Back to Crafty Games Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
October 30, 2014, 12:01:02 PM
Home Help Search Login Register
News: Welcome to the Crafty Games Forums!

Note to New Members: To combat spam, we have instituted new rules: you must post 5 replies to existing threads before you can create new threads.

+  Crafty Games Forum
|-+  Products
| |-+  Fantasy Craft
| | |-+  Walk me through Grapple:Screaming Club
« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 8 9 [10] 11 12 13 Go Down Print
Author Topic: Walk me through Grapple:Screaming Club  (Read 6028 times)
Goodlun
Operative
****
Posts: 490


Yeah thats me with my Judo Gi and an AK-47


View Profile
« Reply #135 on: August 02, 2012, 08:00:27 PM »

I think one of the problems is 
codified grappling such as
Judo, Brazilian Jujitsu, Catch as you Catch can, Glima, ect...
gives you situations such as
the little 130lb Purple belt I roll with that is not particularly strong or large but he knows his grappling and I have seen him tie up skillful very Athletic 250lb men.
Is having ranks in athletics the same as developing highly technical grappling maneuvers that allow someone who is significantly smaller dominate over someone much larger and stronger?
I will say I really and mean really don't like it being BAB based at all because one of the best things about the current system is it is divorced hitting people is so different then using leverage.
I have seen world class Kick Boxers against relatively new grappler just be destroyed because it is so far outside of their element.
Now I know this isn't  simulation and its cinematic but to walk so far away from reality would be a disservice.
So is grappling going to be
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FCU503Locjs
or
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9erKI3pxUWQ&feature=related
 
Logged
Crafty_Alex
Crafty Staff
Control
*****
Posts: 3249


Damned if I do, damned if I don't.


View Profile WWW
« Reply #136 on: August 02, 2012, 08:42:12 PM »

If I want to play a grappler, I'm going to take Explorer 1.

....aaaand there's my problem, in a nutshell. Has anyone ever seen an Explorer who didn't completely ignore Athletics lose a grapple? Ever? Immediate violation of Point 1 (Is it interesting/fun?), do not pass Go, do not collect $200.
 
Quote
While I like the idea of a level of general competency -- and as such, would hate to see grappling treated as a proficiency which would only make it harder to access under the current construction of the rules1 -- people have made the conscious decision to make and play characters who aren't physical powerhouses in order to be good at something else, so they have  zero right to complain when they come up against other characters capable of exploiting those deficiencies. Nerds tend to get seriously pwned by jocks. If you want to fight back, you need to make the choice -- yay origin skills -- to undertake the specific training to do so.

I will never ding someone for specialization. But we don't have a system right now that rewards specialization equally - I have never seen another character talked to death (like shooting themselves or walking off a cliff), but I sure as hell have seen characters grappled to death...or to the point where it was a blanket party for the rest of the party. Bo-ring.

So the question is whether to reduce the stakes of a grapple (no more auto-lose/auto-die) while compensating by making them more interesting, or to make competence for everyone more accessible (This, by the way, precludes making a Wrestling proficiency make you better, as that just amplifies the one-sidedness problem). Lowering the stakes IMO accomplishes more - grappling is less of a default go-to action for the Athletic character, and those 98 lb weaklings needn't quake in fear if they have no ranks in Athletics, but it does give the Athletic character more options and opportunities than the weakling...seems to be a fair trade. So long as Grappling remains useful and rewarding for those who specialize in it, I bet we're good.

Quote
It's not the fault of the rules that this kryptonite exists, it's the fault of the GC who chooses to use it to fatally gimp you. Which most generally won't.

As an aside, I find it funny to hear you make that argument in this thread, considering your stance in other threads on self-imposed GC managment Grin
Logged

Sletchman
Control
******
Posts: 4108


Gentleman Scholar.


View Profile WWW
« Reply #137 on: August 02, 2012, 09:11:07 PM »

If I want to play a grappler, I'm going to take Explorer 1.

....aaaand there's my problem, in a nutshell. Has anyone ever seen an Explorer who didn't completely ignore Athletics lose a grapple? Ever? Immediate violation of Point 1 (Is it interesting/fun?), do not pass Go, do not collect $200.

Wouldn't that not ever be an issue?  PCs use the PC classes, and unless your players are attacking one another (which is a situation I can never seen an upside in) then it only matters how it affects NPCs (who can't even get Tomb Raider).

For what it's worth though, I don't disagree with you here.  I've had my own Explorer lose at a grapple check, though it was against a Large character with reasonable strength and Athletics VII.
Logged
Crafty_Alex
Crafty Staff
Control
*****
Posts: 3249


Damned if I do, damned if I don't.


View Profile WWW
« Reply #138 on: August 02, 2012, 09:32:29 PM »

If I want to play a grappler, I'm going to take Explorer 1.

