Fwurg

[Brend]

Request for Comment

The Tier I Makashi fencing style.

[Elmer]

Disarming Flourish: I understand the fluff is literally copy-pasted from the sun-djem manoeuvre. For the final version I think it would be more in style if you disarm the opponent, so he must spend an action to grab is saber from the ground again.

Something like: If you score a minor injury, and at least the dodging ring is defeated, with this manoeuvre will the lightsaber of the opponent be thrown out of his hand and be deactivated instead of a minor injury.

[Brend]

I agree that disarming is more in style, but that's less powerful than Sun Djem. That would basically do nothing against a dual-wielder (force pulls saber back), and would only be a minor setback for a normal user (force pulls saber back)...

Since the defensive stats are applied immediately (according to the parry mechanism), a disarm would result in a temporary loss or change of offensive capability, but no actual benefit other than that would be gained.

I would also like to have a more disarm-y move there, but I'm afraid it would have to be fluff only, as the mechanics make a non-destructive disarm very weak.

[Elmer]

As the style is a lvl I style, it is not required to be powerful, something nice is good enough, but well, it should indeed be useful somehow.

At this moment, I can think of two ways to make it nice:
1. Prevent the other for at least 1 turn from picking up the lightsaber, or using force powers to pick it up.
2. Apply the minor injury, together with the disarm.

[Brend]

I like your second option. The fact that the other can't attack (unless he dual-wields, in which case this does nothing) gives you a large benefit, and allows you to easily set up your next move.

Actually allowing the other to recover his lightsaber is a good showcase of the extreme arrogance displayed by practitioners of Makashi -- after all, you are good enough to win, so why not keep it sporting? ^_^

Let's wait a bit and get some feedback from others for this style.

[Stuiter]

If it is a fencing style why do you need a curved hilt? Fencing is straight forward to the point. A curved hilt prohibits a regular blades which means that you have to have a shorted blade, so you for this style you can use just one light saber (short blade, curbed hilt). I think that is a bit too limiting.

[Brend]

If it is a fencing style why do you need a curved hilt? Fencing is straight forward to the point. A curved hilt prohibits a regular blades which means that you have to have a shorted blade, so you for this style you can use just one light saber (short blade, curbed hilt). I think that is a bit too limiting.

I'm not sure I understand where this comes from. The requirements make no mention of 'curved hilt', and allow a large range of options.

[RemcoSwenker]

It is mentioned explicitly on http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Form_II:_Makashi#Makashi_Weapon_Specifications
Secondly have you ever seen the grip on a fencing foil? that is also curved.

and about the saberlength thing that why there is a comment with the style that we find it strange that it cant be done.

[Mercury]

I like this style a lot - I would propose making Disarming Flourish an actual disarm (+ off balance) instead of saber damaging since that'd be a copy of the Sun Djem manoeuvre. Other than this, I have nothing to add.

[Stuiter]

If it is a fencing style why do you need a curved hilt? Fencing is straight forward to the point. A curved hilt prohibits a regular blades which means that you have to have a shorted blade, so you for this style you can use just one light saber (short blade, curbed hilt). I think that is a bit too limiting.

I'm not sure I understand where this comes from. The requirements make no mention of 'curved hilt', and allow a large range of options.

The manouvers of the style state that a curved hilt is needed and in the rules page on ligthsaber it is stated that a curved hilt cannot be used with a regular blade. So in combination with the user limit of regular or short blade it leave only a short blade with curved hilt.

[Brend]

We have updated the Makashi manoeuvre:

Disarming Flourish: "If a minor injury is scored and one of the defeated defences is the the Blocking Defence (Middle Ring), not only is the opponent off-balance, he is disarmed as well as his weapon is skillfully removed from his grasp. Recovering the disarmed weapon requires an action. This manoeuvre requires a curved hilt."

Furthermore, we would like to raise the point that that currently the combination of a Curved Hilt with a Regular Blade is not allowed.

We see two options:
1) Makashi makes an exception, as the style allows effective use of a regular blade on a curved hilt.
2) We allow the (curved hilt, regular blade) combination for everyone, and update the saber rules to match.

We prefer option 1, as this makes the style more special and is, in our opinion, the more desirable option. This would however lock a user in, requiring him to take another saber to allow in-combat style switches.

Opinions please.

[Mercury]

Why would this rules require adjustment or be an issue?

Requiring a curved hilt for the specific manoeuvre already sets the precedence that not all sabers are allowed to make all manoeuvres. Why would it be viable to block access to a manoeuvre over hilt type but not over saber length?

[Brend]

The problem is that right now, you can only use a (curved hilt, short blade) with the manoevres. That is a bit too restrictive for my taste; that would basically mean that all practicioners of this style will use the exact same blade.

[Mercury]

Why not drop the entire requirement then, since the requirement to have a duelling / parrying type weapon is basically already part of the style requirements? You could require the off hand be free if you want to add anything.

[Brend]

We concur. Requirements on manoeuvres redacted.

We considered adding a 'the off-hand must be free' clause, but that would prohibit a 'Combat à la florentine' with a blaster in the off hand. We like this detail, so we reject the idea of requiring a free off-hand.