Improving the Tonfa

[Sindri]

Originally Posted by Gollum

A perfectly realistic roleplaying game would have a generic melee combat skill which would be low, on which all other combat skills would be based, and that all other combat skills would improve slowly. But this coming and going experience is very hard to simulate easily in terms of calculation because the player would have to take into account both the number of specific weapon skills and their depth...

Realism doesn't dictate the manner of mechanical representation, just what is being represented. You could have a bunch of skills for different weapons and mandate that realistic characters buy them all up periodically or split skills between a whole bunch of different things that fighters learn some of which would be applicable to other weapons.

Originally Posted by Gollum

Yes. GURPS is a very flexible game.

Flexible is really what it isn't when it comes to the current skill system. I wouldn't recommend doing that without shifting to a more powerful skill system.

Originally Posted by Gollum

That may be true for shortswords, indeed. But a tonkwa is really different from a baton, a mace or a blackjack. The endless tightening/releasing of the grip that you have to do is very specific. So, in a handling point of view, it is very different. But I do agree on the fact that GURPS weapon skill defaults are not based on the manner of handling the weapon (which I regret: it would be most easy to understand... At least for me).

No one is saying that GURPS weapon skills aren't based on manner of handling. What is being said by some is that the total difference in usage between a tonfa and baton is low enough that it shouldn't have it's own skill in a rationalized version of GURPS's weapon skills.

Originally Posted by Gollum

Oh yes, it deserve a -1. If someone tells you: you can now use only half of your parry techniques, you do have a penalty. And if he add something in your hand, something that you have to maintain very firmly to avoid its natural spinning move on that, it will be worse. Not to mention the risk to hurt yourself when your hands go very fast near your own body...

So, in my humble opinion, a -1 is the minimum. -1 to parry do correspond to -2 to attack (because parry is based on half the attacking skill). -2 to attack is just the difference between a shortsword and a broadsword. When you see how close is the handling of these two weapons in reality and how different are the parries with a tonkwa and without a tonkwa, the conclusion is inevitable. A penalty is required.

That's only true if a variety of methods available is contributing hugely to your chance of successful parries. Remember also that the context is someone who knows how to use a tonfa and has spent a point to represent that. Compared to other things that are given penalties "I have to stick to these kinds of unhampered parries instead of getting to choose between them and others" is overstated. Anything more is absurd, you get -2 for trying to parry with a whip.

Originally Posted by Gollum

There would if once would like to have a bit more realism. And the tonfa is already an exception. It is the only weapon that can be use without any specific training. A warrior trained with broadsword cannot use a shortsword without penalty. But a karateka (bare handed training) can use a tonfa without the least problem... Very strange, isn't it.

There would what? Mentioning that familiarities exist doesn't add realism, the rule already exists. Tonfa is also like every other weapon in terms of specific training. Someone who has trained with a pata can use a hook sword because Broadsword is defined such that both are included under it's training. Karate is just likewise defined as including unarmed style strikes with both bare hands and tonfa. That's not without specific training, GURPS Karate "specifically" trains tonfa use. Tonfa isn't even the only weapon that can be used with unarmed combat skills! Brawling covers punching with weapon hilts.

Originally Posted by Gollum

The tonkwa, as any weapons, as a lot of specific techniques. Some are close from the sai techniques; but the handling is different (which is why specific training is required in reality). Some others are very different. Especially the linked attacks. Three very fast attacks (ribs-ribs-head or knee-knee-head); for instance. This is possible with the specific grip of the tonkwa but becomes impossible (at the same speed) with any other weapon, except the nunchaku, maybe (I never trained with nunchaku yet).

It's really best if the word technique isn't used for anything but GURPS techniques.

Originally Posted by Gollum

Yes. Sword sound more logical. But the fact is that there are a difference between shortsword and longsword in rules as written. And that the karate skill allows to use a tonkwa at no penalty in rules as written. In my humble opinion, this is an inconsistency.

Whether that specific case is inconsistent or not the required distance before a new skill is required has lots of inconsistencies in the normal rules.

[Mr Frost]

Originally Posted by Gollum

...don't be afraid to disappoint me...

Santa Claus doesn't exist , it was just your Father in a cheap costume .

[Varyon]

Originally Posted by Gollum

The endless tightening/releasing of the grip that you have to do is very specific.

Tightening/releasing is probably only necessary when changing grips and using the tonfa-specific spinning Technique. Additionally, other weapon skills teach a similar tightening/releasing to change grips - it's called the Reverse Grip Technique, and defaults to Skill-6. That odd handle on the tonfa simply makes it much better for this, eliminating the penalty. (EDIT: If getting rid of the Tonfa skill, it may be more appropriate for the tonfa handle to reduce, rather than eliminate, the Reverse Grip penalty).

