Steve Jackson Games - Site Navigation
Home General Info Follow Us Search Illuminator Store Forums What's New Other Games Ogre GURPS Munchkin Our Games: Home

Go Back   Steve Jackson Games Forums > Roleplaying > GURPS

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 02-21-2020, 06:15 AM   #1
Mailanka
 
Mailanka's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Eindhoven, the Netherlands
Default When is a Kick a Kick?

An interesting discussion recently spawned as a result of a fight we ran. Someone attempted to perform a push kick and missed, and this started a debate as to whether he had to roll DX to remain standing or not. This quickly broke down into two camps.

I'm not taking a position here, just laying out what I see as point and counterpoint, and I want to see what side you guys come down on and why.

Only kicks are kicks.
The argument goes like this: no techniques are related to one another in any sort of unwritten way. You do what it says in the technique and nothing else. For example, it states in Kicking that if you miss, you must roll DX "or kicking skill" or fall down. That means that when you use the Kicking technique, that's true. But it doesn't apply to any technique that doesn't have that explicitly stated rule, so a Push Kick doesn't make you fall anymore than an Armlock would.

As further evidence of this, there are other techniques, such as Jump Kick and Drop Kick, which explicitly discuss what happens when you miss. Thus, there are explicit fall rules where necessary.

If we follow this logic, a Lethal Kick or a Back Kick are "more stable" than a normal Kick, because they have no explicit fall rules stated.

All kicks are kicks.
The argument goes like this: everything that's a kick operates like a kick. There's a weapon "statline" for kicks that has the "DX or fall" rule, which means this has to do with making kicks, rather than the specific rules for the kicking technique. No, they don't default to Kicking, but all kicks still work like kicks.

Further evidence of this can be found in the Jump Kick entry, which includes the following line:

"On a miss, make the usual DX roll to avoid a fall; see p. B274." (emphasis added) The reference points to the rules for the Kick statline, which suggests that anything that uses this statline or a variant has the "DX or fall" rule implicit in it. That is, the "DX or fall" rule is the usual rule for kicks.

Furthermore, no kick has the specific language of "DX or fall" except for Kicking. Every specific mention of missing a kick is an explicit variation of the "general" "DX or fall" rule. Thus, Committed Jump Kicks (and Lethal Kicks and Back Kicks) use the "usual" rules for kicks, while All Out Jump Kicks override those rules with more explicit rules. The same applies to others, like Stamp Kicks and Spin Kicks.

If we follow this logic, a Lethal Kick or a Back Kick follow the same "DX or fall" rules as a normal Kick, because the "DX or fall" rule is a function of all kicks, and Lethal Kick and Back Kick are kicks.

A quick collection of kicks and DX rules for reference
  • Axe Kick: No explicit fall language (except for Axe Kicks to the feet, in which case you must roll DX on a miss or become unbalanced, as per Stamp Kick)
  • Back Kick: No explicit fall language
  • Drop Kick: Explicit fall language (you always fall, no matter what)
  • Jump Kick: Explicit fall language (the "usual" DX roll for a Committed Jump Kick, more extreme rules for All-Out Jump Kicks)
  • Kicking: Explicit fall language.
  • Knee Drop: Explicit fail language (on a miss you injure yourself and in all cases you end up kneeling).
  • Knee Strike: No explicit fall language (is this a kick?)
  • Push Kick: No explicit fall language.
  • Spinning Kick: Explicit fall language (you're at -2); the wording suggests that it's an update to the "usual" "DX or fall" rules
  • Stamp Kick: Explicit fall language (you become unbalanced if you fall a DX roll after a miss)
  • Flying Jump Kick: Explicit fall language (DX-8 to avoid falling)
  • Lethal Kick: No explicit fall language
  • Pole-Valt Kick: No explicit fall language (but it's described as a "variant" of Jump Kick)
__________________
My Blog: Mailanka's Musing. Currently Playing: Psi-Wars, a step-by-step exploration of building your own Space Opera setting, inspired by Star Wars.
Mailanka is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2020, 06:31 AM   #2
aesir23
 
aesir23's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Vermont
Default Re: When is a Kick a Kick?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mailanka View Post
[*]Lethal Kick: No explicit fall language[/LIST]
This is the deciding factor for me.

