Arm Lock with and without Technical Grappling rules

[DouglasCole]

If you manage to survive that without giving up the grab or having to release one hand to Parry, then you can perform a lock, adding CP. Again, that doesn't do very much to your foe other than immobilize one arm (which is very good), and maybe face him with a -1 or so on that next punch which is coming.

...or -5 to punch, -7 (including the -2 to DX from a kick) to kick if you slide into the side arc. :-)

God forbid he perform a Telegraphic Rapid Strike on both turns. In that case, you either have to completely give up the grab/lock, give up one hand and hope you can absorb the multiple parry penalties, or risk Dodges which will likely still be low in spite of the bonus you get from your foe doing a Telegraphic Atk.

If your foe is capable enough to perform a telegraphic rapid strike, then you're in an MMA type situation where the skill levels are equal. In that case, you see a lot of striking, full-body grapples, and only then are you following that up with ground-level locks that leverage weight advantage, relative position, and (frequently) beating the holy heck out of the other guy, taking advantage of shock.

I think when most players, myself included think of a skilled character performing an Arm Lock (followed by a Knee Strike and a Kiss the Wall), they think of something like this.

If they think that - and no denying it's awesome - then to enable this you need to turn on the cinematic switches. Because these partners - and stunt men are partners - throw telegraphic all-out attacks, which are merrily parried by the hero, and then freakin' stand there as hero does Cool Martial Arts Stuff to them.

I am not trying to be dismissive of the skill of the primary actors or their stunt-man partners. I know a few of these guys and they're amazing. But those movies are designed to show off intricate skills through careful choreography, and Real Life is messier than that. You've trained: you know this!

The Parry happens at 1:16, the Arm Lock at 1:17, the Knee Strike at 1:18, and Kiss the Wall at 1:19. While you could make an argument for a Stun happening somewhere in there, none of that sequence would work if the bad guy got to make 2 - 3 punches in the middle of it.

But it works great if the bad guy only AoA's, which is what most of the movies represent. Shock penalties impact their ability to strike successfully, and my read of many of those scenes (including most of Black Widow's supposedly expert opposition in the scene in Iron Man 2) is "stunt man AoAs and stands there as Hero beats 'em up."

To be able to pull off stuff like this in TG, you need a very strong character with very high skills, points in several techniques, and either the Cranking it Up or Quick and Dirty switches in TG. And even then, you still run the risks I outlined above.

I think all of those movies, though, have Cranking it Up on.

The other thing that is worth considering here is the exploitation and training in combinations or, even better, Extra Attack. That allows you to (say) apply an arm lock AND apply pain each turn, which imparts stacking penalties from -2 for Moderate Pain to -6 for Severe...and of course if you manage to score Agony they're done.

My experience is that Extra Attack is 100% worth it for grapplers who can afford it (and cinema heroes can), because it turns a lot of the moves that usually have to be trained as Rapid Strikes (arm-lock/attack is a big one) or on sequential turns and turns them into one-move things.

My more hands-on training does suggest that applying an arm lock and pain in one move is the most common thing - the position for most joint locks (as opposed to "simple" holds that immobilize limbs without reaching the limits of movement) puts the joint in a position of near-zero leverage and usually very much non-zero discomfort. Moving the "apply pain as a free action" to the same turn as the Arm Lock attack rather than the following turn should fix up the issue you see with "and now I have to wait for my foe."

The requirement to spend CP to apply pain is something that I did away with in Fantastic Dungeon Grappling, and it's something I'd do away with in a notional TG 2nd Edition too. That mechanic "makes sense" from a game perspective but for things like strangles and locks, never feels right in play.

For what it's worth, I think the Technical Grappling book is a masterpiece, and there are tons of components that I love (spending CP for dmg/lowering hit penalties, more details on armed grappling, relative facing, etc.). I just think it reduces the utility of a previously overpowered technique to one of almost uselessness outside of a sporting competition.

