Judo is a striking skill
 

B203, Judo Entry
B271, Weapon Box
Conclusion: Judo can make strikes with hands, legs, fist loads and strikers as they're used by DX.

Bonuses:
- Combined skill level/point spending. No need to buy Brawling/Boxing/Karate if you dont expect much use out of them.
- In some situations, easier to acquire perks if Judo is the only style skill.

Downsides:
- No striking techniques or perks out of the box.
- No damage bonus
- Attacks at Reach 1 cannot be used with Judo, so kick is reduced to C range only.

Am I going nuts?

Re: Judo is a striking skill
 

More likely it's a bug. Fairly certain Judo isn't intended as a striking skill.

Re: Judo is a striking skill
 

Another downside: couldn't use them with All-Out Attack (Long) since the +1 to reach would make it not close combat.

I vaguely recall reading errata somewhere (possibly by Kromm?) which narrowed that but I can't remember where.

Re: Judo is a striking skill
 

I think you're reading too much into it. DX as a substitute for Brawling, Karate and/or Boxing is default use of a punch, kick or bite as well as indicating default use of the two weapons you've named. Knowing Judo does not prevent you from making those default attacks, but neither does the ability to make those default non-Judo attacks make Judo into a striking skill.

What Judo does allow is that in Close Combat, if your Judo skill is greater than your DX, then, in that limited circumstance, you benefit by being more likely to connect with a punch, kick or bite or with a sap or stun gun. It may err on the side of generosity, it could have read you may substitute Judo -1 or Judo-2 for DX.

It reflects an argument that having to operate in close vicinity to your opponent in order to throw him, which is a principal use of Judo, you should be able to spot and make more effective use of any opportunities to kick, punch or bite at close quarters than your DX would otherwise suggest. Which still doesn't make Judo a striking skill, it just gives you a better default use of strikes under those limited circumstances.

Re: Judo is a striking skill
 

If we're really going to take that approach, then I would at least limit it with the "you don't count as being in close combat unless you began your turn in close combat" aspect for attackers.

This is from errata for B392's "Defence in Close Combat" (can't block, only reach-C weapons can parry) at http://www.sjgames.com/gurps/faq/FAQ4-3.html#SS3.4.3.6 which modified the BasicRAW to be way less brutal by adding this:

On a turn when someone enters close combat and tries to attack or grapple you, you can defend normally as if you were not in Close Combat

MA117 (Long Weapons in Close Combat) seems to imply something along those lines except it's even better (also counts if attacker began turn but you have room to retreat):

This doesn’t affect parries made as your foe enters close combat.
Likewise, if you’re able to retreat out of close combat, you get your full Parry plus the usual retreat bonus.

The penalty for parrying only seems to apply if the foe BEGAN his turn in close combat (not if he entered it on the very turn he launched the attack).

So perhaps in the same way (attackers don't benefit from penalizing their target's parry if they just approached) a Judoka doesn't get to use his higher-than-DX skill if he just entered close combat that very turn?

This would at least stop Judoka from doing amazing running punches.

Re: Judo is a striking skill
 

There's a very clear difference between "Default" use and use based on attribute. When you do something at default, you still roll a Skill, it's level is based on the default as you have 0 points in it.

When you test DX, even to punch, you do not roll at default, you make a DX roll with specific outcome. Hence the whole basis of the argument.

Just to clear things up. Remember, Brawling, Boxing and Karate HAVE NO DEFAULTS, so you physically cannot 'punch at default' in GURPS.

What you describe in the end of your post is essentially true. You have higher chance to connect a strike if your Judo is higher than DX. I simply call it a "striking skill" because you can use your SL to strike with unarmed and fist-load weapons.

Pay attention, this only covers DEFENSES against an attack. The attacker still counts as in close combat if he enters it on his turn, and can still make Reach C attacks (which is hallmark of being in close combat). The DEFENDER is permitted to defend as if the attacker wasnt, but attacker himself is not penalized at all.

Hence, Judo Step Into Close Combat And Punch is 100% valid.

Re: Judo is a striking skill
 

While training in jujutsu/judo is likely to involve some training with strikes, this is more likely GURPS Brawling or Karate (GURPS Martial Arts suggests Karate for Jujutsu), and indeed many schools make an explicit distinction between the grappling and striking styles (where I practiced, we typically only practiced one of Judo or Taekwondo each day, and indeed our teacher wore a different outfit and belt depending on which we were learning that day; some hybridization was in play on days where we emphasized self-defense training, however). The GURPS Judo skill shouldn't include the ability to make strikes, any more than Wrestling does (where most historical non-Sport styles with Wrestling also incorporate a striking skill, or tend to learned alongside a striking style). While the GURPS rules legally lend themselves to the interpretation that Judo can be used for strikes in close combat, I agree with others that this is an error/oversight rather than something intentional. The fact Martial Arts makes no mention of Judo skill being used for strikes (indeed, under the description it mentions "It’s part of any style that incorporates a systematic body of grabs, grapples, sweeps, and throws, regardless of the style’s provenance" when explaining its inclusion in styles unrelated to historical jujutsu/judo) strongly indicates it is never meant to be used for striking. Indeed, the only striking-like Technique that uses Judo is Eye Gouge, and that also can use Wrestling (and makes sense as a grappling option).

Re: Judo is a striking skill
 

I suspect we are not dealing with "how does judo work" but "what do the rules say". I don't think this was ever Kromm's intent.

Re: Judo is a striking skill
 

If punching, kicking, etc. was meant to default to Judo, the techniques would have the default listed in Basic and Martial Arts. Since Judo is not a valid default for those techniques, they do not default to Judo. In addition, the description in Basic says that Judo is an advanced study of throws and grapples and that Judo replaces only DX rolls (there is nothing about Technique rolls) in close combat. Of course, you could have a perk that gives Judo strikes, but they would be similar to Acrobatic Kicks, and they would not give any damage bonus.

Re: Judo is a striking skill
 

Correct, it is the question of rules. I do not want to judge whether it was Kromm's intent or not until he or somebody else from GURPS team says so.

One argument AGAINST the belief that it is a bug is that there's no DX rolls in close combat other than to draw a weapon or stow the shield away (that I could find).