....aaaand there's my problem, in a nutshell. Has anyone ever seen an Explorer who didn't completely ignore Athletics lose a grapple? Ever? Immediate violation of Point 1 (Is it interesting/fun?), do not pass Go, do not collect $200.

Wouldn't that not ever be an issue?  PCs use the PC classes, and unless your players are attacking one another (which is a situation I can never seen an upside in) then it only matters how it affects NPCs (who can't even get Tomb Raider).

GCs are players, too. Watching fights become "Get Giant to wrestle monster to ground. Get party to surround monster and stab it to death over 10 rounds" is boring Smiley If Grapples used BAB, there'd be no "Flawless XX" ability to amplify the problem of skilled vs. unskilled.
Logged

Bill Whitmore
Mastermind
Control
*****
Posts: 2352


Woot, I got a new hat! :P


View Profile
« Reply #139 on: August 02, 2012, 09:34:57 PM »

Wouldn't that not ever be an issue?  PCs use the PC classes, and unless your players are attacking one another (which is a situation I can never seen an upside in) then it only matters how it affects NPCs (who can't even get Tomb Raider).

Just for the record, the abilities like Tomb Raider and Man of Reason are available to NPCs (see NPC quality Class ability and Class Ability list on page 232).  So just because an NPC can't take Explorer 1 directly, it can still pick up the ability, Tomb Raider.  In fact, at least 1 character in the Rogue's Gallery already has it in the Treasure Hunter.

Any of the abilities like Tomb Raider pretty much lead to automatic wins against an untrained opponent with regards to opposed checks as, unless an error is rolled, (20 + level) will always be greater than 15 (untrained skill cap).
Logged

Don't follow your passion.  Take it with you.

ALL HAIL THE FLYING SPAGHETTI MONSTER!   Ramen.
Mister Andersen
Control
******
Posts: 10783


I'm leaving for a destination I still don't know


View Profile
« Reply #140 on: August 02, 2012, 10:11:31 PM »

If I want to play a grappler, I'm going to take Explorer 1.

....aaaand there's my problem, in a nutshell. Has anyone ever seen an Explorer who didn't completely ignore Athletics lose a grapple? Ever? Immediate violation of Point 1 (Is it interesting/fun?), do not pass Go, do not collect $200.

Yes I have as it happens. While the ability stacks things in your favour, all it does is guarantee that you're not going to completely suck by giving you a minimum, not that you're going to insta win. The most common scenario -- because, seriously, how many people actually stick to a base class and don't either multiclass into another or an Exc -- is that over the life of the character your non-error minimum will remain static at somewhere between 21 and 24.

I would expect a GC to allow a pro-grapple character to grapple to their heart's content, in the knowledge that all you need to do to stop them in their tracks is to spend 2 XP to drop Tomb Raider on an NPC.
 
Quote
Quote
While I like the idea of a level of general competency -- and as such, would hate to see grappling treated as a proficiency which would only make it harder to access under the current construction of the rules1 -- people have made the conscious decision to make and play characters who aren't physical powerhouses in order to be good at something else, so they have  zero right to complain when they come up against other characters capable of exploiting those deficiencies. Nerds tend to get seriously pwned by jocks. If you want to fight back, you need to make the choice -- yay origin skills -- to undertake the specific training to do so.

I will never ding someone for specialization.

Who's dinging? It's a direct consequence of a player's choice, not a punishment, and looking at it any other way strikes me as folly. The whole point of being strong in one area is that you're correspondingly weak in others.  It's why you have a team that  comes together to be stronger than its individual members.

If there are no consequences for our choices, why make them in the first place.

Quote
But we don't have a system right now that rewards specialization equally - I have never seen another character talked to death (like shooting themselves or walking off a cliff), but I sure as hell have seen characters grappled to death...or to the point where it was a blanket party for the rest of the party. Bo-ring.

Part of the problem is that there's something of a schizophrenic approach to design where you have some options that specifically differentiate between PCs and NPCs/mundanes and specials, and others where the attitude is "you can't do that, because it means you can do it the PCs". Why? Main characters live in grossly unbalanced worlds all the time where things that harm ordinary folk have little if any affect on them.

So maybe you can't directly talk someone to death. You sure as hell can talk them out of killing you, or talk someone else into killing the person for you. Being able to wrestle a bear means nothing if the nuclear warhead isn't disarmed or the spell to cast the demon king back into the abyss isn't performed.

And good luck trying feint or distract or what have you in a fight if you don't have any points in the right skills.

