be rolling against 14 still, and he won't be retreating. A kick to the hand against 14, if you've bought off Kicking, or a punch to the hand if otherwise, and he'll be at -2 to defend attacking at effective skill 14.

Disarming is a risky option, you'll still only be rolling against 11 to hit.


Another option is a jump kick to the Torso. You'll have skill 14, he'll be at -2 for his already bad Parry, ST 13 will be doing 1d+4, ST 11-12 1d+3, and hope for a major wound. He'll be stunned for -4 to his next attack anyway. With 12 HP from ST 12, if you have ST 13 it will be a major wound half the time if you're ST 13 or more.

If he has 10 or 11 HP, then it's up to 2/3rds chance of a major wound. If that fails, since his next attack will be at -4, rolling against 8 even at skill 12, that's not good odds, and of course you can retreat for a net +1 to defenses if he does, for Parry-14. Then on your turn, just do it again, it's almost certain to put him below 1/3rd HP. If he has 10 HP, and you're ST 13, then it's a 100% chance he'll be at 0 HP or less. If you can put Extra Effort behind it in your game, then one kick ending it is a lot more likely.

Ironically, seems like throwing a jump kick is the safest option. The damage bonus coupled with the same penalty's worth of Deceptive Attack more than makes up for the -2 to defenses for somebody with skill high enough to make reliable.

If he's got a friend or two, then Judo will put you in a pretty bad spot. Karate works much better if you're outnumbered, since you have much better defenses, then can turn on the next one, assuming he doesn't run off in the first place. If you're an acrobatic fighter with Dodge high enough to make it reliable, being outnumbered gets a lot less bad.

[Toptomcat]

Originally Posted by BraselC5048

If he's got a friend or two, then Judo will put you in a pretty bad spot.

The original question specified 'an assailant', in the singular, and in my post I specifically mentioned that if things were otherwise I'd be thinking about Karate rather than Judo.

Why not a simple Kick to the weapon hand, using Karate?

A Judo Arm Lock is just about as disabling to the weapon arm as a good Kick- but it defaults to full Judo skill. With the three points it takes a karateka to raise Kicking to Karate level, a judoka can buy Arm Lock at Judo + 3...and the technique doesn't take Targeted Attack penalties, so a Judoka with skill 18 is Arm Locking at skill 21, where the karateka is Kicking at skill 14. This buys four points of Deceptive Attack while still retaining the critical-success benefits of an effective skill at 16+.

The knife-12 guy is likely retreating, bringing his Parry to 10 rather than 9. So the karateka, with an attack roll that succeeds 90.7% of the time (and crits 1.9% of the time), has even odds of being parried- while the judoka's attack succeeds 98.1% of the time (and crits 9.3% of the time) and has a 25.9% chance of being parried.

Buying up additional techniques like Sweep or Jump Kick can help the karateka...but this permits the judoka additional points to invest in more Arm Lock (possibly Technique-Mastered) or Counterattack.

The karateka does have the real and meaningful advantage that he doesn't need to wait to successfully parry before he can attack. But the point-efficiency case for the Judo approach remains very strong.

[Gold & Appel Inc]

Originally Posted by TheOneRonin

[snip] In addition to seeing your options/tactics/techniques of choice, I'd like to know WHY you would choose that method over any of the other options available.

Didn't read the thread; sorry. RL Example: the one time a guy tried to stab me, I did an AoA (Determined) grapple on his knife arm, and then used that for leverage to knock him around and do grappled-Parries until I got him to drop it. I chose it because he was totally not expecting it and it seemed like the best idea at the time. The police pulled me off of him way too soon after that.

[Tomsdad]

Originally Posted by vicky_molokh

CA (from a Wait) for the first two hexes of movement into his rear-left hex (alternatively, rear-right). Still need your own turn to get into CC from the rear arc.

Right yes (sorry I thought you'd said you would be grappling on the first turn with the wait triggered CA).

Originally Posted by vicky_molokh

Well, if a grappler needs to Shove People Around, surely the grappled needs it too?