My own experience is that a lot of the "formal" joint locks only work when your foe is surprised at your resistance. Being grabbed at a bar or a table was my own example, where someone got mad and grabbed my shirt, reaching directly to his left. It was a perfect setup for a C-Lock (and why I always insist grapples are mutual!) and so I just grabbed his hand as I stood up and turned, which moved him into "locked" position. Stepping away, he was then forced backwards, tipping his chair over and him with it. No harm to anyone other than that. But it was not something I feel I could have done had he tried that as a quick shot rather than "I will grab you and be intimidating, rah!"

In actual sports grappling, I see a lot more "big moves" in terms of using the entire body rather than the sort of "I have you at arm's length with a finger lock" precision manipulation.

Regardless: if you want cinematic fights you do have to employ cinematic switches, let your guys buy Extra Attack so they can do a lot of "combo" moves without a rapid strike, or really leverage that side and rear arc Change Position maneuver...which you can combine with any other Maneuver that allows a step. As Arm Lock is an attack, you can Change Position-Arm Lock in one move. That should take the wind out of their sails!

Has it come up in any of your games since TG was published, and how did it work out?

I'll admit most of the games I have run use the shorter "Fantastic Dungeon Grappling" rules, which take a lot of the fiddle out of the sequences, and make some improvements in speed of play. Exxar has a great post extrapolating almost all (all?) of the techniques listed in MA:TG to the FDG ruleset.

[EskrimadorNC]

Originally Posted by DouglasCole

That is a "weight advantage" from TG.

I probably should have been more clear, but I'm talking about standing grappling, and using locks to force a standing opponent to turn his kicking leg into his load bearing leg. You can't kick with a leg that is bearing more than 50% of your body weight. Again, that may be below the resolution of GURPS rules, but is a key component to not getting kicked while in a standing grapple. I've learned this the hard way as a handful of the people I train with have TKD backgrounds and will kick the living **** out of you instinctively, even when you have them in a standing joint lock, if you don't force their body weight over whichever leg it makes the most sense for them to kick you with.

Originally Posted by DouglasCole

Hands-free parries are part of both TG and MA, and an important part of leveraging the CP from an arm lock. So is exploiting relative position - this is given a drive-by mention on p. 18.

They are, but TG makes it pretty explicit that you can't use Hands Free parries against strikes...only against grapple attacks.

Originally Posted by Technical Grappling, PG 22

If an opponent attacks you with a grappling move (not a strike) against which you would be permitted a parry, you may parry using any unarmed combat skill and specify that this defense is a “technical parry” or a “counter”:

Again, in my experience, at least when a joint lock is involved, you can totally use the locked limb to short-circuit striking attempts by your foe. It hasn't come up in the games I run, but if it did, I would allow a hands-free Judo/Wrestling/Sumo parry if you have a foe in a joint lock. If it's just a simple grapple, that might be a harder sell, though.

Originally Posted by DouglasCole

* You are attacking, and so can and should leverage change position to slide into the side arc (rear if you can). If this is successful, they defend against your lock at a further -2. Attacking into your side arc (for the bad guy) is at -5 AND skill is capped at 9: it's considered a Wild Swing. So you're at -5 to DX to punch, -7 to DX to kick, and both skills are capped at 9. You can also spend CP to reduce his skill roll even further, or boost your own defenses.

THAT is what I was missing. I was getting the penalty for defending attacks from the side/rear arc, but totally forgot about the -5 wild swing/skill cap 9! That's the missing piece! Not sure at all how I missed that, especially since I've been using relative facing and changing posture/position during a step from the beginning. Thanks for the refresher.

Originally Posted by DouglasCole

Overall, if the sequence for a prospective joint lock is "I grabbing parry, stay in front of my foe, arm lock, still stay in front of my foe, wait for his attack, arm lock again STILL staying in front of my foe, etc." then the fighter is not exploiting all of their options.

