is Reverse Grip possible with swing-only weapons?

[Plane]

MA111's description opens with "A fighter with a reach C, 1, or 2 thrusting
weapon"

What about reach C/1/2 weapons that only describe swing damage and not thrusting damage?

B271 Axe/Mace weapons for example only list swing damage, not thrust... so is it not possible to use a Reverse Grip?

As for the "why would you" (bonus to thrusting damage, penalty to swing damage) that's because of situations where lower range would be a bonus, like if needing to parry during close combat and you want a lesser penalty.

One possibility I thought of is perhaps since "Pummeling" gives a thrusting attack to "the butt of a reach C or 1 melee weapon" you could perhaps use Reverse Grip with these weapons?

For B274 (Two Handed Ace/Mace) if using a Maul/Warhammer you'd need to have it in reach 1 grip for that to be an option though, since Pummeling should be illegal if in a reach 2 grip. It seems pummeling is equally easier whether it's a reach C or reach 1 grip.

[Ultraviolet]

If you want bonus to parry and less penalty in CC, wouldn't you just wield the swung weapon in defensive grip?

[Plane]

Originally Posted by Ultraviolet

If you want bonus to parry and less penalty in CC, wouldn't you just wield the swung weapon in defensive grip?

Defensive Grip only gives +1 and I can only find mention of it reducing the Reach of sword-class weapons.

Even if allowing reach 1+ to parry in close combat using the optional 'Long Weapons in Close Combat" rules (-4 to skill per yard) that's -2 to parry, so -1 to reach would be better than +1 to parry

[talonthehand]

Originally Posted by Plane

MA111's description opens with "A fighter with a reach C, 1, or 2 thrusting
weapon"

What about reach C/1/2 weapons that only describe swing damage and not thrusting damage?

B271 Axe/Mace weapons for example only list swing damage, not thrust... so is it not possible to use a Reverse Grip?

As for the "why would you" (bonus to thrusting damage, penalty to swing damage) that's because of situations where lower range would be a bonus, like if needing to parry during close combat and you want a lesser penalty.

One possibility I thought of is perhaps since "Pummeling" gives a thrusting attack to "the butt of a reach C or 1 melee weapon" you could perhaps use Reverse Grip with these weapons?

For B274 (Two Handed Ace/Mace) if using a Maul/Warhammer you'd need to have it in reach 1 grip for that to be an option though, since Pummeling should be illegal if in a reach 2 grip. It seems pummeling is equally easier whether it's a reach C or reach 1 grip.

Away from books, but I feel like this is a rare time when you need to look at what the term means rather than the raw numbers in GURPS. It's holding a weapon upside down. So instead of holding a knife with the blade being on the same side of your hand as your thumb, you're holding it so the blade comes from the bottom of the hand. That's why you get an increase in thrust (the downward stab) and a decrease in swing damage.

So how would one hold a two handed axe in a reverse grip? And what would one accomplish doing so that they couldn't just by holding it in a defensive stance? If you can explain that, not in GURPS terms, but in real world terms, there may be a GURPS solution for you.

[Anthony]

Well, this is the sort of thing you can test out in the real world. Hold a hammer in a reverse grip and try to drive nails with it.

If the goal is to just be able to parry better, you could certainly hold it in a reverse grip, but it's such a non-standard use that you wouldn't be using axe/mace skill to wield it any more, which would eliminate any benefits it might otherwise grant.

[Varyon]

An unbalanced weapon (likely including Parry U swords) should probably have an attack penalty as well as a damage penalty when swung with a reversed grip. Also, I'm confused about all the mentions of defense bonuses - Reversed Grip gives a -2 penalty to Parry (incidentally, that's the same penalty as using a Reach 1 weapon to Parry in Close Combat). About the only case where it could be said to give a "bonus" is if your character's Brawling or Karate skill is higher than whatever weapon skill being used, as Reversed Grip allows using a Brawling or Karate Parry with the weapon (avoiding the -3 for unarmed Parry against a weapon if using Brawling Parry, or Karate Parry in a setting using some of the Harsh Realism rules). Even then, it's still at -1.

