Quote from: danskmacabre;996690I found the DMG added a lot to 5e, especially clarifications in combat and lots of optional rules you can switch on or off.
5e before the DMG was probably TOO vague and inconsistent it's true.  Especially definitions of combat options, the weird usage of Skill kits (lock licks kits etc), ambushing (passive perception etc).

Early print runs of the PHB also had a typo or omission in the grapple feat text.

QuoteGrappler (p. 167). Ignore the third benefit;
it refers to a nonexistent rule.

Quote from: Dumarest;998278But if Iron Fist and Shang  Chi meet up in the mighty Marvel manner of mysterious misunderstandings and mistake each other for malevolent masked mutant menaces that must be mitigated by macho melee, then half the fun is the [strike]blow by blow[/strike] meticulous minutia of the mangling, mauling, and maiming motivated by their match-up.

Not enough alliteration.

Quote from: Bren;998306Not enough alliteration.

Stan Lee is turning green somewhere.

Scratch out "half the fun" and replace with "most of the merit."

Quote from: Dumarest;998325Stan Lee is turning green somewhere.

Scratch out "half the fun" and replace with "most of the merit."

'Nuff said.

Quote from: Dumarest;998278The more time needed, sure. The level of abstraction is always optional. I'm not interested in playing out a battle between dozens of guys and having to roll for each sword stroke or laser blast. But if Iron Fist and Shang  Chi meet up in the mighty Marvel manner of mysterious misunderstandings and mistake each other for malevolent masked mutant menaces that must be mitigated by macho melee, then half the fun is the blow by blow.

Oh HELL yes.  That's why CHAMPIONS was such a smashing success.  And most comic books, at least back in the day, followed an almost universal pattern:

1) Hero spends a page wiping up something easy to show he's a hero
2) Exposition to set up the menace of the month
3) Fight that lasts most of the issue
4) Wrap up in a page or two

Quote from: Skarg;998183Granted it takes longer than an abstract system, but how did it take that long? Was it lots and lots of arrow shots at people in cover at long range, and then chopping down portcullises with smallaxes?

It was a small number of combatants in a large fortress.  A lot of time was spent just moving, as poor shots fired shortbows at long range at mailed targets.

Quote from: Dumarest;998325Stan Lee is turning green somewhere.

Scratch out "half the fun" and replace with "most of the merit."

Quote from: Bren;998330'Nuff said.

Excelsior!

Quote from: Bren;998188Don't fumbles occur? Does no one think disarming their foe is useful? And do those two things not result in an unarmed foe who may have to grapple? These things you just said are in the systems you play are exactly what I was talking about. :confused:

It feels like we are talking past each other.

I don't consider fumbles which can occur anywhere in any game "grappling rules". Grappling rules for me are specific to the act of making a "grapple" (which ideally includes all the stuff I posted in what I want in grappling rules.) Narrative mechanics or just extraneous sub-systems that replicate things you could possible do while "grappling" do not count for me. At least that's what I'm talking about in relation to the point of the thread: Grappling rules that don't suck. As opposed to "Rules that simulate effects that could happen if we had actually grappling rules."

As for disarming foes - sure. But it depends. Most of my players enjoy playing specialists. Unless they play someone that is inherently a defensive specialist in some form - "Disarming" is a secondary consideration at best. And almost never when it comes to formal combat outside of grappling specialization OR some ability that allows them to disarm without grappling.

Quote from: Bren;998330'Nuff said.

No-Prizes to you both!

Quote from: tenbones;998370No-Prizes to you both!

Matchless magnanimity! But we mustn't misremember and merely memorialize majestic melee! Marvel also meritoriously mooted monthly moderately meandering and mildly maudlin and morose modern melodrama such as mild-mannered Aunt May's matronly mollycoddling.

Seriously, AD&D 2e scales up and down from mass combat to blow-by-blow duels, even in hand-to-hand fumbles, stumbles, & grapples, surprisingly well. It turns on & off switches surprisingly well and then gets outta the away. You may laugh, I laughed too, but even the tables fun is solidness in practice.

Quote from: tenbones;996946Roger Moore had an alternative unarmed combat/grappling rules in Dragon Magazine #83 (How to Finish Fights Faster) that I thought was perfect. It actually scaled well with Oriental Adventure's Martial Arts pretty cleanly.

It handled fist fighting and grappling well. Including WWE type maneuvers etc.

And a good one on martial arts.

Quote from: Larsdangly;998105Very true. Anyone who thinks that skill beats 'brute' force in grappling has never fought a competent larger opponent. The only highly size mis-matched wrestling contest I've seen go to the smaller person was between a guy with a decade of intense BJJ training against a guy who liked fighting but hadn't really done anything organized beyond football. And the bigger guy clearly would have won if it had been a fight rather than a formal wrestling match.

Thats not skill beats brute force then. Thats skill vs brute force+skill.

Quote from: Omega;998415Thats not skill beats brute force then. Thats skill vs brute force+skill.

That doesn't make any sense. How is a couple years of high school football equivalent to a decade of BJJ training? Anyone who understands the first thing about competitive martial arts knows that a casual jock is not the same thing as a seasoned, trained wrestler.

Quote from: Larsdangly;998426That doesn't make any sense. How is a couple years of high school football equivalent to a decade of BJJ training? Anyone who understands the first thing about competitive martial arts knows that a casual jock is not the same thing as a seasoned, trained wrestler.

Easy. Because "skilled" is a relative qualifier.

Being a big strong ox also requires skill to attain. It's just that those skills are not specific to combat. A football player with a lot of experience generally is *very good* at tackling someone. But they're not good at necessarily finishing someone off on the ground, or even holding them down, or manipulating them to put them in finishing positions in actual combat. Training in a dojo learning katas without ever putting those moves to the test is nothing but dancing. I don't give a crap what Mr. Miyagi bullshit people believe. No sparring = no experience. Same goes for lifting weights and being a "brute" in terms of combat.

There are fake BJJ blackbelts that dabble in BJJ but are sloppy as fuck. Does it qualify them as being "skilled" just by dint of time-served messing around in a BJJ club? Not necessarily. Time-served *usually* correlates to skill, but combat skills are very complex things. This is why, particularly in BJJ, the pedigree of the instructor matters. They do a generally good job of policing themselves. But there are plenty of phony BJJ clubs (and most dojos of varying styles) that only do "theory" as opposed to actual training.

So "skill" in combat is a discrete item from "strength". They complement each other, but in terms of combat - actual skill will almost always beat strength alone in a fight.

What we're really discussing here without pinning it down is: what is "skilled"? I'm old school. When you've mastered all the basics and can execute them in proper form and function at the appropriate time, you're "skilled". So normally a blackbelt*. But this also depends on who trains you. I'd apply this to pedigreed students from known instructors. In terms of non-belt grappling sports like wrestling - that's easy too. If you make a Division 1 or 2 team, you're definitely skilled. You wouldn't make it that far otherwise.

Barring that - then it goes back to the criteria of having mastered the basics in full execution. Beyond that, you're talking mastery skills of specialized forms and abilities which continue for life.

This applies to most concepts of skill vs. raw stat - but of course there are always exceptions.

*blackbelt - assuming good pedigree and having gone through the regimen that grants your those basics I listed above. In terms of BJJ - I'd probably include brownbelts too from a reputable club.