We have just posted a short article on using Martial Arts in Traveller on Planet Mongoose. You can find it here;
http://blog.mongoosepublishing.co.uk/
http://blog.mongoosepublishing.co.uk/
Martial Arts in Traveller - Planet Mongoose
- Thread starter MongooseMatt
- Start date
Thanks.
First thing I added to MgT was support for better melee, especially as related to unarmed and armed martial arts
I used technique checks instead of adding more specialty skills - effective combat martial arts does not rely on a single style for a technique and each action usually is intended to achieve several aims.
First thing I added to MgT was support for better melee, especially as related to unarmed and armed martial arts
I used technique checks instead of adding more specialty skills - effective combat martial arts does not rely on a single style for a technique and each action usually is intended to achieve several aims.
Not often I criticise, Matthew, but this may be one area best avoided - for example, my martial art I did, up till injury caused problems, was a hard jujitsu style where we would have been classed as "Defensive", "Grappling" and possibly "Soft" (from the way you described it as being throws), in that we used to block and grab the incoming attack, use a "weakener" (ie counterattack) to get their centre of balance the way we wanted it for the throw or lock we wanted to apply - all in the space of a second or two. And yes, the "weakeners" were, unless aimed at a sensitive area, delivered in strength. I guess, what I'm trying to say here, is that maybe only a few martial arts can be pigeonholed in such a way... most have crossover of skills.
In my experience, martial arts is one of those areas best left alone and kept generic - especially since some, like Karate, have significant crossover of training at higher levels (a few offensive styles teach locks and throws at the higher levels, for example) - since I've seen extensive arguments between practitioners of even similar styles (and occasionally the same style), let alone disparate styles. Every martial artist is encouraged to think that their style is the best (with a few notable exceptions), if only by the fact that they stuck with it (the implication there being that it fitted with their mental or physical outlook). Trying to determine the "best" martial art is much like trying to argue which football team or player is best... it's never going to be settled completely...
The last issue is normally of author exposure to the various styles - those they are exposed to (and since there's more styles than flavours of ice cream, probably only a small proportion) tend to get played up while those they're not so familiar with are often glossed over and I've seen some REALLY biased martial arts rules in the past. In fairness to Mr Ross, though, he's done a fair attempt at being neutral... although his comments about grappling are wide of the mark... strength? Been watching WWF again? Most grapplers use agility, speed and hyperextension of joints to control their opponents - strength is only used when the rest fails... the whole point of grappling styles, including the sumo family tree (sumo, jujitsu, judo and aikido) is that you use the opponent's strength and aggression against them... although, even here, some jujitsu styles now train with them already holding the wrist or gi of their opponent and not practicing grabbing like we did... so even there, there's a level of difficulty in pigeonholing the art...
And a common mistake is confusing martial arts with their sports derivitives (eg jujitsu and judo) where the nastier techniques are taken out (mainly to prevent instinct or temptation) and some degree of safety is put in (I've seen some jujitsuka nearly pass out in groundwork). The most common one is Sumo where it was originally a martial art (and is, I've been informed, still practiced as such) but has also become a sport.
And nobody is unbiased in these arguments, no matter how hard they try.
Edit: BP's approach agrees with the one I prefer, I think - basically allowing martial arts to just be a more advanced form of melee and allow the player to describe what they're doing, rather than pigeonholing them... but rather letting them describe how they fight.
I'd just add technique bonuses (eg making it harder to hit you if your opponent has feet flashing past his head every few seconds (eg Capoeira or Tae Kwon Do) or if he's got his face planted in the decking at the other end of a wrist and arm lock (Aikido or Jijutsu, as well as some Kung Fu and Karate styles) but without going into too much depth (ie they don't need to try to describe HOW they're going to lock him up, for example).
This may be one best left up for each group to argue out amongst themselves.