Quote
So the question is whether to reduce the stakes of a grapple (no more auto-lose/auto-die) while compensating by making them more interesting, or to make competence for everyone more accessible (This, by the way, precludes making a Wrestling proficiency make you better, as that just amplifies the one-sidedness problem). Lowering the stakes IMO accomplishes more - grappling is less of a default go-to action for the Athletic character, and those 98 lb weaklings needn't quake in fear if they have no ranks in Athletics, but it does give the Athletic character more options and opportunities than the weakling...seems to be a fair trade. So long as Grappling remains useful and rewarding for those who specialize in it, I bet we're good.

Ugh, this again. People keep trying to make grappling sound like a universal cureall and it isn't. It's an brilliantly useful strategy against a single opponent you want to stop from doing something (or want to beat goblin to death with another goblin). But if that person has friends, going into a grapple is just begging those friends to do horrible painful brutal things to you unless you have friends of your own. Which as it happens being in a party means you generally do.

And again, you can't be coup de graced while pinned; that action specifically requires you to be helpless. While it makes it easier for them, an enemy still has to grind you down to 0.

Quote
Quote
It's not the fault of the rules that this kryptonite exists, it's the fault of the GC who chooses to use it to fatally gimp you. Which most generally won't.

As an aside, I find it funny to hear you make that argument in this thread, considering your stance in other threads on self-imposed GC managment Grin

Not really: I like to turn complexity on rather than off (auto regenerating pools is totally a non-complex alternative to actively demonstrating you should be given them).

And maybe I'm crazy in that from a gamist perspective I expect that the GC and players should have the same victory condition: the PCs win.
Logged

Mister Andersen
Control
******
Posts: 10783


I'm leaving for a destination I still don't know


View Profile
« Reply #141 on: August 02, 2012, 10:19:56 PM »

If I want to play a grappler, I'm going to take Explorer 1.

....aaaand there's my problem, in a nutshell. Has anyone ever seen an Explorer who didn't completely ignore Athletics lose a grapple? Ever? Immediate violation of Point 1 (Is it interesting/fun?), do not pass Go, do not collect $200.

Wouldn't that not ever be an issue?  PCs use the PC classes, and unless your players are attacking one another (which is a situation I can never seen an upside in) then it only matters how it affects NPCs (who can't even get Tomb Raider).

GCs are players, too. Watching fights become "Get Giant to wrestle monster to ground. Get party to surround monster and stab it to death over 10 rounds" is boring Smiley If Grapples used BAB, there'd be no "Flawless XX" ability to amplify the problem of skilled vs. unskilled.

Then it's the GC's job to do something about it.

Any of the abilities like Tomb Raider pretty much lead to automatic wins against an untrained opponent with regards to opposed checks as, unless an error is rolled, (20 + level) will always be greater than 15 (untrained skill cap).

Untrained people losing to a trained person is a problem how?

Also, technically, Comptency means that all skills checks made by NPCs are considered trained and thus not affected by the 15 cap.
Logged

Sletchman
Control
******
Posts: 4108


Gentleman Scholar.


View Profile WWW
« Reply #142 on: August 02, 2012, 10:27:37 PM »

Just for the record, the abilities like Tomb Raider and Man of Reason are available to NPCs (see NPC quality Class ability and Class Ability list on page 232).  So just because an NPC can't take Explorer 1 directly, it can still pick up the ability, Tomb Raider.  In fact, at least 1 character in the Rogue's Gallery already has it in the Treasure Hunter.

Ah crap.  I checked the list, but managed to totally miss all it.  Dang it.  Not my day for Notice checks.

GCs are players, too. Watching fights become "Get Giant to wrestle monster to ground. Get party to surround monster and stab it to death over 10 rounds" is boring Smiley If Grapples used BAB, there'd be no "Flawless XX" ability to amplify the problem of skilled vs. unskilled.

Yeah, like I said I don't disagree with you - it is boring.  While my at the table experience has been completely lacking in "you hold him down while we shank him" type stuff, I can see the potential for it - and thus why people are worried.  I also haven't seen the problem with Tomb Raider, since no one at my table has used it for a grappler - instead, the few who wanted to use Grapple have gone with Size, and skill boosts (enlightened skill, skill mastery feats, etc).

Mostly people just found Grappling to be boring to be honest - my Luchadore character stopped grappling all together and just used Trips and Bullrushes all but exclusively.  Just because it was far more exciting to play.

Using attack (because raw BAB would be weird), might fix some of the one sided nature of the check (though at a glance at the table, it does look like it favours NPCs a little from about level 10 on - but perhaps no more then skills do), but my concern has never been for it's balance - I just haven't seen any real abuse the others seem to have - my only concern is it being as fun as every other aspect of the system (while, ideally, being balanced to).

