Improving the Tonfa

[Gollum]

Originally Posted by Varyon

Do note that those weapons I listed can only use Karate for hilt punches, you can't swing a hook sword using the skill - just like you can only use Karate to punch with a tonfa.

Shuriken for hilt punch??? Wait a minute. I look at the rules... "Used to claw"... With something which has cutting peaks all around?

OK. It is not a the topic of this thread so I won't discuss that more than that...

Originally Posted by Varyon

I'm currently working on a simplified version of my old Initiative Overhaul, which would allow for a tonfa to benefit from its purported speed. The benefit isn't built-in (the tonfa would behave much like any other Reach 1 swung weapon of its MinST), but it wouldn't be game-breaking to give it an IP discount for its nifty little spin attack. Failing that, you might be able to justify a discount on those combos. Of course, the easiest solution is just to have that crazy speed give a small defense penalty, as I suggested upthread - any foe suffering the effects of Feint or Deceptive Attack is at a further -1 to defend against the tonfa swing.

Yes. it would be a good solution.

[Gollum]

Originally Posted by Sindri

The length of a sword isn't just a trivial adjustment, it's vital to the handling of the weapon.

You may be right here... I don't know enough swords to discuss it.

Originally Posted by Sindri

They are treated as different skills in standard GURPS because the authors considered their handling to be sufficiently different to justify that. You can argue with that and say that Knife/Shortsword/Broadsword should be Knife/Sword but that just means that the differences between them are judged as being below the level of resolution not that they aren't handled very differently in an objective sense. What would even be the alternative to judging weapon skills by method of handling? Weapons that are traditionally aesthetically grouped together in fiction? I consider it very unlikely that the authors of GURPS deliberately set out to build combat skills that way.

I have to admit that if I had to rewrite the weapon skill list by manner of handling, I would have a lot of problem to do it.

Originally Posted by Sindri

This started with you saying...

Yes...

Originally Posted by Sindri

Or that someone who was not only familiar with a tonfa but had actually spent a point to be able to use unarmed strikes with it should have a penalty to parry.

Yes. Here we are. OK... My problem is that the tonfa cut in half the number of parry you can do. It doesn't prevent you to parry, but still prevent you to use all you capabilities.

Note that it also prevent to use at least half of the possible attacks, especially open handed ones. So you may be right. If there is the perk, it should also work for parry. Unless requiring two perks: one for attacks, one for parries...

Originally Posted by Sindri

Any skill gets penalties if you don't have familiarity with the weapons in question. That includes Karate for someone who isn't familiar with using a tonfa.

Yes, but familiarity penalty is removed as soon as you have a few hours of training. I train with tonkwas for 2 years now and am still not able to handle it effectively. In a true combat, I would hurt myself. The best I an do with tonkwas is thowing them at my foe's face and beginning to start fighting barehanded.

Originally Posted by Sindri

Because many people want a combat skill list that is both rational and merely a little bit ridiculously finely grained compared to other skill instead of being absurdly finely grained. For reference, if you were designing a new set of combat skills would you want a different skill for the pata?

The problem is not the shape of the handle, but how you hit with the weapon. Making it spin is very different from simply swinging it.

Originally Posted by Sindri

Because a kusarigama has basically nothing to do with unarmed combat methods and "punching" with a tonfa does.

OK. I see your point. A tsuki is a tsuki, even with the tonkwa...

The perk could be good then... But the tonfa skill would still be necessary for spinning the weapon (or another weapon skill, with a penalty, because spinning a tonkwa has nothing to do with unarmed karate hand attack.

Originally Posted by Sindri

As it stands weapon speed is almost entirely below resolution for GURPS.

Right. But it could, with penalty to the foe's parry for instance. Exactly as flails give a penalty to the parry - just for another reason.

Originally Posted by Sindri

I'll admit that I'm pretty used to ignoring actual names and short descriptions and just judging things on mechanical representation.

Yes. But players often ask questions considering names and what you previously said. If I say one my players "advanced training at unarmed striking" to explain him that karate is not karate but can be Wing Chun, Kempo, Krav maga, and so on and then, suddenly say that he can use tonfa and shuriken with it, there will be a lot of questions and failure to understand.

