Parrying Brass Knuckles

[hal]

Originally Posted by Plane

MA111 actually has two cases of unarmed combat skills being used with weapons, and it doesn't seem clear that any of them intend this to mean that you would use the usual rules for unarmed combat (Hurting Yourself on high damage against 3 DR, penalty to parry weapons, if a weapon parries you it gets a free attack on your arm, if you fail to parry a weapon it can hit your arm)

Pummeling allows penalized DX/Brawling/Karate (or their Hammer Fist / Two-Handed Punch techniques) for hitting with pommels, while tonfas or sword with knuckle guards allow full DX/Brawling/Boxing/Karate (no mention if HammerFist / Two-Handed Punch can be substituted)

Reversed Grip allows parries based on Brawling or Karate...

A failed parry lets the attacker choose to hit his original target or the weapon (the arm would be struck if it weren’t for the weapon; see p. B377).

Using that as a precedent... if people who parried a Tonfa-Pummel or Pommel-Pummel using a weapon did get a free indefensible attack (as they normally would if they successfully parry an unarmed attack using a weapon) then I think it would make sense to substitute the weapon as the available target instead of the limb.

However - note that the rules for unarmed combat ARE being followed with both examples given above. The difference being - that each type of attack whose "aspects" differ from ordinary unarmed combat, have their differences spelled out as an exception to the rule.

Think about that for a second. If I wanted to attack your weapon - the normal rules require that I take penalties to my attack based on the weapon being used, and then following that procedure. If you use a reversed grip in an effort to parry using a brawling parry, and you miss your parry? I automatically can HIT your weapon should I so specify. A big difference between my deliberately attacking your weapon and following those rules, or using the Unarmed combat rules with a failure to parry.

So, in the end, relevant to the original poster's question, the use of a brass knuckle follows the original unarmed combat rules, but negates the self-inflicting of damage per the normal rules (ie a special case change to the normal rules for Brass Knuckles). The rules you cited above are following the same pattern. Use the basic rules as written but with special case rules to negate something in the basic rules.

[Plane]

If brass knuckles don't become the substitute target for the arms since they are on the hands, what about in the case of a failed Aggressive Parry where in that case an attacker can choose to target EITHER the Hand or Arm instead of ONLY the Arm? Should it be "either the BK or the arm" in this case?

It seems like BK should give some kind of protection, even if it was merely a 1/6 chance of taking the hit (like other cases of partial armor) or something like "DR only when Hand (Joints) is targeted at -6 to hit for a cripple requiring 1/4 damage instead of 1/"

[hal]

Originally Posted by Plane

If brass knuckles don't become the substitute target for the arms since they are on the hands, what about in the case of a failed Aggressive Parry where in that case an attacker can choose to target EITHER the Hand or Arm instead of ONLY the Arm? Should it be "either the BK or the arm" in this case?

It seems like BK should give some kind of protection, even if it was merely a 1/6 chance of taking the hit (like other cases of partial armor) or something like "DR only when Hand (Joints) is targeted at -6 to hit for a cripple requiring 1/4 damage instead of 1/"

When you parry the brass knuckles with a sword parry...

what are you parrying? The knuckles themselves, or the arm/wrist so that the hand itself (ie the tip of the weapon system) misses its intended target?

[Plane]

Rules-wise I'm not sure, conceptually I could see someone doing either... come to think of it, if you can slash at an arm with a sword to redirect punch, why not slash at an arm to redirect a dagger?

MA110 has six categories: (1) Extremely Long (2) Very Long (3) Long (4) Medium (5) Short (6) Very Short and could benefit from a seventh (7) "Extremely Short" for Elbow ("Punch" is "Very Short", everyone can punch further than they can elbow!) so you could design a series of house penalties based on Matter of Inches' Weapon Lengths.

If you parry an elbow, you parry the arm, which is what is hitting you. There should be no penalty to parry for "reach past" if you are parrying the thing that is hitting you. But for each category higher, how about a -1 to skill, resulting in a -1 to parry for every 2 levels?

