[Technical Grappling] Teach me using examples

[DouglasCole]

Originally Posted by Icelander

Why did you get T-ST 23?

I was going from memory and winging it. I'm impressed I was only off by one.

[Icelander]

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

I think it's definitely correct for the guy holding the polearm to be able to do some kind of 'technical parry' to resist grapples to it, and I don't think a U parry stat should preempt that.

There is a great deal to be said for it applying on the turn after you use Hook, as you could not execute any other kind of Parry during that turn with the weapon, even if you let go of the Hook. Basically, on the turn you establish a Hook, your foe can take advantage of the fact that your weapon is moving in a very predictable (if not that advantageous to him) way. If you want to avoid that, use a Defensive Attack to Hook someone.

After that, however, I agree that even an U weapon should not be out-of-position to defend with a grappling skill if it was used to grapple.

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

Arguably the technical parry should use weapon skill, but that'll just make this situation uglier!

If a weapon that has grappled someone ought to be able to drag him out of position to Parry a grab of the weapon, the same logic can apply so that it ought to be able to drag him out of position so that he'll miss with a strike.

Which, admittedly, was the way that I ran GURPS before Technical Grappling came out, but at that time, 'wasting' an attack to make a Hook or an Armed Grapple needed every boost it could get.

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

I mean, isn't the alternative that grappling a weapon that's attached to you is totally free to do? Though on the flip side it would also make it impossible to parry against somebody's break free attempt with the weapon.

Totally free to do is not how it should work, I agree. On the other hand, a weapon that is attached to you is heavily restricted in its movements and the usual consequence of a restricted range of movement is a penalty to Active Defences.

Grapples of limbs or weapons that are already grappling you ought, in my personal experience and consumed media, be easier than grappling a limb or weapon that's free to move around at will.

And attacking a grapple, with Break Free, ought to be easier than attacking a third party or the person grappling you.

My first instinct when I saw that Break Free allowed an Active Defence was to look for the penalty to that Active Defence, because it seemed incredible that there was none.

Eyeballing things, my intuition says that I ought to give a -2 to defend against a grapple aimed at a limb or weapon that's being used to grapple the attacker, as you can't really shift that limb or weapon around all that much. I'd either give that same penalty or even a -3, the same as when using a Shield to Block using only the guige (a Hands-Free Block), to attempts to defend against a Break Free attempt.

This will encourage Break Free or a counter-grapple as viable a response to grappling, instead of making it just as hard to achieve as any other attack in that situation.

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

Though you could still dodge. What does dodging a break free even look like?

You move your body or weapon out of the way sufficiently so that the force exerted to counter your grapple is wasted.

[DouglasCole]

Though you could still dodge. What does dodging a break free even look like?

Probably a lot like a Hands-Free Parry. :-)

[DouglasCole]

Originally Posted by Icelander

Totally free to do is not how it should work, I agree. On the other hand, a weapon that is attached to you is heavily restricted in its movements and the usual consequence of a restricted range of movement is a penalty to Active Defenses.

One thing you could do is penalize the parry as if those CP being inflicted were being inflicted on you and your weapon. Make grapples REALLY mutual, in a way.

Grapples of limbs or weapons that are already grappling you ought, in my personal experience and consumed media, be easier than grappling a limb or weapon that's free to move around at will.

They are. You don't suffer hit location penalties when attacking to break free.

[Icelander]

Originally Posted by DouglasCole

One thing you could do is penalize the parry as if those CP being inflicted were being inflicted on you and your weapon. Make grapples REALLY mutual, in a way.

No, we don't want to penalise a good grapple. That would really change the dynamic of grappling and not in a good way.

What I want to do is to make it risky to 'force' a bad grapple, when you've given up the mobility of your weapon or limb by committing it to a grapple, but you've not established sufficient control to make your foe unlikely to be able to grapple you effectively back.

In other words, discourage ineffective 0 to 1 CP (against normal foes, 0-3 CP or higher against more skilled foes) grapples, like grabbing someone's shirt lapels without controlling him, as that just makes it easier for your foe to establish a really effective grapple on the limbs (or weapon) you are presenting to him.

Originally Posted by DouglasCole

They are. You don't suffer hit location penalties when attacking to break free.

Fair enough, but that's only 1 point of difference and it means, for example, that it's easier to grapple the torso of someone who has a hafted weapon hooked around the back of your knee than it is to grab the haft of said weapon.