Veryon, you're falling into the most classic GURPS pitfall and blunder - "I have IRL experience with something that means I can judge how it works in GURPS".

B203, Judo Entry.

Punches, kicks etc are executed by DX, it is not a default, it is a basic use of DX. Brawling, Boxing, Karate etc do not have default to DX. Hence the entire argument - GURPS permits you to use Judo SL instead of DX for any DX task (with noted exceptions). This also appears in Basic Set, a paragraph later after your statement.

Another argument for it not being a bug is that Judo already has non-grappling uses. Namely, you can roll Judo to breakfall to survive a fall or a car crash - just like Acrobatics.

Re: Judo is a striking skill
 

The counter-argument to that aligning with MrFix's interpretation would be that only universal (always applicable) defaults are listed, and that Judo is a situational (close combat only) application for punches/kicks which would not apply to punching/kicking at reach 1.

Attackers with long weapons are penalized if they step+stab instead of stab+step (-4 per yard of maximum length) so it's a "favors defenders" type setup here, is what I meant.

Allowing judo guys to potentially have higher skill attacking doesn't favor defenders, so "delay until they begin the turn close to give them that benefit" somewhat resembles the delay in applying defensive limitations.

Re: Judo is a striking skill
 

As I recall, way back when the GURPS rules explicitly said that Karate was any kind of martial arts trained striking, and Judo was any kind of martial arts defense.

Part of this is the era. Back in the 1980s the general public in the US might have heard of judo and karate, but any other martial art was something only people very interested in the subject would have even heard of.

Re: Judo is a striking skill
 

From the uFAQ:

Re: Judo is a striking skill
 

You're coming to the wrong conclusions.

The penalty is there because they are in close combat, not because of any sort of desire to help the defender. Reach above C gives -4 in close combat. That's why Attacker has it, because he is in close combat.

If he wasnt in close combat, he wouldn't get the penalty.

Hence, if he gets the close combat penalty - he's in close combat.

If stepping and attacking puts you in close combat, you can Judo Punch since it's a punch in close combat.

Even better, using your wrong interpretation, you wouldnt be able to attack with boxing punch or knife because they're reach C - attacks that happen in Close Combat, they cannot happen outside of Close Combat without special options. In any situation that you can make a C-range Knife attack or Boxing punch, you can make Judo Punch.

You're simply reading it wrong.

Even worse, you're assuming because Judo SL is higher than DX, it should be penalized somehow, as if Judo isnt a hard skill that you spend a lot of points on to get DX+1 or DX+2. That is wishful thinking to make the defender's life even easier and has no RAW reason to unfold, or balancing need for that.

Re: Judo is a striking skill
 

Kromm recommends striking and grappling skills separately here so even if you could make a good case about striking with Judo skill, I'd say the spirit of the rule says otherwise.

Re: Judo is a striking skill
 

Kromm also excludes straight up DX punch/kick, despite it being a thing in GURPS. That does not cancel the fact that you can punch/kick at DX, or that Judo allows you to use Judo SL instead of DX for all close combat rolls.

Re: Judo is a striking skill
 

So you're just completely ignoring my post, then?

Re: Judo is a striking skill
 

No, but I think you're trying to split hairs so that you can be "right" about this. There are many places that the rules make a distinction between striking skills (Boxing, Brawling, & Karate) and grappling skills (Judo, Wrestling, & Sumo Wrestling). This can be seen from the descriptions of the individual skills all the way through dozens of template that instruct you to take one from each category to Kromm posting about it in a post linked in this thread. It can also be seen in no weapon table entry explicitly listing Judo as being usable to make a strike.

Pretty much everything I have just mentioned you've already brushed off when other people mentioned it. If you don't want to listen to other people and let your players use Judo to strike then, fine, nobody's going to Judo punch your door down to stop you. But if you want others to agree with you, despite the RAW being contrary to that position, it's not likely to happen. And if you want to be argumentative just to be argumentative then please, just, please don't.

Re: Judo is a striking skill
 

Perhaps, but mentioning my personal experience was simply a case of giving further evidence (I actually added that in just before posting, although obviously nobody could tell that given it shows up rather early in my discussion), and the meat of my post was how Judo seems to work in GURPS, particularly in Martial Arts where, if there were the intent that Judo be used for striking, one would certainly expect it to show up in, say, the discussions of all the styles that include Judo.

I'll also note that using personal experience of how something seems to work is probably more useful than using a strictly legalistic reading of the rules, particularly if all the other evidence makes the interpretation that aligns with personal experience seem more likely to be the intent than the strictly legalistic reading.

Nobody has stated that Judo is only useful for grappling alone - indeed, my post referenced sweeps (which are neither strikes nor grapples) from it's description in Martial Arts, and of course the mention of close combat DX rolls would be unneeded if it were only useful for grappling. We certainly aren't arguing against the Basic Set rule about Judo being used for close combat DX rolls - we're just arguing that the intent doesn't appear to have included strikes in that category. I think post #13 puts the nail in that particular coffin. A quick bit of Googling finds that this is the entry from the uFAQ that quote was taken from, in case you're worried it was being quoted out of context.

Re: Judo is a striking skill
 

I'm surprised this thread is still going on.

Re: Judo is a striking skill
 

Now, to me, the uFAQ doesn't actually go against Judo replacing DX strikes because the general statement only leans against it, and the 'in particular' that elucidates further actually talks about cases where specific other skills are mentioned. Here there are no other skills mentioned, so I think we revert back to the initial state: Judo can sub for any DX roll in close combat except drawing weapons or drop a shield (or based on the uFAQ, where other specific skills are mentioned as subbing for DX).

Re: Judo is a striking skill
 

I brush it off because it's really not an argument, it's appealing to assumed authority. You and others assume that its lack of mention as some sort of evidence that contradicts very clear statement in a rulebook.

I've already mentioned early in the talk that I am calling it a striking skill because you can use it's SL to deliver strikes. These strikes are still DX-strikes, they just use SL of Judo as somebody mentioned before in the thread.

It's a non-standard option that is not universally useful, that's why you don't see it being mentioned in templates and Kromm posts which aren't always aimed at hyper-optimization.

