[MA] Southern Kung Fu, the Common Folk and Tong Hatchetmen

[aesir23]

Originally Posted by Icelander

On the other hand, I find more detail good, less detail bad.

Different philosophies then. I tend to think that since you can always attempt any technique for your Skil anyway, Styles should only present a few specialties. I also think that fewer techniques in a style make those specialties and fight philosophies clearer and the style write-up less cluttered.

But that obviously doesn't mean that my way is right and yours is wrong, of course, just clarifying my different position.

Originally Posted by Icelander

It does look rather cluttered, however. So I've broken Targeted Attacks away from the main Technique list and into their own sub-heading. Hopefully, it now looks cleaner and nicer.

This is cleaner, I think.

Originally Posted by Icelander

Agreed and changed to grant the same +1 to Parry as Defensive Attack, with the +2 Parry only applying to attacks from the foe targeted by your Defensive Jab.

That's better, but I would go even further: you get +1 to Parry (as a defensive Attack), and he gets -2 to attack you if you succeed (which amounts to another +1 Parry if he was planning to use Deceptive Attack). That seems to be reason enough to learn the technique (especially since it's so cheap and easy to learn.)

I might even give it an alternative use (that fits with how it is used in boxing): Instead of the above bonus to parry and penalty to attack, you may choose to Evaluate on the same turn that you use a Defensive Jab.

Originally Posted by Icelander

I wouldn't want there to be no trade-off for the +1 thr damage granted by Reversed Grip.

On the other hand, a -2 to Parry and a -2 to swing damage is enough to make an ice-pick grip mostly useless to a knife-fighter duelling another knife-fighter. It's not unreasonable that training in a style that emphasises that grip could at least give you a fighting chance in a duel. After all, even if you improve both techniques, you're still at Reach C vs. his Reach C,1 on cuts and you have a -1 to swing damage to pay for your +1 to imp. For 5 points, you've made your chosen grip competative, but not clearly superior.

And assuming equal skill, your foe can have spent his 5 points on Enhanced Parry (Knife) or be using Main-Gauche instead of Knife skill, thus retaining a relative advantage in Parries for his sabre-grip.

Okay, I've read these over another time, and I've decided that i really like Forearm Parry as a technique, and will probably borrow that. [EDIT] Come to think of it, I'll probably just make it a Style Perk.

The only one that really bothers me is Underhand Slash which seems to me to be an irreversible feature of (for lack of a better word) ergonomics.

A couple of points to keep in mind: +1 Thrust isn't the only benefit of Reversed Grip, you also get +1 to Feints and Deceptive Attacks (!) (MA 112).

Also consider that it costs 6 points currently to buy the Reverse Grip Technique up to full skill in order to be able to switch as a free action. This grants the benefits of both Reversed Grip Parry and Underhand Slash, plus the ability to get that extra reach when you need it, BUT it requires a skill roll every time you want to do it.

Just food for thought, I'm not really sure where I stand on the issue now, after more consideration.

[Icelander]

Originally Posted by aesir23

Different philosophies then. I tend to think that since you can always attempt any technique for your Skil anyway, Styles should only present a few specialties. I also think that fewer techniques in a style make those specialties and fight philosophies clearer and the style write-up less cluttered.

When presenting a style with which players might not be familiar or even a fictional style altogether, I find that a lot of detail on the Technique menu makes it easier for them to make their combat tactics distinct and interesting. It's true that you can attempt any technique for your skill, but that doesn't mean that all of them are equally appropriate for a stylist of a given style.

Originally Posted by aesir23

That's better, but I would go even further: you get +1 to Parry (as a defensive Attack), and he gets -2 to attack you if you succeed (which amounts to another +1 Parry if he was planning to use Deceptive Attack). That seems to be reason enough to learn the technique (especially since it's so cheap and easy to learn.)

The thing is, I added the +1 to Parry more or less to avoid the Technique having a positive default. In the technique design system, it comes out to skill-1 only after I added it. If I dropped it, I would have to add some other benefit, like the one below.

Originally Posted by aesir23

I might even give it an alternative use (that fits with how it is used in boxing): Instead of the above bonus to parry and penalty to attack, you may choose to Evaluate on the same turn that you use a Defensive Jab.

As for allowing Evaluate alongside an attack, that's a huge benefit. It's an effective +1 to all defences (because you ignore 1 point of Deceptive Attacks) and a +1 to all your attacks in the next turn. That's a lot bigger than +1 to Parry. If I added it, I would have to lower the default a lot.

I'm not conceptually against allowing similar benefits as an Evaluate, but I think the same argument as before would apply. Instead of being 'like AoD, but better', it would be 'like Evaluate, but better'.

Originally Posted by aesir23

[EDIT] Come to think of it, I'll probably just make it a Style Perk.

That was my initial thought, but then I realised that buying off a penalty is pretty much the archtypical Technique.

Originally Posted by aesir23

The only one that really bothers me is Underhand Slash which seems to me to be an irreversible feature of (for lack of a better word) ergonomics.

I agree that a swinging attack in Reversed Grip should never be as effective as one made with more leverage, but I find that allowing characters to buy off half that penalty to be in line with how GURPS deals with similar situational penalties.

Originally Posted by aesir23

A couple of points to keep in mind: +1 Thrust isn't the only benefit of Reversed Grip, you also get +1 to Feints and Deceptive Attacks (!) (MA 112).