I'm firmly in camp B because there is no conceivable justification for a kick becoming more stable because you're kicking in a way that causes piercing damage.

Axe Kicks, you could maybe make the case that since your force is directed downwards it won't disrupt your balance as much when you kick. Back Kicks are different enough from a normal kick I could see some arguments. I'd tend to disagree in both cases, but I could see how a reasonable person could believe these kicks are more stable.

But Lethal Kick? The same as any other kick except you're driving your toe into their flesh? Why would this be more stable?

The one exception for me is the Knee Strike. A: There's insufficient textual evidence to qualify it as a Kick. B: I think it is more stable, your center of gravity doesn't shift as when you're kicking.
aesir23 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2020, 06:39 AM   #3
Mailanka
 
Mailanka's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Eindhoven, the Netherlands
Default Re: When is a Kick a Kick?

Quote:
Originally Posted by aesir23 View Post
This is the deciding factor for me.

I'm firmly in camp B because there is no conceivable justification for a kick becoming more stable because you're kicking in a way that causes piercing damage.

Axe Kicks, you could maybe make the case that since your force is directed downwards it won't disrupt your balance as much when you kick. Back Kicks are different enough from a normal kick I could see some arguments. I'd tend to disagree in both cases, but I could see how a reasonable person could believe these kicks are more stable.

But Lethal Kick? The same as any other kick except you're driving your toe into their flesh? Why would this be more stable?

The one exception for me is the Knee Strike. A: There's insufficient textual evidence to qualify it as a Kick. B: I think it is more stable, your center of gravity doesn't shift as when you're kicking.
I said I wouldn't argue a position, and I'm not, I just want to note from my research that there seem, broadly, a few sort of techniques that are getting mingled here without any real clarification. The first are "modifier" techniques, which mix and match well. Lethal Kick looks like "just" a kick, but modified to inflict piercing damage, while a Back Kick looks like "just" a kick, but to the back, and a "spinning kick" is "just" a kick but with a spin. You can combine all modifiers just fine ("A spinning, lethal back kick").

Others look like completely new moves: Stamp Kicks, Knee Strike, Axe Kick, Jump Kick, Drop Kick, etc. These represent totally self-contained elements that you couldn't combine, like you can't do an Axe Knee Strike, or a Jumping Drop Kick. You can combine them with modifiers: you can do a Spinning, Lethal Jump Kick just fine.

I think some of the problem arises from seeing the former as "just modifiers" to the normal kicks, while seeing the latter as "not actually kicks." And then there's ambiguity about where some of these moves fall, because they tend to blur stuff, like Push Kicks or Spinning Kicks. Is a push kick just a modifier (a kick, but with double KB) or its own thing (a more stable "put your foot in someone and push them" move). Are the explicit falling rules for Spinning Kicks a clue that they're meant to be their own thing, or are they a modifier (and then how do they apply to explicit moves, like if I do a spinning jump kick, do I use the spinning fall rules, or the jumping fall rules, or somehow combine both?)
__________________
My Blog: Mailanka's Musing. Currently Playing: Psi-Wars, a step-by-step exploration of building your own Space Opera setting, inspired by Star Wars.
Mailanka is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2020, 08:07 AM   #4
malloyd
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Default Re: When is a Kick a Kick?

I'd say absolutely. But I maintain there is a fundamental connection, such that I'd also rule that if you have raised your Kicking technique it [also] improves your default for the other kicking techniques - that is it costs 4 points to raise both Kicking and Lethal Kick to the limit of Karate skill, (2 for the Kicks and 2 for the "Lethal" part just like for Lethal Strike) not 6. I've always assumed that was the intent of the rules, but I don't think they actually say so anywhere.