In my experience, martial arts is one of those areas best left alone and kept generic - especially since some, like Karate, have significant crossover of training at higher levels (a few offensive styles teach locks and throws at the higher levels, for example) - since I've seen extensive arguments between practitioners of even similar styles (and occasionally the same style), let alone disparate styles. Every martial artist is encouraged to think that their style is the best (with a few notable exceptions), if only by the fact that they stuck with it (the implication there being that it fitted with their mental or physical outlook). Trying to determine the "best" martial art is much like trying to argue which football team or player is best... it's never going to be settled completely...
The last issue is normally of author exposure to the various styles - those they are exposed to (and since there's more styles than flavours of ice cream, probably only a small proportion) tend to get played up while those they're not so familiar with are often glossed over and I've seen some REALLY biased martial arts rules in the past. In fairness to Mr Ross, though, he's done a fair attempt at being neutral... although his comments about grappling are wide of the mark... strength? Been watching WWF again? Most grapplers use agility, speed and hyperextension of joints to control their opponents - strength is only used when the rest fails... the whole point of grappling styles, including the sumo family tree (sumo, jujitsu, judo and aikido) is that you use the opponent's strength and aggression against them... although, even here, some jujitsu styles now train with them already holding the wrist or gi of their opponent and not practicing grabbing like we did... so even there, there's a level of difficulty in pigeonholing the art...
And a common mistake is confusing martial arts with their sports derivitives (eg jujitsu and judo) where the nastier techniques are taken out (mainly to prevent instinct or temptation) and some degree of safety is put in (I've seen some jujitsuka nearly pass out in groundwork). The most common one is Sumo where it was originally a martial art (and is, I've been informed, still practiced as such) but has also become a sport.
And nobody is unbiased in these arguments, no matter how hard they try.
Edit: BP's approach agrees with the one I prefer, I think - basically allowing martial arts to just be a more advanced form of melee and allow the player to describe what they're doing, rather than pigeonholing them... but rather letting them describe how they fight.
I'd just add technique bonuses (eg making it harder to hit you if your opponent has feet flashing past his head every few seconds (eg Capoeira or Tae Kwon Do) or if he's got his face planted in the decking at the other end of a wrist and arm lock (Aikido or Jijutsu, as well as some Kung Fu and Karate styles) but without going into too much depth (ie they don't need to try to describe HOW they're going to lock him up, for example).
This may be one best left up for each group to argue out amongst themselves.
It would be more elegant to drop the word 'style' from each specialty. Not referring to actual martial arts, as definitively as is done in that writeup, would be less contentious (and more accurate).
Probably should mention: default cascade Melee(any)-0 does not support; no advantage to higher skill levels (though normal DMs still apply); no advantage from personal computer running expert program (same as athletics, social skills, etc.).
While it might intuitively seem unbalancing, allowing more than one style to be applied per round, with skill level DM at lowest skill, probably isn't. Thus skill costs 'balance' against the uber marital artist character. Actually a better balance than the 'credit' cost for all the DMs one can attach to a gun or gain from cybernetics. I don't use the combat rules anymore, but I didn't see any blatant contradictions if combining the styles?
Probably should mention: default cascade Melee(any)-0 does not support; no advantage to higher skill levels (though normal DMs still apply); no advantage from personal computer running expert program (same as athletics, social skills, etc.).
While it might intuitively seem unbalancing, allowing more than one style to be applied per round, with skill level DM at lowest skill, probably isn't. Thus skill costs 'balance' against the uber marital artist character. Actually a better balance than the 'credit' cost for all the DMs one can attach to a gun or gain from cybernetics. I don't use the combat rules anymore, but I didn't see any blatant contradictions if combining the styles?
Rikki Tikki Traveller
Cosmic Mongoose
BP said:
This would probably work as long as you remember to apply the negative DM for multiple actions in a single round. Of course, if you have higher skill levels, that may not be necessary. 6 seconds is a LONG time in martial arts.
6 seconds is a long time when firing most guns too 
Many martial art moves achieve several objectives in a given technique. As long as melee doesn't do much for stopping bullets - I don't think it will 'unbalance' the game. It should allow for unbalancing a fight - that is the whole point. (And a cost of several dedicated skills a good trade off, perhaps.)
