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 08-28-2020, 03:34 AM   #1
Ultraviolet
 
Ultraviolet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Århus, Denmark
Default [TG] Handcuffing, is this right?

In the current Cliffhangers campaign a player wants his character - Kodiak, the German-American bartender/smuggler/accountant - to use his skill as Judoka to employ Handcuffing.
Used as example, Kodiak had key stats of: ST 13, DX 12, Judo 16 (DX+4), Training bonus +1 (slow progression)

We use TG, and take the shortcut of not rolling CP but using ½ Trained ST. And we always round CP up.
We play TL6 so the cuffs give 12 CP in addition to those based on ST and training bonus.

Handcuffing is described on MA 73 and TG 37, plus rules for the cuffs are on TG 17.

Step 1
So, the Technique is initiated by either A) Grappling the foe, or B) having parried an attack the round before.
I assume this is a one-handed to initiate, in order to have a free hand to cuff with, for 0,25xTrained ST = 4 CP.
Q1: If initiating from a parry, does that have to be a Grabbing Parry? Or will a normal one do it, but yielding no CP to play with? While the Grabbing Parry, a bit harder/most costly in points to max out, but gives CP.

Step 2
As next action, roll a QC of Handcuffing vs. foe's DX/Grappling skill. One may spend CP from a prior grapple to affect the QC.
Now the foe's one wrist is cuffed (for 12+7 CP), and the hand/arm may also still be grappled, if it initially was.
Q2: I assume the handcuff-grapple as per the handcuff example counts as a two handed one, inflicting 0,5xST. Either both hands are used (after parrying with one) or the hand you initially had the grapple with also counts. Because if you already havd a hold with one hand, adding the other allows the first to assist (while still keeping the initial grapple) for the new grapple.

Foe's turn
If he wants to break free, that'll be exceedingly difficult due to the cuffs. However
Q3: Wouldnt the weak point be Kodiak's grip on the loose end of the cuffs? The foe doesn't need to to escape from the cuff itself, if he can just yank it away from Kodiak?

Step 3
To attach the other end to the other arm, Kodiak needs to let go with his first hand from the foe's arm, in order to start over with either a grapple at the foe's second arm, or perform a parry. So it's steps 1 and 2 again, only the cuffs enforce a huge penalty of the foe, and Kodiak can spend CP on reducing Hit Loc to grapple the arm, reduce foe's skill i QC and so on.

Does this sound right?
__________________
Playing GURPS since '90, is now fluent in 4th ed as well.
Ultraviolet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2020, 08:28 AM   #2
DouglasCole
Doctor of GURPS Ballistics
 
DouglasCole's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Lakeville, MN
Default Re: [TG] Handcuffing, is this right?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ultraviolet View Post
In the current Cliffhangers campaign a player wants his character - Kodiak, the German-American bartender/smuggler/accountant - to use his skill as Judoka to employ Handcuffing.
Used as example, Kodiak had key stats of: ST 13, DX 12, Judo 16 (DX+4), Training bonus +1 (slow progression)

We use TG, and take the shortcut of not rolling CP but using ½ Trained ST. And we always round CP up.
We play TL6 so the cuffs give 12 CP in addition to those based on ST and training bonus.

Handcuffing is described on MA 73 and TG 37, plus rules for the cuffs are on TG 17.

Step 1
So, the Technique is initiated by either A) Grappling the foe, or B) having parried an attack the round before.
I assume this is a one-handed to initiate, in order to have a free hand to cuff with, for 0,25xTrained ST = 4 CP.
Q1: If initiating from a parry, does that have to be a Grabbing Parry? Or will a normal one do it, but yielding no CP to play with? While the Grabbing Parry, a bit harder/most costly in points to max out, but gives CP.