Honestly I still think Martial Arts 1e should've gone ahead and made "Kickboxing" a freestanding skill, ideally without a default to Brawling or Karate though that probably would've been impossible because even then preserving backward compatibility was an issue. But way too late now.
__________________
--
MA Lloyd
malloyd is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2020, 08:21 AM   #5
Rupert
 
Rupert's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Wellington, NZ
Default Re: When is a Kick a Kick?

Quote:
Originally Posted by aesir23 View Post
The one exception for me is the Knee Strike. A: There's insufficient textual evidence to qualify it as a Kick. B: I think it is more stable, your center of gravity doesn't shift as when you're kicking.
I agree that Knee Strike is the exception. Also, in the text it says of Knee Strike "Unlike a kick...". 'Kick' in that phrase is not capitalised (if it was it would be comparing with the basic Kicking technique only), so to me that says Knee Strike is not considered a type of kick.
__________________
Rupert Boleyn

"A pessimist is an optimist with a sense of history."
Rupert is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2020, 08:23 AM   #6
Donny Brook
 
Donny Brook's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Snoopy's basement
Default Re: When is a Kick a Kick?

Techniques never stand alone. They are traits that mitigate penalties on other rolls. Whatever general conditions apply to those rolls are not altered by using a technique.
Donny Brook is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2020, 01:57 PM   #7
Plane
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Default Re: When is a Kick a Kick?

I think it could simplify the process of analysis if we first begin with a "Basic Only" comparison, since initially excluding the new techniques in Martial Arts helps by limiting the number of techniques we need to look at. So I will make my first reply to this thread without citing any MA pages at all. We can look at MA later after this "first round" of Basic Set analysis. We first establish how Basic text guides us, and then see if MA changed anything in round 2. So Axe/Drop/Push/Spinning/Stamp/Polevault are OUT... for now.

As a prelude, let's look at Ultra-Lite... no kicking at all! There's not even punching. You just use "unarmed" and it never specifies which body part you attack with when you use stuff like Karate. Cool beans.

As for the next step up... GURPS Lite (non-Ultra) pg 26 has "If you miss with a kick, roll vs. DX to avoid falling." listed in the conveniently-separate "Unarmed Combat" box, which isn't lumped in with "Melee Weapons Table" like it is in the non-Lite basic set.
GL26 is the only place Lite mentions that. There isn't actually an option to do a roll based on Brawling or Karate to avoid falling, as we see in later books. It's ALWAYS just DX you roll against in Lite. Just one kind of kicking too (no Back Kick) so there's no question as to whether to apply the rule elsewhere.
Non-Lite Basic Set is where we can begin to discuss it, of course. Unlike the "Unarmed Combat" box on Lite 26, the "Equipment : Weapons : Melee Weapon Table" on B271 does not mention rolling against DX on a missed kick, but it has notes [4] which B274 says "If you miss with a kick, roll vs.
DX to avoid falling."

So like with Lite's table, this section is a DX-only recovery. It is B231 (in the technique section) where you find the expanded non-DX option "If you miss with a kick, roll vs. Kicking skill or DX to avoid falling". This means, to roll against something better than DX (if you haven't bought up the kicking technique) you would need to have Brawling or Karate bought up to DX+3. Merely DX+2 if you have kicking bought up to Skill-1, or DX+1 if you have kicking bought up to Skill-0. You can't buy kicking above Skill+0 in Basic Set as the Technique Mastery perk was not introduced yet and it (like most) lists "cannot exceed prerequisite skill"

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mailanka View Post
A quick collection of kicks and DX rules for reference
You forgot one! B232 says "Sweep" can be called "Sweeping Kick" for unarmed skills. There's no risk of falling listed for a miss.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mailanka View Post
[*]Knee Strike: No explicit fall language (is this a kick?)
B232's Knee Strike refers to B404 for rules. It says:
  • Unlike a kick, it only has reach C.
    ..
    On a hit, roll your usual kicking damage.

