How did you do that neat indented guote thing? I can't fugire it out so i am suing the email quote >.

>Good to have input from a practitioner (though I have to >note >that various schools may have differing opinions on >each others' claims...)

>I would expect some schools would teach it, and others >would >not, or not at the same stage... Is that a >>possibility? (Oh, >and as for the Okinawa origin, that may be via Hollywood... : >)
>I assume that in the new MA too, you can build your own >Ninjutsu style as you like. Just toss the above in... Same >with deleting Jump Kick and making other mods. I don't know >that there's a single Ninjutsu school MA could claim to >depict (though again, I'm no expert).

Well, yes, they probably couldn't, at least not easily. here is the thing: the only authentic Ninja school left in the world is Dr. Masaaki Hatsumi's Bujinkan. Although there were once @70 schools, they have all died out, except the ones that Dr. Hatsmui inherited leadership of.

Of course, the Bujinkkan is actually nine separate ryu put together, several being ninja ryu, and several being samurai ryu. So, yes, it is quite possible that historical ryu varied somewhat. But all the existing scrolls documenting the ninja schools are in Japan, generally in private hands, and often considered secrets. Trying to represent a specific ryu thus involves either traveling to Japan and doing some intensive research, or guessing. As far as trying to represent a "generic" Ninjutsu (as MA is trying to do), Dr. Hatsumi's school is the best basis for that, since it represents the traditions of several famous ninja ryu (the schools of Iga and Koga provinces) and the information is freely available.

>Sounds like a common RL move, as you describe it; can you >paraphrase the technique for those of us without Swash 2E?

Gladly. Actaully, I think it is in 3e. Sorry for the mistake. I highly recommnend Swashbucklers 3e, in spite of having several bones to pick with the author. If you have MA and found it of any use, you really should get SB, especially if combat with weapons is a feature of your campaign. It is invaluable for the manoeuvres alone.

Esquive (Hard) defaults to any combat skill-3

The principle of Esquive is this, when someone attacks you, you don't have to fly across the room to get out of the way, all you have to do is move a few inches. If they miss you by an inch, they still missed.

A successful Esquive roll gives a bonus to any active defence., similar to that fro retreating, but withiut giving ground. Sidestepping within your hex gives +2.

Stepping into an adjacent empty hex neither closer of further to the opponent is +3.

An actual retreat gives +4, not +3 with this manouevre.

They SAY (in SB) that you can't step closer, because this is a Slip. But that is wrong. A Slip gives you no bonus to defence, as written. This can be done as part of a Slip. We do it everyday in class. Treat it like a Slip, with a +2 Def, on a succesful esquive roll.

Here is something else about Esquive not mentioned in SB. A good, well done Esquive will put you in a position where the foe is now open to an attack, but they will have to turn to attack you. (Assuming you sidestepped, not retreated). It is a matter of body angle. We step away diagonally.

I suggest something like: for every 3 points you make on your Esquive roll, the opponent is at -1 to their next attack agiant the user of the Esquive.

>What are the names you use for the two different moves?

Well, Shuto, as mentioned, is a way of holding your hand for a strike, like a karate chop (I forget the technical name. we don;t do those.), but with fingers nest in towards the palm for a more solid striking object, and the thumb pressed against the side of the index fingre. The strike is exceuted as a cutting, scooping sort of motion.

What MA calls a Shuto could be just a plain old Boxing Uppercut, or with Taijutsu, it could have a number of names, based on how you held your fingers. I can't remember the name right now (my wife has our handbook with her at work, and all of our copies of Dr. Hatsumi's books have been loaned to a fellow student), but the three fingered stike we do in Chi no Kata, done by arcing the arm up under their guard into their solar plexus would also be an example.

>But if you have the full (3E) Judo Parry in a COSH-made >skill, that includes and improves upon a "plain" parry, >doesn't it? So unless I'm missing something, I don't see a >discount in order.

Well, yes, in COSH it might work out. Here is the thing: In vanilla, GURPS, Taijutsu would be represented by the Karate and Judo skills. But, that has us paying for a Karate Parry we don't use.