[Sindri]

Originally Posted by Gollum

If skills are reworked one day in GURPS (either in the mythic 5th edition or, more probably, in an Alternate GURPS book), I plead for giving up the automatic damage bonus for Karate and other barehanded combat skills.

It is indeed a specific training that a karateka can train or not train: makiwara, kicking bag, kigu hojo undo (specific muscle training exercises)... Karate masters say that tsuki (punches) is an whole art inside the art.

So, to my mind, it is much more well simulated by striking strength.

Furthermore, why +1 at DX+0, +2 at DX+1 and then, nothing more? Is there a so huge difference between DX+0 and DX+1?

Yes it would be more elegant to have Striking ST bought in parallel.

Originally Posted by Gollum

Shuriken for hilt punch??? Wait a minute. I look at the rules... "Used to claw"... With something which has cutting peaks all around?

OK. It is not a the topic of this thread so I won't discuss that more than that...

They're not technically all hilt punches (the bladed hand also allows swings though it probably should not get Karate damage bonuses with that). Clawing with shuriken is admittedly probably easier to accomplish with some varieties, like spike shuriken, than others.

Originally Posted by Gollum

Yes, but familiarity penalty is removed as soon as you have a few hours of training. I train with tonkwas for 2 years now and am still not able to handle it effectively. In a true combat, I would hurt myself. The best I an do with tonkwas is thowing them at my foe's face and beginning to start fighting barehanded.

It takes at least eight hours of practice and even after that it's reasonable to interpret that as just not justifying a penalty anymore rather than true comfortableness. After all a -2 penalty can result in your chance of success being reduced by 25%. Realistically the familiarity rules may be too easy on people using melee weapons but they're as easy on people using a tonfa as using other weapons that are comparably different from what they are familiar with which is it's own virtue.

I'm surprised you'd abandon a tonfa in a real fight. I know I'd prefer using one in a sword grip to fighting barehanded.

Originally Posted by Gollum

The perk could be good then... But the tonfa skill would still be necessary for spinning the weapon (or another weapon skill, with a penalty, because spinning a tonkwa has nothing to do with unarmed karate hand attack.

Absolutely, no way is Karate handling the full range of tonfa grips.

Originally Posted by Gollum

Yes. But players often ask questions considering names and what you previously said. If I say one my players "advanced training at unarmed striking" to explain him that karate is not karate but can be Wing Chun, Kempo, Krav maga, and so on and then, suddenly say that he can use tonfa and shuriken with it, there will be a lot of questions and failure to understand.

Certainly it's nice to not have names and descriptions that end up confusing people.

[Gollum]

Originally Posted by Sindri

They're not technically all hilt punches (the bladed hand also allows swings though it probably should not get Karate damage bonuses with that).

And neither karate skill. Which kind of advanced barehanded martial art does teach that? I know none.

Originally Posted by Sindri

It takes at least eight hours of practice and even after that it's reasonable to interpret that as just not justifying a penalty anymore rather than true comfortableness.

8 hours of practice are absolutely not sufficient to allow to maintain a tonkwa firmly on once forearm. I know it for sure. I have more than 8 hours of practice with tonkwa.

Originally Posted by Sindri

I'm surprised you'd abandon a tonfa in a real fight. I know I'd prefer using one in a sword grip to fighting barehanded.

And I know that if I used tonkwas, I would eventually hurt myself with it. Which I wouldn't do as easily barehanded.

Originally Posted by Sindri

Absolutely, no way is Karate handling the full range of tonfa grips.

Not the full range, yes. It doesn't allow techniques. But a sufficient range for combat: attacks and parries without the least penalty. After only 8 hours of training without any teacher. While a shortsword will require 800 hours of practice to reach the same comfortableness (or 400 hours with a teacher).

Originally Posted by Sindri

Certainly it's nice to not have names and descriptions that end up confusing people.

Not only the name. Definitions, too, which is even more confusing. My players never had any problem to understand that karate could represent any other striking martial art... But they would have problem to understand that it allows to fight with some weapons, in a game where there are so many different skills and in which judo is not the same thing than wrestling, to take another example than shortsword and broadsword.

