Is unarmed combat underpowered?

[Lakota]

Nah...I was just discussing the fact that many eastern styles were devised by poorly equipped peasants, who had only...say....farm implements to defend themselves.

...and they turned said farming tools into dangerous weapons which came to be feared in the hands of trained fighters.

The sai?

The bo-staff?

I have trained extensively in both, and I can guarantee you, both can kill efficiently.

Korea did amazing things for martial arts.

[fourTwenty]

Nah...I was just discussing the fact that many eastern styles were devised by poorly equipped peasants, who had only...say....farm implements to defend themselves.

...and they turned said farming tools into dangerous weapons which came to be feared in the hands of trained fighters.

We kinda already covered that.

The sai?

The bo-staff?

I have trained extensively in both, and I can guarantee you, both can kill efficiently.

Then you should be pretty confident that you would fuck an unarmed opponent up. Also, who the hell still trains with a sai?

Korea did amazing things for martial arts.

But not nearly as much as Russia and Brazil.

[The7DeadlyVenomz]

Also, who the hell still trains with a sai?

That's a good question. Isn't a sai a sword-breaker or disarming weapon or something? It doesn't have any practicality in the modern world.

[Bilanthri]

Also, who the hell still trains with a sai?

That's a good question. Isn't a sai a sword-breaker or disarming weapon or something? It doesn't have any practicality in the modern world.

The sai originated from a hand held pitchfork like implement used for lifting grain stalks. It was most effective as a concealable stabbing/disarming weapon. Kinda bulky by todays standards though.

[Lakota]

Then you should be pretty confident that you would fuck an unarmed opponent up. Also, who the hell still trains with a sai?

I know several individuals who do. They are quite practical in terms of fending off weapons ranging in all sizes, from small knives to staves to other ranged weapons. It's a discipline I enjoy practicing - not necessarily practical in terms of carrying them around in your pocket, but an amazing, simple, elegant weapon.

But not nearly as much as Russia and Brazil.

I'd disagree with that.

That's a good question. Isn't a sai a sword-breaker or disarming weapon or something? It doesn't have any practicality in the modern world.

See above. Yes, they can be used to disarm weapons, though you'd better be -very- skilled in your attempt. You have to have impeccable timing/reflexes to pull off one.

Use one in a reverse-grip for defense and you've got a game-changer.

[fourTwenty]

Also, who the hell still trains with a sai?

That's a good question. Isn't a sai a sword-breaker or disarming weapon or something? It doesn't have any practicality in the modern world.

<definition of sai was previously here, Bilanthri beat me to it>. It eventually became used as a weapon and in skilled hands could easily disarm a katana or sword. It was never a popular or widely used weapon so much that it eventually became tradition to know how to use one. Unfortunately, lots of Martial Arts suffer the same fate, they begin studying things more for tradition than practicality.

[fourTwenty]

But not nearly as much as Russia and Brazil.

I'd disagree with that.

Sambo and BJJ.

[Lakota]

I'm well aware of Fedor, Antonio, the Gracies, etc.

I respectfully disagree.

[musashi]

fourTwenty ... please refrain from name calling ... ... dickhead.

Anyway, let me show you where you're contradicting yourself first, then give you a follow-up example of how unarmed martial arts have been used in a highly functional manner in history.

As someone studying Chinese culture, language, and history ... I feel comfortable telling you that this piece of garbage you typed up right here:

As long as martial arts have been around it's just now, I'm talking last 40 years that they actually became as functional as everyone would like to believe. It began with Bruce Lee's school of thought about having no 1 style and adapting to the fight and it exploded with BJJ and MMA.

Is wholly inaccurate and screams "hey I'm an ignorant american and don't know fuck all about the history of Chinese martial arts I just got into it after watching some old choppy-stock flicks" ... ... but you don't even have to study anything about China to know that, Wikipedia can bring you up to speed on how martial arts were highly developed prior to Bruce Lee (in China and other places), and the idea of not limiting yourself to any 1 style and adapting to the fight was a retardedly common mindset for anyone in the business of fighting (again, be it in China and other places).

What Bruce Lee did was take an idea that already existed in several cultures within Asia (give the Book of Five Rings a read sometime) about fighting, moderize it, and make it popular in America through movies. That's quite an acomplish in its own right but hardly where the concept of martial arts being functional "began".