So there shouldn't be any penalty to parry a punch if you are parrying the FIST, but if you are parrying the arm (maybe it's a flaming fist) then a -1 to reach past it sounds right. If you have to reach past a blade to parry a hand, same thing.

[hal]

Originally Posted by Plane

Rules-wise I'm not sure, conceptually I could see someone doing either... come to think of it, if you can slash at an arm with a sword to redirect punch, why not slash at an arm to redirect a dagger?

MA110 has six categories: (1) Extremely Long (2) Very Long (3) Long (4) Medium (5) Short (6) Very Short and could benefit from a seventh (7) "Extremely Short" for Elbow ("Punch" is "Very Short", everyone can punch further than they can elbow!) so you could design a series of house penalties based on Matter of Inches' Weapon Lengths.

If you parry an elbow, you parry the arm, which is what is hitting you. There should be no penalty to parry for "reach past" if you are parrying the thing that is hitting you. But for each category higher, how about a -1 to skill, resulting in a -1 to parry for every 2 levels?

So there shouldn't be any penalty to parry a punch if you are parrying the FIST, but if you are parrying the arm (maybe it's a flaming fist) then a -1 to reach past it sounds right. If you have to reach past a blade to parry a hand, same thing.

Here's the problem...

Regardless of whether the weapon attacking you is 3' long, 3" long, or somewhere in between - the business end of the weapon must traverse the distance between where it starts its attack, and where it finally impacts upon your target. The problem is - your parry has to strike something to deflect the incoming attack so as to drive it off (by deflecting) point.

If at the speed your weapon is incoming, in order to effect a successful parry, I have to strike some portion of your arm say, 20" from myself - will it matter if that point of "deflection" contact is a weapon or an arm?

The benefit of using a weapon is that a weapon extends your reach. A short knife doesn't extend the reach all that much. A 32" blade (ie sword) on the other hand, does. An 8' long halberd does.

So - to answer your question? Parries are always about deflecting an incoming attack. They are always one of those things where you either get your blade to parry/deflect, in place in time, or you don't. If I succeed by 3 on my skill roll, perhaps I had 1/2 second to spare, or I caught your attack closer to you than to me. If I make my parry by 1 or even 0, it means I barely got my blade in the right place at the right time to deflect your attack.

So the real question becomes one of "how much granularity are you looking for?"

Can a 32" length blade parry a knife wielding person easier than it can parry a sword wielding person when striking at say, the forearm? For sure. Is an "aggressive parry" that much harder for someone who is punching than someone who is using a 32" blade vs a 9" blade?

You tell me. ;)

[Tomsdad]

I'd argue that given:

a). the relatively small size of brass knuckles in terms of what visible accessible from outside the fist

and

b). the fact that they don't extend much at all beyond the small part of the fist they do cover

They count as unarmed in terms of the benefits an armed parry would have against them.

It would be pretty hard to specifically engage the actual BK with a weapon when parrying it, and much, much easier to engage the clenched hand ins in the wrist, forearm etc.

If you want more granularity though, you could penalise the following skill roll to inflict injury from the parry by say -2, to reflect the chance that your parrying weapon might end up engaging the BK directly and not the hand or arm punching with it.


You want to punch someone with a punch enhancing weapon and avoid the issue of getting parried by armed opponent get a cestus or the like.

[Plane]

Originally Posted by hal

Regardless of whether the weapon attacking you is 3' long, 3" long, or somewhere in between - the business end of the weapon must traverse the distance between where it starts its attack, and where it finally impacts upon your target. The problem is - your parry has to strike something to deflect the incoming attack so as to drive it off (by deflecting) point.

If at the speed your weapon is incoming, in order to effect a successful parry, I have to strike some portion of your arm say, 20" from myself - will it matter if that point of "deflection" contact is a weapon or an arm?

