A New Look at Martial Arts

[Gary]

Re: A New Look at Martial Arts

 

I like to think about the differences between Martial Arts and any old CSLs/Powers/Characteristics bought for similar effect. The real difference seems to be that the effects you gain from performing a Martial Maneuver cannot be stacked with any other Maneuver bonuses, because they are Maneuvers in and of themselves. For example, you cannot execute a Martial Dodge and a normal Dodge at the same time. They are two distinct maneuvers. Likewise, you cannot add the DCV bonus from Martial Dodge when you are performing a Strike or Move Through. You are either using your Martial Dodge, or you are doing something else; so the exclusivity seems to be the inherent restriction that makes Martial Arts so cheap.

 

So I would myself try to build a framework for applying specific Limitations (maybe reflecting the same kind of cost differences as those for different levels of CSLs) to Powers, Characteristics, and CSLs in order to build Martial Arts in a more consistent manner. This seems to be somewhat similar to your approach, but a little less arbitrary. The problem is that it may change prices quite a bit. It would take some prototyping and testing.

 

 

The way I priced the Adders, it was:

 

4 pts for maneuvers that added entirely new capabilities that basic characters didn't have. These maneuvers either affected an uncommon defense, or gave potentially gamebreaking powers such as Fmove.

 

2 pts for maneuvers that enhanced existing maneuvers, or had very useful effects but not gamebreaking such as Throw. V/5 was kept at 2 pts to enable Martial Throw which is a staple of many Martial Artists, but a ! would be needed, especially if you combine it with a Fmove maneuver.

 

1 pt for maneuvers that had minor or trivial effects.

 

I wanted to give a decent bonus for MA, but have each additional point provide real benefits rather than having a diminishing returns effect.

 

The CSL/Multipower approach is intriguing, but then you have silliness and potential abusiveness of placing 2 and 3 pt Levels in a Power Framework.

[prestidigitator]

Re: A New Look at Martial Arts

 

The CSL/Multipower approach is intriguing' date=' but then you have silliness and potential abusiveness of placing 2 and 3 pt Levels in a Power Framework.[/quote']

Yeah. I really wouldn't advocate a Framework. That just complicates things too much and makes me nervous. I just like the idea of building Martial Arts using standard Characteristics, Skills, and Powers, with some possibly, "custom," Limitations. It's the way Talents work now. Why not Martial Arts?

[BNakagawa]

Re: A New Look at Martial Arts

 

martial arts would work better if you just axed FMove and +V/5.

 

Just about everything else has a fixed value for a fixed amount of points. Those two...not so much.

[Markdoc]

Re: A New Look at Martial Arts

 

Yeah. I really wouldn't advocate a Framework. That just complicates things too much and makes me nervous. I just like the idea of building Martial Arts using standard Characteristics' date=' Skills, and Powers, with some possibly, "custom," Limitations. It's the way Talents work now. Why not Martial Arts?[/quote']

 

Fitz has already mentioned it, but I've been using the multipower martial arts system for years now and it addresses virtually every question/problem listed here.

 

The problem with building martial arts as talents is that it rapidly gets *very*expensive* - so no martial artist ever has more than 1-3 maneuvers, because you are buying variations of STR and HA over and over again. It's one of the problems the current martial arts rules have - just made worse, because martial arts "talents" have been made artificially cheap (leading to the "1 -3 trick pony" that started Gary on this thread).

 

Like any use of frameworks it does require a certain degree of GM oversight - no putting 10 x 2 point levels into a single slot, for example. But then, that's true of the standard rules too. The only difference between Multipower: martial arts and Multipower: shield just like Captain America's is special effect.

