Grappling Rules!!!

[icebrand]

These are the grappling rules from the new and improved RetroQuest. "Opposed skill tests" use their special success chance on the resistance table (yes, i know it's clunky but for RetroQuest works just fine since it uses a D20 instead of D100).

Replace "unarmed" for "wrestle" or whatever you call your skill.

Grappling & Wrestling

• Wrestle attacks may not be parried once a successful wrestle has been established

• Wrestling combatants suffer a -30% penalty to any tests outside the wrestle

• Grappling (ground fighting) combatants suffer a -60% penalty to any tests outside the grapple

Getting a Grip

Once a wrestle is established, the character may attempt any of the wrestling maneuvers; a grabbed opponent must roll unarmed combat to either break free or initiate a wrestle himself. Each of these maneuvers counts as an attack action, and the character can split his skill (as per multiple attacks) to attempt several maneuvers at once.

Wrestling Maneuvers

After a successful throw, the attacker may choose to end the grapple or continue fighting from the ground. A target may use the “defend” action to use either his STRx5 or DEXx5 instead of the unarmed skill. Last, but not least, a successful DEXx5 test negates damage from throws, and reduces special and critical damage by one step.

• Disarm – Make an opposed unarmed vs. melee test. If successful the target is disarmed

• Sacrifice Throw – Make an opposed unarmed test to throw your opponent for normal damage

• Throw – Make a normal unarmed attack (subject to a parry) to throw your opponent for normal damage

Grappling Maneuvers

These maneuvers may only be used when both combatants are on the ground (usually the result of a successful throw).

• Break Free – Make a normal unarmed attack (subject to a parry) to escape an immobilization, or a failed finishing maneuver (choke hold, ground & pound, joint lock)

• Immobilize – Make an opposed unarmed test to immobilize a target. If you fail, the target can attempt to break free; if you succeed you can attempt a finishing maneuver (choke, joint lock or ground & pound), or maintain the hold for as long as you want

Finishing Maneuvers

• Choke Hold – Make an opposed unarmed test to choke an immobilized target. If successful, roll STR vs CON. Success in this second test means the target is unconscious

• Ground & Pound – Make an opposed unarmed attack. If successful, roll damage as normal

• Joint Lock – Make an unarmed attack (subject to a parry). If successful, roll STR vs STR. Each success does normal damage until you cause a major wound on a limb. This continues until the target successfully breaks free (though it can only attempt it if you fail the STR test) or you break the limb.

 

[wbcreighton]

What about the classic cinematic struggle for the knife/dagger as it slowly inches towards the heroes neck ? How would you fit that into the rules ?

[icebrand]

No clue! Any ideas?

It's probably an STR vs STR roll though

[Nightshade]

You don't seem to address the issue of how easy it is to start a grapple in the first place; given that once you start one, just as with the current rules, a person without a decent grappling/unarmed skill is going to be in a seriously problematic situation, that's a rather important issue unless you want the ideal tactic against most opponents is to grapple them.

[icebrand]

And why would it be actually hard to start a grapple?

[Nightshade]

And why would it be actually hard to start a grapple?

I'll turn that around; if its that easy and that good, why didn't grappling supplant everything else in environments where single combat was common?

The answer I'd give is that its a pretty unsafe thing to try to do to an armed man, and only done in desperation. But if you don't like that, really think about whether you want, generically, grappling to be the winning way to deal with any other human sized opponent that isn't similarly trained, no matter what else he is trained in or equipped with.

[icebrand]

I'll turn that around; if its that easy and that good, why didn't grappling supplant everything else in environments where single combat was common?

The answer I'd give is that its a pretty unsafe thing to try to do to an armed man, and only done in desperation. But if you don't like that, really think about whether you want, generically, grappling to be the winning way to deal with any other human sized opponent that isn't similarly trained, no matter what else he is trained in or equipped with.

Grappling DOES supplant everything else in environment where single combat is common.

Just check the european fighting style manuals, they are full of grappling techniques. 1-on1 duels with plate armors are won by grappling!

In classic times grappling was a vital part of training, and those were people trained to fight in formations, where grappling is useless.

In my experience, someone who knows how to grapple will beat another martial artist that does striking pretty much all the time. I've seen bjj blue belts mop the floor with people that been doing karate or kickboxing for 10+ years.

Thing with weapons is reach, and get to your opponent. If you are unarmed and your opponent has a weapon, you are SOL 99/100 times; if both have weapons, grappling is VERY viable (just watch some dog brothers fights on youtube, they almost always end up grappling!)

[Nightshade]

Thing with weapons is reach, and get to your opponent. If you are unarmed and your opponent has a weapon, you are SOL 99/100 times; if both have weapons, grappling is VERY viable (just watch some dog brothers fights on youtube, they almost always end up grappling!)

Except its not just an issue of reach, as I can attest from the time when I used to do martial arts and some martial weapons work, or the judoka I was sometimes up against would have won every time (most of the weapons I was using weren't particularly long, such as the bo). Even if your premise is that reach is the issue, unless you have particularly robust rules for that benefit, the result is still going to be that if you know how to grapple, that's what you'll always do, and I don't think that's what the sources you're quoting indicate happens.

If that is your belief as to the situation, I guess we don't have anything further to talk about.