Originally Posted by Gollum

A warrior trained with broadsword cannot use a shortsword without penalty. But a karateka (bare handed training) can use a tonfa without the least problem... Very strange, isn't it.

No stranger than that same karateka being able to use a bladed hand, combat fan, hook sword, qian kun ri yue dao, shuriken, or basket-hilted sword without any problem (see MA226).

Originally Posted by Gollum

Especially the linked attacks. Three very fast attacks (ribs-ribs-head or knee-knee-head); for instance. This is possible with the specific grip of the tonkwa but becomes impossible (at the same speed) with any other weapon, except the nunchaku, maybe (I never trained with nunchaku yet).

I highly doubt those combinations are only doable with tonfas and flails, and GURPS would allow you to build each of those as Combinations - assuming those are all swings and the character starts with Shortsword-20, you're looking at Shortsword Tonfa Strike*/Vitals** + Shortsword Tonfa Strike/Vitals + Shortsword Tonfa Strike/Skull-8+8+4 for the first. The second is Shortsword Tonfa Strike/Knee + Shortsword Tonfa Strike/Knee + Shortsword Tonfa Strike/Skull-6+6+4. I went with a ridiculously high starting skill; a more realistic character probably has some Targeted Attacks and has invested in the Combinations to buy off some of the sizable penalties involved. While I've written those up for a tonfa, you could easily create a different Combination, at the same ending skill levels, with an Ace/Mace Swing.

*Tonfa Strike is the name of the spinning attack Technique; I'm assuming here the character has bought it off in full.
**Vitals seemed the most appropriate target for "ribs," although Torso would also work, making the roll against 11 instead of 8.

EDIT: Also, I should note that those combinations probably aren't typically done as Combinations, but rather as a Telegraphic All-Out Attack (Double) with a Dual Weapon Attack. That would change things for the Skill-20 character to 17+17+17 and 15+15+17, respectively, meaning someone with a more-feasible Skill-14 would be at 11+11+11 and 9+9+11, probably with some Targeted Attacks and/or the Dual Weapon Attack Technique to help boost that.

Originally Posted by Gollum

Yes. Sword sound more logical. But the fact is that there are a difference between shortsword and longsword in rules as written. And that the karate skill allows to use a tonkwa at no penalty in rules as written. In my humble opinion, this is an inconsistency.

Karate can be used for Pummeling (MA111). Punching with a Reverse Grip tonfa is a case of Pummeling. The only thing special is that Karate doesn't suffer the -1, just as for a knuckle guard, which doesn't seem outlandish. That's not any sort of inconsistency. As for Karate Parry, you can actually use Karate Parry with any Reverse Grip weapon. albeit at -1. Again, tonfas get to ignore that -1, in the same way a katar (which also occupies the hand and prevents open-handed parrying) is able to use Karate Parry at no penalty. This implies the penalty is likely due to needing to angle the reversed weapon against the arm (unneeded for tonfa and katar), and possibly to avoid accidentally cutting oneself. As above, there's no inconsistency here.

[Gollum]

Originally Posted by Sindri

Realism doesn't dictate the manner of mechanical representation, just what is being represented. You could have a bunch of skills for different weapons and mandate that realistic characters buy them all up periodically or split skills between a whole bunch of different things that fighters learn some of which would be applicable to other weapons.

What I wanted to mean is that, in reality, when you learn different weapon skills, you also improve a more basic one ("general fighting notions and know how"). That is at least what say kobudo masters. After practicing a lot of different weapon, you become able to use any weapon, and even any tool as a weapon. Exactly as someone who already know several foreign languages learn more rapidly a new one than someone who learn his first foreign language.

Originally Posted by Sindri

Flexible is really what it isn't when it comes to the current skill system. I wouldn't recommend doing that without shifting to a more powerful skill system.

GURPS as written is still very flexible because it is always possible to reduce the number of skills thanks to Wildcard skills or to multiply them thanks to Techniques.

Originally Posted by Sindri

No one is saying that GURPS weapon skills aren't based on manner of handling.

I am saying it. Some skills sound to correspond to manner of handling. But some other don't. Shortsword and Broadsword is my favorite example. Same manner of handling but still two different skills. I could find some other which sounded strange when I read them but it would require a time I haven't yet.

Originally Posted by Sindri

That's only true if a variety of methods available is contributing hugely to your chance of successful parries. Remember also that the context is someone who knows how to use a tonfa and has spent a point to represent that.