 

Here's the linky: http://www.geocities.com/markdoc.geo/Gaming_stuff/martialarts.html

 

cheers, Mark

[prestidigitator]

Re: A New Look at Martial Arts

 

The problem with building martial arts as talents is that it rapidly gets *very*expensive* - so no martial artist ever has more than 1-3 maneuvers' date=' because you are buying variations of STR and HA over and over again. It's one of the problems the current martial arts rules have - just made worse, because martial arts "talents" have been made artificially cheap (leading to the "1 -3 trick pony" that started Gary on this thread).[/quote']

Yeah, but I guess my question is: why artificially cheap? As I pointed out above, I believe there are restrictions to the Martial Arts maneuvers that would merit (possibly large) Limitations. That itself would serve to make them cheaper. I'm not sure if you could justify making them quite as cheap as they are now (in any case the prices very well may not be the same for each maneuver as they are now, if built using a consistent set of Characteristics, Powers, and Modifiers), but they don't necessarily have to be extremely expensive either.

[Black Rose]

Re: A New Look at Martial Arts

 

Yeah' date=' but I guess my question is: why [i']artificially[/i] cheap? As I pointed out above, I believe there are restrictions to the Martial Arts maneuvers that would merit (possibly large) Limitations. That itself would serve to make them cheaper. I'm not sure if you could justify making them quite as cheap as they are now (in any case the prices very well may not be the same for each maneuver as they are now, if built using a consistent set of Characteristics, Powers, and Modifiers), but they don't necessarily have to be extremely expensive either.

 

Well, to use a simple example, Martial Strike is a +0 OCV, +2 DCV, STR +2d6 Strike. To replicate in skill level and power terms: +2 DCV with Strike (6 pts), +2d6 HA (7 pts). Total of 13 pts, costs 4 pts as a martial maneuver. Martial Dodge is +2 DCV (10 pts), costs 4. The reason they are costed so cheaply is there is an assumption that you will be buying a number of them; at least 10 points worth, and more likely 20+. If you imagine it as a multipower, it works out better.

 

Personally, I prefer to simply consider it a Multipower, and throw a +0 Ad/Disad "Martial Art Maneuvers" onto it. They will act as martial art maneuvers in all ways, so you can't Martial Dodge and Offensive Strike to get some bennies out of it. If you go the path of Multipower, however, you have to be sure to NOT LET THE PLAYERS MAKE THEIR OWN MANEUVERS. At all. Ever. At least, not without your extreme oversight. It's too easy to get carried away with things. Some of the more esoteric maneuvers I've translated (Reversal or Escaping Throw, forex) can cost nearly 50 points, no biggie, really, but Martial Dodge costs 10 points. If you start making all your abilities match the reserve size, it can get ugly fast.

[Gary]

Re: A New Look at Martial Arts

 

Well, to use a simple example, Martial Strike is a +0 OCV, +2 DCV, STR +2d6 Strike. To replicate in skill level and power terms: +2 DCV with Strike (6 pts), +2d6 HA (7 pts). Total of 13 pts, costs 4 pts as a martial maneuver. Martial Dodge is +2 DCV (10 pts), costs 4. The reason they are costed so cheaply is there is an assumption that you will be buying a number of them; at least 10 points worth, and more likely 20+. If you imagine it as a multipower, it works out better.

 

Personally, I prefer to simply consider it a Multipower, and throw a +0 Ad/Disad "Martial Art Maneuvers" onto it. They will act as martial art maneuvers in all ways, so you can't Martial Dodge and Offensive Strike to get some bennies out of it. If you go the path of Multipower, however, you have to be sure to NOT LET THE PLAYERS MAKE THEIR OWN MANEUVERS. At all. Ever. At least, not without your extreme oversight. It's too easy to get carried away with things. Some of the more esoteric maneuvers I've translated (Reversal or Escaping Throw, forex) can cost nearly 50 points, no biggie, really, but Martial Dodge costs 10 points. If you start making all your abilities match the reserve size, it can get ugly fast.

 

 

That's my thought. Unless the GM firmly controls what's available, there is no logical reason why players don't max out each slot. If you have a 40 pt multipower, there's no reason why a player would stick to a 1/2d6 HKA killing strike when for 1-2 pts more, he can purchase a 2d6 HKA with +2 OCV and +2 DCV.