The problem of GURPS skill list, what makes it unintuitive (not only for combat, by the way) is that some skills are very broad while some other are very limited... And that some allow things that are against their main definition. It is what make a game hard to play because, to know what a skill exactly allows, you have to read and read again the books (and, often, several different books)... But that is another debate.

[Sindri]

Originally Posted by Gollum

And neither karate skill. Which kind of advanced barehanded martial art does teach that? I know none.

The whole point is that training for it is implicit in barehanded training.

Originally Posted by Gollum

8 hours of practice are absolutely not sufficient to allow to maintain a tonkwa firmly on once forearm. I know it for sure. I have more than 8 hours of practice with tonkwa.

I wrote the rest of that section that you didn't quote for a reason you know.

Originally Posted by Gollum

And I know that if I used tonkwas, I would eventually hurt myself with it. Which I wouldn't do as easily barehanded.

What, even if using it as a club? Given the choice between a weapon and not-a-weapon it's almost always daft to pick not-a-weapon even if you have training in unarmed combat.

Originally Posted by Gollum

Not the full range, yes. It doesn't allow techniques. But a sufficient range for combat: attacks and parries without the least penalty. After only 8 hours of training without any teacher.

What are you talking about with techniques? You absolutely both can and should be able to use techniques with the Karate portion of tonfa use. Pummeling with Karate/Brawling/DX isn't some janky way to get away without having investing in the real skill for tonfa use, it is the only method to use to strike with the short end of a tonfa. If they can't use techniques then honte-mochi never gets access to techniques.

Originally Posted by Gollum

While a shortsword will require 800 hours of practice to reach the same comfortableness (or 400 hours with a teacher).

The skill learning rules are a token nod of a system not a foundational part. Reasoning from them is a terrible idea.

Originally Posted by Gollum

The problem of GURPS skill list, what makes it unintuitive (not only for combat, by the way) is that some skills are very broad while some other are very limited... And that some allow things that are against their main definition. It is what make a game hard to play because, to know what a skill exactly allows, you have to read and read again the books (and, often, several different books)... But that is another debate.

It's important to remember that while people on the forums presume the use of cutting edge GURPS rules the GURPS system even without authorial clarifications and further published material is still better than most systems. If you fall into some badly phrased definitions it will hardly be the end of the world.

[DCB]

Originally Posted by Gollum

Yes, but familiarity penalty is removed as soon as you have a few hours of training. I train with tonkwas for 2 years now and am still not able to handle it effectively. In a true combat, I would hurt myself. The best I an do with tonkwas is thowing them at my foe's face and beginning to start fighting barehanded.

That sounds like a bit of an exaggeration.

While I don't have the training you do, my goju dojo required tonfa for regular belt leveling, so I had a little training. I liked tonfa, so I practiced with it for fun, and after a modest investment of time (probably a few dozen hours) was able to manipulate them fairly smoothly. I wasn't great by any means, but could switch between swing/punch/block smoothly enough that a friend asked, apparently in all seriousness, "the handles rotate, right?"

As a result, my view is that it's realistic enough for most games to handle unarmed use of a tonfa with just a familiarity requirement for punching/blocking. For a more rules-heavy game, it might make sense to have a Technique defaulting to unarmed-1 or unarmed-2 to punch and block with a tonfa, meaning it takes a point or two to get the full benefits in Close Combat.

The problem is not the shape of the handle, but how you hit with the weapon. Making it spin is very different from simply swinging it.

Which makes me wonder whether the weapon should be part of the Flail skill instead of Shortsword. That would also address some of your concern that the weapon is hard to use (and should remove the Reach 1 thrusting attack, which in my experience would be weak and awkward).

[Varyon]

Originally Posted by Gollum

Yes. Here we are. OK... My problem is that the tonfa cut in half the number of parry you can do. It doesn't prevent you to parry, but still prevent you to use all you capabilities.