The key one to not getting biffed by the other guy is achieving the side arc. This is - perhaps usefully - subsumed into many things in non-TG GURPS, but it's available, and really important to avoid the kind of counter attack you're describing. Making your foe's attacks at -5/Wild Swing is a big deal.

That was certainly it. Thanks for the rule reminder. It really was the missing piece for me.

[DouglasCole]

Originally Posted by EskrimadorNC

I probably should have been more clear, but I'm talking about standing grappling, and using locks to force a standing opponent to turn his kicking leg into his load bearing leg. You can't kick with a leg that is bearing more than 50% of your body weight. Again, that may be below the resolution of GURPS rules, but is a key component to not getting kicked while in a standing grapple. I've learned this the hard way as a handful of the people I train with have TKD backgrounds and will kick the living **** out of you instinctively, even when you have them in a standing joint lock, if you don't force their body weight over whichever leg it makes the most sense for them to kick you with.

That's still application of weight advantage in the TG terms; I don't believe it's precluded because of standing.

They are, but TG makes it pretty explicit that you can't use Hands Free parries against strikes...only against grapple attacks.

As far as I know, we specified grappling attacks because so does the box on p. 122 of Martial Arts, with the emphasis in the original:

Originally Posted by Martial Arts, p. 122: What is...a Parry?

"Not all parries involve limbs, either. If you parry a
grappling technique (e.g., Judo Throw or Piledriver)
using Boxing, Brawling, Judo, Karate, Sumo
Wrestling, or Wrestling, you can opt to “counter” –
twist or sprawl so that your adversary’s technique
fails – rather than slap away your enemy’s hands.
This doesn’t require a free hand. It resembles a
dodge, but it’s a parry in game terms."

So it's grappling in TG because it's grappling in MA (this was a cursory search, though - I have to run and get my kids to school).

Again, in my experience, at least when a joint lock is involved, you can totally use the locked limb to short-circuit striking attempts by your foe. It hasn't come up in the games I run, but if it did, I would allow a hands-free Judo/Wrestling/Sumo parry if you have a foe in a joint lock. If it's just a simple grapple, that might be a harder sell, though.

For me, this is best represented by *spending control points* to interfere with a foe's attack. That's always allowed, IIRC. We use pain compliance from a joint lock to keep foes off balance so they can't kick or punch as well, usually by walking them around.

[EskrimadorNC]

Now it's my turn to split my response up into two posts.

Originally Posted by DouglasCole

If your foe is capable enough to perform a telegraphic rapid strike, then you're in an MMA type situation where the skill levels are equal. In that case, you see a lot of striking, full-body grapples, and only then are you following that up with ground-level locks that leverage weight advantage, relative position, and (frequently) beating the holy heck out of the other guy, taking advantage of shock.

Hmmm, I hadn't thought of if that way. A telegraphic rapid-strike nets out to -2...a guy with 13 Brawling would be throwing both punches at skill-11. Maybe that's more of a trained fighter than I was thinking of, but I normally don't equate Telegraphic Attacks with trained fighters. Usually I have untrained foes, or barely trained brawlers throw telegraphic attacks. Most trained characters stay away from them, outside of answering All Out Attacks. But I will certainly have to chew on that.

If they think that - and no denying it's awesome - then to enable this you need to turn on the cinematic switches. Because these partners - and stunt men are partners - throw telegraphic all-out attacks, which are merrily parried by the hero, and then freakin' stand there as hero does Cool Martial Arts Stuff to them.

I am not trying to be dismissive of the skill of the primary actors or their stunt-man partners. I know a few of these guys and they're amazing. But those movies are designed to show off intricate skills through careful choreography, and Real Life is messier than that. You've trained: you know this!

Yeah, I am well aware that film fight choreography is generally several orders of magnitude different that actual fighting, which is quicker, messier, and far less one-sided. But I don't think it's unreasonable for people, especially those that don't have any fighting or combatives training to expect that their trained paper man can pull off at least some of the stuff you see on screen. In fact, I would expect that most of said people make such characters EXPLICITLY because of what they have witnessed in media and wish to reproduce it at the gaming table.