[Trebuchet]

Re: A New Look at Martial Arts

 

That's my thought. Unless the GM firmly controls what's available' date=' there is no logical reason why players don't max out each slot. If you have a 40 pt multipower, there's no reason why a player would stick to a 1/2d6 HKA killing strike when for 1-2 pts more, he can purchase a 2d6 HKA with +2 OCV and +2 DCV.[/quote']If we're simply going to do away with Martial Maneuvers as they currently exist (as opposed to using your idea as supplemental), then I can't see any more reason to restrict the builds in a "Martial Arts Multipower" than I can to restrict any other type of MP. It would be legal under the current rules.

 

As a player with an MA with 53 points in Martial Arts I've been following this thread with great interest. Zl'f would be a natural for this treatment, especially since I could fold all of the attack Powers in her current MP into such an MA Multipower. But there's absolutely no point in doing it this way if the new method creates more problems and/or complications than the current system of martial arts.

[Markdoc]

Re: A New Look at Martial Arts

 

If we're simply going to do away with Martial Maneuvers as they currently exist (as opposed to using your idea as supplemental), then I can't see any more reason to restrict the builds in a "Martial Arts Multipower" than I can to restrict any other type of MP. It would be legal under the current rules.

 

As a player with an MA with 53 points in Martial Arts I've been following this thread with great interest. Zl'f would be a natural for this treatment, especially since I could fold all of the attack Powers in her current MP into such an MA Multipower. But there's absolutely no point in doing it this way if the new method creates more problems and/or complications than the current system of martial arts.

 

This was exactly my point when I started using Multipowers for Martial arts - there are no new rules, I'm simply using the existing rules. Multipowers for martial arts only become a problem because more or less by definition, they include levels.

 

To me that's no biggie because using levels in any kind of framework is strictly "GM's permission only" as noted in FREd. So BlackRose has a point: if you have funky martial arts maneuvers that take up 45 points in one slot and have a 45 point reserve, you don't want to see "offensive Strike, +6 d6 HA, +7 OCV" or worse "Martial dodge, +9 DCV" in another slot. Too many levels can get gross.

 

But then, if a character with a neato-cool gun can have a 45 multipower allowing him 2d6 HKA autofire - I'd be equally leery of letting him have another slot "Homing bullet: 2d6 HKA, +7 OCV"

 

Treat a martial arts multipower the same way you'd treat any other multipower, and you are good to go. If the homing bullet doesn't gross you out, then the Offensive Strike shouldn't either.

 

cheers, Mark

[Trebuchet]

Re: A New Look at Martial Arts

 

This was exactly my point when I started using Multipowers for Martial arts - there are no new rules, I'm simply using the existing rules. Multipowers for martial arts only become a problem because more or less by definition, they include levels.

 

To me that's no biggie because using levels in any kind of framework is strictly "GM's permission only" as noted in FREd. So BlackRose has a point: if you have funky martial arts maneuvers that take up 45 points in one slot and have a 45 point reserve, you don't want to see "offensive Strike, +6 d6 HA, +7 OCV" or worse "Martial dodge, +9 DCV" in another slot. Too many levels can get gross.

 

But then, if a character with a neato-cool gun can have a 45 multipower allowing him 2d6 HKA autofire - I'd be equally leery of letting him have another slot "Homing bullet: 2d6 HKA, +7 OCV"

 

Treat a martial arts multipower the same way you'd treat any other multipower, and you are good to go. If the homing bullet doesn't gross you out, then the Offensive Strike shouldn't either.

 

cheers, Mark

You could remove some of those difficulties by only allowing the attacks to be put into the MP, but still requiring the Levels to be bought as Skills (Perhaps with "tight group of maneuvers" or ":Only with these three maneuvers".) That would probably allow the MP Reserve to be considerably smaller.

[Gary]

Re: A New Look at Martial Arts

 

You could remove some of those difficulties by only allowing the attacks to be put into the MP' date=' but still requiring the Levels to be bought as Skills (Perhaps with "tight group of maneuvers" or ":Only with these three maneuvers".) That would probably allow the MP Reserve to be considerably smaller.[/quote']

 

 

If you disallowed CSLs in the multipower, there ceases to be any real benefit to martial arts through a multipower. "Martial Arts" would simply be a special effect for a collection of powers. That may not be a bad thing, but it's probably now what you're looking for.

