techical grappling, bind weapon and disarming

[Devil_Dante]

So, my PC wants to create some nasty combinations of attacks. As Italian fencer, he fights with rapier and main-gauche. I was looking the bind weapon from "flos duellatorum" (i' v studied a little bit of 1200 medieval fence, so i am not experienced with 1600 fence school), and i thought to create a duelist with "italian school" style (MA p156). Now, i use technical grapplling as standard grappling rule.

My purpose is to use bind weapon in order to disarm my opponent and open his defenses, following with some attacks to the neck or vitals, or simply show my talents disarming him and threat his vitals.

From a mechanical view:
1) i wants to bind weapon as a parry (in my opponent round), to inflict CP to his weapon. Because a rapier is a fencing weapon i have no penalty: my parry skills is 1/2 bind weapon + 3
2) in my round i want to disarm him, with a instant disarm (TG p13). I have CP on his weapon that i can use. Now, i suppose i have to attack his weapon again (without any penalties) and IF he doesn't defend, we can do a quick contest (disarming vs retail weapon). If i win, he's disarmed.

Two questions here:
A)But because i have already parried his weapon, i thought i don't need to attack his weapon, but only need to roll the quick contest. Am i wrong?
B)if i inflict the CP to make his weapon "unready", i suppose he can't try to parry, because both of our weapons are tied. So he can only dodge this attack (he can't even block i guess). If, with bind weapon, i reduce his Grip CP to 0, he is disarmed. Right or wrong?

3)My combination would be: disarming(weapon) + rapier (thrust/vitals)
Is it a legal combinations?

Thanks for answers

[DouglasCole]

Originally Posted by Devil_Dante

From a mechanical view:
1) i wants to bind weapon as a parry (in my opponent round), to inflict CP to his weapon. Because a rapier is a fencing weapon i have no penalty: my parry skills is 1/2 bind weapon + 3

Well, you have no *additional* penalty beyond the -3 to your Rapier or Main Gauche skill that is part of the technique. You have to have a *trapping* weapon to inflict CP.

But . . . if you do have such a weapon, when you succeed at the parry you roll CP based on one handed trained ST, at +2 per die for the trapping weapon (for most folks, they'll only be rolling 1d unless their strength is inhuman).

2) in my round i want to disarm him, with a instant disarm (TG p13). I have CP on his weapon that i can use. Now, i suppose i have to attack his weapon again (without any penalties) and IF he doesn't defend, we can do a quick contest (disarming vs retail weapon). If i win, he's disarmed.

Two questions here:
A)But because i have already parried his weapon, i thought i don't need to attack his weapon, but only need to roll the quick contest. Am i wrong?

If you rolled a successful parry the prior turn, you may proceed immediately to the Quick Contest. That's explicitly stated in the rules.

If you wish to attack to accrue more CP, you do have to make a Bind Weapon attack, and your foe may parry or dodge. Parry uses the unarmed counters concepts on p. 22-23; had I thought of this case, and now having trained in sword and shield binds in a non-sport viking martial arts class, I'd say this should allow use of primary weapon skill to parry as well, penalized for control points.

B)if i inflict the CP to make his weapon "unready", i suppose he can't try to parry, because both of our weapons are tied. So he can only dodge this attack (he can't even block i guess). If, with bind weapon, i reduce his Grip CP to 0, he is disarmed. Right or wrong?

See above; I'd allow the parry using weapon skill penalized for CP; alternately, you can say that this is a parry using Armed Grapple, so Parry-1 from Skill-1, and then hit 'em with your control point penalties.

Both allowing use of weapon skill and the "default" to Armed Grapple are non-canonical but I think good ideas based on the way real people from history trained to use swords.

3)My combination would be: disarming(weapon) + rapier (thrust/vitals)
Is it a legal combinations?

Thanks for answers

I'd call an Instant Disarm an attack, so I'd say sure, combo it up.

[Tomsdad]

EDIT ninja'd by the man himself (and I'm wrong on having to make the disarm attack roll if you made a prior disarming parry, so ignore that!)



Yep you can use Bind weapon as part of a parry (Subject to the rules in TGpg35)

you will inflict one handed CP +2

so to answer question a)

You will need to hit with your instant disarm attack TGpg13-14 (EDIT: no you won't see Douglas Coles post, sorry), but because you instant disarm attack follows a successful parry with the right kind of weapon (trapping) you will avoid the -2 penalty. If you hit you then go to the QC where you can spend those CP's you got because your parry was a bind weapon parry

The end result of the QC is either:

nothing happens (your opponent wins the QC by 3+ MoS)

your opponent's weapon is unready (a tie or your opponent wins the QC by 1 or 2 MoS)

Your opponent's weapon is knocked away (you win the QC by 1+ MoS)

You can avoid the necessity to make a disarm attack (which they can defend against), by going straight to the Grip QC based on Disarm/Retain Grip with penalties for each based on the CP of the other. This is IMO a more slow deliberate attempt to reduce and break your opponent's Grip.

