[Martial Arts] Should a Beat prevent using a weapon to attack?

[phayman53]

Originally Posted by Anthony

Realistically Beat should probably not be a separate maneuver, it should just be a subspecies of Deceptive Attack. You don't do a beat and then wait around, it just flows immediately into an attack. The defensive aspect of a Beat is primarily as a means of getting past a Wait, and can be mechanically represented by parry.

Originally Posted by Anthony

Sometimes the correct answer is "they should never have written the rule that way".

While I generally agree that a beat makes most realistic sense as part of a rapid strike, I could definitely visualize a tempo where Fighter 1's beat brings fighter 2's weapon off line, but as sir_pudding says, fighter 2 is able to make an attack without recovering, so the beat is still effective when fighter 1 is able to attack again.

[sir_pudding]

Originally Posted by kmunoz

Yeah. I'm with you there. But the other real world examples being offered were ones that involved a beat and an immediate followup attack, with the opponent having no opportunity to attack in between. So they didn't actually address the original issue, unless they were assuming a rapid strike (which the OP was not).

I suppose I was perhaps unclear, but nothing I said actually requires anything like a GURPS rapid strike (and basically I just phrased the same example slightly differently twice).

[phayman53]

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

"Beat" is an option for the Feint Maneuver and Martial Arts p.101 explicitly says under Defensive Feint "You can use a feint (including a Beat or a Ruse) to make it harder for your enemy to attack you instead of weakening his defenses."

Oops, missed that parenthetical when I was looking at those pages in MA. Thank you.

For the case of Beats specifically, I still tend to think this defensive bonus should apply automatically while leaving feints and ruses either-or (they are powerful enough as it is IMHO).

[Anthony]

Originally Posted by phayman53

While I generally agree that a beat makes most realistic sense as part of a rapid strike, I could definitely visualize a tempo where Fighter 1's beat brings fighter 2's weapon off line, but as sir_pudding says, fighter 2 is able to make an attack without recovering, so the beat is still effective when fighter 1 is able to attack again.

In general that only makes sense for unbalanced weapons. A reasonable option for beat is "penalizes the next roll with this weapon, whatever it is, if that roll occurs in the next turn".

[aesir23]

Originally Posted by Sindri

OP is talking about the beated, not the beating weapon.

Originally Posted by phayman53

This. My point was that if Fighter 1 beats Fighter 2's weapon aside, then it should be harder for Fighter 2 to both defend and attack with the affected weapon specifically because the weapon is out of position until the beat "expires" after Fighter 1's next turn.

Yeah, that was sloppy reading on my part, sorry. I caught it and edited my post almost right away, but not fast enough I guess.

Originally Posted by Anthony

You don't do a beat and then wait around, it just flows immediately into an attack.

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

"Beat" is an option for the Feint Maneuver and Martial Arts p.101 explicitly says under Defensive Feint "You can use a feint (including a Beat or a Ruse) to make it harder for your enemy to attack you instead of weakening his defenses."

I could see ruling that Beats have to be Defensive Feints unless used as part of a Rapid Strike (which isn't allowed for Feints in RAW) or All-Out (Feint and Attack.)

This still leaves them as a far inferior option to a regular Feint, which I don't like.

Beats: Feints:
RAW:
Uses ST instead of DX: + or neutral. Uses DX: + or neutral (depending on character)
Must follow a parry by either party: - Can be used at any time: +
Opponent defends with ST or DX based skill: - Dx based only: +

If you add may be used as a Rapid strike to the Beats column, that still doesn't quite even things out. I'd like Beats to be a viable option for characters who aren't significantly stronger than they are agile-- both because this is true IRL, and because it's another thing that can differentiate fighting styles.

[evileeyore]

Originally Posted by Anthony

In general that only makes sense for unbalanced weapons. A reasonable option for beat is "penalizes the next roll with this weapon, whatever it is, if that roll occurs in the next turn".

Oh, very nice. Yes, I like this solution.

[aesir23]

Originally Posted by Anthony

In general that only makes sense for unbalanced weapons. A reasonable option for beat is "penalizes the next roll with this weapon, whatever it is, if that roll occurs in the next turn".

Originally Posted by evileeyore

Oh, very nice. Yes, I like this solution.

Me too, actually. I'd say, "unless your opponent uses a Ready Maneuver before their next roll" instead of necessarily specifying the turn (to account for things like Altered Time Rate, etc...).

I also think that you should be able to target an opponent's weapon with an attack (that, like a Shove, does no damage) and get a Beat as a free action. This makes the most sense with Beating as part of a Rapid strike and it's how I usually use it in HEMA, rather than waiting for a successful parry.

[sir_pudding]

Originally Posted by aesir23

I also think that you should be able to target an opponent's weapon with an attack (that, like a Shove, does no damage) and get a Beat as a free action. This makes the most sense with Beating as part of a Rapid strike and it's how I usually use it in HEMA, rather than waiting for a successful parry.

Isn't this just a Set-up Attack targeting the weapon?

[aesir23]

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

Isn't this just a Set-up Attack targeting the weapon?

Not quite. Certainly not game-mechanically--you're using ST-Based skill in a contest instead of subtracting from your attack roll to subtract from a later defense.