[prestidigitator]

Re: A New Look at Martial Arts

 

Well' date=' to use a simple example, Martial Strike is a +0 OCV, +2 DCV, STR +2d6 Strike. To replicate in skill level and power terms: +2 DCV with Strike (6 pts), +2d6 HA (7 pts). Total of 13 pts, costs 4 pts as a martial maneuver. Martial Dodge is +2 DCV (10 pts), costs 4. The reason they are costed so cheaply is there is an assumption that you will be buying a number of them; at least 10 points worth, and more likely 20+. If you imagine it as a multipower, it works out better.[/quote']

But my whole point was that the Martial Arts maneuvers are way more restrictive than just buying those DCV Levels, HAs, etc. For example, if you were to buy Martial Dodge as simply +2 DCV, then you could use it while performing a Strike, Move Through, or even stack it on top of the benefits you get from a normal Dodge, and according to the combat rules, you cannot do this with Martial Arts maneuvers! In order to gain the benefit of Martial Dodge, you have to perform the Martial Dodge maneuver, which diallows performing any other Attack Half-Phase maneuvers (including Dodge). That has to be worth some additional Limitation.

 

The same thing goes with the HA portion of Martial Strike; not the DCV bonus, but then 3-point CSLs could normally apply to multiple maneuvers and add to OCV or damage instead, so equivalent CSLs used to buy a Martial Strike would have to be Limited too.

 

EDIT: Yes, I know you normally cannot put Limitations on CSLs that are under the 5-point level. I understand that changing this rule could make CSLs way too cheap. Perhaps an exemption could be made when building a maneuver like this, so that the CSLs are prevented from being used with any other maneuver. Some other balancing factors, such as placing an AP cap on such a maneuver, could potentially make Martial Arts pretty consistent with the rest of the system.

[Guest WhammeWhamme]

Re: A New Look at Martial Arts

 

Interesting system. Problem:

 

Either

a) It will cost more than an equivalent Multipower + CSL's

or

It will cost less.

or

c) It will cost the same.

 

In case of a) no one should take it. In case of it will be taken too often. In case of c) it's largely pointless.

 

Martial Arts should be like talents; prepackaged powers designed for Heroic games, where a Superhero can just take REAL powers.

[Gary]

Re: A New Look at Martial Arts

 

Interesting system. Problem:

 

Either

a) It will cost more than an equivalent Multipower + CSL's

or

It will cost less.

or

c) It will cost the same.

 

In case of a) no one should take it. In case of it will be taken too often. In case of c) it's largely pointless.

 

Martial Arts should be like talents; prepackaged powers designed for Heroic games, where a Superhero can just take REAL powers.

 

It's slightly more expensive than existing MA if you only have the equivalent of 2-3 maneuvers, about the same if you have 4-5, and slightly cheaper if you have 6-8 depending on which maneuvers you would've selected. You do get a real savings if you want to play a true master who conceptually should know virtually every maneuver. This would be horrifically inefficient and expensive under the current system, but manageable under my system. With my system, every point spent gives real measurable benefits, and you don't have the diminishing returns aspect if purchasing 2 similar maneuvers.

[Black Rose]

Re: A New Look at Martial Arts

 

You could remove some of those difficulties by only allowing the attacks to be put into the MP' date=' but still requiring the Levels to be bought as Skills (Perhaps with "tight group of maneuvers" or ":Only with these three maneuvers".) That would probably allow the MP Reserve to be considerably smaller.[/quote']

 

The way I've been buying them is:

 

OCV is... 5-pt CSL w/HtH (5 Active Points); OCV only (-1/2), specific maneuver only (-1/2) (2.5 Real Points, rounded to 2 for one level).

 

DCV is... 5-pt CSL w/ DCV (5 Active Points); HtH only (-1/2), specific maneuver only (-1/2) (2.5 Real Points, rounded to 2 for one level). Unless it's a Dodge, then lose the HtH only.

 

Now, this does make the initial Reserve costlier than it could be, since I could be using 2- and 3-pt CSLs, but I feel like I'm letting myself "cheat" less if I make it cost more than I can get away with.