Step 2
As next action, roll a QC of Handcuffing vs. foe's DX/Grappling skill. One may spend CP from a prior grapple to affect the QC.
Now the foe's one wrist is cuffed (for 12+7 CP), and the hand/arm may also still be grappled, if it initially was.
Q2: I assume the handcuff-grapple as per the handcuff example counts as a two handed one, inflicting 0,5xST. Either both hands are used (after parrying with one) or the hand you initially had the grapple with also counts. Because if you already havd a hold with one hand, adding the other allows the first to assist (while still keeping the initial grapple) for the new grapple.

Foe's turn
If he wants to break free, that'll be exceedingly difficult due to the cuffs. However
Q3: Wouldnt the weak point be Kodiak's grip on the loose end of the cuffs? The foe doesn't need to to escape from the cuff itself, if he can just yank it away from Kodiak?

Step 3
To attach the other end to the other arm, Kodiak needs to let go with his first hand from the foe's arm, in order to start over with either a grapple at the foe's second arm, or perform a parry. So it's steps 1 and 2 again, only the cuffs enforce a huge penalty of the foe, and Kodiak can spend CP on reducing Hit Loc to grapple the arm, reduce foe's skill i QC and so on.

Does this sound right?
Sounds basically right.

I'd treat yanking the loose cuff from the hand of the would-be applicator as a disarm attempt; a contest of ST where you can spend CP but probably NOT from CP from the cuffs.
__________________
My blog:Gaming Ballistic, LLC
My Store: Gaming Ballistic on Shopify
My Patreon: Gaming Ballistic on Patreon
DouglasCole is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-31-2020, 01:04 AM   #3
Ultraviolet
 
Ultraviolet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Århus, Denmark
Default Re: [TG] Handcuffing, is this right?

Quote:
Originally Posted by DouglasCole View Post
Sounds basically right.

I'd treat yanking the loose cuff from the hand of the would-be applicator as a disarm attempt; a contest of ST where you can spend CP but probably NOT from CP from the cuffs.
In that case, it would be the Grip ST of Kodiak's hand holding the loose end of the cuff which the disarm attempt is against.

And if he still has a hold on the foe's arm with his other hand, it would be those CP he could spend. Not any of the humongeous amount the cuffs themselves have.
__________________
Playing GURPS since '90, is now fluent in 4th ed as well.
Ultraviolet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-31-2020, 01:58 PM   #4
Chris_0369
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Bremerton, Wa
Default Re: [TG] Handcuffing, is this right?

Quote:
Originally Posted by DouglasCole View Post
Sounds basically right.

I'd treat yanking the loose cuff from the hand of the would-be applicator as a disarm attempt; a contest of ST where you can spend CP but probably NOT from CP from the cuffs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ultraviolet View Post
In that case, it would be the Grip ST of Kodiak's hand holding the loose end of the cuff which the disarm attempt is against.

And if he still has a hold on the foe's arm with his other hand, it would be those CP he could spend. Not any of the humongeous amount the cuffs themselves have.
Hey folks,
I will open with I consider myself a novice to GURPS and thus the rules are still largely unfamiliar. That aside, I do offer some insight into the application of handcuffs to both compliant and non-compliant individuals. Obtaining the "loose" appendage is usually accomplished in one of two ways. First is with the aid of a partner who can deal with the loose appendage and bring it into the cuff position. The second is for doing it by one's self. When you are on your own, typically you try to get the cuffee to comply with your instructions of moving the loose appendage into position. Though you still maintain a grip on the handcuffs themselves. Typically in the middle where the chain/hinge is located.
Once one side of the handcuffs is applied, they (the individual cuff) can help to maintain control of the apprehended arm/appendage and even used to provide pain compliance in obtaining the second arm to be restrained. It is a little easier to hold on to the hinge/chain of the handcuffs than it is to a wrist or arm of the individual being restrained.
Going with Mr. Cole's suggestion, I would probably say you may eek one or two CP into the CP pool but not the full value. This may be justified because the cuffer will have a bit better grip on the cuff than the already restrained appendage. Even though the already restrained appendage may be in some form of lock, hold or controlling technique.
Without getting into the particulars of the RP situation, the first restrained appendage will usually be in some form of lock or hold while the second appendage is retrieved.
__________________
Friendly fire aint. It is also not wise to share a foxhole with a guy who is after glory.
Chris_0369 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-22-2020, 03:30 PM   #5
Plane
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Default Re: [TG] Handcuffing, is this right?