@apoc527 I don't use 'combat rules' anymore. By this I mean no turns, action timing, initiative and such. We roleplay combat using a variant of the task mechanic. I use a stat for health and separate tracking of injuries (and armour damage) and lots of standard (and adhoc) DMs. I'm also using 3d6 and different gear stats - so its more than just replacing RAW. We've only used it a handful of times - fun, but not comprehensive or documented good enough to share.
Early on, toyed with lots of house mods and timing approaches. Ended up with a more complex set of rules and things to be remembered - which did support roleplay options more, but at the cost of detracting from actual play. Before even fully playtesting them, I realized I had built a multi-deck battleship aircraft carrier when I really wanted a jet ski.
IIRC, first 'mod' to the RAW was to support Melee by coming up with SA 'techniques' and using opposed rolls for all melee. The techniques applied DMs in complicated ways. For instance, successful nerve blocks would also impart -DM to Str/Dex DMs of opponent for next round, or entire combat if exceptional. Nerve strike would work for next on marginal, entire combat on normal, and result in a knockout on exceptional. (Failures would leave one more vulnerable - more DMs.) Locks would require opponent to counter, freeze, or chose injury. Knee fighting would provide positive DMs, except to dodges and motion. Throws and takedowns benefited from opponent's Str. Higher level skill allowed 'single strike to kill' option (quite difficult, so the skill level didn't increase odds so much). Street and other fighting options included sacrificial disarm, headbutting (a risky business), biting, sternum knock, feints, etc. I had about 5 pages of options at that point.
Then, I tied timing changes and action mechanic changes into it, and then, tried to add hit locations and more detailed damage. Players got a kick out of the options (pun intended) - but the simulation level of complexity soon became too much for them or me to master and was distracting from roleplay and still didn't feel right. Don't know if I still have any of those printouts - I overwrote the same document as things 'evolved'.
Many martial art moves achieve several objectives in a given technique. As long as melee doesn't do much for stopping bullets - I don't think it will 'unbalance' the game. It should allow for unbalancing a fight - that is the whole point. (And a cost of several dedicated skills a good trade off, perhaps.)
@apoc527 I don't use 'combat rules' anymore. By this I mean no turns, action timing, initiative and such. We roleplay combat using a variant of the task mechanic. I use a stat for health and separate tracking of injuries (and armour damage) and lots of standard (and adhoc) DMs. I'm also using 3d6 and different gear stats - so its more than just replacing RAW. We've only used it a handful of times - fun, but not comprehensive or documented good enough to share.
Early on, toyed with lots of house mods and timing approaches. Ended up with a more complex set of rules and things to be remembered - which did support roleplay options more, but at the cost of detracting from actual play. Before even fully playtesting them, I realized I had built a multi-deck battleship aircraft carrier when I really wanted a jet ski.
IIRC, first 'mod' to the RAW was to support Melee by coming up with SA 'techniques' and using opposed rolls for all melee. The techniques applied DMs in complicated ways. For instance, successful nerve blocks would also impart -DM to Str/Dex DMs of opponent for next round, or entire combat if exceptional. Nerve strike would work for next on marginal, entire combat on normal, and result in a knockout on exceptional. (Failures would leave one more vulnerable - more DMs.) Locks would require opponent to counter, freeze, or chose injury. Knee fighting would provide positive DMs, except to dodges and motion. Throws and takedowns benefited from opponent's Str. Higher level skill allowed 'single strike to kill' option (quite difficult, so the skill level didn't increase odds so much). Street and other fighting options included sacrificial disarm, headbutting (a risky business), biting, sternum knock, feints, etc. I had about 5 pages of options at that point.
Then, I tied timing changes and action mechanic changes into it, and then, tried to add hit locations and more detailed damage. Players got a kick out of the options (pun intended) - but the simulation level of complexity soon became too much for them or me to master and was distracting from roleplay and still didn't feel right. Don't know if I still have any of those printouts - I overwrote the same document as things 'evolved'.