As an example ... the Okinawa people were oppressed by the Japanese (the Satsuma Clan to be precise) back in the 15th and 16th century, and one of these marks of oppression was the banning of weapons for Okinawa people. The Japanese thought, if we have the swords, we have the power. Good idea ... sadly the Okinawans blended two martial arts (see how they didn't limit themselves to 1 style, but rather combined what they liked from multiple ones?) called "Te" and "Kenpo" into what we now refer to as "Karate", and proceeded to use it to kick the everliving shit out of the Japanese and oust them from the island. The Japanese did later come back with even bigger numbers and basically say: Good effort ... now give up or we'll kill you all ... ... also some of you come to mainland and teach us how you did that. But the point I'm offering up is that unarmed combat was used to defeat armed opponents on a massive scale, and that would suggest that it was both quite functional as well as developed before you saw Bruce Lee on television.

Mind ... the point of the thread was not to talk about martial arts in general, but to talk about martial arts in Zalanthas. To which you said:

I don't see Zalnathians as having put that much time into unarmed combat.

But you also said

Even though Martial Arts have been studied since pretty much the dawn of time ...

right before it so ... lemme see if I understand you right ... humans have studied martial arts (ie unarmed combat) pretty much since the dawn of time, thus ... Zalanthas humans haven't put much time into studying unarmed combat? 

And having said ALL of that ... since staff feel unarmed combat is functioning the way they want it to function in the game, and other players have said that their uber fighters are quite capable fighters unarmed codewise ... I believe that the thread's origional topic is more or less settled and I'm satisfied with it, though in 2.arm I do hope that perhaps a richer unarmed combat style/documention/culture/history could be developed for the game ... if only because it would be really cool.

[fourTwenty]

fourTwenty ... please refrain from name calling ... ... dickhead.

Refrain from posting that I am 100% wrong without backing it up. I just call'em like I see'em

Anyway, let me show you where you're contradicting yourself first, then give you a follow-up example of how unarmed martial arts have been used in a highly functional manner in history.

Still not sure where I contradicted myself. I never said unarmed combat was not functional. I said unarmed combat was not functional against an armed opponent, where unless there's a serious skill gap, it's not.

As someone studying Chinese culture, language, and history ... I feel comfortable telling you that this piece of garbage you typed up right here:

As long as martial arts have been around it's just now, I'm talking last 40 years that they actually became as functional as everyone would like to believe. It began with Bruce Lee's school of thought about having no 1 style and adapting to the fight and it exploded with BJJ and MMA.

Is wholly inaccurate and screams "hey I'm an ignorant american and don't know fuck all about the history of Chinese martial arts I just got into it after watching some old choppy-stock flicks" ... ... but you don't even have to study anything about China to know that, Wikipedia can bring you up to speed on how martial arts were highly developed prior to Bruce Lee (in China and other places), and the idea of not limiting yourself to any 1 style and adapting to the fight was a retardedly common mindset for anyone in the business of fighting (again, be it in China and other places).

What Bruce Lee did was take an idea that already existed in several cultures within Asia (give the Book of Five Rings a read sometime) about fighting, moderize it, and make it popular in America through movies. That's quite an acomplish in its own right but hardly where the concept of martial arts being functional "began".

As an example ... the Okinawa people were oppressed by the Japanese (the Satsuma Clan to be precise) back in the 15th and 16th century, and one of these marks of oppression was the banning of weapons for Okinawa people. The Japanese thought, if we have the swords, we have the power. Good idea ... sadly the Okinawans blended two martial arts (see how they didn't limit themselves to 1 style, but rather combined what they liked from multiple ones?) called "Te" and "Kenpo" into what we now refer to as "Karate", and proceeded to use it to kick the everliving shit out of the Japanese and oust them from the island. The Japanese did later come back with even bigger numbers and basically say: Good effort ... now give up or we'll kill you all ... ... also some of you come to mainland and teach us how you did that. But the point I'm offering up is that unarmed combat was used to defeat armed opponents on a massive scale, and that would suggest that it was both quite functional as well as developed before you saw Bruce Lee on television.

See, this is the jackass part. China and Bruce Lee have little to do with Martial Arts as a whole. The progress of MMA is what made Martial Arts progress so much lately. Though, Bruce Lee -was- an innovator (in fact, he was persecuted for believing that he needed to know more than 1 style which to traditional practitioners was taboo(Go read the Tao of Jeet Kune Do)) I don't attribute nearly as much of the advancement of Martial Arts to him as I do Helio\Carlos Gracie and the Russian Spetsnaz(sp?). Your studying Chinese culture, language, and history only includes a small fraction of Martial Arts. I will repeat. Martial Arts had been around long before there even was a fucking China. And your post seems to be screaming "Hey I am a jackass that thinks I know what I'm talking about" because while you are studying a people and a culture I have been studying the fucking subject we're talking about.