[Ulzgoroth]

Originally Posted by Icelander

There is a great deal to be said for it applying on the turn after you use Hook, as you could not execute any other kind of Parry during that turn with the weapon, even if you let go of the Hook. Basically, on the turn you establish a Hook, your foe can take advantage of the fact that your weapon is moving in a very predictable (if not that advantageous to him) way. If you want to avoid that, use a Defensive Attack to Hook someone.

After that, however, I agree that even an U weapon should not be out-of-position to defend with a grappling skill if it was used to grapple.

It makes no sense to Break Free before the hook is in place (that's your Active Defense against the hook attempt), and after it's in place it isn't swinging like that.

Originally Posted by Icelander

If a weapon that has grappled someone ought to be able to drag him out of position to Parry a grab of the weapon, the same logic can apply so that it ought to be able to drag him out of position so that he'll miss with a strike.

Which, admittedly, was the way that I ran GURPS before Technical Grappling came out, but at that time, 'wasting' an attack to make a Hook or an Armed Grapple needed every boost it could get.

Drag out of position? Why would you frame it that way? You don't need to manipulate your attacker to perform a technical parry.

Originally Posted by Icelander

Totally free to do is not how it should work, I agree. On the other hand, a weapon that is attached to you is heavily restricted in its movements and the usual consequence of a restricted range of movement is a penalty to Active Defences.

Grapples of limbs or weapons that are already grappling you ought, in my personal experience and consumed media, be easier than grappling a limb or weapon that's free to move around at will.

And attacking a grapple, with Break Free, ought to be easier than attacking a third party or the person grappling you.

My first instinct when I saw that Break Free allowed an Active Defence was to look for the penalty to that Active Defence, because it seemed incredible that there was none.

Eyeballing things, my intuition says that I ought to give a -2 to defend against a grapple aimed at a limb or weapon that's being used to grapple the attacker, as you can't really shift that limb or weapon around all that much. I'd either give that same penalty or even a -3, the same as when using a Shield to Block using only the guige (a Hands-Free Block), to attempts to defend against a Break Free attempt.

This will encourage Break Free or a counter-grapple as viable a response to grappling, instead of making it just as hard to achieve as any other attack in that situation.

Remember that a good wrestler is not unlikely to have Escaping Parry bought up and may have Technique Mastery for Break Free. That gives them a considerable advantage in forcing the opponent off.

Break Free also never takes a hit location penalty, though a torso grapple doesn't either.

A weapon you are grappled with is always grabbed at a lower penalty than any weapon that you aren't.

It is true, as best I can tell, that it is no easier to grab an arm that is grappling you than an arm that is free.

[Ulzgoroth]

Originally Posted by Icelander

No, we don't want to penalise a good grapple. That would really change the dynamic of grappling and not in a good way.

What I want to do is to make it risky to 'force' a bad grapple, when you've given up the mobility of your weapon or limb by committing it to a grapple, but you've not established sufficient control to make your foe unlikely to be able to grapple you effectively back.

In other words, discourage ineffective 0 to 1 CP (against normal foes, 0-3 CP or higher against more skilled foes) grapples, like grabbing someone's shirt lapels without controlling him, as that just makes it easier for your foe to establish a really effective grapple on the limbs (or weapon) you are presenting to him.

It means surrendering the ability to properly Retreat:
"You may only retreat on a defense if, accounting for the
effects of posture (see the Posture Table, p. B551) and treating your foe’s weight as encumbrance, you don’t fall below Move 1. In any case you only gain +1 for retreating while grappled – even with Judo, Karate, or fencing weapons." (p23)

And of course your opponent can use a low-CP grapple in many of the same ways you can, since grapples are mutual.

I'm curious what an offensive Judo Throw through your opponent's grasp on your shirt lapels would look like, but it seems valid by the book...

EDIT: Perhaps not, as the offensive Judo Throw specifies an 'offensive' grapple. However, it seems you're good to use your shirt lapels to Force Posture Change on your assailant.

[Icelander]

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

It makes no sense to Break Free before the hook is in place (that's your Active Defense against the hook attempt), and after it's in place it isn't swinging like that.

Polearms that can Hook are marked with U specifically for the Hook attack mode. If that is supposed to mean something, they presumably can't Parry at all after a Hook attempt, successful or not.