Brawling and Boxing typically don't make much use of open-handed parries (you typically use your arms) or strikes (you use your fists), yet don't have an attack or defense penalty (in fact, for equal investment, both of those get you better chance to hit and defend). I'd imagine there are several advanced styles (which would use GURPS Karate skill) that don't really make a lot of use out of open-handed bits. A character who has trained significantly in the karate style might become overly dependent on these and thus suffer a penalty when wielding a tonfa (or otherwise having a fistload in hand), but that's probably either a Quirk or below resolution.

Originally Posted by Gollum

Yes, but familiarity penalty is removed as soon as you have a few hours of training. I train with tonkwas for 2 years now and am still not able to handle it effectively. In a true combat, I would hurt myself. The best I an do with tonkwas is thowing them at my foe's face and beginning to start fighting barehanded.

So go with a Perk. The 200 hours of training isn't set in stone - some people will take less time to get it, some will take more.

Originally Posted by Gollum

The problem is not the shape of the handle, but how you hit with the weapon. Making it spin is very different from simply swinging it.

You keep coming back to this. The spinning attack should require a Technique, not an entire skill, which would require training to get up to skill.

Originally Posted by Gollum

spinning a tonkwa has nothing to do with unarmed karate hand attack

This is something else you keep coming back to. Douglas Cole did indeed write up his version of the Technique using Karate, but I think that's because he mistakenly thought Karate was the general skill for using the tonfa (rather than just the skill to punch with it in Reverse Grip). I don't think anyone in this thread is now working under the assumption you can use Karate to spin the weapon - the debate is basically over if the spin should require a dedicated skill (Tonfa) or just a Technique based on Shortsword (or Sword, if you want to trim skills down further).

Originally Posted by Gollum

Right. But it could, with penalty to the foe's parry for instance. Exactly as flails give a penalty to the parry - just for another reason.

Flails are a bad comparison here - they don't give a penalty because of speed, but rather because the chain allows it to wrap around a Parrying surface and hit you anyway. Sheer speed is going to penalize all defenses but be somewhat difficult to capitalize on - using the same mechanics as Reverse Grip (further -1 to defense if you've already got the foe suffering from Feint/Deceptive Attack) probably works best here. I should note, however, that I don't personally believe the tonfa is likely fast enough to really cause this penalty - the penalty is more due to the fact that the weapon functionally extends as you strike with it, making it harder to determine actual striking range.

Originally Posted by Gollum

Yes. But players often ask questions considering names and what you previously said. If I say one my players "advanced training at unarmed striking" to explain him that karate is not karate but can be Wing Chun, Kempo, Krav maga, and so on and then, suddenly say that he can use tonfa and shuriken with it, there will be a lot of questions and failure to understand.

I'm not certain how this happens. "Karate represents advanced training at unarmed striking, not the actual Karate style, or any style for that matter. In fact, GURPS Karate is even usable with fistloads and the like, unlike the style."

[Gollum]

Originally Posted by Sindri

The whole point is that training for it is implicit in barehanded training.

In GURPS rules, yes. In my karate training, no. And this is precisely what I am talking about: the comparison between GURPS rules and what sounds realistic to my mind (to my mind because I cannot tell what others find realistic or not, of course).

Originally Posted by Sindri

I wrote the rest of that section that you didn't quote for a reason you know.

There was no such intention. I didn't quote it because I just didn't understand it. Really. I read it three times again and still don't understand the sentences, which are too complex for me. It's not your English. It's mine! My English is not as good as I would like too. I sometimes don't understand at all some sentences, despite understanding every word apart, and some fragment of sentences. So, I prefer not answering than saying something totally inadequate.

Originally Posted by Sindri

What, even if using it as a club? Given the choice between a weapon and not-a-weapon it's almost always daft to pick not-a-weapon even if you have training in unarmed combat.

Yes. My little experience taught me that it is better to use what you really know that to use a tool that you don't know. Having said that, if I had to fight someone with a more dangerous weapon than a knife, I would just flee. Or use a weapon that I much better know: a bo.

Originally Posted by Sindri

What are you talking about with techniques?

I'm speaking about GURPS Techniques.

Originally Posted by Sindri

You absolutely both can and should be able to use techniques with the Karate portion of tonfa use.