re something DC mentioned some years ago in another handcuffs discussion...
Quote:
Originally Posted by DouglasCole View Post
If I, a 2,000-lb. iron golem, grab your ST 10 wrists with a ST 50 grip and just stand there, there's not much difference there between being handcuffed or very securely tied up/bound. In a very real sense, handcuffs DO grapple you, in that there's very little else in GURPS that would be best suited to describe a very strong gripper that encircles one or both wrists, but can do little else, and is only capable of offering passive resistance rather than active defense against the grapple.

The handcuffs, while very hard to escape unless you know the trick, certainly don't fight back actively
TG17 mentions that handcuffs have "Control Resistance 10" which "subtract CP from any escape attempt" so per TG27 this isn't just "it's hard to inflict CP via a grapple or Grabbing Parry" but also "it's hard to subtract CP via a Break Free or Escaping Parry" ?

It sounds like if you wanted to reflect the golem having some kind of bulldog lock-jaw sort of grip (it just passively resists even if the golem is not actively defending against break-free attempts or making further attacks to add CP) that you would buy CR?

For a golem which goes into "lock mode" I'm thinking maybe you could buy CR with Switchable and Temporary Disadvantage: Paralysis (assuming a -150% value based on Affliction... next best thing would be TD: Quadriplegic). In that case the golem couldn't even make defenses but in exchange for being immovable, any grapples he has made become very hard to force off due to that rigidity?

The thing about Quadriplegic though is that this is basically the sum value of Paraplegic w/ No Manipulators and if you have No Manipulators you lack hands... but this uses more of a "has hands but can't use them". If you'd ALREADY used the hands though (just to establish CP) then would you just retain the value but can't improve/defend so CR is the only stop?

A similar question would be what happens to the CP established by a Grappling Using Your Legs if someone then becomes temporarily Paraplegic. B141 unlike Legless you still HAVE the legs... so they would still be wrapped around someone if you left them that way... but not able to attack or defend.

So would it be fair to keep CP applied but most people could easily wriggle free by making attacks whose "damage" can't be reversed since paralyzed legs cannot improve their grapples?

This makes me wonder about "proxy grappling" like using your arms to move a paralyzed leg (yours or maybe someone else's) around an opponent as if you were using it like an entangling weapon like a rope, only more clumsy.

I know that Trained ST is supposed to set the maximum CP you can be inflicting. TG6 would seem to imply that if your ST is reduced to 0 (say for example you fall unconscious and are unable to actively exert your ST) that your Maximum Control Points is thus 0.

I'm wondering if maybe there could be an option (like there is with resisting knockback) to instead use HP as the basis for Maximum CP, to reflect how you could just passively leave a grapple on someone even without doing anything.

That could be one interesting way to increase maximum control points: maybe grappling could apply "active CP" (based on ongoing ST use) and "passive CP" (based on mass/HP of already having wrapped around someone).

TG31's "If you manage to get your opponent on the ground, you may apply CP if you manage to lay on top of him." reminds me of that: after all, does it matter if you have consciously active ST or not simply to lie atop someone? Even if you were KO'd and reduced to 0 ST you would still have mass impeding their motion.

HP-based Maximum CP seems like it could at least be appropriate for TG24's "Pass Limb" because then you're merely "maintaining control". It mentions that trained ST is halved if you remove all your limbs (which I'm guessing would halve the maximum CP, and possibly result in losing CP if you had more than 1/2)

Something like "kneeling on his neck" (TG25) seems like pure weight, as in the HP which can sub for ST against knockback, or the mass which determines slam damage. An unconscious golem (effectively active ST of 0) would probably still be able to reduce your ST/DX by a lot if he was immobilized (like via No Mana Shutdown) after having knelt on a target's neck.

