[MA] Italian fencing description and the riposte
 

The description for the Italian school of fencing (MA156) says two things about defense using this style: stylists make extensive use of the riposte and stylists rarely parry with the main weapon but use an off-hand weapon or dodge. Having read Agrippa and working through Capo Ferro (solely for use in roleplaying :P) this makes sense, you avoid the opponents blade and attack into their attack and make them impale themselves on your blade, as Agrippa says on every other page. He explicitly, repeatedly says to avoid parrying with your main blade.

However, the Riposte (MA124-125) requires you to attack with the weapon you defended with to gain the penalty to your opponents defense. So the style suggests things that are clearly incompatible. The riposte works as described for how swashbuckling often looks in the movies, but it doesnt fit with fencing as described in the fencing manuals, nor with how it's described in Martial Arts. It feels like they tried to describe both the historical style and the swashbuckling movie style at the same time.

So my question I guess is how do I make the style so that it penalizes the opponents defense without using my main blade to parry? Just a dodge and deceptive attack? A feint of some kind? I don't mind it being cinematic and jumping around like a true swashbuckler, but I'd like it to keep at least fairly true to the core philosophies of the historical style.

Thoughts?

Re: [MA] Italian fencing description and the riposte
 

You're right, based on the description of the techniques, and the way Riposte works, there is an inconsistency here. I have no knowledge of fencing in the real world, so I can't say whether the description is actually accurate, but assuming it is, what I'd suggest doing is adding a new perk to the Italian School style, Special Setup (Ripost from main weapon after parry with off-hand). Basically, it does what it says - allows you to use a Riposte with your main weapon, with the appropriate bonuses, after taking the relevant penalties to your off-hand weapon parry.

Re: [MA] Italian fencing description and the riposte
 

That's such an elegant solution! Thanks! :) Is dodge riposte too much? I'm thinking maybe a counterattack is close enough for use after dodging ^^

Re: [MA] Italian fencing description and the riposte
 

The Italian School write up has the Counter-attack (Rapier) technique in it. Which by RAW is the closest to parry with the off hand and then take advantage by striking with your rapier into the target's out of line rapier.

Ultimately though while by RAW riposte and counter attack are distinct things (and one an attack option, one a technique) in reality this stuff is all on a continuum.

I think a Italian school specific 1 pt perk "riposte off a different weapon" sounds fine.

Re: [MA] Italian fencing description and the riposte
 

The problem is that no one does it in earnest any more except German students who only use tip cuts and aim for the cheek, limiting the nature. Oh once in a while you will have an eccentric pair of people do a real duel with real traditional weapons over a real quarrel to this day. However, though that is weirdly charming it doesn't happen often enough to be educational.

HEMA clubs can tell a lot. They have the disadvantage that no one is trying to kill or seriously injure or risking same and therefore the assumptions change. Many people for instance would make a move in a fight club that they would not when there was a definite prospect of ending up as a kebab.

Re: [MA] Italian fencing description and the riposte
 

I don't see how a similar "Special Setup (Riposte after Dodge)" perk would be unbalanced either, since it still involves penalizing your Dodge roll, and Dodge is more expensive to buy up to high levels than Parry anyway. I wouldn't allow one Special Setup perk to get a Riposte opportunity on both off-hand parries and Dodges, though. To do both, you'd need two perks.

Re: [MA] Italian fencing description and the riposte
 

Buy up Counter-attack and not Riposte. Neither technique is especially useful without any points in.

Re: [MA] Italian fencing description and the riposte
 

Can you buy up Riposte?

Re: [MA] Italian fencing description and the riposte
 

Yeah, I'll definitely use counterattack too. More, if I can :P

Fair point, probably gonna invest in both then, if the GM agrees ^^

Counterattack is basically a worse deceptive attack without points in it, so yeah. But Riposte is a maneuver, not a technique, so no buying up that sadly.

I'd much rather not give up any defense because that spells doom in gurps, but otoh a character trained in that kind of style would probably risk it, so I feel I'll have to bite the sour apple for roleplaying's sake. An excerpt from Agrippa again: "Though I had not originally intended to mention it, let me note here that one often places oneself at risk of being hit by insignificant blows in order to emerge the victor and kill the other combatant"

In gurps there are sadly no insignificant hits. A hit is a hit.