Half of the thread consists not of actual debunking of the original statement, but emotional statements of "It cant be right!" and "Well, it's not mentioned anywhere else, it cant be right!". By mere fact that this is the first time it's brought up on these forums, it means this topic is obscure - thus of course it'd have no mention in Kromm posts, something I am trying to solicit.

Now, if all you can provide to this discussion is "You dont wanna have a fair discussion", please reconsider your position or don't discuss it.

Re: Judo is a striking skill
 

It's not like we're saying "Joe Blow" said it. Kromm is the authority that wrote the book and is paid to answers questions in an official capacity, and to make sure that authors follow his interpretations of the rules in all the official publications. If GURPS has an authority at all, he's it. So when he interprets a rule to say "That's not how it works" then that's not how it's supposed to work.

Re: Judo is a striking skill
 

And there's where the argument falls apart. Kromm DID NOT YET STATE that this isn't an option, you assume that because he didn't that it isn't.

Hence appeal to assumed authority. You imagine that this is what Kromm would say on the topic. Which is utterly useless. Either we're talking about the rule, or we're waiting for Kromm to reply.

We can't sit here and make imaginary Kromm rulings.

Re: Judo is a striking skill
 

Again, are you not seeing my earlier post?

Direct quote of Kromm: "The line is drawn when strikes (punches, kicks, shoves, slams, etc.) or equipment (readying, dropping, or using) get involved."

Re: Judo is a striking skill
 

Yes, I did miss it. I suppose that is the end of that.

Re: Judo is a striking skill
 

It looks like both Fix and Ryan are missing my post.

Re: Judo is a striking skill
 

I saw your post, but didnt understand context of it until i read the FAQ. I am torn on your interpretation and statement of faq saying that it excludes strikes.

How do we reconcile the two?

Re: Judo is a striking skill
 

I saw it, I just didn't think you were referring to the same part of the uFAQ as I was, given I thought "the line is drawn when strikes (punches, kicks, shoves, slams, etc.) get involved" was pretty unambiguous.

Re: Judo is a striking skill
 

My post explained why it was important to read further, to the 'in particular' statement that follows that.

Re: Judo is a striking skill
 

I may be not understanding what you meant, but doesnt Punck/Kick list skills other than DX in the weapon box? I quoted them post 1.

Re: Judo is a striking skill
 

That's not a DX roll, it's a skill roll with a default from DX.

Re: Judo is a striking skill
 

Oh yeah? What skill would that be?

Brawling, Karate, Boxing etc explicitly have no DX default.

Please find us the skill that defaults to DX to punch and DX-2 to kick.

Re: Judo is a striking skill
 

It's a skill-less default. The same as saying "solving this puzzle requires an IQ roll" or "resisting this gas is a HT-4 roll".

Re: Judo is a striking skill
 

Do a search. I know this has come up before.

It's an artifact from the 3rd edition. The Close Combat section in 3e (p.111-112) had a more enumerated list of stuff you could do than the 4e version (p.B391-392). It contained a bunch of stuff that got moved earlier in the 4e Combat chapter - particularly to the Unarmed and Grappling headers, which were not in the Basic Combat chapter in 3e at all. The intent was Judo replaces DX for DX rolls [in the Close Combat subheading]. Unfortunately it appears that the only DX rolls from that section left in the 4e Close Combat subheading are the two it specifically exempts - readying a weapon and dropping a shield. Of course the entire reason those are explicitly called out in the Judo description is they [are] in that section in 3e, while all the other things Judo undoubtably does not substitute for DX rolls for, say not falling into a pit (which is after all only an issue at "Close Combat" ranges, you don't often fall into a pit in a different hex) didn't need to be mentioned, because they weren't in that section.

I suppose you could still take the literal interpretation and limit it to only those DX rolls in the 4e Close Combat section and not exempted, which is none, and rule Judo never substitutes for DX...

Re: Judo is a striking skill
 

What is more likely - that Kromm intended Judo to be a striking skill or that this is, at best, an errata?

Re: Judo is a striking skill
 

It's Brawling. Except that DX rolls for unarmed combat predate the rules for defaults (and quite possibly for any unarmed combat skills at all).
Since Brawling covers stuff not actually available at DX defaults - particularly that damage bonus - which is actually true of *all* defaults, but so many people refuse to understand that, I suppose it was felt that explicitly wording it as a default would hurt more than it would help, especially in these post Martial Arts 1e days when Brawling picked up more stuff that would need to be exempted from the default and people would argue about when it was.

That historical issue also hits this Judo = DX issue too, remember when that rule was written Judo was the only grappling skill in GURPS, and grappling has those DX defaults too - this substitution is actually a version of the same thing, saying you can use Judo anywhere the grappling rules that call for DX. Later written rules will usually call for "DX or grappling skill" in places the oldest rules would call for DX and slightly later rules might possibly have used "DX or Judo" but mostly didn't, depending on this substitution written into the Judo skill.

Re: Judo is a striking skill
 

MrFix re your initial list, one omission I just noticed is Pummeling, which MA101 lets you roll against DX-1 to hit with weapons.

This explicitly says "reach is always C" though (not sure if being SM+10 would override that or not) which would make the omission of "Judo-1" from that list even more innocuous, were it actually intended.

There is definitely a 'desire to help the defender' manifest in the errata for basic set. It's basically a "let's pretend they're not in close combat in a way which benefits the defender and not the attacker because they only just entered it this second" approach.

Without that errata, reach 1 weapons could not parry attacks if the attacker stepped into close combat. Now they can, as long as that step happened in the same turn as the attack.

The errata was no surprise, as there was already something of this idea with Runaround Attack rules, where you count as attacking from the side instead of the back, so long as you didn't begin your turn in the back.

It's the same principle: favor the defender as if circumstances were as they were at the start of the turn before the attacker did anything.

Based on the errata, when an attacker steps into close combat, the defender doesn't count as being in close combat in terms of parrying when defending on that turn.

I think this would probably still apply even with Martial Arts giving us rules which allow long weapons to parry in close combat: those would only apply on subsequent turns after the attacker stepped in.