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

Drag out of position? Why would you frame it that way? You don't need to manipulate your attacker to perform a technical parry.

At Reach 2, you cannot touch your opponent with anything other than your Reach 2 weapon, which is, according to the rules in MA and TG, not available for a Parry while you are using it to grapple or Hook. Furthermore, you can't use the normal defence against an attack on your weapon, which is moving it out of position, because while you want to retain the Hook, it must stay in position, hooking the back of the knee of your foe. So the only justification that I can see for a 'counter' or 'technical parry', using the rules under Hands-Free Parry, is for you to drag your foe off balance or out of position so that he can't grab the weapon.

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

Remember that a good wrestler is not unlikely to have Escaping Parry bought up and may have Technique Mastery for Break Free. That gives them a considerable advantage in forcing the opponent off.

Only if the wrestler is dedicated to staying out of grapples. It generally doesn't pay to have more than 2-3 Techniques, rather than just raise the skill in general and if you have offensive Techniques, you might be wasting points taking these as well, instead of a higher general skill level.

Mickey doesn't have any specific Wrestling techniques, apart from Arm Lock at skill+4, i.e. 29.

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

Break Free also never takes a hit location penalty, though a torso grapple doesn't either.

Indeed.

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

A weapon you are grappled with is always grabbed at a lower penalty than any weapon that you aren't.

True and for a Reach 2 weapon, that lower penalty is -2 instead of -3. This while you can grab the arm holding the weapon at -1 or the torso at 0, assuming you can Step into range.

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

It is true, as best I can tell, that it is no easier to grab an arm that is grappling you than an arm that is free.

Dozens of akido or jujutsu 'self-defence' moves that start with 'first, grab my hand/arm/clothing' argue differently. When someone has a grip, but not that much effective control, on you, it is much easier to grapple the hand he's using to grip you than it is to grapple his leg, for example.

[Icelander]

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

EDIT: Perhaps not, as the offensive Judo Throw specifies an 'offensive' grapple. However, it seems you're good to use your shirt lapels to Force Posture Change on your assailant.

What is your ST for a wrestling move executed from a mutual grapple where you are using no hands and no legs, like the aformentioned CP 0 shirt lapel grapple?

[Ulzgoroth]

Originally Posted by Icelander

Polearms that can Hook are marked with U specifically for the Hook attack mode. If that is supposed to mean something, they presumably can't Parry at all after a Hook attempt, successful or not.

That stat vastly predates Technical Grappling, and I don't see any reason to think it was set with technical parries in a grapple in mind.

Originally Posted by Icelander

At Reach 2, you cannot touch your opponent with anything other than your Reach 2 weapon, which is, according to the rules in MA and TG, not available for a Parry while you are using it to grapple or Hook. Furthermore, you can't use the normal defence against an attack on your weapon, which is moving it out of position, because while you want to retain the Hook, it must stay in position, hooking the back of the knee of your foe. So the only justification that I can see for a 'counter' or 'technical parry', using the rules under Hands-Free Parry, is for you to drag your foe off balance or out of position so that he can't grab the weapon.

Your movement is constrained, but you are in control of the shaft. You don't need to strike your opponent's hands away or move your weapon out of reach to make it hard to grab hold.

Originally Posted by Icelander

Only if the wrestler is dedicated to staying out of grapples. It generally doesn't pay to have more than 2-3 Techniques, rather than just raise the skill in general and if you have offensive Techniques, you might be wasting points taking these as well, instead of a higher general skill level.

Mickey doesn't have any specific Wrestling techniques, apart from Arm Lock at skill+4, i.e. 29.

No, being good at shedding enemy CP is very desirable when you intend to be in grapples, where you are likely to get CP put on you.

And while the usual efficiency note applies to Break Free, Escaping Parry is a defensive technique, which makes the math a bit different. If you are one of those grapplers who the Technique description states "will often attempt every parry using this technique", you'd be mad to not drop the 3 points.

Originally Posted by Icelander

Dozens of akido or jujutsu 'self-defence' moves that start with 'first, grab my hand/arm/clothing' argue differently. When someone has a grip, but not that much effective control, on you, it is much easier to grapple the hand he's using to grip you than it is to grapple his leg, for example.

Grappling the leg from that position would likely require a posture change, which would be seriously problematic even with a weak grapple on you.

How does getting the arm compare to counter-grappling their torso?