[Black Rose]

Re: A New Look at Martial Arts

 

But my whole point was that the Martial Arts maneuvers are way more restrictive than just buying those DCV Levels' date=' HAs, etc. For example, if you were to buy Martial Dodge as simply +2 DCV, then you could use it while performing a Strike, Move Through, or even stack it on top of the benefits you get from a [i']normal[/i] Dodge, and according to the combat rules, you cannot do this with Martial Arts maneuvers! In order to gain the benefit of Martial Dodge, you have to perform the Martial Dodge maneuver, which diallows performing any other Attack Half-Phase maneuvers (including Dodge). That has to be worth some additional Limitation.

 

On a one-to-one basis, yeah, the Martial Manuevers are more restricted than a comparable build with Powers and CSLs. But they are intended for Heroic use primarily (Superheroics can do straight builds), so I think they work out okay costwise. It's when you've got over 20 points worth (or more than four different maneuver types) that the redundancy kicks in; if you ever buy a "duplicate" maneuver (two strikes, or blocks, or dodges), you're losing out. Why on earth would I buy Martial Dodge and Flying Dodge, when I can buy Flying Dodge and +1 DCV with works with every maneuver I have? Better yet, I can buy Running and Leaping to make my Half Moves equal to Full Moves, and never buy a "Flying" maneuver at all. NTM, any velocity-based maneuver get a boost as well.

 

The same thing goes with the HA portion of Martial Strike; not the DCV bonus, but then 3-point CSLs could normally apply to multiple maneuvers and add to OCV or damage instead, so equivalent CSLs used to buy a Martial Strike would have to be Limited too.

 

EDIT: Yes, I know you normally cannot put Limitations on CSLs that are under the 5-point level. I understand that changing this rule could make CSLs way too cheap. Perhaps an exemption could be made when building a maneuver like this, so that the CSLs are prevented from being used with any other maneuver. Some other balancing factors, such as placing an AP cap on such a maneuver, could potentially make Martial Arts pretty consistent with the rest of the system.

 

See my post above for my fix for this. And as far as OCV/DCV penalties go, make them Custom Adders (if you're using HD) onto whichever CV is positive. They come out a little more expensive, but we're talking one or two points here.

 

I really have to work up something like what Hierax has done, just so we could compare them side-by-side. I think mine will be more pricy on the AP end, but I think I've come up with some more "complete builds".

[CourtFool]

A New Look at My Boxing Framework

 

So how abusive is this?

 

15 Boxing: Multipower, 15-point reserve

1u 1) Accurate Punch: EB 2d6, Area Of Effect Accurate (One Hex; +1/2) (15 Active Points); No Range (-1/2), Restrainable (-1/2) 1

1u 2) Clinch: +15 STR (15 Active Points); Limited Power Only For Martial Maneuvers (-1/4) 1

1u 3) Combination: EB 2d6+1, Autofire (3 shots; +1/4) (15 Active Points); No Range (-1/2), Restrainable (-1/2) 1

1u 4) Cross: (Total: 14 Active Cost, 11 Real Cost) HA +2d6 (10 Active Points); Hand-To-Hand Attack (-1/2) (Real Cost: 7) plus +2 with any single Strike (Real Cost: 4) 1

1u 5) Hitting Below the Belt: EB 2d6, NND (Rigid Armor; +1/2) (15 Active Points); No Range (-1/2), Restrainable (-1/2) 1

1u 6) Hook: HA +3d6 (15 Active Points); Hand-To-Hand Attack (-1/2) 1

1u 7) Jab: (Total: 15 Active Cost, 13 Real Cost) HA +1d6 (5 Active Points); Hand-To-Hand Attack (-1/2) (Real Cost: 3) plus +2 with DCV (Real Cost: 10) 1

1u 8) Rabbit Punch: HKA 1d6 (2d6 w/STR) (15 Active Points); Restrainable (-1/2) 1

1u 9) Working the Body: Drain END 1 1/2d6 (15 Active Points); Restrainable (-1/2) 1

 

Am I being a munchkin here? Skills require GM permission to go in a Framework but I thought it would be reasonable since they are similar to Martial Maneuvers. The Jab's +2 DCV are the 5 point varient, so they could apply to ranged attacks as well. Is that abusive?