And I totally get that there are some requirements to make this sort expectation materialize at the table, some of which include:
-PCs with relatively high point values, likely investing in Judo, Karate, AND Wrestling
-PCs with advantages like Extra Attack 1 (almost a pre-req), Enhanced Parry, High Pain Threshold for ignoring shock, etc.
-Mook foe that generally lead with All Out Attacks, so they can't defend against that PC's follow up attacks
-For Technical Grappling, switches like Cranking it up or Quick and Dirty (I prefer Quick and Dirty)
And a host of others.

It's part of the GMs job to level-set the PCs, and make sure they understand that their 100 point modern character that is a yellow-belt in Krav Maga isn't going to fight like Rama or Jason Bourne.

But with those switches turned on and with the appropriate skills/advantages/mook behavior, I EXPECT my 250 point Action Hero Martial Artist to be able to do EXACTLY that. That's why it bothers me when you still can't duplicate that stuff.

Originally Posted by DouglasCole

But it works great if the bad guy only AoA's, which is what most of the movies represent. Shock penalties impact their ability to strike successfully, and my read of many of those scenes (including most of Black Widow's supposedly expert opposition in the scene in Iron Man 2) is "stunt man AoAs and stands there as Hero beats 'em up."

So your "Technical Natasha" article is actually what led me to pick up a copy of Technical Grappling, and I've been all in on it since then.

One thing I did want to mention from RL regarding this, though, is timing and flow are critically important in landing techniques, and there are ways string together techniques in a manner that prevents or reduces the chance of a counter attack. And those ways don't necessarily involve landing a stunning hit so your foes has to take a DO NOTHING maneuver on his turn, nor do they require a willing stunt-man who will just stand there and take hits.

The only solution I've found to this in the GURPS rules structure so far is try and compress things to a single turn when really they should take 2 - 3 seconds of time. While that may not be realistic in terms of time-scale to execute, it's one of the few ways make stuff work. As it stands now, you need one or more of the following:

-Extra Attack (REALLY expensive, not always allowed)
-AoA Double (Generally a bad idea, especially if there are multiple bag guys)
-Rapid Strike (HEFTY penalty, need really high skill to overcome)
-Bought up Combinations (better than plain RS, but gets really expensive for more than one Combo

And of course that doesn't count any of the supernatural stuff like ATR.

Some techniques really do have to be strung together, you should be able to build a character in GURPS who can do this effectively without having to spend 200 characters on JUST unarmed competency.

Check out https://youtu.be/EElqjVt2joY?t=79 this series of techniques moves for what I am talking about. Granted, this is a demo and not something being done under duress, and the uke here is not really resisting or trying to counter, but it's about 4 seconds of techniques where the uke really only gets one or two opportunities to counter attack at best. You do see exploitation of relative position, and possible vitals striking that might result in stunning. But regardless, a well trained PC with appropriate levels of skill should be able to pull something like this off, but shouldn't need 100 points of unarmed combat skills/advantages/techniques to do it.

Incidentally, look up the rest of Maul's videos. He has some really cool stuff, and there is a lot of cross pollination between his Silat and the Modern Arnis stuff that I train in. I especially like his Axe/Tomahawk stuff.

[EskrimadorNC]

Originally Posted by DouglasCole

I think all of those movies, though, have Cranking it Up on.

Maybe. Any reason why you feel that Cranking it Up provides a more cinematic feel than Quick and Dirty?

Double CP sounds awesome, but the die roll is pretty variable, are you are likely to get **** for CP with a low roll, even with that switch in place. Q&D means that you will always get some CP, even on relatively low ST characters. If my guy has Trained ST 11 (1d-1 CP) and we are using CiU and I roll a 1 for CP that is still 0 CP. If I roll a 2, then I net out at 2 CP. With Q&D, I'm always getting 5 CP. Less variation, but I never get punished for a bad CP roll.