Re: [MA] Italian fencing description and the riposte
 

Styles don't affect your maneuver choices, just what techniques you are allowed to improve and style perks, so I am a little confused about the discrepancy here.

Sure there are. Hits that do less damage than DR.

Re: [MA] Italian fencing description and the riposte
 

The Italian School writeup in MA feels like a bit of a potpouri, combining elements of many different styles across 200 years and a very diverse country. So I woud not worry too much. The design goal for MA was to be inclusive, because players are way more likely to complain that their favourite style was given too few cool techniques than too many (and its usually fun to say "sure, your karate teacher liked that technique even if its rare today in our world").

Suppliments like Fairbairn Close Combat System or the issue of Pyramid with the designer's notes for GURPS Renaissance Florence have the writeups which stick closer to what a particular teacher or group of teachers taught in a specific place and time.

Or, say, one point of cutting damage to the Arm.

Re: [MA] Italian fencing description and the riposte
 

They affect what maneuvers I should choose for good roleplaying tho, I like when stylists have different tactics and philosophies.

Yes but that's a different thing. What I meant was that if I take a hit I can't affect the damage, only hope the dice are on my side. Besides, people in renaissance Italy or a fantasy facsimile would think I was a huge coward if I wore armor in civilian life.

That's very true. And thanks I'll check them out!

Re: [MA] Italian fencing description and the riposte
 

Which one?

Re: [MA] Italian fencing description and the riposte
 

Having trained in the Classic French style back in the 1980's and 90's, Riposte as written is on the mark.

The problem might not be with how GURPS describes a particular manuever so much as semantics where one use of a word doesn't not match another's use of the same word.

In this case, I think that's what happening here.

But now, we have an instance in which the rules as written seem to have a hole in them.

Let me draw your attention to the rules regarding "Dual weapon attacks" and "Dual weapon defense". GURPS originally only had rules for dual weapon attacks. It took GURPS MARTIAL ARTS (page 83) to give us rules for Dual weapon defenses.

Where's the hole? What happens if/when some with two weapons, attempts to utilize what amounts to a dual weapon combination that is both a defense AND attack at the same time?

Could for example, a Riposte be written as a "combination" in which you must successfully parry before you can follow up with the attack? Could a combination be written such that the first sequence is done at a penalty to skill, so that the secondary follow up gain a benefit from the primary action?

Much of what I've seen thus far about using a secondary weapon to parry to allow the primary weapon to attack suggests to me that it is essentially a dual weapon action.

If I were to house rule this at all (and seeing this discussion, I may very well do just this):

Any dual weapon combination can be used as a Dual ACTION. If both are used defensively, then it is a dual weapon defense. If both are used offensively, it is a dual weapon attack. If both are used, one as an attack, the other as a defense - then that should be equally valid.

For the unskilled - the dual weapon technique is penalized by a -4. An additional off-hand skill penalty is imposed, but for weapons that are designed to be used off hand in the first place, I'd skip that requisite entirely.

how would I simulate a fencer who has a parrying dagger in one hand, a rapier in the second hand, up against a foe with but one rapier to hand?

Attacker has the combination: Parry/Counterattack. He has his main gauche skill for the first segment of the combination, and he has his rapier skill as the second segment.

So, the action might start off with:

First Fighter with one blade... attacks.
Second fighter armed with blade and defensive dagger uses his Parry/Counterattack - succeeds with both. Original attacker now defends with a parry at -2 penalty.

Second Fighter now attacks with dual weapon attack as two separate weapons in a low line attack (aimed for the vitals and leg).

First fighter parrying for the second and third time before the start of his next turn, is at penalties to his defense rolls for second and third parries, plus the -1 for dual weapon attack.

That's how I'd visualize some of the action possible based on the discussion thus far.

But it requires filling in the gap of "what happens if in a dual weapon situation, one weapon is offensive at the same time as the other is offensive?"

Just my thoughts... ;)

Re: [MA] Italian fencing description and the riposte
 

Yes, where are these notes? I must have missed them entirely.

