[TG] Innate Attack Enchancement: Inflicts CPs?

[Icelander]

Originally Posted by DouglasCole

I will admit that I will watch this thread with some interest. We tried to price control points as an inmate attack during the playtest, and came up with no good pricing scheme. The best that we could do was simply to price grappling attacks as telekinesis, which had the right point structure and feel.

I can't see any simple and elegant way to price a ranged Innate Attack which also inflicts CP, except to have it Linked or Follow-up with a Binding or Telekinesis attack.

For Melee, ST-based attacks, though, there ought to be a way to make them behave like bites already do. And there ought to be a way to buy lobster-man/Glabrezu type gripping claws which strike for damage and inflict CPs in the same attack.

I mean, obviously, as the GM, I'm just going to declare to the players that their foes are grappling and causing damage simultaneously, because Demon!, but I expect that this will lead to queries about the ability to shapeshift into such forms and wreak havoc.

So we need a Pincer Striker.

[DouglasCole]

Originally Posted by Icelander

I can't see any simple and elegant way to price a ranged Innate Attack which also inflicts CP, except to have it Linked or Follow-up with a Binding or Telekinesis attack.

For Melee, ST-based attacks, though, there ought to be a way to make them behave like bites already do. And there ought to be a way to buy lobster-man/Glabrezu type gripping claws which strike for damage and inflict CPs in the same attack.

I mean, obviously, as the GM, I'm just going to declare to the players that their foes are grappling and causing damage simultaneously, because Demon!, but I expect that this will lead to queries about the ability to shapeshift into such forms and wreak havoc.

Canonically, there's no good way to do this, though your suggestion of a follow up is the best I've heard so far (I'd invert them - grapple with follow up damage).

Even when choking, the way to do it is to attack first for CP, and then spend them for damage either on that turn or the next. I know Kallatari has some house rules he plays with that might smooth this out.

[Figleaf23]

Originally Posted by DouglasCole

In many cases they can be translated to injury fairly directly. The rules as they are make you spend CP one for one to set the upper limit on injury. Rolling control points on the damaged table, as a sort of deferred injury pool, is a purposeful analogy.

I will admit to (a) not understanding this reply, (b) not owning Technical Grappling, and (c) probably having nothing useful to contribute after all.

What happens to a CP after the Grapple is terminated?

[Icelander]

Originally Posted by DouglasCole

Canonically, there's no good way to do this, though your suggestion of a follow up is the best I've heard so far (I'd invert them - grapple with follow up damage).

That would do it, usually, though it's cludgy to do.

It ought to be possible to just add grappling capability to a natural attack, like a bite. Eyeballing it, Extra Mouth costs 5 points, so it shouldn't be all that expensive.

Would it be unfair for a Grabbing Striker to add +5 to the base cost of a Striker (based on damage type), meaning that for 10 points (modified by Reach, Parry, etc.) one could get a Pincer?

I'm not sure about what the Grip ST ought to be. There doesn't appear to be anything in TG about Striker Grip ST, which seems like it could matter when PCs inevitably grapple the stegosaurus' tail or the minotaur's horn.

With the minotaur, I guess one could use 'Using your Head' as a guide, but that makes Strikers attached to heads different to Strikers that are more-or-less independent limbs, albeit ones without manipulators.

Should Strikers have Grip ST equal to Arms as a default? Or Two Arms?

[Icelander]

Originally Posted by Figleaf23

What happens to a CP after the Grapple is terminated?

It goes quietly away to die.

[Figleaf23]

Originally Posted by Icelander

It goes quietly away to die.

Yeah, that's what I guessed.

So it seems to me that CP aren't something you could inflict in and of themselves, like damage. Rather, they're descriptors/measures of a condition for the time that it applies. As such, they're inappropriate for an innate attack that fires and ends.

Seems like various advantages might give CPs though -- TK was mentioned, and there's Binding (which is perhaps the best analogy to an Innate Attack), and others in more specialized situations.

[Nereidalbel]

Originally Posted by Icelander

That would do it, usually, though it's cludgy to do.

It ought to be possible to just add grappling capability to a natural attack, like a bite. Eyeballing it, Extra Mouth costs 5 points, so it shouldn't be all that expensive.

Would it be unfair for a Grabbing Striker to add +5 to the base cost of a Striker (based on damage type), meaning that for 10 points (modified by Reach, Parry, etc.) one could get a Pincer?

I'm not sure about what the Grip ST ought to be. There doesn't appear to be anything in TG about Striker Grip ST, which seems like it could matter when PCs inevitably grapple the stegosaurus' tail or the minotaur's horn.

With the minotaur, I guess one could use 'Using your Head' as a guide, but that makes Strikers attached to heads different to Strikers that are more-or-less independent limbs, albeit ones without manipulators.

Should Strikers have Grip ST equal to Arms as a default? Or Two Arms?

Stretching 1: Force Extensions (+50%) [9] essentially gives you Strikers that (a) can't be damaged (but can be overpowered) and (b) have your ST. Not sure how one would price a limitation making them for Grapples Only, though.

Originally Posted by Figleaf23

Yeah, that's what I guessed.

So it seems to me that CP aren't something you could inflict in and of themselves, like damage. Rather, they're descriptors/measures of a condition for the time that it applies. As such, they're inappropriate for an innate attack that fires and ends.

Seems like various advantages might give CPs though -- TK was mentioned, and they're Binding (which is perhaps the best analogy to an Innate Attack), and others in more specialized situations.

Some IAs can be used without breaking a grapple, though. Specifically, ST-Based ones.

[Figleaf23]

Originally Posted by Nereidalbel

Some IAs can be used without breaking a grapple, though. Specifically, ST-Based ones.

I've miscommunicated something. I mean I don't think it's really a good match to look to Innate Attacks for traits that inflict CPs. I think Binding is a better trait to build this ability with.

[chandley]

Originally Posted by Icelander

I'm not sure about what the Grip ST ought to be. There doesn't appear to be anything in TG about Striker Grip ST, which seems like it could matter when PCs inevitably grapple the stegosaurus' tail or the minotaur's horn.

Should Strikers have Grip ST equal to Arms as a default? Or Two Arms?

Id have built a "grabbing striker" as an extra arm layered with Striker (Limb) if you want it to get the "can parry and be parried like its a weapon, not an arm" bit. That gives it grip ST equal to 1 arm. If it needs more ST cause its a big fiddler crab like claw, that is just Limb Grip ST (TG p.28), probably add Ham Fisted. If you believe that the creature really qualifies for No Fine Manipulators, thats fine, grip ST for the arm is just 0.3xST instead of 0.5xST, and you need that much more Limb Grip ST to get to where you want.

Strikers are priced explicitly as "attached melee weapons" and so should not be given any uses that properly require a hand (and thus extra arms). If you want to add a normal striker to a grapple (a thagomizer, for example) in a way that doesnt involve impaling the target like a pick, Id use the 0.3xST for a NFM Arm.

Just how I'd do it while building animals/monsters.

[DouglasCole]

The above is well reasoned, and sound advice.