[Black Rose]

Re: A New Look at My Boxing Framework

 

So how abusive is this?

 

15 Boxing: Multipower, 15-point reserve

1u 1) Accurate Punch: EB 2d6, Area Of Effect Accurate (One Hex; +1/2) (15 Active Points); No Range (-1/2), Restrainable (-1/2) 1

 

No ST adding to this, overall this one seems fine.

 

1u 2) Clinch: +15 STR (15 Active Points); Limited Power Only For Martial Maneuvers (-1/4) 1

 

With the lim you have on it, this could add to any Martial Maneuver. I'd say, make it Limited Power Only For Non-Damaging Martial Maneuvers (-1/2) , and it merely becomes a very efficient way to do all the Exert maneuvers.

 

1u 3) Combination: EB 2d6+1, Autofire (3 shots; +1/4) (15 Active Points); No Range (-1/2), Restrainable (-1/2) 1

 

Another one to which STR won't add.

 

1u 4) Cross: (Total: 14 Active Cost, 11 Real Cost) HA +2d6 (10 Active Points); Hand-To-Hand Attack (-1/2) (Real Cost: 7) plus +2 with any single Strike (Real Cost: 4) 1

 

You can only add 10 STR to this for damage, IIRC. Not so bad, really.

 

1u 5) Hitting Below the Belt: EB 2d6, NND (Rigid Armor; +1/2) (15 Active Points); No Range (-1/2), Restrainable (-1/2) 1

1u 6) Hook: HA +3d6 (15 Active Points); Hand-To-Hand Attack (-1/2) 1

1u 7) Jab: (Total: 15 Active Cost, 13 Real Cost) HA +1d6 (5 Active Points); Hand-To-Hand Attack (-1/2) (Real Cost: 3) plus +2 with DCV (Real Cost: 10) 1

1u 8) Rabbit Punch: HKA 1d6 (2d6 w/STR) (15 Active Points); Restrainable (-1/2) 1

 

All reasonable to me. Since you wouldn't be do more than double your STR, these are all fine IMC. Now for superheroic games, things would be different.

 

1u 9) Working the Body: Drain END 1 1/2d6 (15 Active Points); Restrainable (-1/2) 1

 

I really like this on, BTW.

 

Am I being a munchkin here? Skills require GM permission to go in a Framework but I thought it would be reasonable since they are similar to Martial Maneuvers. The Jab's +2 DCV are the 5 point varient, so they could apply to ranged attacks as well. Is that abusive?

 

So long as you don't expect the to "magically" transform your STR into new and different powers without paying for it. If you upped the Reserve value, and made all the slots Add Modifiers To Base Characteristics, I'd watch it at first, but I don't think I would be too bad.

 

Is this one of your "sneak it past the GM" creations, Court Fool?

[CourtFool]

Re: A New Look at Martial Arts

 

On my first pass I had Advantages on Hand Attacks. When I reviewed the rules I realized I had screwed up. The character's STR is 20 but he would not be able to use more than 5 maybe 10 of that at most. Not what I really wanted. Then I thought about buying Variable Advantage on his STR just so he could use it with all of the Hand Attacks. It was expensive and cumbersome so I decided to go with Energy Blasts. His STR does not add to them but that is o.k. I just wanted to simulate more exotic abilities.

 

I did want the Clinch maneuver to be used as a Grab and Squeeze thing. I was not planning on using it for anything else. Is that a no go?

 

Regarding the Cross maneuver: According to reFrED a STR 20 and a +2d6 HA is 6d6 "base damage" and may be doubled to 12d6 through various means. Am I missing something? I still may not double the damage of a weapon, but none of these maneuvers are meant to be used with a weapon. A STR 20 is plenty to double most weapons' DCs. Actually, he is more effective without weapons.

 

I agree that a superheroic game would be completely different. I tried to keep the reserve down because a 4d6 attack is already pretty respectable and anything more really starts to eat up END.

 

I am particularly proud of Working the Body. It would be extremely useful for bringing down someone who is fairly evenly matched. Wear them down until they can not use their STR and then finish them off with whatever you like. It is also a good way for the character to lay the smack down on a normal without worrying about doing serious damage.