Only shoving is about changing the facing of the other, not yourself.

Only shoving (or being shoved) people round is not the only way to change your facing. And it changing your facing we're interested in. we only referencing shoving because it only in that context that facing is referenced in CC.

Remember what were talking about here, on a second by second basis someone's going to interrupt move two hexes, with facing change, parry and slip then attack from behind, all while the target stands motionless in terms of facing (but still managing to attack).

TG has rules for changing relative facing, and for what starting relative facing is, but then TG also makes grappling a more gradual and gradiated process.

Originally Posted by vicky_molokh

As for just being in CC, it seems to care from what are the entry occurs.

But only in the context of what hexes you can leave it by, and weather or not you need an evade.

Originally Posted by vicky_molokh

Yes, he can, getting +1 with his Knife Parry.
As for stringing together - that's only fair, for our Wait allowed the opponent to also effectively string together two manoeuvres.

Oh the stringing together aspect is fine (as I said that wait makes wait-feint and attack so good, or even wait-set up, and attack). But how did the opponent get two consecutive manoeuvres?

Originally Posted by vicky_molokh

Surely Feint doesn't take the penalty for the attack which it imitates? After all, it doesn't make a weapon Unready for weapons that do after an attack.
Even if you rule that it does, a Feint against 13 vs 12 seems better than nothing.

Feint just says roll melee skills (and MA refines that to roll highest melee skill to resist). Obviously most of the time its not going to matter because as you say the attack doesn't actually happen and there's no benefit to choosing any that's not your highest skill. My general argument would be if you pretending to do a thing how well you pretend to do it will depend on how well you can do it. Bit in a game balance POV I'd do it so you don't get double effect.

Take the kick vs. strike issue here. Strike is reach C, kick is reach 1. You can't feint with strike unless in CC. But you can feint with kick at reach 1.

So IMO you make you choice you can feint at CC with full karate skill, or you can feint at reach 1 with your karate(kick) skill. But you can't feint at reach 1 with you karate (strike) skill.

Interestingly this only really come up with unarmed skills, which tend to have a greater variety of techniques that allow you to play with stuff like reach and damage with corresponding balancing mods. I'd argue that you have to bring those mods with you when feinting as well as attacking. But I agree RAW is silent on it. It depends on how you read "compare melee skills". It's is how I initially read it and how I've always played it.

Think of it this way, you can increase the reach of a melee attack, with AoA(l), would you allow someone to declare A feint - AoA(l) and as the attack doesn't happen not take all the AoA penalties?

Not that AoA(l) and Kick tech are completely analogous of course!

Basically feinting at extra reach is very powerful because not only are you increasing situations were feint is useful, but you reducing the risk of giving up the attack as well.

Originally Posted by vicky_molokh

Apparently it does (I missed that on first read), unless the enemy has Peripheral Vision. Though I wonder if a Side Kick technique is included in Back Kick; probably not.

It's a tough one, because realistic I see no difference between kicking, striking or elbowing to the back left, back centre of back right (outside of lead/trailing, dominant left/right limbs questions of course). Just as attacking to any of the front three hexes isn't any different.

However, Elbow and back kick or back strike already largely circumvent the wild attack penalties as it is.

(so I can wild strike with my sword at -5 with a max skill 9, or I can just do a back strike at -2 and accept -2 pen to defences, which I'm not going to be relying on anyway what with being attacked from behind.

So ehh, I'm not sure

Originally Posted by vicky_molokh

If Wait doesn't let one still act at one's next turn according to combat sequence, Wait becomes a very poor choice.

Oh I've no problem with wait allowing you to string two actions together, but I always try and refer back to what actually happening and asses it by that criteria, rather than abstract rules.

In theory you could do the following

Chap steps forward into the hex in front of you face to face you wait and feint with step, he then attacks you defend and side step, you then CA moving another hex and into CC.