Re: [MA] Italian fencing description and the riposte
 

Offhand, the fictional style was Il Lavoro Veloce and the issue was #3-10 Crime and Grime, but you can search the archives as well as I can.

Re: [MA] Italian fencing description and the riposte
 

Nah, all kinds of sources from 14th, 15th, and 16th century Christendom describe men wearing hidden or partial armour (usually collars, headpieces, body armour, armoured sleeves). In Trecento Florence there was a fad for wearing a collar of mail around town, and one of the Scottish kings tried to forbid men at court from wearing concealed armour. I think that one of the Medici survived an assassination attempt at church because the knifeman tried to pat him down for hidden armour and he realized that something was wrong.

There was a fad in the 16th and 17th century for duelling in your shirt, but not everyone participates in a fad. So in the USA today there are people who love their black 'tactical gear' and people who like oiled hardwood and leather and carbon steels ... the second group is not as trendy, but they still exist.

Re: [MA] Italian fencing description and the riposte
 

I don't think that is how it works. While my books are in the old country, I think the sequence is:

Agent Attacks with his Rapier and Hits. Patent Parries with his Rapier using the Counterattack technique, and succeeds.

Now Patient gets his turn. If he chooses to attack agent, Agent will be at -2 to Parry due to the Counterattack. Patient does not get an extra attack, or to attack out of order ... GURPS simplifies combat into discrete turns because the alternative is not practical for mere humans.

Again, my books are in the old country, so anyone who wants to play this out should check Martial Arts.

Re: [MA] Italian fencing description and the riposte
 

Taking a thrust impaling hit to a limb for ×1 in order to deliver a hit to vitals for ×3 probably qualifies.

Re: [MA] Italian fencing description and the riposte
 

Yes, of course I can. But when you said:

"issue of Pyramid with the designer's notes for GURPS Renaissance Florence have the writeups which stick closer to what a particular teacher or group of teachers taught in a specific place and time."

I took that to mean that I had missed the designer's notes on GURPS Renaissance Florence which included notes on period fencing, not a fictional fighting style.

Re: [MA] Italian fencing description and the riposte
 

Yep counter attack isn't an extra attack, it's an attack technique that you can use if you happen to have just successfully defended an attack from your intended target.

Fighter A and Fighter B

On A's first turn: A attacks, B defends

On B's first turn: B Attacks using counter attack, A defends at -2 or -1



You could do what Hal's suggesting with a Wait though I think.

as in declare a Wait: "after defending against X counter attack against X"


Fighter A and Fighter B again

on A's first turn: A declares Wait "after defending against B counter attack against B"

on B's first turn: B attacks A, A defends and A's Wait triggers so A counter attacks B (B will defend at -2 or -1)

on A's second turn: A attacks B, only B may now have already used an active defence which means they will have to use different defence or suffer a multiple defence penalty

on B's second turn: B doe what every B wants (so long as B is still in the fight).


It could go well if A is confident they can defend against B having given up the chance to attack first, and hit with the counter attack.

Re: [MA] Italian fencing description and the riposte
 

Yes, it looks like I worded that poorly. Feel free to chose another illustrative example of a GURPS book with examples of styles taught at specific places and times, like the Martial Arts book for Yrth or GURPS Tactical Shooting.

Such designers notes may well exist, or I may have confused something by Matt Riggsby with a forum thread or blog post.

Also: here are some descriptions of hidden armour in the Medici arsenal around the time that the Pazzi tried to murder Lorenzo and Giuliano at Mass

And you can find James's thoughts from 1599 in the Basilikon Doron.

In other words, half the men at the Scots Court were wearing jacks of plates and secrets, but the King Did Not Approve. Apparently in his mother's time there had been innumerable fights with dirks in the hallways and courtyards.

Re: [MA] Italian fencing description and the riposte
 

No worries, I was hopeful that I hadn't missed it. As it was, it made me go back and look at his article on the Medici. It's all good.

I just returned in May from a semester teaching abroad in Florence. We lived in a 15th century villa for three months just outside the city. Visited a lot of Medici history in Florence, of course. I drove my little Fiat across Tuscany and beyond: Sienna, Lucca, Pisa, San Gimignano, etc. Spent several nights in Venice, trained to Rome, Naples, and then on to Sicily. As such, I was excited to read some more GURPS on Florence! Ciao!