I don't ask for much, do I?
Logged
Mister Andersen
Control
******
Posts: 10783


I'm leaving for a destination I still don't know


View Profile
« Reply #143 on: August 02, 2012, 10:41:43 PM »

Which version of the grappling rules were you using: "one benefit per person per round", or "one benefit per opposed check won"? Because that's the difference in getting to screaming club at the top of round 3 with 4 checks, or the top of round 2 with just 2.
Logged

Sletchman
Control
******
Posts: 4108


Gentleman Scholar.


View Profile WWW
« Reply #144 on: August 02, 2012, 11:01:53 PM »

Which version of the grappling rules were you using: "one benefit per person per round", or "one benefit per opposed check won"? Because that's the difference in getting to screaming club at the top of round 3 with 4 checks, or the top of round 2 with just 2.

Winner of the check gets an advantage, no matter whose turn it is.  That's the only way I thought the rules could have been interpreted, the other way just never occurred to anyone in my group.  Also, we imported Critical Success = 2 Advantages from 2.0.
Logged
ludomastro
Control
******
Posts: 1670



View Profile
« Reply #145 on: August 02, 2012, 11:30:43 PM »

Which version of the grappling rules were you using: "one benefit per person per round", or "one benefit per opposed check won"? Because that's the difference in getting to screaming club at the top of round 3 with 4 checks, or the top of round 2 with just 2.

Winner of the check gets an advantage, no matter whose turn it is.  That's the only way I thought the rules could have been interpreted, the other way just never occurred to anyone in my group.  Also, we imported Critical Success = 2 Advantages from 2.0.

This is also how my group and I interpreted the rules.
Logged

Mister Andersen
Control
******
Posts: 10783


I'm leaving for a destination I still don't know


View Profile
« Reply #146 on: August 03, 2012, 05:54:57 AM »

Which version of the grappling rules were you using: "one benefit per person per round", or "one benefit per opposed check won"? Because that's the difference in getting to screaming club at the top of round 3 with 4 checks, or the top of round 2 with just 2.

Winner of the check gets an advantage, no matter whose turn it is.  That's the only way I thought the rules could have been interpreted, the other way just never occurred to anyone in my group.  Also, we imported Critical Success = 2 Advantages from 2.0.

So what about that makes it boring to use grapple?
Logged

Wireless
Recruit
*
Posts: 38



View Profile
« Reply #147 on: August 03, 2012, 07:13:22 AM »

Just to stick in a random idea why not make the defending against the grapple be a half action and give the defender so other options.  for example :

Attacker grapples : does not make check yet ( full round action )

Defender makes unarmed attack ( half action) + resists grapple ( half action) = both roll dice now

Defender could have taken another half action like:tire, trip, handle item, threaten, or fient.

some ideas with this :  taking the 1st half action when defending requires a concentration check
                                     reduce attackers athletics check by defenders damage (even if say stress damage)
                                     let defender use acrobatics against the grapple check
                                     say if defender is drake let them use breath weapon before grapple check
                                     let defender take an all out grapple defend trick or something for like +2 vs grapple

Another problem i see is for example you grapple a monster with squeeze attack how does that work ?
Would you want to wrestle a giant snake like a boa ?

Not sure if this is crazy thinking or too powerful for defender but it just stuck me as odd the defender does not have more options. To balance this you could give the attacker a better choice of things if he wins the check since it did cost them a full round action, but i am not sure at this point.

And one last idea why not keep as written (for the most part ) grapple for standard characters, but make you win a benefit twice against a special for it to happen. Example: Big boss villain must be held twice to get held , pinned twice to get pinned .

Just random thoughts but i could not hold them in with everything going on in this thread. I have had two characters in two groups use this as the "win button" for most encounters.

Excuse the rambling , Thank you all for your patience.

Logged
SilvercatMoonpaw
Control
******
Posts: 1212



View Profile
« Reply #148 on: August 03, 2012, 08:24:50 AM »

Hm, do you suppose if escaping a grapple had more options while initiating was still simply Athletics things would even out?


IMPORTANT NOTE: At this point I'm only talking about houserules for FantasyCraft.  I'm sure Spycraft 3 will be great and all, but right now I'm trying to figure out something I can use right now.
Logged
LordKruelos
Handler
*****
Posts: 998



View Profile
« Reply #149 on: August 03, 2012, 10:34:53 AM »


Using attack (because raw BAB would be weird), might fix some of the one sided nature of the check (though at a glance at the table, it does look like it favours NPCs a little from about level 10 on - but perhaps no more then skills do), but my concern has never been for it's balance - I just haven't seen any real abuse the others seem to have - my only concern is it being as fun as every other aspect of the system (while, ideally, being balanced to).

If Wrestling/grappling became powered by Unarmed attack, I could easily see an equivalent of the Eagle Eye trick allowing you to substitute your Athletics (Str) bonus for your Unarmed Attack bonus x number of times per combat.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 8 9 [10] 11 12 13 Go Up Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.13 | SMF © 2006-2011, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!