Allowing a defender to avoid a -2 penalty to parry is kind of similar to giving the attacker a -4 to skill if he wouldn't spent that skill on a deceptive attack.

So I'm thinking penalize the attacker in another way: make the judoka wait until he's actually started his turn in close combat before allowing this "punch with judo" idea.

C-range knife attacks can be made against the limb of an unarmed attacker on a successful parry, even if that attacker wasn't in close combat.

It would be a stronger limit for punches if we made the AOA (Long) effect more accessible. Aside from burning valuable FP on Extra Effort. Technical grappling had Committed Attack (Long) which imposed a damage (well, control point, but damage is easily subbed) penalty (similar to Defensive Attack) instead of completely crippling defence.

I'd just make it a -4 to skill technique to do a +1 reach lunge.

I don't remember that, do you recall where you saw it? I assume you mean a "straight up DX minus 2 kick" in the 2nd case, unless you're talking about kicking at DX-0 while lying face-up on one's back.

Was this maybe part of some idea of untrained people getting to use brawling at default? Non-defaults skills getting defaults is an idea promoted with "Wizardly Dabbler" so I'm fine with it.

Did you maybe mean 'technique roll' ? MA75 has "Kicking" which mentions the Brawl/Karate defaults but not the DX one. Punching isn't mentioned, I think because it's a primary-use technique which can't be bought up separately from the underlying skill (much like grappling)

Fun fact: this was actually a broader issue in 3e when Wrestling was added as the 2nd grappling skill and Sumo was added as the 3rd...

Page 243 of 3e's Basic Set:

You can use your Wrestling skill to replace DX in Close Combat, just as for Judo.

Which I figure refers back to page 51:

You may also use your Judo skill, instead of your DX, in any DX roll made in Close Combat except to draw a weapon or drop a shield.

Page 35 of 3e's Martial Arts:

You can substitute Sumo Wrestling for DX in these contests, and for any other use of DX in unarmed Close Combat.

That doesn't call out Judo specifically like Wrestling did in the 3e basic set, but I think "unarmed" would clearly also rule out not only weapon-drawing and shield-dropping, but Pummeling too. Not punches though =/

Looks like Wrestling and Sumo Wrestling got nerfed in 4e since B228's and B223's description of them did not retain that note from 3e's B243/MA35...

Or maybe these Wrestling/Sum notes removed to avoid this confusion regarding punching, and they intended but forgot to remove it for Judo?

Re: Judo is a striking skill
 

You can Punch at DX or DX-2, this is not a default, it's instinctive use of the body.

It appears in Basic Set's weapon tables that I quoted in my first post.

Re: Judo is a striking skill
 

Sorry, I should have been more specific about which part of your quote I was asking about:

I mean do you recall where you saw Kromm saying to exclude DX-punches (I already know it's a thing in GURPS)

I remember SOMEONE proposing just ignore DX defaults and let Brawling default to DX, but I can't remember who it was.

Here in 2013 he is supporting the rule you're talking about, for example.

Re: Judo is a striking skill
 

Re: Judo is a striking skill
 

I'm a lawyer too, and I don't subscribe to your analysis, which appears to me to err by turning to contextual and esoteric interpretation without giving due regard to the plain meaning of the words found in the skill description, quoted in the OP while getting hung up on the non-specialist usage in the OP refering to Judo as a "striking skill".

And I would note that there is no particular reason why GURPS rules should be interpreted according legal canons.

Re: Judo is a striking skill
 

I find this response peculiar, because:



1. The plain meaning of the terms "grapples" and "throws" do not include strikes such as punches or kicks. There's no "esoteric interpretation" there.


2. I fail to see a distinction in interpreting statutes, rules, contracts, or GURPS rules. In the end, it's all about logical interpretation of what someone has written.



3. Since Kromm's answer in the uFAQ seems to agree...I'm not clear on what the issue is here. How is Kromm's answer different from Curmudgeon's (or mine)? Or, more importantly, how does your answer differ from Curmudgeon's (or mine)? Seems to me that we all agree that in close combat, Judo can substitute for DX. That still doesn't make it a "striking skill," which was the OP's premise.

Re: Judo is a striking skill
 

While I disagree with your points 1 and 2, it appears I misunderstood your position as described in 3. (In fact I am surprised by it, given what you say in your point 1.)

I thought you were concluding that Judo cannot substitute for DX for strikes in close combat. Still, I don't think the OP's main point is about the nomenclature of whether Judo is a "striking skill" (a phrase which nothing turns on, btw). I think he was remarking on being surprised to find Judo can be used for strikes and he expressed that surprise in an off-the-cuff phrase.

Re: Judo is a striking skill
 

In the list of Kromm Templates, he suggests getting both Striking and Grappling skill. It's linked earlier in the thread.

In this post, he does NOT mention DX for striking, just Brawling/Boxing/Karate. That's why when I wrote what I wrote, I quoted the post that said so.

Re: Judo is a striking skill
 

He also doesn't mention that you can run without Running skill, Hike without Hiking skill, or sneak without Stealth. The whole point of the Everyman Skills was to suggest that characters be improved from the baseline. He didn't leave DX off the list because you can't strike with DX, he left it off the list because you the way to improve your barehanded striking ability is by taking one of the three Striking skills he listed - Boxing, Brawling, or Karate. Just like the way to improve your running ability is with the Running Skill and your hiking speed is with the Hiking skill.

Re: Judo is a striking skill
 

MrFix has a legit point that the 4th could refer to punching. The 4th is a very broadly-worded thing.

The 4th does not for example isolate the example of "DX rolls to keep your footing" even though Kromm later verified it includes that. So it doesn't actually need to call out striking to include it: the wording itself shows that it needs to be excluded via inclusion on the "except to" list.

Why are you only reading 4 skills? There are 6.

I think you're oversimplifying the combat skills. Sumo for example, can be used to strike with a Shove or Slam, and both it and Judo can also do the "Sweeping Kick" (B232).

MA68 also gifted the "Drop Kick" to both Wrestilng and Sumo Wrestling.