You have been able to string two actions together and respond to him twice (wait and parry slip), allowing you to take 4 steps. While he has basically been an observer unable to act to avoid the chap who's just dashed to his rear and attacked him. What I find odd is that due to order of movement and attacking, the chap can attack no problem, he can even adjust his attack to the changing situation, but he remains standing fixed forward. What I might allow that free facing change to be allowable after the attack not just after the step. (abut that might less OTT position tactics harder)

It's not problem with wait, or problem with getting an extra step of defending, it when it's both together that gets a bit OTT. But even that's fine to an extent as everyone can do it. It when it get ended with grapple to the back and all that bonus I start getting a bit twitchy on it.

[Tomsdad]

Originally Posted by vicky_molokh

Hmm?
"Wait-CA double-step into his rear-left hex, then Attack into his rear into CC before he gets his turn. "
So he doesn't get to do anything against our CA (we're Feinting), and when we Attack (with a step into CC), he gets his usual runaround Active Defence from a rear arc, trying to Retreat. If he retreated successfully, he can now make his attack, at which point we're in an Attack state, not CA state.

hang on is it wait-CA double step

or

Wait-feint single step?

Or are you

Feinting-CA (not sure you can do that see above) and just using the double step, and then making another attack with step to get into CC from his flank, or another CA to double step into rear and then into CC?

You point about he can't do anything against you CA "because you're feinting" suggests you're doing the latter?


We're still discussing the primary Wait-and-flank double-action tactic? If we went off on the single-action tactic to the fullest, then my answers are indeed off.

Originally Posted by vicky_molokh

And you can't be in CC twice with the double-action tactic; I shouldn't've went on this tangent.

No worries,

You could actually just with normal attacks and they get their defence responses . It's pretty brutal actually, wait - step into CC and grapple the target. He would then get to complete his attack, but he's grappled at that point, you then get you go to do something else probably with an AoA. But best to grapple that knife (to go full circle).

Originally Posted by vicky_molokh

We need a picture. By 'step into his rear' I meant stepping towards him, into the rear arc of his CC hex. To reiterate:
First hex of movement is from his front hex into his left-front hex.
Second movement from his left-front to his rear-left hex.
Next turn, step into his rear, within his hex, which meets criteria for both 'Close Combat' (same hex) and his rear arc. You're no longer in his side hex, you're behind him, close enough to choke, or to grab his either arm. I'm not sure if my post is enough to visualise it.

Ah I think you can only step into Rear CC from the rear hex, what you describe would be stepping in to Side CC. (and it's at that point I have an issue with grappling his right had from the direction of his left side hex. (but again question regarding facing in CC in Cam&MA apply here).

Originally Posted by vicky_molokh

Really, this forum needs a standardised way of naming hexes by letter and number, like squares in chess. How about this?

I'd go with relative ones to the target as it's the target that generally suffers the effects of facing. So moving clockwise starting from 12 o'clock

Front Centre (FC)
Front Right (FR)
Side Right (SR)
Rear (R)
Side Left (SL)
Front Left (FL)

The problem with rear arc and rear hex is that they both include the term rear but rear means different thing at different times in the game. I.e you only have one 'rear' hex, even if your side hexes are in your 'rear' arc

Originally Posted by vicky_molokh

I'll try to find them eventually.

Cool like I say I use TG now (and I was always bitt shaky on Cam&MA CC/grappling anyway)

Originally Posted by vicky_molokh

Sure we do. Especially with longue-ish posts of ours.

no probs

Originally Posted by vicky_molokh

That seems counterintuitive to me. If so, people would never feint-pretend making anything other than the Attack they have the highest level in (e.g. Arm Locks for close combat grappler, Spinning Attack with Technique Mastery for strikers etc.)

Well see above for more on this. The reason to feint with a kick at -2 is that a feint kick is a believable feint at reach 1 where as as feint punch at reach 1 doesn't work.

Although as I said earlier if someone had made habit of AoA(l)'s I might allow it, as per feints off shield bashes. But I probably make you take the AoA penalties with the feint, you can't get the benefit of both without while avoiding the negatives).

