Gareth Martin:
> I've been trying to convert L5R to HW with some success, I think, although
> it has yet to see anything resembling a playtest.
I'd be interested in "comparing notes" -- offline, if it's not of general interest.
> I'll concede that martial arts is
> challenging, but essentially I would argue that you treat it as a
> magical ability - it has a high order and sub order which give it
> greater detail. "broad ability" I here you cry
Actually, no: my preferred solution is to treat martials arts as a _set_ of abilities; the obvious comparison being the existing mysticism rules (or indeed the hsunchenism rules...), but with a somewhat different "gloss" as to what the different "disciplines" mean. (I think most Gloranthan martial arts are, if not "genuine" mystical practices, then see in that light by practioners and their cultures.) And I I mentioned before, perhaps even different numbers of "disciplines", more useful in their own right, less directly focused on immediate personal liberation, often.
> However, there is a lot of stuff you can do without even going that
> far. Give them abilities like "one life, one arrow" or "breathing to
> the belly", with some fluff text, and all the "detail" will be
> provided by the player in their description of action. If they
> need/want to augment CC with "martial shout", they will soon get to
> grips with the conceptual, dramatic and descriptive quirks of martial
> arts.
Any system of martial arts based around Generic Close Combat and a handful of augments is, I feel, doomed to tediousity. (Which isn't to say the background colour can't be made suitably exciting, just that the system will end up doing nothing to _help_.)
David Cake:
> A martial arts style in HW should be thought of as more like
> a Combat Affinity (with accompanying feat like bits and pieces) than
> just a 1HP combat style.
i.e., a lot like a Broad Ability, really. ;-)
Personally, I dislike this, as it seems to proceed from the basis that if martial arts aren't a form of theism, then they bleedin' well ought to be. Strikes me as a failure of imagination, and to give up on the idea of a narratively different approached to martial arts before we even start. I see the temptation, in that theism is clearly the most "successfully described" of any of the magical methods, but I feel the need to try and resist it. (I've heard much the same said about animism, btw, at least with the Bad Old Rules.)
> Its very common for martial artists to add a new weapon
> technique in a few weeks of practice. Thats pretty much what I think
> the new weapon style is modelling. And its good that it can do so.
> And much better than game systems where your black belt martial
> artist always starts weapon techniques at base levels (RQ3, for
> example).
This is getting back into the debate I said I'd stay out of (and am already failing to), but a more pressing question is, how transferable is your "black belt" in Centipede Style martial arts to charging on a Pentan warhorse with a couched spear? Or to Fonritan-style wrestling? Or fighting in close order in a Daxdarian phalanx?
Unless you can make the case that all of the above are best described as 1HP "styles" within a single, "narrow" ability, then I'm not buying it. I'm not arguing that there be _no_ transference at all, even in such extreme cases -- after all, we have the perfect mechanic for that: improvisation modifiers. (In this case, flat rate seems to me to work just fine.) Essentially total transference, at a frankly trivial cost, however, I find problematic.
OK, now I really am gonna belt up on BA's... One day at a time, at least. ;-)
Slán,
Alex.
Powered by hypermail