[Black Rose]

Re: A New Look at Martial Arts

 

On my first pass I had Advantages on Hand Attacks. When I reviewed the rules I realized I had screwed up. The character's STR is 20 but he would not be able to use more than 5 maybe 10 of that at most. Not what I really wanted. Then I thought about buying Variable Advantage on his STR just so he could use it with all of the Hand Attacks. It was expensive and cumbersome so I decided to go with Energy Blasts. His STR does not add to them but that is o.k. I just wanted to simulate more exotic abilities.

 

IIWM, I would calculate the slots as if your full STR were there; might mean you lose a DC here and there, but you'd get in all of your STR.

 

I did want the Clinch maneuver to be used as a Grab and Squeeze thing. I was not planning on using it for anything else. Is that a no go?{/QUOTE]

 

No, it's perfectly fine. But, if you were being anal, you could use the STR for things other than Grab and Squeeze, since it doesn't say you can't. See what I mean?

 

Regarding the Cross maneuver: According to reFrED a STR 20 and a +2d6 HA is 6d6 "base damage" and may be doubled to 12d6 through various means. Am I missing something? I still may not double the damage of a weapon, but none of these maneuvers are meant to be used with a weapon. A STR 20 is plenty to double most weapons' DCs. Actually, he is more effective without weapons.

 

No, you're right, I believe. I was thinking of the weapons when I said that. I think I was also thinking of a rule (possibly house) somewhere that you can't add more STR into an Advantaged HA than the DCs listed, and you must prorate your STR for that. I'm going to go over your list at the end and try to rethink it as I was before. Hopefully it'll make sense.

 

I am particularly proud of Working the Body. It would be extremely useful for bringing down someone who is fairly evenly matched. Wear them down until they can not use their STR and then finish them off with whatever you like. It is also a good way for the character to lay the smack down on a normal without worrying about doing serious damage.

 

Oh yeah. I'm thinking of stealing that one.

 

And now for the "reworking" of your MA MP!!!

 

15 Boxing: Multipower, 15-point reserve

1u 1) Accurate Punch: EB 2d6, Area Of Effect Accurate (One Hex; +1/2) (15 Active Points); No Range (-1/2), Restrainable (-1/2) 1

 

Okay, all of these calculations are according to HD v2.41, so if you use house rules, you might have to tweak.

 

Accurate Punch: (Total: 14 Active Cost, 13 Real Cost) Area Of Effect Accurate (up to One Hex; +1/2) for up to 20 Active Points of STR (10 Active Points) (Real Cost: 10) plus HA +0 1/2d6, Area Of Effect Accurate (One Hex; +1/2) (4 Active Points); Hand-To-Hand Attack (-1/2) (Real Cost: 3)

 

This gives you 4 1/2d6 HA with the AoE: Accurate Advantage. It's automatically restrainable, since it's STR.

 

1u 2) Clinch: +15 STR (15 Active Points); Only For Martial Maneuvers (-1/4) 1

 

This works fine, but you might make the Lim "Only to 'Grab and Squeeze' (-1/2)" or even higher if you think it'll be used less.

 

1u 3) Combination: EB 2d6+1, Autofire (3 shots; +1/4) (15 Active Points); No Range (-1/2), Restrainable (-1/2) 1

 

Combination: (Total: 15 Active Cost, 12 Real Cost) Autofire (3 shots; +1/4) for up to 20 Active Points of STR (5 Active Points) (Real Cost: 5) plus HA +1 1/2d6, Autofire (3 shots; +1/4) (10 Active Points); Hand-To-Hand Attack (-1/2) (Real Cost: 7)

 

Giving you 5 1/2d6 HA with Autofire x3.

 

1u 4) Cross: (Total: 14 Active Cost, 11 Real Cost) HA +2d6 (10 Active Points); Hand-To-Hand Attack (-1/2) (Real Cost: 7) plus +2 with any single Strike (Real Cost: 4) 1

 

This one's fine as is.