I guess the effect of "I just can't get this golem off me" might not require Control Resistance, if the result of Control Point penalties to ST just makes ST low enough that it can't even roll a 1 because ST 0 has no thrust whatsoever and forbids attacks?

TG24 mentions you can still do actions at ST 0 when using Extra Effort but isn't entirely specific how. TG6 references using Extra Effort in Combat (B357) but it seems off...

Mighty Blows can emulate AOA:Strong but the effect of that is +2 to damage which doesn't seem right because if you used 0 "damage" 0+2 is actually better than 1d-4 you would get for using AOA strong at ST 1 or 2

The more general rules (B356) seem more appropriate here, since it's "ST for the purposes of making a single ST roll".

-1 per 5% increase in capabilities is no help at all if it's vs EFFECTIVE strength (infinity % increase from 0) so I figure EE is probably calculated from base ST, and then you apply the Control Points penalty to the increase ST you get from EE.

This could still mean if there's enough CP that EE is still not enough (ie the ST 10 human passes the -20 Will roll somehow to double his base ST to 20 for one second, but due to 50 Control Points from the golem, the -25 ST penalty keeps his ST at 0) but it would explain how "0 is no guarantee because the base can be briefly increased".

Once you get at least "effective ST 1" (enough to have 1d-6 thrust) then presumably at that point you could use the usual options such as trained ST bonus, AOA:strong, x2 or x3 control points from Breaking Blow, or even Mighty Blows.

Another idea which comes to mind is to treat AOA:strong or Mighty blows, rather than +2 to damage (or +2 control points) as being 1 attack's worth of +4 to base ST (striking or lifting, as appropriate) since that's the ST boost required to get that sort of damage boost.

That for example would improve a ST 10 human to ST 14 for 1 second, so if they were -10 to ST from 20 CP (effective ST 0) they'd be briefly effective ST 4 and able to use Break Free. If however they were -14 to ST (28 control points) then it wouldn't be enough and they can't attempt Break Free due to remaining at effective ST 0?

Another way to look at the +1 per die of AOA strong is that this is +2 to ST per 10 ST, since +1 die per +10 ST is how B16 eventually ends up in longterm patterns. So that's roughly +1 ST per 5 ST, or +20% to base Grip ST from EE or AOA.

What I don't entirely get though is why TG24 would specify EE as the ONLY way around this. If AOA:strong could just give an automatic +4 (or +20%) ST for one attack only, then wouldn't that work just as well as Mighty Blows without spending FP?

I think maybe since choosing a maneuver is not actually "performing an action", perhaps if your ST was reduced to 0, merely having chosen AOA:strong would improve your ST upon that choice (before you even act upon it?) and so then you would evaluate "capacity to act" upon that +4 or +20% ST and whether or not your new briefly-higher base ST is enough (after subtracting 1/2 CP) to get effective ST 1 to roll 1d-6 thrust?

This also mentions skills being unusable if DX penalties reduce them below 3 but given that this mentions AOA:Determined and Telegraphic Attack, I get the sense this means attacks and not active defenses.

Having "Karate 2" for example, means you can't punch/kick, but that still gives you a parry of 4. Even if parry drops below 3 (I guess via penalties like from Feint, since even Karate 0 gives you Parry 3... unless Karate can go negative?) you can still do it though per B326 "even if the effective defense score was only 1 or 2!" no clue on Parry 0 or Parry -1 though: they also work on 3s? Just how negative can Feints take someone? B17's forbidding Dodge going below 1 makes me think Dodge 0 (if attainable) means no dodges, otherwise why need that cap?
Plane is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-22-2020, 03:43 PM   #6
Plane
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Default Re: [TG] Handcuffing, is this right?