[talonthehand]

Originally Posted by Varyon

Also, I'm confused about all the mentions of defense bonuses - Reversed Grip gives a -2 penalty to Parry (incidentally, that's the same penalty as using a Reach 1 weapon to Parry in Close Combat). About the only case where it could be said to give a "bonus" is if your character's Brawling or Karate skill is higher than whatever weapon skill being used, as Reversed Grip allows using a Brawling or Karate Parry with the weapon (avoiding the -3 for unarmed Parry against a weapon if using Brawling Parry, or Karate Parry in a setting using some of the Harsh Realism rules). Even then, it's still at -1.

Not to speak for the OP, but it looks like they're trying to get around the parry penalty from using a weapon with a longer reach in close quarters by using the weapon in such a way that it has a smaller reach. It's very.....convoluted.

[Varyon]

Originally Posted by talonthehand

Not to speak for the OP, but it looks like they're trying to get around the parry penalty from using a weapon with a longer reach in close quarters by using the weapon in such a way that it has a smaller reach. It's very.....convoluted.

The penalty to Parry in CC with a Reach 1 weapon is -2 (-4 to skill, halved for Parry), the same as the penalty to Parry with a Reverse Grip weapon. Technically, GURPS doesn't give a rule that I'm aware of to use a Reach 2 weapon at Reach 1, but I'd assume it would be the same -4, so Parry there is also -2 either way. Using a Reach 2 weapon in CC is at -8, thus -4 to Parry. Using a reverse-grip Reach 2 weapon in CC would be at -4, thus -2 to Parry, in addition to the -2 to Parry for reverse grip, again for -4 to Parry. In all cases, Parry is the same with reverse grip, and is in fact worse if the opponent is within your weapon's normal Reach. You could claim reverse grip allows you to basically trade the normal attack penalty for a damage penalty, which can be a benefit, but as I said above most swing-only weapons should probably be at a penalty with reverse grip, largely negating that benefit.

Essentially, while you could wield, say, an axe in a reverse grip, there's no good reason to do so, which is probably part of why the authors of Martial Arts opted to just simplify things by disallowing such use.

[AlexanderHowl]

A few possible solutions. First, retreat while parrying, which would put you at Reach 1. Second, step back when attacking, so that your next defense is at Reach 1 (retreat is generally better though). Third, learn Judo or Karate, so you can parry with your off-hand. Four, put a spike on the end of your axe/mace so you can deal thrust damage and therefore benefit from Reverse Grip.

[Plane]

I just realized (and then I saw Varyon pointed it out too) that I overlooked the -2 to parry that Reverse Grip inflicts. That sort of puts a nail in my strategy of using -1 to reach to negate the -4 to skill (-2 to parry) penalty.

This mostly only seems useful for using reach 1 weapons to parry in close combat, by using the option to use Brawling/Karate parries. That's obviously better if Brawling/Karate skill is higher than axe/mace.

The parry penalty is only -1 in this case, which could be better than taking the -3 penalty to try parrying weapons unarmed... or would that still apply?

Plus the benefit that if your parry fails, they can only opt to strike the WEAPON instead of original target, not your arm.

Even if brawling skill was tied with axe/mace, the benefit of reducing reach 1 to reach C would be avoiding the -4 skill (-2 parry) penalty to parry in close combat.

MA112 also describes another benefit for BOTH thrusting/swung attacks to front/sides: due to arm partly concealing weapon, successful deceptive attacks or feints inflict another -1 to attacker's defences.

Something else I'm wondering about with unbalanced weapons too, since Varyon also brought that up...

B269 defines U as "you cannot use it to parry if you have already used it to attack this turn (or vice versa)."

This apples to all Axe/Mace other than Hatchet, and all 2-handed Axe/Mace except chainsaw (it can't parry at all)

One interesting thing you can notice with the Naginata (either wielded with Polearm B272 or Staff B273 or Two Handed Sword B274) is that whether parrying is 0 or 0U depends on what attack you are using: it is unbalanced if swung and balanced (no U) if thrust...