 

1u 5) Hitting Below the Belt: EB 2d6, NND (Rigid Armor; +1/2) (15 Active Points); No Range (-1/2), Restrainable (-1/2) 1

 

Hitting Below The Belt: (Total: 14 Active Cost, 13 Real Cost) NND (rigid armor; +1/2) for up to 20 Active Points of STR (10 Active Points) (Real Cost: 10) plus HA +0 1/2d6, NND (rigid armor; +1/2) (4 Active Points); Hand-To-Hand Attack (-1/2) (Real Cost: 3)

 

Giving you 4 1/2d6 HA NND (rigid armor).

 

1u 6) Hook: HA +3d6 (15 Active Points); Hand-To-Hand Attack (-1/2) 1

 

Fine.

 

1u 7) Jab: (Total: 15 Active Cost, 13 Real Cost) HA +1d6 (5 Active Points); Hand-To-Hand Attack (-1/2) (Real Cost: 3) plus +2 with DCV (Real Cost: 10) 1

 

You do realize the DCVs with this apply to ranged attacks, right? Since you aren't modifying them in any way, why not make them 3-pt CSLs? Heck, add one to OCV while you're at it.

 

1u 8) Rabbit Punch: HKA 1d6 (2d6 w/STR) (15 Active Points); Restrainable (-1/2) 1

 

Works for me.

 

1u 9) Working the Body: Drain END 1 1/2d6 (15 Active Points); Restrainable (-1/2) 1

 

And, as always, I love this one. For this character, if you see it in his 'schtick', I'd grow the Multipower, allowing you to improve the slots, and maybe one day add a Transfer END to END slot; he gets weaker, you get stronger.

[Trebuchet]

Re: A New Look at Martial Arts

 

Interesting builds, but they are still not quite as versatile as the official martial arts maneuvers. They also have one other serious flaw: They cost END. Official maneuvers do not cost END (except the STR used), so characters using these will run out of gas much sooner than most MAs.

 

How much more expensive would they be to build as "0 END Cost"?

[Markdoc]

Re: A New Look at Martial Arts

 

Interesting builds, but they are still not quite as versatile as the official martial arts maneuvers. They also have one other serious flaw: They cost END. Official maneuvers do not cost END (except the STR used), so characters using these will run out of gas much sooner than most MAs.

 

How much more expensive would they be to build as "0 END Cost"?

 

Not very: you would need to increase the reserve a little to incorporate it, but that has little effect on slot cost, since most of the slots are at minimum cost.

 

cheers, Mark

[Black Rose]

Re: A New Look at Martial Arts

 

Interesting builds, but they are still not quite as versatile as the official martial arts maneuvers. They also have one other serious flaw: They cost END. Official maneuvers do not cost END (except the STR used), so characters using these will run out of gas much sooner than most MAs.

 

How much more expensive would they be to build as "0 END Cost"?

 

Well, the Reserve would be half again as much. Personally, I don't usually worry about the END cost; it's pretty slight. The big reason, IMO, to do martial arts as a MP is to allow for the nifty, yet costly, special techniques that any longstanding school should have; Ultimate Dodges using Desolid, weapon flourishes using Damage Shield, chi attacks using EB, stuff like that. You've already invested the points, after all. It makes a certain sense to me that, since you've committed the points to such things, you should get a bit of a break. Kind of like my perception of the EC; you commit to a tight definition of powers, pretty much cutting yourself off from a wider range of schticks, and you get a nice break for it.

[CourtFool]

Re: A New Look at Martial Arts

 

Interesting builds' date=' but they are still not quite as versatile as the official martial arts maneuvers.[/quote']

 

I disagree. They are more versatile. The only thing I have had trouble simulating is a Target Falls effect (thanks to Markdoc for helping with other effects). Yes they cost END but you could build them so not only do the maneuvers not cost END but the STR used with them does not.

[prestidigitator]

Re: A New Look at Martial Arts

 

I disagree. They are more versatile. The only thing I have had trouble simulating is a Target Falls effect (thanks to Markdoc for helping with other effects). Yes they cost END but you could build them so not only do the maneuvers not cost END but the STR used with them does not.

Indeed. As built, you can even use them with other maneuvers, like Move Through! Much more versatile!