You can only feint with an arm lock if you have grappled your target first, i.e feint with technique has to conform to the requirement of the technique to be believable (and thus effective feint)

Put it this way you could stand facing me and make the most believable looking back kicks feints in the world but I'll never flinch because I know I'm not in danger form back kick.

I'd have no problem with something feinting off technique they had spent points in though, they've spent the point after all. You also defend with your best skill. However as techniques are by definitions more specialised actions than the primary skill I might you start to penalise people who kept making exactly the same feint over and over again, as per the targeted attack rules.

don't forget feint is also a technique

[Tomsdad]

Originally Posted by BraselC5048

Why is everybody assuming Judo is the best option? From the standpoint of somebody using Karate, the options almost seem a lot better. Low odds of disarming, but good odds of wining the fight by simply beating him up enough.

Why not a simple Kick to the weapon hand, using Karate? If you've spent the 3 points to buy off the -2 for kicking, it's a 14 or less roll to hit (assuming skill 18). The target, assuming Knife-12, has Parry 9.

Thing is if we're assuming Skill 18 vs. Skill 12 the actually skill choice against the knife wielder does become less relevant as he's sitting on 6 pt skill advantage, and that's a big advantage especially in this range (16 vs. 10 would be even worse).

A skill 18 knife vs. a skill 12 unarmed is quicker of course, weapons value add and force multiply after all.

[vicky_molokh]

Originally Posted by Tomsdad

Right yes (sorry I thought you'd said you would be grappling on the first turn with the wait triggered CA.



Only shoving is about changing the facing of the other, not yourself.

Only shoving (or being shoved) people round is not the only way to change your facing. And it changing your facing we're interested in. we only referencing shoving because it only in that context that facing is referenced in CC.

Well, a success of Shoving People Around gives the right to change either your facing xor the opponent's facing; that seems to indicate it's not allowed to change facing without it. Also, you can't freely Step while grappled, right? If so, you can't Change Facing either.

Originally Posted by Tomsdad

Remember what were talking about here, on a second by second basis someone's going to interrupt move two hexes, with facing change, parry and slip then attack from behind, all while the target stands motionless in terms of facing (but still managing to attack).
[ . . . ]
Oh the stringing together aspect is fine (as I said that wait makes wait-feint and attack so good, or even wait-set up, and attack). But how did the opponent get two consecutive manoeuvres?

Two effectively consecutive - K acts, U waits (i.e. does nothing yet), K acts again, U acts for the Wait, K rolls feint resistance, U acts again.
Strictly speaking, neither fighter strings two turn-beginnings together. But de facto both are stringing turn executions together - first K, then U.

Originally Posted by Tomsdad

Feint just says roll melee skills (and MA refines that to roll highest melee skill to resist). Obviously most of the time its not going to matter because as you say the attack doesn't actually happen and there's no benefit to choosing any that's not your highest skill. My general argument would be if you pretending to do a thing how well you pretend to do it will depend on how well you can do it. Bit in a game balance POV I'd do it so you don't get double effect.

Take the kick vs. strike issue here. Strike is reach C, kick is reach 1. You can't feint with strike unless in CC. But you can foent with kick at reach 1.

That's somewhat perverse, in that it means that nobody ever feints a kick or knee strike or whatever in CC, because feinting with a punch (or, worse, an improved Arm Lock) will be always better.

Originally Posted by Tomsdad

So IMO you make you choice you can feint at CC with full karate skill, or you can feint at reach 1 with your karate(kick) skill. But you can't feint at reach 1 with you karate (strike) skill.

Interestingly this only really come up with unarmed skills, which tend to have a greater variety of techniques that allow you to play with stuff like reach and damage with corresponding balancing mods. I'd argue that you have to bring those mods with you when feinting as well as attacking. But I agree RAW is silent on it. It depends on how you read "compare melee skills". It's is how I initially read it and how I've always played it.