That first bit makes it pretty clear to me that it isn't a kick, it merely does the same damage.

I think that second bit is referencing bare feet. I'm pretty sure author didn't want knees to get the +1 to damage when wearing boots, for example.

That sort of common-sense thing would also need to be applied to B229's "Kicking does +1 damage relative to a punch"... obviously even though you get +1 punch damage when using a Fist Load, kicking would not do +1 relative to THAT sort of punch... or relative to a punch w/ boxing which benefitted from a punches-only damage bonus which didn't apply to kicks.

Although I don't think it's made it into any of the books, there IS apparently a "you fall down on a miss" version of Knee Strike according to FAQ.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mailanka View Post
[*]Back Kick: No explicit fall language
Actually, B230 mentions:
Roll against Back Kick to hit, but otherwise resolve this as a normal kick.


One could reasonably consider the DX roll on a miss as the normal way kicks are resolved.

This does beg one interesting question though, and that is the ability to substitute a technique roll for DX if it is higher.

Would one substitute the kicking technique (as kicking normally does) or the back kick technique?

The former seems fine to me, because I think the extra -4 reflects "it's hard to see and aim at somebody behind me" not "it's harder to keep my balance".

That said, if someone's Back Kick technique was HIGHER than their Kicking technique, it would also seem find to let them roll against that INSTEAD. Basically a "use whichever technique is better" approach when subbing for DX to maintain balance. Seem fair?

This dilemma wouldn't exist if variant kicks all defaulted to kicking (I think that's how it worked in 3e) but 4e mostly seems to take a "no techniques defaulting to other techniques" approach, except for B231 Finger Lock defaulting to B230 Arm lock.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mailanka View Post
[*]Jump Kick: Explicit fall language (the "usual" DX roll for a Committed Jump Kick, more extreme rules for All-Out Jump Kicks)
B203 definitely differed from kicking. It did not use the usual rules. Yes there was a DX-based roll to avoid falling...but the alternative to that, rather than rolling against the Kicking technique (or even the Jump Kicking technique) is actually an ACROBATICS roll.

B557 result 12 mentions doubling a usual penalty, and calls out Jump Kick in particular. This result doesn't mention the option of being able to sub the Kicking technique for DX with normal kicks (and I would imagine, Back Kicks too, due to 'otherwise resolve as') or to sub Acrobatics-2 for DX-4, so I'm not sure if these are still options when you get this result on the unarmed critical fail.

It's also kind of unclear whether result 12 is INSTEAD OF the usual DX roll for missed kicks, or a 2nd roll in addition to the normal one. It's certainly an additional roll in any other respect (like a missed punch).

MA75 completely rewrote "Jump Kick" (no longer gives a reach bonus, instead they just say it's mandatory to move forward...) but GMs are "free to use the less-realistic version". To distinguish between these I suggest we term them "Basic Jump Kick" and "Martial Jump Kick".'

I like the BJK because you could still use it on a normal attack maneuver or a defensive attack :) But if we're using that to allow reach 2 kicks then some kind of 'Basic Jump Punch' to give +1 reach punches should maybe also be allowed?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mailanka View Post
[*]Lethal Kick: No explicit fall language
B404 "Special Unarmed Combat Techniques" said for Lethal Strike "It is an option for any punch or kick with Karate." Presumably you would follow all normal rules for whatever punch or kick you apply it to.

I would imagine that "Roll against Karate to hit, but at -2 over and above any other penalties." would only apply to the hit roll itself, and not also be a -2 to the roll against the Kicking technique (or DX) that you would need to make on a miss...

But then again, having a -2 to that roll wouldn't be the worst thing in the world either. Maybe it's extra-awkward to do compared to other kicks and harder to keep your balance.