Fancy latin, but if you're arguing that something needs to be a grapple or a throw to fall under Judo's purvey just because those things are singled out in the first sentence, that's clearly a wrong assumption. There's consensus that Judo does plenty of other stuff:
1) parrying
2) sweeping kick
3) maintain balance
4) evading (B368, affirmed MA71)
5) breakfall (MA68)
6) trip (MA81)

I've always understood the I in RAI to stand for "intended", not "interpreted".

Meaning that there is no absurdity in making the distinction: I often write something intending one meaning and come back and look at it later and realize it came out either ambiguous (could mean at least 2 things) or even in a way that can't logically be interpreted to mean what I had in mind.

Grappling/Striking is a false dichotomy.

I've given examples of the 2 other "mostly grappling" skills (wrestling and sumo) also having strikes in their repertoire, plus Judo (sweeping kick IS a strike, it's just a non-damaging one, like a shove)

If you're responding just to the title then I agree: even if we allow "roll vs DX to punch in close combat" that would not characterize judo as mostly-striking (like brawl/karate/box) it's still mostly-grappling like wrestling/sumo.

I think however that's probably fixating too much on the title: I think all MrFix intended with his choice of title is to say "you can roll vs Judo to make a strike" (thus "Conclusion: Judo can make strikes with hands, legs, fist loads and strikers as they're used by DX.")

This is sort of like me saying "if I take the Clinch perk it turns Boxing/Brawling/Karate into a grappling skill!". Doing so DOES allow me to roll against the skill I take the perk for to make a grapple (head/neck/torso only!) so I might intend that, but I would not intend "grappling skill" to mean "a skill primarily useful for and characterized by grappling" since BBK would still be a mostly-striking skill.

Irrelevant, it doesn't include Feinting or Resisting Feinting or Parrying or Sweeping Kick or Evade or Maintain Balance either, get Judo can do all those things. There's no reason to limit what these skills do merely by the star-features mentioned in a 1st sentence.

Kromm's FAQ answer rejected the idea of being able to "punch at Judo in close combat".
You and Curmudgeon seem to be agreeing with the idea?

I think you guys are getting wires crossed about what the central premise is. Probably due to OP's choice of title.

I don't think OP means to say the Judo should (even allowing "punch at judo" and so on) be characterized as "more striking than grappling".

I think his title choice is just representing "you can use judo to make strikes".

I propose we already know the answer to this: yes it can, because a Sweeping Kick is a (non-damaging, like a Shove) strike, therefore even if you reject the idea of "roll Judo to punch", there is already an estabilshed Basic Set strike (Sweeping Kick) which Judo (and Sumo) can make.

THIS

I guess I'm not following the argument here, not mentioning DX for striking doesn't mean you're ruling it out.

Re: Judo is a striking skill
 

So there's no confusion, I should note I agree with you, I'm just calling this bit out to make a point.

By the rules in Basic Set, one is absolutely justified in deciding that "DX rolls in close combat" includes punching and kicking in CC. There isn't anything explicitly preventing it, and there isn't enough discussion of Judo's use in unarmed combat to rule it out simply based on it never being mentioned explicitly as an option. However, GURPS Martial Arts is full of discussion of combat, with an emphasis on unarmed combat and with no small amount of discussion of how the Judo skill works. The complete and utter lack of mention of using Judo to punch or kick (or bite, headbutt, etc) strongly implies it's not meant to be usable for such. Indeed, one would think there would be a mention of Judo (Sport) not teaching the strikes Judo does (seeing as strikes beyond sweeps - which I don't count as "strikes" in GURPS terms - are disallowed in competition). The nail in the coffin, of course, is Kromm explicitly stating the DX substitution doesn't apply to strikes.

That said, if anyone feels the Judo skill should include strikes, it's certainly acceptable for them to have it do so in their games. Any argument for this option, however, doesn't have a leg to stand on if it's relying on the rules, as Kromm has clarified those. You'll need to come up with another reason, such as historical jujutsu and similar training incorporating strikes (as I stated in an earlier post, the normal GURPS approach to this is including a striking skill in the style). Despite jokes to the contrary, Kromm's rulings aren't divinely-inspired and perfect, and thus not necessarily the best options for a given group of players.

Re: Judo is a striking skill
 

But he didn't say that. He said:

A specific rule does say so, which the OP quoted. And the 'particular' cases don't change the general case.

Re: Judo is a striking skill
 

Kromm was responding to a question about the very rule we are discussing here. Here is the specific uFAQ entry - note Vicky's question (which, to be fair, hasn't been stated in the thread) was This leaves things rather unambiguous, although I can see how without that context it may have been less clear.

Re: Judo is a striking skill
 

I don't know that every possible application of a combat skill is necessarily something you were specifically taught to do, but more like a general ability you get from the training.

Like for example, when using Judo instead of DX to keep your balance after a shove, that wouldn't necessarily mean Judoka practice getting shoved from all directions to gain that ability, I see it as just a general proficiency that they have.

Or for example, using the Parry ability against kicks or a specific weaopn: that doesn't necessarily mean that Judoka actually practice parrying kicks, just that they practice parrying and that gives a general flexibility of parrying that is adaptable to many scenarios.

Or like, knowing Boxing allows you to target the foot or the groin, but that doesn't mean a boxer actually practices hitting the foot or the groin, but his accuracy in targeting torsos/faces can be adapted there.

So in that sense I could see how, even if a judoka didn't practice throwing punches/elbows/knees/kicks (in the sense that 'punch' can be an elbow using arm or 'kick' can be a kick using arm, instead of hand/foot) perhaps their general bodily awareness could allow them to put their limbs where they want their limbs to go?

I think the most disambiguating aspect of that answer (kind of wish Vicky had dated when she got those PMs...unclear how far prior to 30 Jan 2015 that answer was received...) is that Kromm actually gives us the format of what "a specific rule" would look like:

Since we know there IS a "list of allowed skills" for punching (albeit this is found in the Basic Set weapon section, it isn't given a "technique" entry in like kicking is) as well as Pummeling/Kicking, the lack of Judo in that list seems to speak against it.

However... if Judo WERE to be listed, but only worked in close-combat, what would we expect it to look like?

For example
B231/MA75 for Kicking: "Defaults: Brawling-2 or Karate-2."

If the author wanted to list a default for judo, but ONLY in respect to close combat (ie won't work at reach 1) would it look like this?