True. Very true. On the other hand, I've found that no player who doesn't have Reverse Grip at 16+ uses it for a knife*. So it's clearly not perceived as a viable alternative to a saber grip. My goal is to allow specialised training to make it a valid way to fight, not better, just different.

*Occasionally they do it for swords, for use in Close Combat.

Originally Posted by aesir23

Also consider that it costs 6 points currently to buy the Reverse Grip Technique up to full skill in order to be able to switch as a free action. This grants the benefits of both Reversed Grip Parry and Underhand Slash, plus the ability to get that extra reach when you need it, BUT it requires a skill roll every time you want to do it.

It costs from 0-7 points. If your skill is 22+, like main-line fighter in a DF game or pretty much any combatant in a high-power MA game, you don't need any points in the Technique. If you have lower skill, you have to spend points on the Technique. And you could theoretically get a No-Nuisance Roll Perk for it.** Even if you can't, requiring a skill check isn't really a very meaningful limitation when you have skill 16+ and thus only fail once in a blue moon.

So the alternative of being able to parry and slash in a sabre-grip and stab in an ice-pick one is often not all that expensive for characters that might consider spending five points on Techniques for a fairly specialised knife-fighting move.

**Arguably, spinning your weapon in your hand is not necessarily directly related to combat. Could just as well be a circus trick.

[aesir23]

Originally Posted by Icelander

]
The thing is, I added the +1 to Parry more or less to avoid the Technique having a positive default. In the technique design system, it comes out to skill-1 only after I added it. If I dropped it, I would have to add some other benefit, like the one below.

Ah, I hadn't thought of that. Another thought is to limit the parry bonus even more: only to retreating parries against the foe who attacked you. And perhaps apply that to the whole benefit!.

Originally Posted by Icelander

]
As for allowing Evaluate alongside an attack, that's a huge benefit. It's an effective +1 to all defences (because you ignore 1 point of Deceptive Attacks) and a +1 to all your attacks in the next turn. That's a lot bigger than +1 to Parry. If I added it, I would have to lower the default a lot.

I'm not conceptually against allowing similar benefits as an Evaluate, but I think the same argument as before would apply. Instead of being 'like AoD, but better', it would be 'like Evaluate, but better'.

True, but I think that Evaluate is a less potent option than AoD. At least it's a very unpopular option.

Originally Posted by Icelander

]
I agree that a swinging attack in Reversed Grip should never be as effective as one made with more leverage, but I find that allowing characters to buy off half that penalty to be in line with how GURPS deals with similar situational penalties.

Yes, you make good arguments. I'm beginning to come around.

Originally Posted by Icelander

]
**Arguably, spinning your weapon in your hand is not necessarily directly related to combat. Could just as well be a circus trick.

Yes, this makes me wonder if it shouldn't be it's own skill, like Fast-Draw. Or perhaps it's simply another specialty of Fast-Draw. Fast-Draw (Reverse Grip).

[Icelander]

Originally Posted by aesir23

Ah, I hadn't thought of that. Another thought is to limit the parry bonus even more: only to retreating parries against the foe who attacked you. And perhaps apply that to the whole benefit!

By RAW, that counts as another drawback for the Technique and so gets the default up to +0. I'm also not sure it's completely necessary. True, a boxer will not consider other threats than his opponent in the ring, but that's a function of his specific sport training. There's no reason that a Defensive Jab needs to lower his guard relative to other potential attackers any more than a normal Defensive Attack.

As for requiring Retreat, that's not a meaningful drawback. In practice, the jabbing character will always attempt to Retreat or Sideslip anyway.

Originally Posted by aesir23

True, but I think that Evaluate is a less potent option than AoD. At least it's a very unpopular option.

All-Out Defence doesn't just allow a +2 to Parry. You can also get a bonus to Dodge and move around, which is the best way to safely get somewhere while in combat. And you can get two Active Defences against each attack, which is huge. So even if Defensive Jab allows a +2 to Parry, that's not replacing AoD.

I agree that Evaluate is not a desirable combat option, as written. Especially not in the Basic Set. MA went a long way toward fixing that, but in my game, I also double the 'to hit' bonus from Evaluate. Makes it a lot more popular.

Originally Posted by aesir23

Yes, this makes me wonder if it shouldn't be it's own skill, like Fast-Draw. Or perhaps it's simply another specialty of Fast-Draw. Fast-Draw (Reverse Grip).

Eh, it's fine the way it is. I'm more concerned wtih Fast-Draw*, really, but that's way off-topic here.

*I disagree that every speciality should be its own skill. No default between drawing a knife and a sword seems harsh. I'd prefer to have just one Fast-Draw skill, with weapon Bulk giving a penalty along with position, with specific weapons and holster locations being Techniques.

[aesir23]

Originally Posted by Icelander

All-Out Defence doesn't just allow a +2 to Parry. You can also get a bonus to Dodge and move around, which is the best way to safely get somewhere while in combat. And you can get two Active Defences against each attack, which is huge.

But you have to choose only one of those effects, and +2 to Parry is usually the best bet.

[Icelander]

Originally Posted by aesir23

But you have to choose only one of those effects, and +2 to Parry is usually the best bet.

I do not find it so. The option to roll two defence rolls against each attack is at least equally viable, if not often mathematically superior. And, as I noted above, the Increased Dodge option is a superb way to get around a battlefield, for example to assume a flanking position.

All three varieties of All-Out Defence seem to me pretty decent.