As some point it has to matter. Particularly with the "Destructive Parry" enhancement "Your attack damages weapons it parries or that parry it." if a weapon is long enough (say 2-3 yards) then you couldn't feasibly parry the attacker's arm instead of the weapon itself unless you had arms more than a yard long, right?

There's got to be some middle ground between "parrying your arm is just as easy as parrying your weapon" and "I can only parry your weapon" being "I can parry your arm, but I have to overextend myself to get around your weapon to do so"

[hal]

Originally Posted by Plane

As some point it has to matter. Particularly with the "Destructive Parry" enhancement "Your attack damages weapons it parries or that parry it." if a weapon is long enough (say 2-3 yards) then you couldn't feasibly parry the attacker's arm instead of the weapon itself unless you had arms more than a yard long, right?

There's got to be some middle ground between "parrying your arm is just as easy as parrying your weapon" and "I can only parry your weapon" being "I can parry your arm, but I have to overextend myself to get around your weapon to do so"

Hi Plane,
In response to your comment about "middle ground", I think it best to review the rules as written, with an eye towards trying to discern what the difference is between the rules as written and the reality the rules portray vs what you think SHOULD happen. But, when discussing the rules as written, it is often best to read the rules as written *rueful chuckle*

First, take a hard look at the weapons page of GURPS BASIC SET CHARACTERS. Be prepared to have your eyes opened a bit *Teasing grin*

1) all punch style attacks come under the heading of "BOXING, BRAWLING, KARATE, or DX" (see pg 271). This means then, that a punch attack (unarmed combat) can only occur in close combat.

2) All other attacks with the use of "unarmed skill" have a reach of C,1 (ie kicks)

Now, look up the rules on page 377 (Retreat) as well as page 391 and 392 in GURPS BASIC SET CAMPAIGNS where it discusses close combat rules, particularly, the rules for Defenses in Close combat.

Per RAW - a defender can never parry a punch with a non-C rated weapon!

The only valid defense that can be used in Close Combat is a dodge or a parry with one's fist or other weapon rated at C. Technically speaking, the only weapon capable of parrying in C range, is a knife.

Once GURPS MARTIAL ARTS comes into play, then we have rules for longer weapons being used in Close Combat - which supersede the rules given in GURPS BASIC SET.

In any event - GURPS MARTIAL ARTS is very specific. It states that parrying an unarmed attack with a weapon is functionally the same as an aggressive parry - for free. The irony is? You have to accept a -2 penalty to your defense to engage in an aggressive parry, which is the same penalty that a 1 hex reach weapon sustains when trying to parry in close combat.

This means, per the rules, that one has to use an aggressive parry (functionally free or not) to be able to parry a close combat attack that strikes the arm. If you do not take the -2 penalty to your parry against a knife attack - you do NOT get to parry the arm itself. Note too, that the aggressive parry option seems to be strictly aimed at Martial Arts techniques, not weapon techniques. So, can one use an aggressive parry with a sword against a knife? If you use the rules as specified under Aggressive parry, the damage you do with your aggressive parry sustains a -4 damage to thrust, or -1 per die, which ever is worse. Whether that applies to weapons or not is open to debate, since parrying with a weapon in the original rules against unarmed attacks suffer no damage reduction at all.

In the end, it appears that the use of a knife does not constitute by the intent or wording of the rules - as an unarmed attack.

Punching with a heavy gauntlet is not an "armed" attack, but an unarmed attack that happens have the benefit of the armor helping inflict damage. Likewise, the brass knuckles do the same.

Again, you can rule as you wish, or the original poster can rule as they wish (assuming they're the GM) - and I would not be bothered either way. I have to confess, reading RAW on close combat was a good refresher of the rules that I need from time to time. ;)

[Plane]

Originally Posted by hal

1) all punch style attacks come under the heading of "BOXING, BRAWLING, KARATE, or DX" (see pg 271). This means then, that a punch attack (unarmed combat) can only occur in close combat.

By default, though high SM beings can have this range extended, and MA adds AOA Long which adds +1 to reach.