"Defaults: Brawling-2 or Karate-2; or Judo-2 in Close Combat only"

- - -

This is not a complete picture though, because the Judo text was never interpreted to "it defaults to Judo and I can buy it up as a technique". Judo subbing for DX is not defaulting for Judo, so we would not actually expect to see Judo listed like this.

Notably: DX itself is also missing from B231/MA75. If you were ONLY reading those 2 writeups for kicking, you would be unaware that you could kick at DX-2 if you lacked an unarmed combat skill.

This is why I think the key here is actually the Melee Weapon Table on B271. It includes THREE categories which actually aren't given names (like Axe/Mace preceding them, or Broadsword following them).

I'd call them the "Brawler categories" because that's the first word in the trio's respective headings and responsible for it's alphabetical placement. Er... well except in the first case Boxing preceding Brawling...

But anyway what's common to them is all 3 cover punches/kicks/bites which can be done with Brawling or with DX, with options to use Boxing/Karate for punches or Karate for kicks.

- - -

Probably the weirdest thing is the 3rd table, since I'm wrong in saying it's just bites... The "Brawling or DX" table also includes 2 weapon-ish-things-which-maybe-don't-count-as-weapns-I'm-not-sure which are "Blackjack or Sap" and "Stun Gun".

Stunguns/Blackjacks can strike at DX, making them weirdly accurate to other weapons used by untrained people. The most generous defaults which can otherwise be enjoyed are DX-4 for Garrotte/Knife/Shield. Even a should-be-simple-to-weirld "Light Club" defaulted to DX-5.

This was ultimately fixed of course by GURPS Martial Arts introduction of DX-1 default "Pummeling" which could be used by NEARLY everything. Instead of a thrust+1 crush at -4 to hit, a person could use a light club at "thrust crushing" (like brass knucks) which made them better than the thrust-1 for a punch (tied with barefoot kick damage) but still inferior to the +1 thrusting damage (plus "swing" options) you got if using the "Broadsword" skill to wield a Light Club.

There are exceptions. "the butt of a reach C or 1 melee weapon" is the criteria for non-sword weapons (apparently you can hit with the handle of ANY sword) so in theory reach 2+ weapons are still out of luck.

B272 "reach 4" lance is definitely out, for example (you can't 'pummel' with a lance)
B273 "reach 2,3" long spear would also be out, I think.

I can't find any other besides those 2 in basic set, all the other weapons seem to have "reach 1" options which would allow pummeling.

- - -

"Reversed Grip" (MA111 also) seems like it might be a solve to allow Pummeling with a reach 2,3 Long Speer though. Not 100% sure though. Reverse Grip is allowed with C/1/2 weapons but I'm not sure if you consider a Long Spear reach 2 (allowed) or reach 3 (disallowed) for this purpose.

MA112 mentions "butt strikes" if "effective reach is 1" (meaning it began as reach 2, effective 1 after -1 to reach effect of Reversed Grip) strike with full weapon skill instead of pummeling (DX-1 or brawling/karate) and non-crushing weapons do their normal thrust damage MINUS one (and also not enjoying the usual +1 reversed grip gives to thrust) as crushing instead of impaling.

Does anyone know if the answer as to whether or not Reversed Grip is usable on the 2,3 Long Spear was answered?

- - -

Seems like there's no solve at all for the lance... which is weird because you'd think you could just smack with the middle of a lance as a blunt weapon. Like I don't get why you couldn't Reverse Grip a reach 4 weapon using similar rules as reach 2: just hold it in the midle and it counts as reach 2 in 2 directions?

"Slams with Long Weapons" (MA112) seems like it might be the option if you wanted to do Crushing damage with a lance (since you can't Pummel or use Reverse Grip), since it's open to "reach2+" with no upper limit. Can anyone think of another option?

B204 also mentions lances can't parry... I'm picturing someone holding a 12-foot pole and trying to block attacks with it though. How do we cover that? As awkward as it would be, I'd rather have that than nothing if someone was trying to chop me with an axe or a wolf was trying to bite me.

Re: Judo is a striking skill
 

I am well aware of the quote and its context. I don't think it changes what I said.

Re: Judo is a striking skill
 

It is important to note that in the uFAQ, Kromm used quotes around the key types of situations where Judo cannot sub for DX. I did a word search in Basic set and Martial Arts and found the following instances:

"DX or Sumo Wrestling" appears under Sumo on B223, and Shove on B372.

"DX, Brawling, or Sumo Wrestling" appears under Slam on B371.

"DX, Brawling, Sumo Wrestling, or Wrestling" appears twice under Grab and Smash on MA118.

Given that Kromm quoted specific phrases that appear under specific rules, it does not seem like he meant that to be extrapolated to other usages such as the listings in the weapons table(s).

Re: Judo is a striking skill
 

Except that he preceeded those three examples with the phrase:

"if a rule explicitly lists the allowed skills – like [X], [Y], or [Z]"

The word "like" is a qualifier, it means he's using a set of examples, not creating an exhaustive list. He also did not call out those three specific rules, as you did, he chopped them off as examples. If he had meant the three specific examples you mentioned and nothing more, he would not have said "like" he'd have said "these three specific exceptions."

e.g. "A character should have some combat skills - like Brawling, Broadsword, or Guns (Pistol)"
This does not rule out OTHER combat skills, it sets up an example list.

Re: Judo is a striking skill
 

'Like' defines the category. UNlike things are excluded.

Re: Judo is a striking skill
 

How is:
"Boxing, Brawling, Karate, or DX"
completely UNlike:
"DX, Brawling, Sumo Wrestling, or Wrestling"

They are both explicit list of allowed skills defined by a rule. That one rule is in the form of a table and the other a written paragraph is irrelevant.

Re: Judo is a striking skill
 

I feel like one of us is missing the other's point.

Kromm's quote means Judo is excluded as a sub for DX in the category of cases where a specific rule sets out specific skills for it along with DX. He defined that category with examples which my post above (#53) tracks down.

Uses of Judo to sub for DX that are not within that excluded category are okay.