Originally Posted by DouglasCole

The other thing that is worth considering here is the exploitation and training in combinations or, even better, Extra Attack. That allows you to (say) apply an arm lock AND apply pain each turn, which imparts stacking penalties from -2 for Moderate Pain to -6 for Severe...and of course if you manage to score Agony they're done.

This is interesting to me. I went back and re-read the "Inflicting more pain with locks" section in TG to make sure I was understanding it correctly. I was not aware that you could STACK pain penalties. My assumption was that if your MoS in the QC = Severe Pain on turn 1, then you rolled another QC on turn 2 and got Moderate pain, then your foe on turn 2 is only under the moderate pain penalties. I always thought you had to hit MoV 10+ in a single quick contest to inflict Agony, and that it only lasted until your next turn.

Granted, if you have to SPEND CP each turn to do this, you are going to eventually run out and lose the lock/grapple. That's not how it works IRL in my experience, but it makes sense from a game mechanics perspective.

Originally Posted by DouglasCole

My experience is that Extra Attack is 100% worth it for grapplers who can afford it (and cinema heroes can), because it turns a lot of the moves that usually have to be trained as Rapid Strikes (arm-lock/attack is a big one) or on sequential turns and turns them into one-move things.

Yeah, I came to the same exact conclusion. Especially if you want to lock/throw in one turn, which is my experience in how it tends to work IRL, especially with wrist locks, which we use almost exclusively to throw people.

Originally Posted by DouglasCole

My more hands-on training does suggest that applying an arm lock and pain in one move is the most common thing - the position for most joint locks (as opposed to "simple" holds that immobilize limbs without reaching the limits of movement) puts the joint in a position of near-zero leverage and usually very much non-zero discomfort. Moving the "apply pain as a free action" to the same turn as the Arm Lock attack rather than the following turn should fix up the issue you see with "and now I have to wait for my foe."

I would go so far as considering a throw from a lock is something you can also do in the same turn that you apply the lock. Timing wise, that makes it happen way faster than IRL, but game flow wise, it makes the most sense as the lock/throw happens in one smooth motion.

Originally Posted by DouglasCole

The requirement to spend CP to apply pain is something that I did away with in Fantastic Dungeon Grappling, and it's something I'd do away with in a notional TG 2nd Edition too. That mechanic "makes sense" from a game perspective but for things like strangles and locks, never feels right in play.

Agreed. Also, this made me go and pick up FDG from DriveThruRPG yesterday. I am really digging the rules in there. GREAT supplement.

Originally Posted by DouglasCole

My own experience is that a lot of the "formal" joint locks only work when your foe is surprised at your resistance. Being grabbed at a bar or a table was my own example, where someone got mad and grabbed my shirt, reaching directly to his left. It was a perfect setup for a C-Lock (and why I always insist grapples are mutual!) and so I just grabbed his hand as I stood up and turned, which moved him into "locked" position. Stepping away, he was then forced backwards, tipping his chair over and him with it. No harm to anyone other than that. But it was not something I feel I could have done had he tried that as a quick shot rather than "I will grab you and be intimidating, rah!"

Mine too, though I would add that standing joint locks are a lot easier to achieve on a non-surprised opponent if you lead in with distracting strikes first. If a guy grabs you by the wrist and is focusing on your wrist, getting him into a joint lock is really hard. But if you slam the instep of your foot against his shin FIRST, then the lock becomes pretty easy.

I suppose that sorta counts as "surprise" too. My point is that locking someone who is focusing on the joint your are trying to lock is probably going to prevent you from doing so. Getting him to think about something else first significantly increases your chance of success.

Incidentally, this applies to weapon disarms as well, and all of our disarms are preceded by strikes, feeds, or some other distraction to keep the guy from focusing on the weapon you are trying to take away from him.

