RE: tackling

[Jevan Furmanski <furmansj@ecn.purdue.edu>]

If the 22nd is next weekend, I would be willing to have a mini gm meeting
to discuss the tackling and grappling stuff.  This would include all
relavent contributions to the discussion so far.  The meeting could
immediately precede the adventure, starting at 6.

Jevan

On Fri, 14 May 1999, Lyle H Janney wrote:

> Uh, hmmm, assuming they were still capable of movement (read: did
> not have fractured bones or blown nerve clusters), and they were not
> encumbered (read: armored), then perhaps your statement regarding
> combat-weathered Bujinkan swiftly standing immediately after being
> tackled could be acceptable as truth.
> 
> As for my nit-picking, well, I'm just trying to fit in with most of the rest
> of the communication that occurs on this list when it comes to rules
> and how to bend the life out of them.  Call it what you want, but I call
> it emulation to prove a point.  My words to you were a direct reflection
> of your words to Steve.  I leave it to you to figure out where the pissant
> commentary began.
> 
> Now, regarding to goal of fixing the tackle skill to be more realistic as
> opposed to a serious bend for power-gamers.  You have some good
> suggestions, as does Steve.  I submit that Dan would agree to the
> two points you make below regarding tackle.  I also submit that Dan
> would agree that the idea of a "free round" is far beyond the original
> intention of the attacker gaining an advantage.  Unfortunately, I am
> far too busy right now to go into the ideas I have, but I'd love to get
> together before the game on the 22nd to discuss some ideas face
> to face.  Let me know what you think.
> 
> Lyle
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From:	Jevan Furmanski [SMTP:furmansj@ecn.purdue.edu]
> 
> Any person combat weathered in the Bujinkan can stand in less than a
> second after a "tackle".  
> 
> I still don't see why people are getting on me about the multi-attack
> because I distinctly disagree with it.  Tackle should:
> 
> knock both people to the ground
> give the attacker an advantage
> 
> Perhaps the attackee loses a round or initiative. 
> 
> Oh, and Lyle, I'm still waiting for you to make any contribution besides
> just arguement.  Counterproposal is much more productive than pissant
> nit-picking.
> 
> Jevan
> 
>