Mind ... the point of the thread was not to talk about martial arts in general, but to talk about martial arts in Zalanthas. To which you said:

I don't see Zalnathians as having put that much time into unarmed combat.

But you also said

Even though Martial Arts have been studied since pretty much the dawn of time ...

right before it so ... lemme see if I understand you right ... humans have studied martial arts (ie unarmed combat) pretty much since the dawn of time, thus ... Zalanthas humans haven't put much time into studying unarmed combat? 

Actually, the point of this thread was to discuss whether or not unarmed combat was underpowered. (Okay, I see how you pay attention and that explains a lot). Since Earth has been around for a really, -really- long time (without the magick dragon destroying everything and making us start over to boot) and people can, you know, read and write and stuff and we're -just now- coming to the level of Martial Arts that most people want to see achieved I don't see Zalanthians as having spent that much time studying unarmed combat or unarmed combat as having progressed quite as far as it has in our Earthen culture. Also, another mistake you are making is assuming that unarmed combat=Martial Arts and there is a HUGE, distinct difference.


I do have one question I want you to answer. How the hell does studying Chinese culture, language, and history qualify you to speak on Martial Arts as a whole?

[fourTwenty]

Wikipedia can bring you up to speed on how martial arts were highly developed prior to Bruce Lee (in China and other places), and the idea of not limiting yourself to any 1 style and adapting to the fight was a retardedly common mindset for anyone in the business of fighting (again, be it in China and other places).

This was certainly NOT a common mindset, It was, in fact, taboo in the China you claim to be studying. BTW you wanna not look like a jackass, don't get your facts from Wikipedia.

[Bilanthri]

True martial arts stems all the way back to the Greeks, Romans, and various native peoples. There are techniques for disarming and killing an opponent proven to have been used by Greek and Roman Soldiers still used today.

I had to do some research on this. From what I've found, Pankration was the first true Greek unarmed combat form and was introduced as such in the Olympic Games of 648 BCE. Certainly a long time ago. However, I find references to open hand styles being practiced in China at the beginning of the Zhou Dynasty (c. 1030 BCE). So how is it that the first true forms came from the mediterranean?

Am I missing an earlier Greek form?

[fourTwenty]

True martial arts stems all the way back to the Greeks, Romans, and various native peoples. There are techniques for disarming and killing an opponent proven to have been used by Greek and Roman Soldiers still used today.

I had to do some research on this. From what I've found, Pankration was the first true Greek unarmed combat form and was introduced as such in the Olympic Games of 648 BCE. Certainly a long time ago. However, I find references to open hand styles being practiced in China at the beginning of the Zhou Dynasty (c. 1030 BCE). So how is it that the first true forms came from the mediterranean all over the world?

Am I missing an earlier Greek form?

Yes and No. Martial Arts have been practiced since one little African cave man decided he needed a better way of shoving this stick up that other little African cave mans ass. However, wrestling and pugilistic competitions predate even the Olympics. There's a reason it is still today referred to as Greco Roman wrestling. Unfortunately, many people ignore boxing and wrestling as forms of martial arts even though most martial artists will tell you that wrestlers and boxers will fuck you up. Also, native peoples have had their own forms of martial arts an even battle tactics. I once read an interesting little piece on what exactly a Cherokee warrior could do with that tomahawk(knife).



Edited to add: Damn, My friend beside me is actually pointing out a few things I have missed in previous posts. Vale Tudo, Krav Maga and Muay Thai have been extremely beneficial (for a long time) to the advancement of martial arts as well.

[Bilanthri]

True martial arts stems all the way back to the Greeks, Romans, and various native peoples. There are techniques for disarming and killing an opponent proven to have been used by Greek and Roman Soldiers still used today.

I had to do some research on this. From what I've found, Pankration was the first true Greek unarmed combat form and was introduced as such in the Olympic Games of 648 BCE. Certainly a long time ago. However, I find references to open hand styles being practiced in China at the beginning of the Zhou Dynasty (c. 1030 BCE). So how is it that the first true forms came from the mediterranean all over the world?

Am I missing an earlier Greek form?

Yes and No. Martial Arts have been practiced since one little African cave man decided he needed a better way of shoving this stick up that other little African cave mans ass. However, wrestling and pugilistic competitions predate even the Olympics. There's a reason it is still today referred to as Greco Roman wrestling. Unfortunately, many people ignore boxing and wrestling as forms of martial arts even though most martial artists will tell you that wrestlers and boxers will fuck you up. Also, native peoples have had their own forms of martial arts an even battle tactics. I once read an interesting little piece on what exactly a Cherokee warrior could do with that tomahawk(knife).