{quote=DouglasCole]
In actual sports grappling, I see a lot more "big moves" in terms of using the entire body rather than the sort of "I have you at arm's length with a finger lock" precision manipulation.

Regardless: if you want cinematic fights you do have to employ cinematic switches, let your guys buy Extra Attack so they can do a lot of "combo" moves without a rapid strike, or really leverage that side and rear arc Change Position maneuver...which you can combine with any other Maneuver that allows a step. As Arm Lock is an attack, you can Change Position-Arm Lock in one move. That should take the wind out of their sails!

I'll admit most of the games I have run use the shorter "Fantastic Dungeon Grappling" rules, which take a lot of the fiddle out of the sequences, and make some improvements in speed of play. Exxar has a great post extrapolating almost all (all?) of the techniques listed in MA:TG to the FDG ruleset.[/QUOTE]

I like what I've read so far in FDG, and once I've had some more time to digest it and make sure it covers all of the bases from TG that are important to me, I'll likely it up making it my defacto ruleset for Grappling in GURPS.

Thanks again for your feedback. You've filled some gaps, applied some perspective, and given me lots of food for thought. I really appreciate it.

[DouglasCole]

Originally Posted by EskrimadorNC

This is interesting to me. I went back and re-read the "Inflicting more pain with locks" section in TG to make sure I was understanding it correctly. I was not aware that you could STACK pain penalties. My assumption was that if your MoS in the QC = Severe Pain on turn 1, then you rolled another QC on turn 2 and got Moderate pain, then your foe on turn 2 is only under the moderate pain penalties. I always thought you had to hit MoV 10+ in a single quick contest to inflict Agony, and that it only lasted until your next turn.

Yah, sorry. I took a shortcut here. I meant the DX/ST penalties from your CP from the grapple stack with pain penalties from the lock. That can get bad, fast. Especially in a cinematic-switched fight.

Granted, if you have to SPEND CP each turn to do this, you are going to eventually run out and lose the lock/grapple. That's not how it works IRL in my experience, but it makes sense from a game mechanics perspective.

We struggled with this during (and after) writing and playtest. Spending CP for continuous-pressure techniques like locks and chokes has never really felt right, and Peter and I used to spend some casual time brainstorming over how to make it better. I obviously decided, even then, "one rule to ring them all" so that the "spend CP for effect" was a universal concept...but no question this is a case where it squeaks around the edges.

One concept we came up with was instead of spending CP, you "risk" them. You ante up (just as you'd spend them) to set the maximum effect of the technique, then make an attack roll. If you succeed, woo hoo, nothing lost (but you also don't get more CP), and the technique works as you intended.

If you fail the roll, you lose the CP.

Fantastic Dungeon Grappling does some of this; it was written with 15 years of experience of at-the-table play.

[DouglasCole]

Originally Posted by EskrimadorNC

I like what I've read so far in FDG, and once I've had some more time to digest it and make sure it covers all of the bases from TG that are important to me, I'll likely it up making it my defacto ruleset for Grappling in GURPS.

Thanks again for your feedback. You've filled some gaps, applied some perspective, and given me lots of food for thought. I really appreciate it.

If you've gone all-in on TG but like some of the tweaks in FDG: Read this post by The Chaotic GM.

[DouglasCole]

Originally Posted by EskrimadorNC

Some techniques really do have to be strung together, you should be able to build a character in GURPS who can do this effectively without having to spend 200 characters on JUST unarmed competency.

Check out https://youtu.be/EElqjVt2joY?t=79 this series of techniques moves for what I am talking about.

The ones in the demo before the title card (first 3 minutes of the video) are gloriously efficient.

Most of those are (mildly to very) representable.

most lead off with a grappling parry (which parries and retains mild control of the punching limb), followed immediately by a strike. GURPS doesn't always represent the openings inherent to attacking fully, but I'd consider Riposte for this, though the restriction on the effect to "Dodge only" found on pp. 124-125 of MA is not great.

