Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: David Buehrer <dbuehrer@******.CARL.ORG>
Subject: Martial Arts Idea
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 11:10:36 -0600
I'm looking for some feedback on an idea for martial arts specialization.

I'm taking martial arts and have learned that there are several
different basic techniques for harming someone: using speed (a quick
snap), using strength (comes into play on most strikes), and using body
weight (a reverse punch).

Under the current rules the base damage for a strike is StrM(Stun).

I was thinking of changing this based on the martial art/unarmed combat
style.

For a quick style the damage base might be (Str+Qui/2)M(Stun) or
QuiM(Stun).

A style which teaches you to apply your body weight might have a damage
base of (Str+Bod/2)M(Stun) or BodM(Stun).

Comments?

-David
--
"Earn what you have been given."
--
email: dbuehrer@******.carl.org
http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/1068/homepage.htm
Message no. 2
From: Sean McCrohan <mccrohan@*****.OIT.GATECH.EDU>
Subject: Re: Martial Arts Idea
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 13:50:00 -0400
Quoting David Buehrer (dbuehrer@******.CARL.ORG):
> I'm taking martial arts and have learned that there are several
> different basic techniques for harming someone: using speed (a quick
> snap), using strength (comes into play on most strikes), and using body
> weight (a reverse punch).
>
> Under the current rules the base damage for a strike is StrM(Stun).
<SNIP>
> For a quick style the damage base might be (Str+Qui/2)M(Stun) or
> QuiM(Stun).
>
> A style which teaches you to apply your body weight might have a damage
> base of (Str+Bod/2)M(Stun) or BodM(Stun).

Hmm. Okay, the problem I see here is that a quick strike, like a
jab, isn't really intended to do heavy damage. I can't imagine any case where
a jab would do more damage than a reverse punch, but under the rules you
suggest, someone with average strength and high quickness would get that
effect. In my experience, a jab is used to set up your opponent for a followup
strike, or just to keep them busy so they don't hit YOU.
I also interpret the reverse punch slightly differently. I wouldn't
consider it a use of body weight so much as pulling in muscles other than
those in your arms. (For those who don't know, a reverse punch is one thrown
with the trailing hand, and involves twisting your hips and putting whole-body
motion into the punch.) I think its extra strength is more a result of using
the muscles in your torso and legs in addition to your arms than it is from
using your body weight (which is settling downward, typically, not flying
forward).
Body and Quickness certainly play large roles in unarmed combat, but
I don't think I'd go with the variant punch damages you've suggested. On
the other hand, Body might well factor into damage in a wrestling situation,
where body weight and solidity are very real concerns.
I said it a while back, but given the fairly abstract nature of the
SR combat system, I don't think it would pay to make the unarmed system any
more complicated than perhaps specializations in broad categories of
techniques (like Hand Strikes, Kicks, and Grappling, for instance). For
those three categories, I might give hand strikes (punches, palm-heels,
elbows, knife-hand, ridge-hand, etc) extra Power (maybe +2?), kicks +1
reach (a kick has about the same range as many of the Reach 1 weapons),
and grappling the ability to do continuous (and increasing) damage if the
attacker can set and maintain a hold or choke.
Sure, you could get a lot more detailed than that, but I'm not sure
it'd be in keeping with the way the SR combat system is designed.

--Sean
--
Sean McCrohan (mccrohan@**.gatech.edu) | "He uses his folly as a stalking
Grad Student, Human-Computer Interaction | horse, and under the presentation
Georgia Institute of Technology | of that he shoots his wit."
http://www.lcc.gatech.edu/~smccrohan | _As You Like It_, Act 5 Sc 4
Message no. 3
From: Adam Getchell <acgetchell@*******.EDU>
Subject: Re: Martial Arts Idea
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 13:10:23 -0700
>I'm looking for some feedback on an idea for martial arts specialization.
>
>I'm taking martial arts and have learned that there are several
>different basic techniques for harming someone: using speed (a quick
>snap), using strength (comes into play on most strikes), and using body
>weight (a reverse punch).

I guess the problem I see with this is that *all* strikes should use all
the above, plus timing, focus, and esoteric things such as chi if you
believe in it. Well, except strength. To my mind "dynamic strength" (ie
kinetic energy) is more important than pressure (force/area), and I could
go off a bit into physics to elaborate. But suffice to say you get kinetic
energy from velocity, which is gained by extending in a relaxed, snappy
manner with explosive focus at the end of the strike. Merely applying
strength gets pressure, that's all. (Useful for push kicks if you want to
set up a combo, but not damaging by itself.)

Bread and butter boxing punch: the jab. Quick snappy punch. Jack Dempsey
nicknamed his "the jolt" and he used body weight and timing as well. It is
quite a bit heavier than a classic jab, and it's not any slower.