Re: [MA] Italian fencing description and the riposte
 

The dual action technique is definitely interesting and something to think about, but probably too advanced of a house rule for me to pitch to the GM before this particular campaign I'm preparing for ^^

Definitely noted, I'll take armor into consideration then!

True! It'd be nice if there was some way I could choose what parts I exposed with something like a riposte, like a larger part of the random hit location table became left arm or something. Then again an unlucky damage roll could cripple my arm forever, but on the other hand that's probably realistic.

Re: [MA] Italian fencing description and the riposte
 

You could check out the Focused Defense option in GURPS Martial Arts: Gladiators

It does something of what you want...though it isn't that great for two weapon fighters.

Re: [MA] Italian fencing description and the riposte
 

Well, don't forget that by the time you're declaring your Riposte, you probably do know what target your enemy is hitting. Riposte is declared as part of your defense, which by definition happens after your foe has successfully attacked (and thus, taken any hit location penalties, or rolled on the random table). If they didn't successfully hit, after all, there'd be no need for defense! So you can say "Ok, she's aiming at my arm, that means relatively low damage potential if she hits, I can afford to risk taking -4 on Riposte".

Re: [MA] Italian fencing description and the riposte
 

You can also say, for example, "I have DR 6, I am not going to bother Blocking the Defensive Attack from the scrawny guy when I might have to save it for the ogre with the club." But in real life and in GURPS, the effects of wounds are very unpredictable.

Re: [MA] Italian fencing description and the riposte
 

You're welcome. Pyramid #3-52 has worked examples of concealed armour.

Re: [MA] Italian fencing description and the riposte
 

Ok, sorry I got your hopes up! Its hard, because on one hand I don't want to spend a lot of concentration checking facts for a forum post, but on the other hand I want to take time to read things and reply thoughtfully, unlike on some other social media. I don't know if I always strike the right balance.

Glad you got to live in Italy for a while!

Re: [MA] Italian fencing description and the riposte
 

We've always rolled hit location after the defense in my group, but I suppose it makes sense the other way around, and would help a great deal with risk assessment ^^ Do people usually roll hit location first?

Re: [MA] Italian fencing description and the riposte
 

Rolling hit location first is outright required to stay consistent with other rules. For instance, leg parries only may only be initiated against attacks that target the lower parts of a character. Or the fact that you are not supposed to waste time declaring/rolling a Parry if the attack misses. And whether the attack hits or misses will partially depend on what hit location the PC chooses (it usually doesn't depend on random hit locations though).

Re: [MA] Italian fencing description and the riposte
 

We usually specify the target hit location before we roll the attack, but it amounts to the same thing.

Re: [MA] Italian fencing description and the riposte
 

I don't roll for hit locations except in those instances where it specifically calls for it (shrapnel, falling damage, truly random things). But when, it is: roll for attack; roll for hit location; roll defense.

Re: [MA] Italian fencing description and the riposte
 

In my Cliffhangers campaign we often rely on random hit locations, for when attacker is not targeting a specific location. But I don't think we roll before defence, because the kinds of fight we have it rarely matters. Fights are mostly fisticuffs, where ordinary arm parries are fine - or simple melee weapons vs. other melee weapons.
But I do see a point for more finicky fights, that locations matter.

But I'm not sure I like the idea of the defender knowing in advance where he will be hit, before he decides if he'll bother with a defense. I mean, a fighter with a really good corselet and bare arms only parries if he'll take a hit to the arms.
On the other hand I suppose a skilled fighter can see where the blow lands. Plus when deciding whether to defend or not it's not like you're abandoning our next attack - that's only if deciding between AoD or normal. But in a fight against multiple enemies you risk 'using up' a parry on atrivial attack.

PS: In the old 'Millenium's End' technothriller rpg you rolled defence once attack was declared but *before* it was actually rolled. Because if defense is succesful don't bother with the rest. However that game did not (IIRC) have the All out options, or limited number of defenses per turn. However I guess there had to be a fumble chance.

Re: [MA] Italian fencing description and the riposte
 

It's often worth rolling random location with cutting weapons, rather than targeting torso, since nearly every location is good for cutting.