I'd probably wind up treating these as "setup attacks" but off of a parry. Every -1 to Parry is -1 to your foe's defense, declared ahead of time (in effect, this is the Setup Attack version of Riposte, but without the special cases).

So the instructor is doing a Setup-Parry with a grappling parry, making an immediate strike into the opening on his turn.

Now, GURPS doesn't penalize active defenses after a shock penalty...but it probably should for "Harsh Realism." Four points of damage would be an extra -2 to Parry and -1 to Dodge...which is why you throw that strike in there to begin with, in most cases.

That shoulder strike to what we call a gooseneck - a wrist compression - is going to be rough to model in GURPS.

There are a few moves in there that are "destabilizing" sweeps that generally lead to Takedowns...though some of them just effectively so imbalancing that even though the guy is still on his feet, he might as well have fallen down; something that is the effect of "Stun" (so Do Nothing, -4 to Defend) but requires a DX roll to recover would be interesting to represent those.

Such a move as an Action After a Grapple would go a long way to represent some of the "I have all the time in the world" stuff you see in these demonstrations, and what you see in the real world when these things work.

[DouglasCole]

Originally Posted by EskrimadorNC

Maybe. Any reason why you feel that Cranking it Up provides a more cinematic feel than Quick and Dirty?

You know, you may be right about this. I've always used Cranking it Up to model "movie reality," but when I've played with TG/FDG, there are a few things I've found:

1) Folks who want to grapple in their games optimize for it. The best/worst offender is the 250-point Wrestler, Lisbet, in the Hall of Judgment sample characters. She's got Wrestling Master, copious Lifting ST, and throws down at Lifting ST 28 when grappling, and 3d+5 control points on a successful attack.

This is a case where the player has paid nearly 250 points to grapple to death any ONE foe they face (they suffer in groups, much like an anti-Fezzik).

So folks who have used grappling to grapple really, really grapple the heck out of the bad guys.

2) I've mostly focused on the double CP because it has always in my mind been associated with an eliminated Max CP cap (per p. 6), and also because I like the die rolling. But you're right - in movies, these grapples ALWAYS work, unless the director is making a point of how awesome the foe is, such as when Bourne fights an equal, and they're very effective quickly. Quick-and-Dirty does that quite well.

[DouglasCole]

Sorry for parsing out your (and my) long posts into bits, but I don't want to lose the many points made.

Originally Posted by EskrimadorNC

Yeah, I came to the same exact conclusion. Especially if you want to lock/throw in one turn, which is my experience in how it tends to work IRL, especially with wrist locks, which we use almost exclusively to throw people.

I would go so far as considering a throw from a lock is something you can also do in the same turn that you apply the lock. Timing wise, that makes it happen way faster than IRL, but game flow wise, it makes the most sense as the lock/throw happens in one smooth motion.

We liked to end up with the throw in Hwa Rang Do as well, though not always. I note that for this one, I actually went in to the dojang with some friends who were also training with me...and we brought a stopwatch.

My conclusion was that not only was the "on your next turn" realistic, that in many cases, it takes a full second for the other guy to LAND.

Try it - I think you'll be surprised at how long some of the techniques actually take. Or maybe not! I was, though.

I note that in a way, Fantastic Dungeon Grappling does this better: you can spend CP doing more or less anything to Injure the Foe, and you can definitely do this during a Takedown. So if you want a one-step "throw-from-lock," just do a Takedown while spending your CP to inflict damage. Subsume any "and I crank his arm/shoulder/neck in the process" into a penalty on the Quick Contest for the Takedown. You'll note Locks are a special case in FDG on p. 8, used for Pain...ALL the other joint locks that cause damage are subsumed into Injure the Foe.

One other thing to consider here might be Dual-Weapon Attack. It's less penalized than Rapid Strike, less expensive than Extra Attack, carries the built-in penalty to defend (which is why you do a lot of these techniques simultaneously), and with a Special Training perk, or in a cinematic world, the DWA penalty can be bought off.