This is detailed in the final paragraph of Pg13 (and continues onto pg14) that starts:

You can also attempt to force an object or weapon out of
your foe’s grasp

I think the intention is to give two options:

1). Fast with Instant disam which involves an attack (but also allows a defence) followed by a QC and gives an instant result. This is an instant disarm even if it benefits from a set up of having a Disarm parry first.

2). By breaking their Grip which is a QC after a grapple as described that allows the defender to also spend their Grip CP to win but weakens their grip to do so, possible reducing their chances on subsequent QC's.

However this can still be instant as if you win they lose their grip. But since they start with at least a one handed grip and trained ST bonuses you'll likely need either an advantage in Skill/stat in the QC or a good roll on the set up disarm parry!

So the first need a successful attack but the QC is likely easier, the second removes the need for an attack, but the QC is harder without lots of CP on your side.

Different contexts will favor either one!

(What I'm not 100% sure on is how the rules for "gimmie that" interact with the 2nd option in disarming)

to answer question b).

Yep if you make their weapon unready then they can't parry with it, perfect for a follow up stab to the vitals. However if you want to use the weapon you were binding their weapon with I think it would have to be free to do so.

The great thing about doing this as a combination is if they try and parry both attacks even if you don't get the end result on the disarm QC their 2nd parry will be penalised anyway!

[Tomsdad]

OK I'm likely going to kick my self because I'm missing something obvious but were does it explicitly say in the rules you don't need roll to hit with a disarm attempt after a binding parry with a trapping weapon?

I can see a couple of places with it states the benefits of having this set up, but not where it says you don't need to roll to hit on the subsequent disarm*

e.g

Disarming

A successful parry with a trapping (p. 16) weapon
allows you to attempt an instant disarm (pp. 13-
14) on your next turn at no penalty TGpg36

Suggests having the parry first avoids some penalties on the disarm attempt, but not that you remove the attack roll altogether!


If the Author's intent is that you don't need it than that's cool too and more than good enough of course!



*unless were talking about the 2nd type of QC as outlined at the bottom of pg13, which talks about first grappling the weapon (which I'd certainly argue the binding parry qualifies as nicely!)

[Devil_Dante]

First of all, thanks for replies, you guys are always nice and forgive me if i wrote something badly, i'm not native english speaker but i'm doing my best

then:

Originally Posted by DouglasCole

Well, you have no *additional* penalty beyond the -3 to your Rapier or Main Gauche skill that is part of the technique. You have to have a *trapping* weapon to inflict CP.

Yes, of course, i meant, on top of this penalty. But from your sentence seems that a fencing weapon is not a trapping weapon. Did i missread? Because at page 16, is written that a fencing weapon "is" a trapping weapon. Correct?

Originally Posted by DouglasCole

If you rolled a successful parry the prior turn, you may proceed immediately to the Quick Contest. That's explicitly stated in the rules.

Originally Posted by Tomsdad

OK I'm likely going to kick my self because I'm missing something obvious but were does it explicitly say in the rules you don't need roll to hit with a disarm attempt after a binding parry with a trapping weapon?

I can see a couple of places with it states the benefits of having this set up, but not where it says you don't need to roll to hit on the subsequent disarm*

e.g

Disarming

A successful parry with a trapping (p. 16) weapon
allows you to attempt an instant disarm (pp. 13-
14) on your next turn at no penalty TGpg36

Suggests having the parry first avoids some penalties on the disarm attempt, but not that you remove the attack roll altogether!

I quoted these togheter, because was my doubt: both for disarming and joint lock techs (for instance), there is written that if you have successfully parried in the prior round, you can attempt these techs without some penalties. You need to attacck and only if your opponent fails to defend, you can inflict the consequences of the techniques. These penalties, i suppose, are the one used to grab locations (hand are -4, legs -2, weapon reach 1 -4.... ) and it has sense because you are in contact with these from previous round (if you have parried them of course). So, in both cases, you need to attack.

Originally Posted by DouglasCole

If you wish to attack to accrue more CP, you do have to make a Bind Weapon attack, and your foe may parry or dodge. Parry uses the unarmed counters concepts on p. 22-23; had I thought of this case, and now having trained in sword and shield binds in a non-sport viking martial arts class, I'd say this should allow use of primary weapon skill to parry as well, penalized for control points.

I'd allow the parry using weapon skill penalized for CP; alternately, you can say that this is a parry using Armed Grapple, so Parry-1 from Skill-1, and then hit 'em with your control point penalties.

Ok, it's difficult to imagine, because, when i bound my weapon during sword training, my opponent couldn't move his arm (from the elbow), but in that case, i guess was a particular arm lock, done with the unarmed hand, but with a main gauche in the off-hand shouldn't be so different.
So, i was pretty sure that he could not defend with a parry. But has sense let him parry with the CP penalties. So, if i have 4 CP on his weapon, he will parry at -1 from passive but i can't use all 4 CP to reduce his defense because is not a quick contest roll.