Re: Judo is a striking skill
 

I was attempting to give you the benefit of the doubt but... you're honestly saying that, when asked about the "Judo substitutes for DX in CC" rule, he called out that it did not apply to strikes, but meant it actually does apply to strikes, because he said "unless a specific rule says so," and the rule he was being asked about was a specific rule? Really?

Re: Judo is a striking skill
 

And I am saying that the Weapon Tables are 1) a rule or set of rules and 2) the lists of allowed skills on the Weapon Tables match the examples for a limited list of skills which Kromm used. Thus, the Weapons Tables listings exclude the use of a Judo substitution because those list explicitly exclude Judo from them (except for the one entry on Low-Tech, p. 67).

Re: Judo is a striking skill
 

I am saying that view is mistaken because Kromm used quotes around the types of rules he meant,and in doing so excluded things he didn't mean. Those rules are different from weapon tables, being both very specific and having passages that match the actual quotes.

Re: Judo is a striking skill
 

You're wrong. I don't think anybody, even the OP of this tread, agrees with your assessment after reading Kromm's quote from the uFAQ. I'm done with this, because there's not much point in further discussion since it's obvious that the point of disagreement means that nothing short of Kromm dropping in will change your mind, but you are dead wrong.

Re: Judo is a striking skill
 

No, you are wrong.
And it wouldn't make me right or wrong, but in fact, several posters appear to agree with my general position, and many others have not yet had the chance to consider the point just made about the categories of things Kromm quoted.


If that's how you feel, what can I say? Though I wonder what, short of Kromm dropping in, would change your mind.

Re: Judo is a striking skill
 

A rule that actually explicitly said that Judo can be used to strike, instead of having to do a convoluted double-reading of "Judo can substitute for DX" and "The Weapon Table lists DX as usable to strike" therefore "If I combine these two rules in a way they obviously weren't meant to be..."

A complete rewrite of the GURPS rules to include Judo along with the three striking skills every time they're mentioned. Or a rewrite of the Judo skill to say it is usable for "Grappling, throws, or striking." Or a posted Errata that does the rewrite.

Re: Judo is a striking skill
 

Donny, your argument appears to hinge on the wording of how Kromm listed examples of how exceptions to the rule would work, but how do you reconcile the fact Kromm explicitly called out striking as invalid with your interpretation that striking is valid? The only rule that lends credence to the idea that Judo can be used for striking is the one he was discussing, so it makes little sense to say "Rule A doesn't apply to Action B, except where a rule says otherwise" if "Rule A" is meant to be one of the rules that says otherwise. There's no case where Rule A is in play where Rule A isn't in play, so if Rule A is meant to allow for Action B, there would be no reason to say otherwise.

Re: Judo is a striking skill
 

If you want to get really annoyingly pedantic, nothing says you can attack using a DX roll.

• Basic p. 271 "Melee weapons are grouped under the skills required to use them. Skill names appear in capital letters, with defaults in parentheses"
• Basic p. 563 "attack roll: A success roll against a combat skill"

It just happens that you have innate combat skill with natural weapons equal to your DX (or DX-2 for kicks), but the phrase "DX roll" is never actually used in relation to it. I admit, it's a completely preposterous way to read the rules.

On the other hand, do you think "BOXING, BRAWLING, KARATE, or DX" is somehow not "explicitly list[ing] the allowed skills" or that Judo has somehow stealthily snuck into that list without me noticing it?

Re: Judo is a striking skill
 

Kromm didn't write this rule in the first place, it's much too old for that. I assume Steve Jackson did.

I don't know that it matters who is "wrong" particularly. I wouldn't allow a Judo punch or kick at my table, at least not without an additional Perk, and am fairly sure neither SJ or Kromm would either, but that doesn't mean you can't if you think it makes the game more fun.

Re: Judo is a striking skill
 

Are you refering to the passage in the uFAQ? Because over several posts I have been explainign that it does NOT rule out striking as invalid. Quite tbe opposite.

The rule that allows Judo to sub for DX in close combat, including for strikes, is the Judo skill rule cited in the OP.

Apparently Vicky had the same impression at some point and asked Kromm, and Kromm indicated that Judo can't sub for DX when a rule specifies DX and specific skills other than Judo.

I don't think it follows that Vicky asking about "Rule A" means that rule can't be a rule that allows it.

Re: Judo is a striking skill
 

The other view is that from reading his remarks in the uFAQ, it seems Kromm would allow it.

Re: Judo is a striking skill
 

Knowing how the rules are intended to be used is useful, particularly because it allows one to be mindful when deviating from them, as the chance something will "break" increases the further you get from the intended use.


Yes, I'm referring to that passage, the one I linked earlier.

"In particular, if a rule explicitly lists the allowed skills – like "DX or Sumo Wrestling," "DX, Brawling, or Sumo Wrestling," or "DX, Brawling, Sumo Wrestling, or Wrestling" – Judo works only if it's called out on the list" is pretty clearly referencing the line before it, "Under those circumstances, Judo cannot replace DX unless a specific rule says so." That is, his "in particular" examples are clarifying how rules that could be the exception would look, not saying "these are the only cases in which what I said before is true." And what he said before was "The line is drawn when strikes (punches, kicks, shoves, slams, etc.) or equipment (readying, dropping, or using) get involved."

The most logical interpretation of his statement is that Judo can't allow you to make a strike (punch/kick/shove/slam/etc) unless a specific rule makes an exception (such as Judo Throw being usable as a "strike" of sorts when used in its damaging form, or if a later book were to allow some sort of strike with Judo). I don't see how you are getting such a bizarre interpretation that Kromm meant the opposite of what he said (specifically, that strikes in close combat can use Judo, when he said they can't without a specific rule saying otherwise; the clear implication, when talking about a certain rule, was that he meant a specific other rule).

Re: Judo is a striking skill
 

Which punching and kicking does. Specifically Brawling, Boxing, Karate, or DX. In fact, I can't find any reference to punching and kicking using DX (Strikers, Melee spells, Telekinesis, Shoves, and Slams have such references in their respective sections) other than the weapons table, which very explicitly calls out allowed skills and does not mention Judo.

Re: Judo is a striking skill
 

Kromm does not say "exception". He says: "unless a specific rule says so".
A specific rule does say so. That's undeniable.

