New Notes from the Bunker at WotC (12/18): Cinematic Maneuvers

[Vigilance]

Nothing new here, I suspect, but Aikido can very easily be turned into a lethal art... the distance between holds and throws to breaking maneuvers is a close one, and of course, it's very close to sword fighting as well.

Indeed. The art aikido is most directly descended from, aikijustsu, is one of the most brutal, combat-efficient martial arts ever devised.

A *big* reason why it was the favored unarmed fighting style of the medieval samurai.

Chuck

 

[C. Baize]

And, of course, the maneuver can be tried by untrained characters at -4 to hit.

Nicely done, Vig.

 

[ThoughtBubble]

So, why don't we hit this up from a for dummies angle.

I'm in a situation where my player wants to do something odd. What are a simple series of logical steps for working it out?

My process would be:
1. Decide on a check to see if the manuver can be pulled off. ie: Strength check for pulling the rug up from under the villians, Jump check for a diving cross body off the top of a building.
2. Decide if an attack roll is needed. If so, decide if it's a standard attack, a touch attack, or a ranged touch attack.
3. Decide on if the target gets a save vs. an effect.

For a jumping splash off of a rooftop, I'd start with a jump check (to see if the guy can jump out far enough and to the correct distance), followed by an attack-roll (representing the opponent's attempt at dodging), followed by damage, and finally a fort save vs. stun (for having the stuffing knocked out of them) probablly on the part of both parties.

Does that work, or am I completely on crack?

 

[Vigilance]

That works for me, but one thing your post raises into question was the point of the article. Rich's point was that "all the tools are already in the game".

The Maneuver you describe, as well as the clothesline I made up above, constitute *new* rules.

I guess my point is that *new* rules are a not bad thing when needed. There seem to be many in the d20 Modern community (of which I am a part) who want to conclude that either *everything* is in it or it *sucks*.

I think a middle view is the way to go, making new rules as needed.

Chuck

 

[DMauricio]

They forgot the curb-stomp

As I said, they forgot the curb-stomp

Though I think that would rely on having the street-fighting feat (or whatever they call that dirty fighting feat nowadays)

Mind you it is effectively a coup de grace on a prone opponent.


D.

 

[ledded]

Early Christmas present for all

Clothesline (Martial Arts Maneuver)<snip>

I like it very much, thanks. Adding to the printed copy of Blood & Fists as I type (well, not *actually* as I type, because that wouldnt be poss... oh never mind you get what I mean )

I like this, because you can use this manuver for the 'trained' or experienced street fighter, or you can go with Mr Redmans suggestion for a character who has no obvious fighting experience.

 

[Plane Sailing]

That works for me, but one thing your post raises into question was the point of the article. Rich's point was that "all the tools are already in the game".

The Maneuver you describe, as well as the clothesline I made up above, constitute *new* rules.

I found that statement of Rich's a little strange too, since it seemed to me that he was inventing new rules and I'd expected him to use Tackys favourite "flavour text" route for explaining things (nods to Tacky). e.g when Biff Beefsteak says "I clothesline the guy" the DM interprets that as an AoO trip attack with a +2 circumstance bonus bonus because Biff has been descriptive in how he wants to present it.

Although I'm not familiar with the phrase "clothesline" in anything other than a tailoring sense, some of the examples above suggest that it is somewhat more debilitating than a mere trip; perhaps it is a technique that can only be attempted by someone with "Improved Trip" and the "followup attack at +4" is actually just the roll to cause damage via the clothesline?

- Just guessing at how I'd intepret an action in an "all the tools are in the game" sense, rather than a "make up new rules to cover it" sense

p.s. I love Blood & Fists too... just trying to persuade my d20Modern DM to let me use it!

Cheers

 

[takyris]

I have a route!

My interpretation of what he said was that he wasn't advocating the creation of new feats, and that these little things didn't qualify as Brand New Rules. I'm not sure that I agree with him -- some of them are as complex as the rules for grappling or disarming, which certainly makes them qualify as new rules in my book -- but I can see his point about not making a new feat for every ability (unless you're in a Martial Arts campaign and that degree of grittiness is good).

But yeah, as PS said, I'm inclined to use the rules he gave as "improved" versions of normal actions. If you want to say "I trip him" without doing anything special, and you don't have Improved Trip, then I would ask you whether you want it to be a trip attack (which doesn't do damage, but leaves him prone) or a damaging unarmed strike (which doesn't leave him prone in a game sense). If the former, I'd describe the trip as sending the guy into a splayed awkward landing that doesn't hurt -- crashing flat on his butt and rolling, for example. If the latter, I'd describe it as flooring the guy with a full-body crash to the ground, but he gets back to his knees quickly (on your turn) so that he's not considered prone in any game-related way.

 

[ledded]

Well said, Tacky.