Unlike Elbow Strike and Knee Strike, Lethal Strike did not show up on B230/232 "Sample Techniques" but presumably could be trained up since it was explicitly a technique, we just didn't know if it was Average or Hard.

Due to that, the only clear idea of how it worked was as a Combat Option: If you had Karate 10 with Kicking 8, you would have Lethal Kick at 6. If you wanted a lethal kick of 7, you could either buy up your Kicking technique to 9, or have Kicking raised to 9 by buying Karate up to 11.

MA85 finally answered the difficulty question (Hard... and needs TBAM to improve) but also reminds us also has a key quote here:
As combat options, Lethal Kick and Lethal Strike (below) are reasonable even in a realistic game.
Options are basically add-ons to baseline techniques (for example: a Telegraphic Attack or a Deceptive Attack) so by using it as a Combat Option instead of a technique, it basically means it was a -2 default to Kicking instead of a -4 default to Karate.

That's all-around a much better investment, since by spending 3 points (Kicking is a hard technique) buying Kicking from Karate-2 up to Karate+0, it helps ALL your kicks, including Lethal Kick. Why spend that on Lethal Kick just to buy it up to Karate-2? The only benefit there is you can spend another 2 points (total 5) to bring it up to Karate. You could spend those 1 points on Technique Mastery and another +1 on kicking (Karate+1 skill) though, so I'd still rather do that.

GM could always say that Lethal Strike is no longer a Combat Option in which case the only way to do it is the technique, in which case it won't default to the Kicking skill anymore so you'd need to train it up from Karate-4 by itself.

Quote:
Originally Posted by aesir23 View Post
This is the deciding factor for me.

I'm firmly in camp B because there is no conceivable justification for a kick becoming more stable because you're kicking in a way that causes piercing damage.

.. Lethal Kick? The same as any other kick except you're driving your toe into their flesh? Why would this be more stable?
This is why I think it's important to review B404, not just MA85, for the full context of its parameters. As a combat option for other technqiues, it inherits the usual rules for them.

Lethal Kick as a combat option instead of standalone technique is also supported on MA80 where you can combine it with Spinning (Attack), referencing MA64's Using Techniques Together:
determine the relative level of each technique by taking the difference between its level and that of its parent skill.
..
To calculate your level with the combined technique, sum the relative levels of all the techniques involved and add the total to the underlying skill.
That's basically what Lethal Kick (Karate-4) is
Plane is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2020, 03:13 PM   #8
AlexanderHowl
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Default Re: When is a Kick a Kick?

In MA, Lethal Kick is not a option, it is a separate technique from Kicking (MA, p. 85), which is why it does not have a fall chance. In addition, Knee Strike and Sweep are a completely different core techniques from Kicking (MA, p. 90), which is why they do not have a fall chance.
AlexanderHowl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2020, 04:55 PM   #9
Plane
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Default Re: When is a Kick a Kick?

Quote:
Originally Posted by AlexanderHowl View Post
In MA, Lethal Kick is not a option, it is a separate technique from Kicking (MA, p. 85), which is why it does not have a fall chance.
MA85 clearly describes it as both:
As combat options, Lethal Kick and Lethal Strike (below) are reasonable even in a realistic game. The techniques are cinematic
It goes to the trouble of italicizing for distinction.

As a combat option you can't get rid of the penalty (like how you can't buy off Deceptive Attack) but it's a lot simpler to just buy up kicking and default the option at -2 than to buy up the technique from -4.

The basic Melee Attack Options of Hit Location (B369) and Rapid Strike (B370) end up getting techniques in MA to buy off the penalties that combat options give (Targeted Attack and Combinations) so it should be the same for Lethal Strike.

It's MEANT for combining though, to piggyback off an attack with parameters, not have parameters of its own.
Plane is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2020, 06:50 PM   #10
AlexanderHowl
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Default Re: When is a Kick a Kick?

It does not default to Kicking.
AlexanderHowl is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Fnords are Off
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:54 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.