I skipped something somewhere because what I am saying is that it is someone who never learned tonkwa. He just learned karate, or brawling, and suddenly know how to use tonkwa without the least penalty. In a restricted use, but still sufficient (attacks and parries).

Originally Posted by Sindri

There would what? Mentioning that familiarities exist doesn't add realism, the rule already exists. Tonfa is also like every other weapon in terms of specific training. Someone who has trained with a pata can use a hook sword because Broadsword is defined such that both are included under it's training. Karate is just likewise defined as including unarmed style strikes with both bare hands and tonfa. That's not without specific training, GURPS Karate "specifically" trains tonfa use. Tonfa isn't even the only weapon that can be used with unarmed combat skills! Brawling covers punching with weapon hilts.

Here again, I must have skipped something somewhere because I really think that we are not speaking about the same thing.

Brawling includes using some weapons because it is a generic "improvised street fight" skill, which include some improvised (or, at least, non very formal) weapons like sap and, why not bottles and so on. It is not a very precise skill. Karate is supposed to be the "advanced training at unarmed striking" (Karate definition, page 203), which supposed not to be armed.

Originally Posted by Sindri

Whether that specific case is inconsistent or not the required distance before a new skill is required has lots of inconsistencies in the normal rules.

The bigger inconsistency, in my opinion is saying that a skill is "advanced training at unarmed striking" and suddenly saying that you can use a weapon with it without the least penalty.

[Gollum]

Originally Posted by Mr Frost

Santa Claus doesn't exist , it was just your Father in a cheap costume .

What? Oh my! Noooooo!
;-)

[Gollum]

Originally Posted by Varyon

Tightening/releasing is probably only necessary when changing grips and using the tonfa-specific spinning Technique. Additionally, other weapon skills teach a similar tightening/releasing to change grips - it's called the Reverse Grip Technique, and defaults to Skill-6. That odd handle on the tonfa simply makes it much better for this, eliminating the penalty. (EDIT: If getting rid of the Tonfa skill, it may be more appropriate for the tonfa handle to reduce, rather than eliminate, the Reverse Grip penalty).

There is something I don't really understand here. Why is it so important to get rid of the tonfa skill?

Originally Posted by Varyon

No stranger than that same karateka being able to use a bladed hand, combat fan, hook sword, qian kun ri yue dao, shuriken, or basket-hilted sword without any problem (see MA226).

What? Oh my, I skipped that... But this skill become to be a mess. And then, why not all kobudo weapons?

I really don't anymore understand GURPS skills here...

Originally Posted by Varyon

I highly doubt those combinations are only doable with tonfas and flails

Yes. You're right. But the tonfa is a weapon that allows to do it very quickly. At least, more quickly than every other weapon I have tried or see being used in my kobudo training (to speak only about what I know quite well).

Originally Posted by Varyon

Karate can be used for Pummeling (MA111). Punching with a Reverse Grip tonfa is a case of Pummeling. The only thing special is that Karate doesn't suffer the -1, just as for a knuckle guard, which doesn't seem outlandish. That's not any sort of inconsistency. As for Karate Parry, you can actually use Karate Parry with any Reverse Grip weapon. albeit at -1. Again, tonfas get to ignore that -1, in the same way a katar (which also occupies the hand and prevents open-handed parrying) is able to use Karate Parry at no penalty. This implies the penalty is likely due to needing to angle the reversed weapon against the arm (unneeded for tonfa and katar), and possibly to avoid accidentally cutting oneself. As above, there's no inconsistency here.

Here again, the Karate skill really begin to become a mess in my point of view... It's just my point of view, of course, but that is the sort of thing that can make GURPS hard to play. A skill is not really what its name (and its definition!) means. It's often more than that. Weapons can be used with barehanded skill at no penalty. Weapons that are very close from some skill do have a penalty...

But, no matter. That's another topic and it's just my opinion.

[DanHoward]

Originally Posted by Gollum

There is something I don't really understand here. Why is it so important to get rid of the tonfa skill?

For the same reason we should get rid of Shortsword and Fencing (and probably a few more too such as merging Karate and Brawling). There are better ways to handle them than bloated lists of skills.

[Sindri]

Originally Posted by Gollum

I am saying it. Some skills sound to correspond to manner of handling. But some other don't. Shortsword and Broadsword is my favorite example. Same manner of handling but still two different skills. I could find some other which sounded strange when I read them but it would require a time I haven't yet.

The length of a sword isn't just a trivial adjustment, it's vital to the handling of the weapon. They are treated as different skills in standard GURPS because the authors considered their handling to be sufficiently different to justify that. You can argue with that and say that Knife/Shortsword/Broadsword should be Knife/Sword but that just means that the differences between them are judged as being below the level of resolution not that they aren't handled very differently in an objective sense. What would even be the alternative to judging weapon skills by method of handling? Weapons that are traditionally aesthetically grouped together in fiction? I consider it very unlikely that the authors of GURPS deliberately set out to build combat skills that way.