What I would try to do, in COSH, is do something like the D. Weber's Stripped down Judo, only for Karate. I would remove the Parry from Karate. The trick is that this would neccesitate allowing Aggressive Parry to default to Judo Parry. That is what I mean by "discount."

>That's a wide-ranging issue: is there "general" combat >ability above and beyond individual skills? High DX is a >sensible answer for a skilled fighter, representing >improved ability with any weapon or combat move, stemming >from his areas of focus... Or, as you say later, perhaps >there should be more extensive cross-defaults, even between >really disparate skills. (But as you may know, I don't >think the GURPS mechanics for defaults support that too >well; once level in the leading skill is high enough, it >becomes a waste to put any points into the defaulting >skills. It can make for a bit of a point crock.)

I tried making up a general combat skill. It is a bit of a pain, honestly. Yes, in GURPS the default is a bit of a problem, with some skills. (Vetinary/Animal Handling!) I don't think it is unrealitic with combat skills though. As you become really good at any one combat skill, you will be learning techniques that apply to all.

As an example, our Grandmaster, Dr. Hatsumi turned out to be a very good marksman the first time he picked up a gun, juts because his knwledge of Ninjustu gave him a very good feel for how he used his body, his balance, judgement of distance, etc.

One thing I do (using an ESCARG0 type sytem of course!) is allow defaults both ways between skills. It involves a bit of record keeping though. Anyway, ESCARGO fixes the point crock problem. Though I think ESCARGO rises a bit steeply. Hence I use Fibonnacci sequence in place of the ESCARGO one.

>Doesn't GURPS 4e already grant this, via cross-defaults >among the three? Per my comment above, it may not be an >ideal mechanic, but it is some treatment of the matter. Do >you think the cross-defaults here should be even less?

I suppose it depends on how the weapon is taught. I think weapons should be looked at like COSH tends to. If I learn to use a swung and thrust poleram using both a middle and end grip (Ninjutsu specializes in rapidly switching to an end grip to get extra range out of pole weapons), then I should be able to use staves, spears and naginatas with it equally well.

GURPS still has me learning three skills, no matter how low the defaults. If hand grip, length and balance and mthod of handling are the same or even just close enough, then there should be no penalty.

>If you consider the footwork as belonging to a style, not >an individual skill, there's nothing in 3e to address what >you say here. It's one of the vaguely unsatisfying things >about MA 3e: a style isn't really anything more than a name >attached to a bundle of component abilities. There's no >skill, or other special "hook", that creates and defines >the style itself. I'm curious as to whether 4e has >something new here.

They actaully did represent the effects of a Style once: In SB 3e, La Destreza Verdadera gets a Speed and Min ST penatly in exhange for a bonus to Feints and Counterattacks.

And yes, I think doing this more often is worth consideration. But is needs to be done with care. It opens up the opportunity to try to give one's favourite style all kinds of unwarranted bonuses. What I find as I study is that there is more in common between real combat arts than there are differences. After all, trial and error will reveal the same basic lessons about how the human body moves and bends.

>Hmm, picking up on that thought, you could also see >normally-paced, everyday mixing-and-matching of general >attacks, defenses, and other actions as "combos", if you >want to use the name, meaning normal GURPS combat does >support combos as you describe them. Would you agree?

Yes and no. A very large part of it would be remedied by just allowing variosu manoeuvres to be combined. Consider what I mentioned above. There is nothing special about doing a Slip at the same time as an Esquive. That shouldn't require a combo. There are a number of instances where using one manoeuvre at the same time as another is just common sense. Corps a Corps should be able to be done as part of a Riposte (and not as the attack, either, just as part of the Parry, like Bind(from SB 3e)). Or Pass (SB3e) + an Esquive defence, as part of a Riposte/Counterattack. Step way and parry, step in and attack.

Another part of it is making shock happen immediately, not starting next turn. If I strike my opponent's hand with my staff, he feels that now, and it seriously inhibits his ability to keep moving that sword, offensively or defensively, and allows me to keep controlling the fight.

Do those two things and you have addressed the biggest part of the matter.