TG7's mention of how sleeves work seems to reinforce my assumption it detracts from Break Free rolls too:
gives you Control Resistance equal to the same amount, but only against his attempts to break free from your grapple.
It would seem strange if CR acquired from Slippery or TG7 sweat/oil CR had that effect though... it makes sense you can't apply as much CP to an oily foe, but not necessarily that you can't "Break Free" of them as easily either... you might not be able to "grab his arm and pull it off my body" so well, but actually trying to wriggle free of a slippery/sweaty/oily foe probably ought to be easier, applying the CR bonus as a CP bonus to your Break Free?

"The Control Resistance applies to both parties" makes it harder to establish CP in the first place (make a new grapple or improve a hold), but once they're there, it would actually become harder to lose the CP when it ought to be easier?

Maybe that should actually be "the slippery applies to both parties" ? TG 29 at least gives equal bonus to the CP rolled on Break Free attempts. This ties the CR which weirdly means 2 equally slippery foes are just as bad at subtracting CP from grapples as non-slippery foes... it seems odd since I'd think 2 slippery foes would just always very easily break free of one another.

Instead +1 CP on Break free for BF attacker -1 CP vs a Slippery foe seems to balance out to 0... maybe Slippery could instead give +1 per level (instead of +1 per 2 levels) so the CP bonus on BF is always better than the CP penalty?

Or... treat sweat/oil/slippery CR as "only penalizes CP rolls to add/improve grapples against me, not CP rolls to diminish my own grapples" unlike Control Resistance which would penalize both.

- - -

One other idea I had for a "golem effect" ... TG 20's "Strength as a Proxy" rules: the roll against ST-4 is only mentioned for resisting contests... but TG 39 opens it up to active defense too: against a judo throw.

This is often going to be way better than a Brute Parry (TG26) which DOES require using a defence (roll against base ST-4 instead of merely HALF of EFFECTIVE strength plus three). Even assuming effective=max, this is only really better for low-ST creatures (eg a ST 1 creature has Brute Parry 3 the same SAAP score as a ST 7 creature ... but a ST 14 creature has SAAP and BP of both 10, while ST 24 has SAAP 20 and BP 15.

What if instead, when using SAAP against attacks (rather than contests) you count that as a Brute Parry which uses effective ST - 4 for ST? IE half effective ST minus 2. That's a little less of an extreme stop against Judo throws, and could then be used as some kind of automatic defense against Break Free to reflect passively strong grips. Reactive to active defenses (ie if they used telegraphic attack) would not apply since it's just a passive reaction.

In the spirit of combining HP and Lifting ST for setting maximum CP, maybe HP could be used to calculate the "proxy for mass" instead, too. You used Lifting ST to actually close the grip and attain the position, but would only use Lifting ST for ACTIVE brute parries (full trained Lifting ST) and not passive "Mass Parries".

Since HP is incapable of lifting things (your basic lift is 0 if you have ST 0 HP 10 like one of those 'body of' guys) TG8's Grappling Encumbrance Multiple rules result in a "divide by zero" situation leading to GEM infinity. This maxes out at the bottom "over 46" for -20 to rolls (Grappling Weight Modifier) and -4 Encumbrance Penalty.

Kind of weird how that caps at -4 no matter how heavy the thing is... TG10's "up to 10xBL" implies a tier beyond Extra-Heavy, which I think is BLx15 per B353's "Carry on Back"...

Losing 1 FP per second per moving weight beyond BLx10 up to BLx15 seems like it's using EE to get a +50% increase in BL...

B356 terms... a % increase to ST is actually BETTER than a % increase to Basic Lift once you due to the exponential function. Per B17 for example each x2 to ST gives you x4 BL

2*(STxST)/5 = BL of (STxST) *0.4
v
(STx2xSTx2)/5 = 4(STxST)/5 = BL of (STxST) *0.8 = twice as much, I think? For that reason I'm thinking tweak 357's formula to -1 per 5% increase in ST or 10% increase in Basic Lift? Just for fairness? Otherwise "making a single ST roll" is more favorable.
Plane 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 05:19 AM.


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