[MA] Armed Grapple (Neck) vs Choke Hold with Weapon

[germandan]

Hi Folks,

I am new to GURPS and in the process of building my first Melee Character. I really like the system but have encountered an oddity that I don't quite understand.

For the purpose of grappling an enemy by the neck using a Weapon (let's say a staff), I see two solutions:

Armed Grapple (Neck) [MA67]: Defaults to Weapon Skill-2 plus the hit location penalty for grappling, which is -3 in the case of the neck. Totalling to Skill -5
OR
Choke Hold [MA69]: Defaults to Weapon Skill-3 (-4 if from the front).

As far as I understand, on success, both end up the same way. A neckgrapple with your weapon. Where is the difference? Especially since Choke-Hold is up to 2 points 'cheaper'. Am I missing something?

[Mathulhu]

Armed Grapple appears to be the generic ability in this comparison, while Choke Hold is the specialised one.

If all you want to do is apply a choke hold then the Choke Hold technique is better. However if you want to apply other maneuvers like throws or locks then Armed Grapple is better. And an Armed Grapple can target the torso to completely negate the location penalty, then the technique is only a -2 instead of Choke Hold's -3.

In effect the additional penalty is to make up for the larger array of options Armed Grapple offers.

[germandan]

Originally Posted by Mathulhu

Armed Grapple appears to be the generic ability in this comparison, while Choke Hold is the specialised one.
....
In effect the additional penalty is to make up for the larger array of options Armed Grapple offers.

Makes sense to me. Though it is kind of unfortunate that using Armed Grapple you will never be as proficient as with Choke Hold, since both techniques 'cannot exceed prerequisite skill'. Even if you'd be willing to spend the additonal CP to account for the more general usability of Armed Grapple.

That leaves Armed Grapple to the neck at a potential maximum of Skill-3 (skill-0 plus hit location penalty -3) while Choke Hold can simply be raised up to Skill-0 (*)

But since this is arguably a very niche case, that might be something that could be talked about with the GM.

* Edit: Minus the -1 potential 'from-front' penalty