Those are your interpolations apparently based on your idea that there is an "exception" required. Those interpolations are not evident in Kromm's actual words.

I'm going by his very words. From my POV is seems as if it's you who is somehow finding the opposite meaning in them.


That is not clear at all. The quote is:

The "In particular" sentence defines the category where Judo does not sub for DX because there is a list without Judo on it. By implication, where a rule DOESN'T have a list, the use of Judo for strikes is permitted by the specific rule under the Judo skill that says it can sub for DX.

Re: Judo is a striking skill
 

If you could, please, quote the page that says punches and kicks can be made with DX without listing it as an alternative to Brawling, Boxing, or Karate.

Re: Judo is a striking skill
 

Well nothing is 'completely' unlike another thing, everything is usually like+unlike to everything else in varying degrees.

Like an inconsequential difference between the above two is for some reason DX is listed last in the first and first in the last.

As best as I can imagine, this means if we are told JUST a DX roll, but no other skill is ever called out, then Judo works?

B368 (evade v obstruct roll) seems like one such instance.

B401 "if you’re attempting to knock away a missile weapon, your opponent rolls against DX." perhaps also? Though maybe only if the one attacking your gun/bow is in close combat with you?

What about P112 "Requires (Attribute) roll" ?

*also reads supporting paragraph on LT57*

Nice find with the Kakute. Makes me wonder how +1 to the grappler's QC roll to prevent a foe using Break Free would translate to Technical Grappling... like if it influenced Control Points or influenced a dodge/parry vs the Break Free attack. You there Cole?

B85's +1/level to Break Free for Slippery was changed to +1 CR/CP per TWO levels (I assume not adding a +DX for the attack roll?) but a 1:2 ratio wouldn't give any incentive to use a Kakute...

TG28 on the other hand keeps the +3/+5 to DX for Flexibility/Double-Jointed intact for using Break Free attack rolls (a 1:1 ratio) so maybe that could be precedent for keeping the Kakute bonus as something like +1 to DX (for parrying or dodging a Break Free attempt) which MIGHT make a difference?

Just to keep Kakutes cool I was thinking they should maybe subtract 1 control point (like Control Resistance 1) from the "damage" rolled by a successful "Break Free" attempt, or maybe do something like give +1 "damage" when establishing Control Points for a grapple to start with. Or perhaps both?

Ironically enough, B370 does seem to have language like that, but not for striking :)
(Grabbing) "Make an attack using DX or a grappling skill"
(Grappling) "Roll against basic DX or a grappling skill to hit."

B403 "Trampling is a melee attack: roll vs. the higher of DX or Brawling"

I'm thinking that since Brawling is called out (a skill) this would be one of the situations where Judo couldn't be subbed for DX for Trampling based on Kromm's wording.

For B88 Striker "Roll against DX or Brawling" I figure you can't use Judo since it does call out another skill (Brawling).

For TK "Grappling and Striking", B92's "Roll against DX or an unarmed combat skill to hit", I pretty much assume you would only roll against an appropriate unarmed combat skill, like judo/sumo/wrest if grabbing/grappling or brawl/box/karat if punching.

Melee spells though... B240 "To attack, roll against DX or an unarmed combat skill to hit with a
hand" seems like ANY unarmed combat skill would do, like it wouldn't matter whether it trains punches or grapples as the primary use, because they're contact spells.

One aspect of that... doesn't this pretty much assume that parrying works by deflecting the ARM rather than the HAND? I don't think for example, it would make sense to allow a "Grabbing Parry" which grabs the HAND instead of the ARM, to stop a Melee Spell, because you're choosing to touch the hand, so the spell should go off!

It's not really like a punch where you can just assume that this means they stopped the punch's power...

B371 "Roll against DX, Brawling, or Sumo Wrestling to hit"
B372 "Roll against DX or Sumo Wrestling to hit"

I imagine Judo doesn't apply since skills are called out in addition to DX though.

Re: Judo is a striking skill
 

Could you explain the relevance of such?

Re: Judo is a striking skill
 

Since this is for spells, you just need to make contact, and a grappling skill allows you to make contact. Note that at the beginning of that section it also says that a Mages staff can be "charged" with a Melee spell, and you have to use "a normal melee attack roll to hit your target with your hand or staff." This means that you can also use Staff, Shortsword, Smallsword, or Axe/Mace to make contact with an appropriate piece of wood which has been Enchanted to be a Wizards Staff.

That doesn't mean you get to "punch" with any of those skills, you just get to do a normal attack with the skill (and weapon) and the Melee spell will activate if you make contact. If you use Brawling you can punch them normally and then activate the Melee Spell; if you use Judo you can Grapple them and then activate the Melee Spell. If you use a Quarterstaff you can swing or thrust with Staff skill and then activate the Melee Spell. Or, in any of the cases, you can choose to "Pull your punches" (p. B401) and just make light contact with hand or weapon to activate the Melee Spell. This can be useful if you're not trying to hurt the target; you can cast Paralyze Limb or Total Paralysis on them with a light hit/touch.

Re: Judo is a striking skill
 

This.

Also, in the original quote, "any DX roll made in close combat" does not mean "any DX-based skill roll". "A DX roll" isn't a super-category including everything related to DX.
The term simply means the bare DX rolls that are unassociated with any skill -- though as in this case, sometimes you can substitute an actual skill in place of the raw attribute check.

Re: Judo is a striking skill
 

You seem to have acknowledged that you cannot use Judo as a DX substitute when DX is listed among a set of skills that does not include Judo. You also claim that Judo can be used for strikes. I assume that means you know of a case where strikes are allowed using a DX roll that is not part of a list of skills that does not include Judo.

Re: Judo is a striking skill
 

Re: Judo is a striking skill
 

If I understand what your are saying then I think that's right, bearing in mind that the Judo skill write-up limits it to close combat.

So you're defending against a having your missile weapon knocked away and you are allowed a DX roll for that. Hmmm. If the attacker is at more than Reach C, I'd say you cannot sub in a Judo roll.

Rolls in close combat would be a very narrow case within that. I'd have to think about much more.

Re: Judo is a striking skill
 

What are you trying to convey?