Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Bedrockgames" data-source="post: 8235596" data-attributes="member: 85555">I think these martial arts forays are pretty pointless. But I think it is worth pointing out this isn't a comprehensive list and many on that list have stellar striking skills too (when I think Chuck Liddell the first thing I think of is his striking power----he was a knock out artist). If anything these lists are arguments in favor of blending styles and adapting to the needs of specific sport you are playing (MMA has involved and both grapplers and strikers have had to evolve their training away from the roots and adapt them to the MMA). I have some experience with MMA (more with striking). I can't just take my boxing whole cloth into an MMA fight (and to be clear because it is the internet, I am not nor have I been a fighter, but I have sparred plenty in MMA and I used to compete in other styles). That boxing must be adapted for the specifics of MMA. Same for if you take boxing into Muay Thai, or muay thai into boxing (I've switched between those and the change is always a bit jarring). I agree with you fundamentals are important. But we can also probably agree there were a lot of flawed fundamentals that didn't pan out very well in MMA in those early days. But a sport like MMA is pretty objective, you either win or lose the match. People can see what works and what doesn't. They can debate and theorize but at the end of the day this is a sport that has winners and losers. In RPGs, you can take a 'what works at the table approach' (which I do, and I always elevate that over theory), but it is a much more subjective experience as we see in these threads. With martial arts, especially combat sports, there is only so much room for me and you to disagree. At a certain point it has to be acknowledged that a particular fighter knocked out another or didn't win, etc. But in gaming we are not asking &quot;who won&quot; but &quot;who had fun&quot;</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Bedrockgames, post: 8235596, member: 85555"] I think these martial arts forays are pretty pointless. But I think it is worth pointing out this isn't a comprehensive list and many on that list have stellar striking skills too (when I think Chuck Liddell the first thing I think of is his striking power----he was a knock out artist). If anything these lists are arguments in favor of blending styles and adapting to the needs of specific sport you are playing (MMA has involved and both grapplers and strikers have had to evolve their training away from the roots and adapt them to the MMA). I have some experience with MMA (more with striking). I can't just take my boxing whole cloth into an MMA fight (and to be clear because it is the internet, I am not nor have I been a fighter, but I have sparred plenty in MMA and I used to compete in other styles). That boxing must be adapted for the specifics of MMA. Same for if you take boxing into Muay Thai, or muay thai into boxing (I've switched between those and the change is always a bit jarring). I agree with you fundamentals are important. But we can also probably agree there were a lot of flawed fundamentals that didn't pan out very well in MMA in those early days. But a sport like MMA is pretty objective, you either win or lose the match. People can see what works and what doesn't. They can debate and theorize but at the end of the day this is a sport that has winners and losers. In RPGs, you can take a 'what works at the table approach' (which I do, and I always elevate that over theory), but it is a much more subjective experience as we see in these threads. With martial arts, especially combat sports, there is only so much room for me and you to disagree. At a certain point it has to be acknowledged that a particular fighter knocked out another or didn't win, etc. But in gaming we are not asking "who won" but "who had fun" [/QUOTE]

Verification