Originally Posted by Gollum

I skipped something somewhere because what I am saying is that it is someone who never learned tonkwa. He just learned karate, or brawling, and suddenly know how to use tonkwa without the least penalty. In a restricted use, but still sufficient (attacks and parries).

This started with you saying...

Originally Posted by Gollum

At the limit a perk (1 character point = 200 hours of training) could allow a karateka to use a tonfa/tonkwa just to increase its damage... But even then, it would prevent any open hand parries, which would certainly give him a -1 to parry.

Or that someone who was not only familiar with a tonfa but had actually spent a point to be able to use unarmed strikes with it should have a penalty to parry.

Originally Posted by Gollum

Here again, I must have skipped something somewhere because I really think that we are not speaking about the same thing.

Any skill gets penalties if you don't have familiarity with the weapons in question. That includes Karate for someone who isn't familiar with using a tonfa.

Originally Posted by Gollum

There is something I don't really understand here. Why is it so important to get rid of the tonfa skill?

Because many people want a combat skill list that is both rational and merely a little bit ridiculously finely grained compared to other skill instead of being absurdly finely grained. For reference, if you were designing a new set of combat skills would you want a different skill for the pata?

Originally Posted by Gollum

What? Oh my, I skipped that... But this skill become to be a mess. And then, why not all kobudo weapons?

I really don't anymore understand GURPS skills here...

Because a kusarigama has basically nothing to do with unarmed combat methods and "punching" with a tonfa does.

Originally Posted by Gollum

Yes. You're right. But the tonfa is a weapon that allows to do it very quickly. At least, more quickly than every other weapon I have tried or see being used in my kobudo training (to speak only about what I know quite well).

As it stands weapon speed is almost entirely below resolution for GURPS.

Originally Posted by Gollum

Here again, the Karate skill really begin to become a mess in my point of view... It's just my point of view, of course, but that is the sort of thing that can make GURPS hard to play. A skill is not really what its name (and its definition!) means. It's often more than that. Weapons can be used with barehanded skill at no penalty. Weapons that are very close from some skill do have a penalty...

But, no matter. That's another topic and it's just my opinion.

I'll admit that I'm pretty used to ignoring actual names and short descriptions and just judging things on mechanical representation.

[Varyon]

Originally Posted by Gollum

Why is it so important to get rid of the tonfa skill?

I feel there are far too many combat skills as it stands (there are likely far too many non-combat skills as well, of course). Any skill that basically has a single weapon that uses it gets a serious look. The only weapon that uses tonfa is, of course, the tonfa, and that seems so similar to baton that it seems it should use a different skill.

Originally Posted by Gollum

What? Oh my, I skipped that... But this skill become to be a mess. And then, why not all kobudo weapons?

Do note that those weapons I listed can only use Karate for hilt punches, you can't swing a hook sword using the skill - just like you can only use Karate to punch with a tonfa.

Originally Posted by Gollum

Yes. You're right. But the tonfa is a weapon that allows to do it very quickly. At least, more quickly than every other weapon I have tried or see being used in my kobudo training (to speak only about what I know quite well).

I'm currently working on a simplified version of my old Initiative Overhaul, which would allow for a tonfa to benefit from its purported speed. The benefit isn't built-in (the tonfa would behave much like any other Reach 1 swung weapon of its MinST), but it wouldn't be game-breaking to give it an IP discount for its nifty little spin attack. Failing that, you might be able to justify a discount on those combos. Of course, the easiest solution is just to have that crazy speed give a small defense penalty, as I suggested upthread - any foe suffering the effects of Feint or Deceptive Attack is at a further -1 to defend against the tonfa swing.

[Gollum]

Originally Posted by DanHoward

For the same reason we should get rid of Shortsword and Fencing (and probably a few more too such as merging Karate and Brawling). There are better ways to handle them than bloated lists of skills.

If skills are reworked one day in GURPS (either in the mythic 5th edition or, more probably, in an Alternate GURPS book), I plead for giving up the automatic damage bonus for Karate and other barehanded combat skills.

It is indeed a specific training that a karateka can train or not train: makiwara, kicking bag, kigu hojo undo (specific muscle training exercises)... Karate masters say that tsuki (punches) is an whole art inside the art.

So, to my mind, it is much more well simulated by striking strength.

Furthermore, why +1 at DX+0, +2 at DX+1 and then, nothing more? Is there a so huge difference between DX+0 and DX+1?