The equivalent to boxing's jab in Taekwondo is the lead leg roundhouse
kick, thrown with very little windup and mostly intended to draw out an
opponent or set up a combination. When someone first learns roundhouse, the
rear leg roundhouse is inevitable the power kick, and the front leg kick
less strong. As they get better the gap in power decreases dramatically. My
instructor's lead leg roundhouse is as strong as anyone's rear leg
roundhouse.

>Comments?

Keep plugging away, I think that somehow there must be some way to more
satisfactorily simulate martial arts.

>-David

--Adam

acgetchell@*******.edu
"Invincibility is in oneself, vulnerability in the opponent." --Sun Tzu
Message no. 4
From: Erik Jameson <erikj@****.COM>
Subject: Re: Martial Arts Idea
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 16:55:09 -0400
At 01:10 PM 10/19/98 -0700, you wrote:

>I guess the problem I see with this is that *all* strikes should use all
>the above, plus timing, focus, and esoteric things such as chi if you
>believe in it. Well, except strength. To my mind "dynamic strength" (ie
>kinetic energy) is more important than pressure (force/area), and I could
>go off a bit into physics to elaborate. But suffice to say you get kinetic
>energy from velocity, which is gained by extending in a relaxed, snappy
>manner with explosive focus at the end of the strike. Merely applying
>strength gets pressure, that's all. (Useful for push kicks if you want to
>set up a combo, but not damaging by itself.)

Careful Adam. This gets back to my other recent post; it's all about the
application of said force. A quick snappy strike might not carry with it
any more power than a brisk slap. If used properly by someone with solid
strength, the same quick snappy strike could KO someone.

That said, *trying* to be powerful tends to result in the pushing that you
describe and it's a tough lesson to learn, but an important one, to relax
in the ring and not to be tense, to flow and snap. It's nigh unto
impossible to deliver a quick and powerful punch if you're tensed up.

>Bread and butter boxing punch: the jab. Quick snappy punch. Jack Dempsey
>nicknamed his "the jolt" and he used body weight and timing as well. It is
>quite a bit heavier than a classic jab, and it's not any slower.

Different sort of jab, though much the same. The classic jab is pretty
much all arm; you just sort of "pop" the fist out there to gauge range, set
up combinations and to keep an opponent at bay.

The Dempsey type jab you describe does have more power as it also includes
some of the body motions more common to the classic overhand or cross. A
slight turn of the shoulders and a slight drive with the thighs/pelvis.
Does have more power, is only fractionally slower, but it does telegraph
the punch because of the extra motion (especially in the shoulders). Which
is why it's not seen that often; you need to be very quick (or have a slow
opponent) to pull it off.

A powerful jab is almost the holy grail in boxing. Almost anyone can have
a solid cross or uppercut, but to have the timing, the skill and the raw
strength to have a punishing jab is rare. Roy Jones Jr. has it, that's why
he's so punishing. The same punch most others use to gauge range, set up
combo's and keep opponents away, he can use as an offense in and of itself.

I'd imagine the same sort of thing would hold true in other martial arts.

How might this all be resolved in Shadowrun mechanics? I don't know. Then
again, I'm not too disatisfied with the current mechanics; leave the finer
points such as above to discussion and to role-play.

Erik J.


http://www.fortunecity.com/rivendell/dungeon/480/index.html
The Reality Check for a Fictional World
Message no. 5
From: Adam Getchell <acgetchell@*******.EDU>
Subject: Re: Martial Arts Idea
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 16:20:39 -0700
>At 01:10 PM 10/19/98 -0700, you wrote:
>>go off a bit into physics to elaborate. But suffice to say you get kinetic
>>energy from velocity, which is gained by extending in a relaxed, snappy
>>manner with explosive focus at the end of the strike. Merely applying
>>strength gets pressure, that's all. (Useful for push kicks if you want to
>>set up a combo, but not damaging by itself.)
>
>Careful Adam. This gets back to my other recent post; it's all about the
>application of said force. A quick snappy strike might not carry with it
>any more power than a brisk slap. If used properly by someone with solid
>strength, the same quick snappy strike could KO someone.

I was very careful. ;-) I did say "with explosive focus". It is that part
of the training which delivers most of the force. I can be more precise and
say "explosive focus" meaning short-power acceleration through contact zone.

"Short" because it is biomechanically impossible to sustain high
acceleration through a large range of motion.

"Contact zone" referring to the target area in which you wish to deposit
kinetic energy and/or change in momentum.

A slap *sometimes* lacks these elements, even though it is speedy. The slap
I teach in self-defense classes is actually a fairly stunning blow, applied
as a shock to a sensitive surface, even with little follow-through.

Developing short power is an exercise in training and skill ... Bruce Lee's
1-inch punch ...

