Author Topic: quick question  (Read 1752 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline rgmadd7

  • Neophyte
  • *
  • Posts: 35
  • OIC Points +0/-0
quick question
« on: May 09, 2014, 07:27:16 PM »
Anyone ever two weapon combo a melee weapon and an unarmed strike? If so how did you handle it?  I was thinking along the lines of, swing yer sword and then punch'em in the face.
"You know what ol' Jack Burton says at a time like this?"

Offline markc

  • Elder Loremaster
  • ****
  • Posts: 10,697
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: quick question
« Reply #1 on: May 09, 2014, 07:36:30 PM »
In the Martial Arts Companion there are rules for that, but it you do not have that book then you would develop it just like two weapon combat. 
MDC
Bacon Law: A book so good all PC's need to be recreated.
Rule #0: A GM has the right to change any rule in a book to fit their game.
Role Play not Roll Play.
Use a System to tell the story do not let the system play you.

Offline rgmadd7

  • Neophyte
  • *
  • Posts: 35
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: quick question
« Reply #2 on: May 09, 2014, 07:58:05 PM »
Kinda what I figured. 2WC:broad sword and martial arts striking. Do you think I'll need to develop new 2WC for different degrees of martial arts strking?
"You know what ol' Jack Burton says at a time like this?"

Offline rgmadd7

  • Neophyte
  • *
  • Posts: 35
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: quick question
« Reply #3 on: May 09, 2014, 08:00:02 PM »
A friend of mine that moved away had MAC it was a really cool book. Unfortunately it's one of the few I don't own.
"You know what ol' Jack Burton says at a time like this?"

Offline markc

  • Elder Loremaster
  • ****
  • Posts: 10,697
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: quick question
« Reply #4 on: May 09, 2014, 08:14:22 PM »
Yes the MAC is a great book and I have used it for so long I forget if you need to develop 2WC for each degree of MA Strikes or sweeps. I am going to guess that by the rules the answer would be yes.
 But as a GM in my game I would rule no that you do not just from the pure DP aspect of the 2WC and the MA Strikes.


MDC
Bacon Law: A book so good all PC's need to be recreated.
Rule #0: A GM has the right to change any rule in a book to fit their game.
Role Play not Roll Play.
Use a System to tell the story do not let the system play you.

Offline Cory Magel

  • Loremaster
  • ****
  • Posts: 5,632
  • OIC Points +5/-5
  • Fun > Balance > Realism
Re: quick question
« Reply #5 on: May 10, 2014, 01:22:07 PM »
I love the MAC.  I think it's one of the best books released for RMSS/RMFRP.  Oddly we don't use it directly as presented a lot, but it inspired a LOT of new stuff for me/us.  However, if you don't want to do a bunch of design work yourself it is an excellent resource for adding more flavor to not just martial artists, but pure arms users in general.

You can find it used on Amazon for $18+$4 shipping, which isn't a bad deal really.

If you, or any group members, are into martial arts characters Check out the Guild Companion for a article called the "Shao-Lin Monk".  The MAC did not have Channeling semi, so I created one.  It's basically akin to a 'paladin-like' setup for a martial arts character.
- Cory Magel

Game design priority: Fun > Balance > Realism (greater than > less than).
(Channeling Companion, RMQ 1 & 2, and various Guild Companion articles author).

"The only thing I know about adults is that they are obsolete children." - Dr Seuss

Offline BeggarKing (Thomas)

  • Initiate
  • *
  • Posts: 127
  • OIC Points +40/-40
    • Wandering Monster Studios
Re: quick question
« Reply #6 on: May 11, 2014, 11:21:34 PM »
I really liked Oriental Companion, but never owned MAC either - how does it compare the original companion?
Adventurer walks into a bar with Flint and Steel. Bartender says, "Don't start anything."

Offline Frabby

  • Initiate
  • *
  • Posts: 124
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: quick question
« Reply #7 on: May 12, 2014, 07:44:40 AM »
Hm. My first impulse was to point out that, according to the rules, a character must have both hands free in order to perform a Martial Arts attack (the only rules-legal exception being the weapon kata rules) - which seems to preclude a simultaneous use of MA skill and a weapon or shield in two-weapon-combo.
Apparently this was overturned in the MAC, which I don't own.

Offline yammahoper

  • Sage
  • ****
  • Posts: 3,858
  • OIC Points +0/-0
  • Nothing to see here, move along.
Re: quick question
« Reply #8 on: May 12, 2014, 07:51:23 AM »
Hm. My first impulse was to point out that, according to the rules, a character must have both hands free in order to perform a Martial Arts attack (the only rules-legal exception being the weapon kata rules) - which seems to preclude a simultaneous use of MA skill and a weapon or shield in two-weapon-combo.
Apparently this was overturned in the MAC, which I don't own.

I think KATA is the key term here.  The attack is incorporated into the style and becomes part of the martial art. 

The MAC is a great book.
I've seen things you people wouldn't believe. Attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion. I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhauser gate. All those moments will be lost in time... like tears in rain... Time to die.

Offline jdale

  • RMU Dev Team
  • ****
  • Posts: 7,123
  • OIC Points +25/-25
Re: quick question
« Reply #9 on: May 12, 2014, 09:33:22 AM »
You could use martial arts skill plus a martial arts combat style skill that incorporates a Weapon Kata option plus Additional Strike. Or, you could a weapon combat style that incorporates Additional Unarmed Attack.

In the former case, you end up using only two skills, your MA attack skill and the MA style skill. (You don't roll against the style but the OB in the MA skill is limited by it.) The weapon kata attack is made at a penalty (-20). There are some additional requirements for the style and it will probably need to be Advanced which means for many characters it will be a Restricted skill.

In the latter case, you use three skills: your weapon skill, your weapon style skill, and your unarmed combat skill. (Again, you don't actually roll against the style skill, it just limits the other two.) It could in principle be a basic style, which means it will have the DP cost of any other combat maneuver skill.

I also like the MAC. It does have some limitations but they are things that are fundamental to RMSS. (E.g. generally speaking, it is very limiting to try to pick up a new combat style later on, just like other combat maneuvers like mounted combat or TWC.) Aside from those limitations, it is very well done.
System and Line Editor for Rolemaster

Offline tbigness

  • Navigator
  • ***
  • Posts: 1,518
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: quick question
« Reply #10 on: May 12, 2014, 10:20:25 AM »
I like the MAC but for some TWC I keep it simple. I allow a weapon with Sweeps and Throws but limit the rank to 1 unless MAC is used with weapon Kata then use as described. For Strikes I use TWC rank 1 Strikes and one handed weapons. My thoughts on this is similar to a shield bash or kick attack. Note that the Kata will fair better with higher rank MA attacks. Either way the limit with TWC is level 1 MA and Kata's based on description but do not have to develop one for each rank.
Knowledge is unimagined Power