Quote:
Originally Posted by EskrimadorNC
My takeaways from all of that (assuming I got the sequence right) are... - Establishing a weight advantage will significantly impact a foe's ability to execute grappling moves, but will have a relatively small impact (if at all) to striking.
- Brawling doesn't suffer the Encumbrance Penalty from being on the wrong side of a weight advantage, so the brawler can kick with impunity.
- Without having a significant ST AND Weight advantage over your foe, it just doesn't seem like establishing a weight advantage really has that much influence on weather or not someone you have grappled can kick you.
Again, entirely likely I am missing something key here, but the results just don't even come close to what I have experienced IRL. |
Bah. I forgot Grappling Encumbrance is for, well, grappling. I figured it was the equivalent of forcing someone to suffer a "lying down" penalty or something . . . effectively a disadvantaged form of posture.
Quote:
|
Was there a conscious effort to NOT allow hands-free parries to be used against striking attacks, or was it the simple case of just following the text in a previous book?
|
I will admit to being a bit two-minded on this. Where there was a clear rule that didn't interfere with the mission of the book to spread the joy of control points far and wide, RPK and I let it stand. This is why originally, grapples impacted defenses like Dodge on a 1:1 basis by DX penalty. So -4 to DX was -4 to Dodge. Then we both realized at the same time that the traditional DX/Parry or Block/Dodge was -4/-2/-1 . . . and did we really want to undo that? We decided no.
Same thing here. The emphasis on grappling in TG was really to call attention to the box's emphasis in MA.
Quote:
|
If you were to do a TG 2.0 book, would you explicitly allow a Grapple to perform a hands-free parry vs a strike from a foe that he was grappling? Would your answer change if it's a lock instead of a simple grapple?
|
I'm of two minds here: on the one hand, squirming to avoid a grapple and squirming to avoid a punch aren't that different. On the other, both of these things really are best represented by spending control points to interfere with the other person - it's an active manipulation. You don't have something like that in Martial Arts because CP don't exist in that context, and in most cases, the philosophy seems to be "grappling skills counter grapples, striking skills counter strikes." That's not universal, but there's an undercurrent.
I suppose, in both cases, you could say "spend 1 CP and then parry normally," so that you give up something but then you have enabled the hands-free defense. Or "so long as you spend at least 1 CP, you can use a hands-free parry against any attack vs someone you've grappled."