>A powerful jab is almost the holy grail in boxing. Almost anyone can have
>a solid cross or uppercut, but to have the timing, the skill and the raw
>strength to have a punishing jab is rare. Roy Jones Jr. has it, that's why
>he's so punishing. The same punch most others use to gauge range, set up
>combo's and keep opponents away, he can use as an offense in and of itself.

BTW, a well-executed straight up the centerline jab has a very good chance
of KO due to rotating the skull backwards and compressing the medula
oblongata. A hook punch accomplishes much the same through rotation of the
head.

>I'd imagine the same sort of thing would hold true in other martial arts.

It does, in spades. It is for this reason that most Korean TKD players
wouldn't even think of serving up a KO kick (spin hook, high roundhouse,
axe) until there were 3 or 4 initial kicks. Even so, Herb Perez, for
example, went to the Olympics mainly on the strength (so to speak ;-) of
his roundhouse.

>Erik J
--Adam

acgetchell@*******.edu
"Invincibility is in oneself, vulnerability in the opponent." --Sun Tzu
Message no. 6
From: Erik Jameson <erikj@****.COM>
Subject: Re: Martial Arts Idea
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 20:13:19 -0400
At 04:20 PM 10/19/98 -0700, you wrote:

>Developing short power is an exercise in training and skill ... Bruce Lee's
>1-inch punch ...

Which is easily the most awesome strike ever developed. The ultimate
expression of a precise application of force.

Massive application of technique with this strike, but Bruce wouldn't have
been able to do it if he hadn't been such an obsessive weightlifter;
seemingly, when he wasn't performing/perfecting his art, he was lifting.

Again, my basic contention is that with all of Bruce's technique, if he had
been a wimpy girly-man with no muscles, that one-inch punch would have been
nowhere near as effective or impressive.

>BTW, a well-executed straight up the centerline jab has a very good chance
>of KO due to rotating the skull backwards and compressing the medula
>oblongata. A hook punch accomplishes much the same through rotation of the
>head.

Ummmmm...I'd beg to differ, if only in terminology. There really isn't
enough power behind any jab to KO anyone but a glass-jawed opponent. Now a
nice overhand or a cross, now those punches have some power behind them and
in that case, you are right.

>It does, in spades. It is for this reason that most Korean TKD players
>wouldn't even think of serving up a KO kick (spin hook, high roundhouse,
>axe) until there were 3 or 4 initial kicks. Even so, Herb Perez, for
>example, went to the Olympics mainly on the strength (so to speak ;-) of
>his roundhouse.

Don't know the guy, but he sounds like a one-trick pony. If that one-trick
is phenomenal, it can take that pony places, but eventually, it'll wear
thin. True regardless of sport or whatever. Specialists can be
impressive, but I'm not convinced they have long term prospects in sport,
the workplace or possibly even in "life" depending on which one-trick they
rely upon.

Anyway...my time with this e-mail address is rapidly drawing to a close;
I'll have to send my unsubscribe message tomorrow morning, so I'm afraid
this discussion will either have to cease or to go private to my home addy.

Later!

Erik J.


http://www.fortunecity.com/rivendell/dungeon/480/index.html
The Reality Check for a Fictional World
Message no. 7
From: Lehlan Decker <DeckerL@******.COM>
Subject: Re: Martial Arts Idea
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 08:56:42 -0400
>For a quick style the damage base might be (Str+Qui/2)M(Stun)
>or QuiM(Stun).

>A style which teaches you to apply your body weight might have
>a damage base of (Str+Bod/2)M(Stun) or BodM(Stun).

Not a bad idea but....take for example aikido. In your system,
I would think this would be a body style. However since the
style emphasizes throws, jointlocks, as well as strikes, I would
say the attacker's body rating as little to do with the size. I might
even venture you would use the attackers strength rating
(Attacker Str)M(Stun). I'm not as familiar with other styles,
and I'm far from an expert with aikido, so this is of course IMHO.
And of course with only three categories, and the fact that
martial art styles tend to overlap in certain areas, I can forsee
heated debate.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lehlan Decker, Unix Admin (704)331-1149
deckerl@******.com Fax 378-1939
Moore & Van Allen, PLLC Pager 1-888-608-9633
Message no. 8
From: David Buehrer <dbuehrer@******.CARL.ORG>
Subject: Re: Martial Arts Idea
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 10:10:56 -0600
For the mere cost of a Thaum, Adam Getchell wrote:
/
/ >Comments?
/
/ Keep plugging away, I think that somehow there must be some way to more
/ satisfactorily simulate martial arts.

The problem is that SR's system is so abstract. Adding specifics mucks
it up :-\

That doesn't mean I won't keep trying tho ;)

-David
--
"Earn what you have been given."
--
email: dbuehrer@******.carl.org
http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/1068/homepage.htm

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Martial Arts Idea, you may also be interested in:

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.

Thwap!