Damage from Grappling techniques - lifting or striking ST?

[B9anders]

Do grappling techniques that such as wrench limb, backbreaker and such that uses swing dmg calculate dmg from their lifting or striking ST?

Lifting ST is generally used when it comes to grappling, but I am a bit confused when it then uses the basic damage chart that is ususally associated with striking ST. If they are not the same, do you then calculate the swing damage from lifting strength or do you simply use striking strength?

[chris1982]

Originally Posted by B9anders

Do grappling techniques that such as wrench limb, backbreaker and such that uses swing dmg calculate dmg from their lifting or striking ST?

Lifting ST is generally used when it comes to grappling, but I am a bit confused when it then uses the basic damage chart that is ususally associated with striking ST. If they are not the same, do you then calculate the swing damage from lifting strength or do you simply use striking strength?

For these techniques striking ST makes sense since those are fast aprupt movements and not steadily applied pressure (which is the reason to use lifting ST when grappling).

[DouglasCole]

I think in general, Striking ST is "combat ST" and lifting ST is "encumbrance ST" in terms of pricing. A search on what Kromm's said on this would prove fruitful.

[aesir23]

Originally Posted by DouglasCole

I think in general, Striking ST is "combat ST" and lifting ST is "encumbrance ST" in terms of pricing.

Nope. The book is crystal clear that Lifting ST applies to grappling techniques; which are definitely part of combat.

Originally Posted by chris1982

For these techniques striking ST makes sense since those are fast aprupt movements and not steadily applied pressure (which is the reason to use lifting ST when grappling).

I disagree. Arm Wrench isn't anymore abrupt necessarily than Arm Lock, it just uses brute force instead of focused leverage.

I'd use Lifting St for Arm Wrench. An argument could be made for back-breaker being more of a strike, however, like a grab and bash, so I'd consider using Striking St for that one.

[chris1982]

Originally Posted by aesir23

I disagree. Arm Wrench isn't anymore abrupt necessarily than Arm Lock, it just uses brute force instead of focused leverage.

Arm Lock also uses ST... ;)

[blacksmith]

Originally Posted by aesir23

Nope. The book is crystal clear that Lifting ST applies to grappling techniques; which are definitely part of combat.

Cite?

When these things come up it is generaly that striking strength is used, because it is more expensive. Bows are another example that uses striking st but can be argued should be lifting st.

[aesir23]

Originally Posted by blacksmith

Cite?

Originally Posted by Campaigns pg 65

Lifting ST adds to ST in situations where you apply slow, steady pressure (grappling, choking, etc.)

There you have it.

[EDIT] That's Characters I'm quoting; not Campaigns. Sorry.

[Agent]

The thing called into question is whether those techniques are 'slow, steady pressure'.

I'd agree, though, that Wrench Limb would fall under that. The idea of ripping, tearing, crunching a limb doesn't have to be limited to 'quick strikes'. Almost seems more appropriate to the more skill-based techniques of Arm Lock, where quick breaks using momentum and so forth are probably more common.

In any case, what exactly is 'quick' with 1 second rounds? If I do a grapple and choke as part of a rapid strike, is that then 'too quick' for 'slow, steady pressure'?

[aesir23]

Originally Posted by Agent

In any case, what exactly is 'quick' with 1 second rounds? If I do a grapple and choke as part of a rapid strike, is that then 'too quick' for 'slow, steady pressure'?

I personally think it's far simpler to say, striking = Striking ST, Grappling = Lifting ST. If you start making things overcomplicated it opens up issues on both sides of the equation, like whether or not Push Kicks should use Lifting ST since they're slower.