[MA] [TG] Berserk, Reistance, Pins and potential Errata

[DouglasCole]

Originally Posted by chandley

. . . the Throw from Lock explicitly says "the turn AFTER the one during which you applied the lock".

I had a big ol' post talking about this, and looking up "next turn" in the Basic Set and Martial Arts provides a lot of merit to the argument. But . . .

Martial Arts, p. 128 throws a bit of a monkey into that wrench:

Grappling and Multiple Attacks
Any grappling move that counts as an attack is permitted
as part of a multiple attack sequence during a maneuver.
You must usually attempt different actions (takedown and
pin, kick and break free, break free and grapple, etc.).

What I don't see here is anything that either allows or forbids combining two things that say "on your next turn" together. it would be very reasonable to disallow such. All Actions After a Grapple may only be done on the turn following the grapple (p. B370), and this includes Takedown, Pin, Arm Lock, etc. The MA rule on p. 128 notes that you CAN make a grapple and an instant follow-up (grapple and pin, or maybe even grapple, takedown, and pin if you can eke out three attacks).

[vicky_molokh]

Originally Posted by DouglasCole

I had a big ol' post talking about this, and looking up "next turn" in the Basic Set and Martial Arts provides a lot of merit to the argument. But . . .

Martial Arts, p. 128 throws a bit of a monkey into that wrench:

Grappling and Multiple Attacks
Any grappling move that counts as an attack is permitted
as part of a multiple attack sequence during a maneuver.
You must usually attempt different actions (takedown and
pin, kick and break free, break free and grapple, etc.).

What I don't see here is anything that either allows or forbids combining two things that say "on your next turn" together. it would be very reasonable to disallow such. All Actions After a Grapple may only be done on the turn following the grapple (p. B370), and this includes Takedown, Pin, Arm Lock, etc. The MA rule on p. 128 notes that you CAN make a grapple and an instant follow-up (grapple and pin, or maybe even grapple, takedown, and pin if you can eke out three attacks).

IIRC there's some precedent in the Fairbarn MA book.

Do we still need to split off the grappling posts into a different thread? (I think we do if we're to continue this tangent.)

[DouglasCole]

Originally Posted by vicky_molokh

IIRC there's some precedent in the Fairbarn MA book.

There's precedent in real life, too. Some of the moves can happen pretty quick.

Do we still need to split off the grappling posts into a different thread? (I think we do if we're to continue this tangent.)

I think we should:

* It's a topic that is rather separate from the discussion at hand
* It's a topic that has come up frequently
* It contains what are basically errata from both authors

[chandley]

Originally Posted by DouglasCole

I had a big ol' post talking about this, and looking up "next turn" in the Basic Set and Martial Arts provides a lot of merit to the argument. But . . .

Martial Arts, p. 128 throws a bit of a monkey into that wrench:

Grappling and Multiple Attacks
Any grappling move that counts as an attack is permitted
as part of a multiple attack sequence during a maneuver.
You must usually attempt different actions (takedown and
pin, kick and break free, break free and grapple, etc.).

What I don't see here is anything that either allows or forbids combining two things that say "on your next turn" together. it would be very reasonable to disallow such. All Actions After a Grapple may only be done on the turn following the grapple (p. B370), and this includes Takedown, Pin, Arm Lock, etc. The MA rule on p. 128 notes that you CAN make a grapple and an instant follow-up (grapple and pin, or maybe even grapple, takedown, and pin if you can eke out three attacks).

Good point, and now Im trying to dig up a forum post I recall that limited one of those options to turn after, and I think it really was pin.

Man, Technical Grappling is pretty much a must have at this point :)

[vicky_molokh]

Oww, apparently I can't do that through a proxy, and I won't get to a legit non-proxied IP until Monday.

[vicky_molokh]

Originally Posted by vicky_molokh

Oww, apparently I can't do that through a proxy, and I won't get to a legit non-proxied IP until Monday.

Okay, there's been a delay, but now the thread surgery is done, and we have two threads.