Do you agree with these?

[DouglasCole]

Originally Posted by Devil_Dante

Yes, of course, i meant, on top of this penalty. But from your sentence seems that a fencing weapon is not a trapping weapon. Did i missread? Because at page 16, is written that a fencing weapon "is" a trapping weapon. Correct?

Yah. I seem to have swept in all fencing weapons, which means that you get the best results there.

Ok, it's difficult to imagine, because, when i bound my weapon during sword training, my opponent couldn't move his arm (from the elbow), but in that case, i guess was a particular arm lock, done with the unarmed hand, but with a main gauche in the off-hand shouldn't be so different.
So, i was pretty sure that he could not defend with a parry. But has sense let him parry with the CP penalties. So, if i have 4 CP on his weapon, he will parry at -1 from passive but i can't use all 4 CP to reduce his defense because is not a quick contest roll.

Do you agree with these?

I would slightly differentiate between a joint lock and a weapon bind. The binds we do in class (especially with sharps) are a sticky edge, so to speak. Locking down the weapon or the limb entirely would require a different move, likely done with Armed Grappling or a pure unarmed grappling skill.

The parry is more of a counter - You're trying to do a move, and he's moving the blade or resisting.

I'd need to think and read on it more - and honestly I don't have the time today to do it - but what you as GM (or in concert with your GM as player) need to decide if the bind/disarm attack is to achieve the bind (which would be indicated by having CP on your foe's weapon) in which case you just proceed to the QC in order to resolve the disarm, or if the skill (attack) roll and defense is to execute a move correctly, which the foe can resist . . . but then to roll ANOTHER QC seems like double-dipping to me.

Dunno. In my game I'd say if you have CP you can execute the QC as an attack.

[Devil_Dante]

edit 2.0: is reasonable that if you have parried you don't need "to attack again" and pass to a QC. By RAW seems you need to attack, from what i've red. But i find faster and easier the first option. My only concern is to make disarming (and similair techniques) very powerfull: an arm lock after successful parry or a bind weapon itself or an armed grappled/grappling parry that inflict CP in your opponent's round, would give you a good benefit in your round.
3 or 4 CP will grant you an instant disarm or a better position to injury your foe very easy.

take this example: your enemy attacks you and you defend with a bind weapon parry, for an average of 4 CP

in your turn, you attempt a disarm, so, quick contest against retail weapon skill. He already has -2 for passive CP and you can use all 4 CP for an additional -4= -6 in total. The chance to succede is very high :O

[Tomsdad]

Originally Posted by DouglasCole

00000
.....

I'd need to think and read on it more - and honestly I don't have the time today to do it - but what you as GM (or in concert with your GM as player) need to decide if the bind/disarm attack is to achieve the bind (which would be indicated by having CP on your foe's weapon) in which case you just proceed to the QC in order to resolve the disarm, or if the skill (attack) roll and defense is to execute a move correctly, which the foe can resist . . . but then to roll ANOTHER QC seems like double-dipping to me.

Dunno. In my game I'd say if you have CP you can execute the QC as an attack.

On pg13-14 in instant disarms there seem to be two different QC options.

The first seems to require a successful disarm attack roll, but gives a range of results that (IMO) favours the disarm-er over the defender. Which is reasonable as it requires a successful disarm attack first.

The Second doesn't seem to require a disarm roll but does need a grapple, and is on balance a harder one for the disarm-er to get a positive result.


In both cases I think any CP gained from a prior binding parry could be used in all stages. E.g. I think it would be reasonable to allow the CP from the binding parry on the weapon to passively penalise defending the weapon against the subsequent Disarm attack in the first option, and of course those CP could be actively spent in either QC.

[Devil_Dante]

I think too that any CP could be spent to influence any QC roll and it is written in the CP paragraph. My concern is only about the techniques you can use after a parry: if you have successfully parried in the last round, is reasonable to skip the attack and roll a qc. But from the other hand, in this way the attacker has a good benefit: as I wrote before, rolling a quick contest with a +6 gives you very high chance to win.

The first way to disarm, via "gimme that" paragraph can be useful in a situation where you have not a lot of chances to win a qc, and in that a case you use an attrition approach

Both methods are interesting and usufull in different scenarios

[Tomsdad]

Originally Posted by Devil_Dante

I think too that any CP could be spent to influence any QC roll and it is written in the CP paragraph. My concern is only about the techniques you can use after a parry: if you have successfully parried in the last round, is reasonable to skip the attack and roll a qc. But from the other hand, in this way the attacker has a good benefit: as I wrote before, rolling a quick contest with a +6 gives you very high chance to win.

The first way to disarm, via "gimme that" paragraph can be useful in a situation where you have not a lot of chances to win a qc, and in that a case you use an attrition approach

Both methods are interesting and usufull in different scenarios

Yep ultimately I think you can choose the one that you think most matches what is happening at the time.