Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

From: Hahns Shin Hahns_Shin@*******.com
Subject: CC Martial Arts
Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2000 15:33:31 -0500
Hmm... I never thought that SR could take the fun out of combat until now.
:-( As you can tell, I'm not happy with the CC Martial Arts rules. A few
years back, I made up some rules that were very similar to the CC Martial
Arts rules, almost verbatim. Among my players, I have a Tae Kwon Do black
belt who is also learning Hapkido and Tai Chi, a person who is learning
Capoeira, a high belt Judo who learned a little Aikido, etc, etc (I'm not
sure about the details). In fact, all of us have had some sort of physical
combat training, and we've taught each other some neat techniques over the
years. I had a lot of helpful input for the system, but when we playtested
it, it royally sucked. We brushed it under the carpet as a good try, and
played normal SR for a while... then the Cannon Companion comes out, and we
all had deja vu. I suppose our group has higher standards from what we
expect from a Martial Arts system because of our group composition and
expertise (then again, we all like Kung Fu/John Woo action flics, none of
which are realistic). The CC Martial Arts system might work wonders in some
groups, but until something more realistic or playable comes along (Aikido
and Jujitsu are equal, gameplay-wise???), we'll stick w/ abstracting it into
good ol' Unarmed Combat.

In fact, the only Martial Arts system that our group has ever liked is
Palladium's Ninjas and Superspies. Not for the realism, mind you, but for
the "cheesy action flic" mentality (any system in which a natural 20 can
kill automatically has a certain element of cheese). It also has a HUGE
list of Martial Arts (some of which only exist in Kung Fu movies) that all
seem to have their own "style" to them. I hope SR doesn't go this route,
but it would be interesting to see how N&S converts to SR rules.

Hahns

Disclaimer

These messages were posted a long time ago on a mailing list far, far away. The copyright to their contents probably lies with the original authors of the individual messages, but since they were published in an electronic forum that anyone could subscribe to, and the logs were available to subscribers and most likely non-subscribers as well, it's felt that re-publishing them here is a kind of public service.