It is not what is written in the Tonfa skill. Wait a minute... I will read again slowly... OK. I'm wrong. The description only speaks about Reverse Grip and Arm Lock techniques... All my apologize for that mistake...

Originally Posted by Sindri

The skill learning rules are a token nod of a system not a foundational part. Reasoning from them is a terrible idea.

Unlike you, I find the learning rules very useful to have a good idea of how long a training can be. Of course, nobody learns at exactly the same speed than someone else, and when someone learns, he sometimes improves fast, sometimes improves slower, sometimes not improves at all for a while, and then improves again... I'm a professional school teacher and I know that by heart. The learning rules don't take that into account. But they still give a good average and remains quite realistic as soon a the characters attributes remain realistic.

Originally Posted by Sindri

It's important to remember that while people on the forums presume the use of cutting edge GURPS rules the GURPS system even without authorial clarifications and further published material is still better than most systems. If you fall into some badly phrased definitions it will hardly be the end of the world.

I perfectly do agree with that. I just simply regret that some things are not simpler... It's a bit stange to know that you have to own Basic Set, Martial Arts and Low Tech Companion 2 just to know the right damage inflicted with a bo... Or to read a thread about Tonfas on this forum...

[Tomsdad]

Originally Posted by Gollum

... I just simply regret that some things are not simpler... It's a bit stange to know that you have to own Basic Set, Martial Arts and Low Tech Companion 2 just to know the right damage inflicted with a bo... Or to read a thread about Tonfas on this forum...

I know what you mean, as a generalisation I find GURPS ultimately tends to "get it right" from a realism POV, but it often takes you on a long journey around various supplements to get there. However that's because realism isn't the only metric it seeks to be measured by. And some people are happy to jump off early when they reach their own upper threshold of "that's as realistic as I need my Bo to be" before reaching the final "this is as realistic as GURPS gets" final stop

Luckily for me I like buying GURPS stuff, and enjoy a scenic trip through crunch!

[Gollum]

Originally Posted by DCB

That sounds like a bit of an exaggeration.

The fact that I would hurt myself is not an exaggeration. It is what my master make me realize when they say: "Hey, Jean-François, your tonkwa is moving on your arm! hold it more firmly!" or "If you parry like that, your arm will be broken." There is a huge difference between training ans true combat. And I'm not even good in training, without any stress. I will become, one day. With more training. But not yet.

Originally Posted by DCB

While I don't have the training you do, my goju dojo required tonfa for regular belt leveling, so I had a little training. I liked tonfa, so I practiced with it for fun, and after a modest investment of time (probably a few dozen hours) was able to manipulate them fairly smoothly. I wasn't great by any means, but could switch between swing/punch/block smoothly enough that a friend asked, apparently in all seriousness, "the handles rotate, right?"

Yes. I can reverse grip and spin my tonkwa very fast too. And it impress my friends too. They wouldn't like to be hurt. But when an expert look at me, he immediately notice that my weapon sometimes moves unintentionally or that my hikite is not good, and that in a true combat, it would be very dangerous for me.

Originally Posted by DCB

As a result, my view is that it's realistic enough for most games to handle unarmed use of a tonfa with just a familiarity requirement for punching/blocking. For a more rules-heavy game, it might make sense to have a Technique defaulting to unarmed-1 or unarmed-2 to punch and block with a tonfa, meaning it takes a point or two to get the full benefits in Close Combat.

A little penalty could add more realism, indeed. Yes, the current rule is realistic enough for most games... Where characters are heroes with some attributes score as high as 15 or 16... It is realistic for Walker Texas Rangers, or Bruce Lee in his movies (because Brucely was much realistic when true hints for true combat than in his movies, which are made to be an entertainment). But I am precisely discussing about harsh realism, here.

Originally Posted by DCB

Which makes me wonder whether the weapon should be part of the Flail skill instead of Shortsword. That would also address some of your concern that the weapon is hard to use (and should remove the Reach 1 thrusting attack, which in my experience would be weak and awkward).

The 1 yard thrusting attack is possible and quite strong... As soon as you can handle the grip very firmly. Here again, a lot of training is required. And even more than for C-reach punch.