Think of it this way, you can increase the reach of a melee attack, with AoA(l), would you allow someone to declare A feint - AoA(l) and as the attack doesn't happen not take all the AoA penalties?

Not that AoA(l) and Kick tech are completely analogous of course!

Hmm. I'd actually consider allowing people to pretend that they're about to do an AoA(L). That sounds plausible. It's also a good way to make an opponent 'waste' a reaction on it fluff-wise (but de jure, it's just a reduced AD in case of a successful Feint).

Originally Posted by Tomsdad

Basically feinting at extra reach is very powerful because not only are you increasing situations were feint is useful, but you reducing the risk of giving up the attack as well.

People say Feint doesn't get enough love in combats unless it's an improved Technique and/or used against an inferior-skill opponent. Maybe this would make them more popular.
Also, interestingly, Evaluate only works within a range at which it is possible to strike an opponent with a Move and Attack.

Originally Posted by Tomsdad

It's a tough one, because realistic I see no difference between kicking, striking or elbowing to the back left, back centre of back right (outside of lead/trailing, dominant left/right limbs questions of course). Just as attacking to any of the front three hexes isn't any different.

However, Elbow and back kick or back strike already largely circumvent the wild attack penalties as it is.

(so I can wild strike with my sword at -5 with a max skill 9, or I can just do a back strike at -2 and accept -2 pen to defences, which I'm not going to be relying on anyway what with being attacked from behind.

So ehh, I'm not sure

Yeah, tough choice indeed.

Originally Posted by Tomsdad

Oh I've no problem with wait allowing you to string two actions together, but I always try and refer back to what actually happening and asses it by that criteria, rather than abstract rules.

In theory you could do the following

Chap steps forward into the hex in front of you face to face you wait and feint with step, he then attacks you defend and side step, you then CA moving another hex and into CC.

You have been able to string two actions together and respond to him twice (wait and parry slip), allowing you to take 4 steps. While he has basically been an observer unable to act to avoid the chap who's just dashed to his rear and attacked him. What I find odd is that due to order of movement and attacking, the chap can attack no problem, he can even adjust his attack to the changing situation, but he remains standing fixed forward. What I might allow that free facing change to be allowable after the attack not just after the step. (abut that might less OTT position tactics harder)

It's not problem with wait, or problem with getting an extra step of defending, it when it's both together that gets a bit OTT. But even that's fine to an extent as everyone can do it. It when it get ended with grapple to the back and all that bonus I start getting a bit twitchy on it.

Well, two CAs in a row still provide less movement than an M&A, and slightly more than AoA with a Move 5 character.

[vicky_molokh]

Originally Posted by Tomsdad

hang on is it wait-CA double step

or

Wait-feint single step?

Or are you

Feinting-CA (not sure you can do that see above) and just using the double step, and then making another attack with step to get into CC from his flank, or another CA to double step into rear and then into CC?

You point about he can't do anything against you CA "because you're feinting" suggests you're doing the latter?

You can use any attack in a turn as a Feint, right? IIRC.

Also, two CAs don't give much - it still counts as a Runaround. Now, AoA (Feint + 3 hexes move) then Attack or CA - that's interesting. But you give up your defences in hopes of not getting hit by his Wild Swing; that means no Defensive Arm Locks, and you really better spend your attack on a Defensive Feint there.
(After the brief pause, I'm missing some thoughts I had on the whole topic, so let's just forget any possible 'offs', and stick to the Waiting Dancer-Around-Knives.)

Originally Posted by Tomsdad

You can only feint with an arm lock if you have grappled your target first, i.e feint with technique has to conform to the requirement of the technique to be believable (and thus effective feint)

Or after a Parry, then?

Originally Posted by Tomsdad

I'd have no problem with something feinting off technique they had spent points in though, they've spent the point after all. You also defend with your best skill. However as techniques are by definitions more specialised actions than the primary skill I might you start to penalise people who kept making exactly the same feint over and over again, as per the targeted attack rules.

This gets fiddly fast, it seems. Alas.