This differs from the Bastard Swords which are always the same regardless of thrusting/swinging: unbalanced if wielded 1-handed via Broadsword (B271) or always-balanced if wielded using 2HS (B274)

I think the way it would work with the naginata is if you just made a swing attack you can't parry, but if you just made a thrust attack you can parry.

Now if you just parried... that means you could follow up freely with a thrust but NOT with a swing.

What I'm wondering about though, is now that MA added a new thrust-based attack to many weapons (pummeling) and we know that balance-for-parrying is specific to attack type (per separate listings on naginata/bastard) should a conservative pummeling attack on a sometimes-unbalanced weapon unbalance it?

That could create a very interesting use for pummeling: a way to attack with axes (other than Defensive Attack) which perhaps doesn't involve negating your ability to parry.

Or conversely, if you just parried with your axe (you can't use your normal swing attack the following turn) then perhaps you could do a meager thrusting attack (pummeling) instead?

I like the idea because it adds more variety to combat, if it has that naginata-contrast instead of a less-interesting bastard-consistency.

Since reverse grip allows brawling/karate parries and makes mention of pummeling, maybe in this situation normally always-unbalanced weapons (most axes/maces) could be considered balanced? After all, you're not making unbalanced axe/mace parries, you're making balanced brawling/karate parries!

It kinda makes sense since you have the weight closer to you.

If that's the case, mechanically it could explain another motive for using that kind of grip, supposing you allow it on the basis of Pummeling turning normally swing-only weapons into thrust-also weapons.

Originally Posted by talonthehand

So how would one hold a two handed axe in a reverse grip?

"extending along his arm rather than as an extension from it" I think basically means the end projects from the pinky-side of the hand rather than the thumb-side.

The along/away contrast (envisioning weapons as parallel with the forearm) I think probably assumes maximum ulnar deviation (thumb is parallel with forearm: 180 degrees of spce, pinky crooks ~30-40 degrees away (~150-160 degrees of space on that side) because if you do neutral (midpoint between radial/ulnar deviation) the handle (and weapon attached to it) are closer to perpendicular with the forearm.

Originally Posted by talonthehand

what would one accomplish doing so that they couldn't just by holding it in a defensive stance?

By having the handle of the weapon along your arm you might be more able to protect your arm.

Originally Posted by talonthehand

That's why you get an increase in thrust (the downward stab) and a decrease in swing damage.

One factor that I also just noticed here regarding the decrease in swing...

"-2 damage or -1 damage per die" isn't as extreme as it seems when talking about long weapons in close combat...

That's because you're using the -1 to Reach to offset a DIFFERENT penalty to swing damage, the one on MA117 (-1 per yard of your weapon’s maximum reach)

So overall you're still getting a penalty, but it's slightly less worse than it seems when you take into account ignoring the smaller penalty for long swung weapons in CC.

Originally Posted by AlexanderHowl

A few possible solutions. First, retreat while parrying, which would put you at Reach 1.

No idea why they still need to coddle defenders like that, I'd rather someone be pressured to rely on a Wait/Stop-Thrust to keep foes from entering close combat and attacking.

I realize why an attacker starting in CC should be more threatening than one you see coming stepping into it... but they're STILL closer, so it feels like it ought to be harder to stop than an attack generated from further out...

I sort of get why http://www.sjgames.com/gurps/faq/FAQ4-3.html#SS3.4.3.6 was added to Basic Set because you absolutely could not parry/block AT ALL, but since LWICC makes it an option (just penalized) I'd prefer to just apply the -4 to skill per yard, or maybe at least half of it (-2 to skill / -1 to parry per yard of Reach)

Originally Posted by AlexanderHowl

put a spike on the end of your axe/mace so you can deal thrust damage and therefore benefit from Reverse Grip.

Would that be like thrust/cutting or thrust/impaling?

Even without that, you'd figure the option to do thrust/crushing would exist... whether you're pummeling with the tip or the handle.