Originally Posted by hal

2) All other attacks with the use of "unarmed skill" have a reach of C,1 (ie kicks)

Er, I don't think so... pretty sure Knee Attack and Elbow attack are also reach C. Kicks might be the only C,1 thing that comes to mind...

Originally Posted by hal

Now, look up the rules on page 377 (Retreat)

"You are at -3 to parry weapons, unless the attack is a thrust or you are using Judo or Karate" prior to that seems more relevant to this conversation.

MA124 "Harsh Realism for Unarmed Fighters - Parrying Weapons" is even more interesting.

Originally Posted by hal

Once GURPS MARTIAL ARTS comes into play, then we have rules for longer weapons being used in Close Combat - which supersede the rules given in GURPS BASIC SET.

A117 "Long Weapons in Close Combat", I'm aware :)

Originally Posted by hal

In any event - GURPS MARTIAL ARTS is very specific. It states that parrying an unarmed attack with a weapon is functionally the same as an aggressive parry - for free. The irony is? You have to accept a -2 penalty to your defense to engage in an aggressive parry

Aggressive parries in unarmed combat are only -1, there's no penalty to do them in armed combat.

Originally Posted by hal

which is the same penalty that a 1 hex reach weapon sustains when trying to parry in close combat.

Keep in mind though: MA111 Defensive Grip can allow swords to be used at range C, and Reversed Grip can reduce reach reach 1 weapons to reach C if attacking to front or side.

Originally Posted by hal

This means, per the rules, that one has to use an aggressive parry (functionally free or not) to be able to parry a close combat attack that strikes the arm.

I'm not understanding how you got there.

Originally Posted by hal

If you do not take the -2 penalty to your parry against a knife attack - you do NOT get to parry the arm itself.

Can you rephrase how you got to this conclusion?

Originally Posted by hal

Note too, that the aggressive parry option seems to be strictly aimed at Martial Arts techniques, not weapon techniques.

MA65 for Boxing/Brawling/Karate only, yes (MA74 "Jam" or Brawilng/Karate too) Though there's probably some way in the technique design system to float it elsewhere.

Originally Posted by hal

So, can one use an aggressive parry with a sword against a knife? If you use the rules as specified under Aggressive parry, the damage you do with your aggressive parry sustains a -4 damage to thrust, or -1 per die, which ever is worse.

Compared to a punch which does thrust-1, "thrust-4 or thrust-2 at -1 per die" is actually -1 and the worst of (-2 or -1 per die)

Jams similarly compared to a kick (or knee strike) which does thrust-0, "thrust-3 or thrust-1 at -1 per die" is the same, -1 and the worst of -2 or -1 per die.

So that's the guideline of how much aggressive parries should do, if they could be adapted to other techniques.

Originally Posted by hal

Punching with a heavy gauntlet is not an "armed" attack, but an unarmed attack that happens have the benefit of the armor helping inflict damage. Likewise, the brass knuckles do the same.

MA224 comparison, Improved Weapons are described "can stand in for real weapons"

"Purse, Clutched: Use for two-handed punch [Two-Handed Punch-2]. Doesn’t affect damage but eliminates extra risk of hand injury."

"Bra (underwire)", "Earring Posts", "Eyeglasses", "Nailclippers" and "Keys" can all use the "Eye Rake" technique, which you can see on page 72 is described "scratching
a clawed hand across his face"

These don't mention anything about protecting the hand like Clutched Purse does, but if they had some kind of Aura going on, I don't think doing a face-rake with one of those would necessarily harm your hand.

[hal]

When I spoke of aggressive parries, the -2 penalty to your parry is what I spoke of. If you parry straight up without a -2 penalty, you are doing a non-aggressive parry, or a normal parry. THAT parry affects the weapon attack, not the arm/hand holding the weapon.

Any change in grip that allows one to add the range class "C" to the combat, is strictly a function of the original rules specifying that only C reach weapons can be used to parry close combat attacks.

Regards to aggressive parries being at -1, thanks, I mis-read it when reading it quickly. :(