So you're saying that Pugilism, defined as "the art or practice of fighting with the fists" was first refined into a structured form by the Greeks. But I just don't see any documentation to support it. However, I have found a few bits of information pertaining to the Chinese doing just such a thing centuries before.

Really the argument is flawed in general...or at least it overlooks the most obvious point. Low tech people fought with their hands. Asking who did it first is really just asking who was a grunting savage first. Whether you talk of the Greeks, the early bronze-age Chinese, neolithic Japan(c. 600CE), NorthAm Natives, or the ancient Irish art of Fuk-yu (couldn't resist) the fact remains...the weapons sucked, so a warrior had to be able to fight with their hands.

[fourTwenty]

True martial arts stems all the way back to the Greeks, Romans, and various native peoples. There are techniques for disarming and killing an opponent proven to have been used by Greek and Roman Soldiers still used today.

I had to do some research on this. From what I've found, Pankration was the first true Greek unarmed combat form and was introduced as such in the Olympic Games of 648 BCE. Certainly a long time ago. However, I find references to open hand styles being practiced in China at the beginning of the Zhou Dynasty (c. 1030 BCE). So how is it that the first true forms came from the mediterranean all over the world?

Am I missing an earlier Greek form?

Yes and No. Martial Arts have been practiced since one little African cave man decided he needed a better way of shoving this stick up that other little African cave mans ass. However, wrestling and pugilistic competitions predate even the Olympics. There's a reason it is still today referred to as Greco Roman wrestling. Unfortunately, many people ignore boxing and wrestling as forms of martial arts even though most martial artists will tell you that wrestlers and boxers will fuck you up. Also, native peoples have had their own forms of martial arts an even battle tactics. I once read an interesting little piece on what exactly a Cherokee warrior could do with that tomahawk(knife).

So you're saying that Pugilism, defined as "the art or practice of fighting with the fists" was first refined into a structured form by the Greeks. But I just don't see any documentation to support it. However, I have found a few bits of information pertaining to the Chinese doing just such a thing centuries before.

No, that is not what I said.

"However, wrestling and pugilistic competitions predate even the Olympics. There's a reason it is still today referred to as Greco Roman wrestling."
That is what I said. And there is plenty of documentation on how far back the form of "wrestling" actually goes.

Low tech people fought with their hands. Asking who did it first is really just asking who was a grunting savage first.

That's kinda what I was saying. "True martial arts stems all the way back to the Greeks, Romans, and various native peoples."

Whether you talk of the Greeks, the early bronze-age Chinese, neolithic Japan(c. 600CE), NorthAm Natives, or the ancient Irish art of Fuk-yu (couldn't resist) the fact remains...the weapons sucked, so a warrior had to be able to fight with their hands.

This bit is flawed though as some these cultures (especially Native people) had relatively elegant weapons and Martial Arts does NOT exclude training with a weapon.

[Bilanthri]

That's kinda what I was saying. "True martial arts stems all the way back to the Greeks, Romans, and various native peoples."

The problem I've been having throughout this thread has been the implication that the Greek and Roman cultures predated those of eastern people. I have to say I'm pleased to have been rankled so, since it forced me to do further research. What I'm finding to be more and more true as I delve into the topic is that, around 1000BCE, those people that we generally consider to be the ancient empires, were all in pretty much the same boat.
I've found references to bronze weaponry from that era stemming from all over Europe, East Asia, and Northern Africa. As well as numerous descriptions of unarmed combat styles from those same areas.
It makes me wonder if this disagreement isn't entirely due to a difference in the  geographical focus of our studies.

[fourTwenty]

It makes me wonder if this disagreement isn't entirely due to a difference in the  geographical focus of our studies.

You are most probably correct. The only reason I went off into that tangent was because musashi's assumption that studying Chinese history, language and culture was the be-all-end-all to knowing about martial arts. Seeing as how my entire post on unarmed vs. armed combat and how history reflected on martial arts practicality was refuted with

As someone currently studying Chinese language, culture, and history ... I feel confident in assuring you that you're entirely wrong in almost 100 percent of what you just posted. Sorry.

And nothing else.


On the whole Bilanthri I have agreed with much of what you've stated. (As well as I am now reading some intresting new things on Pankration I was not aware of.)

[Bilanthri]

It makes me wonder if this disagreement isn't entirely due to a difference in the  geographical focus of our studies.

You are most probably correct. The only reason I went off into that tangent was because musashi's assumption that studying Chinese history, language and culture was the be-all-end-all to knowing about martial arts. Seeing as how my entire post on unarmed vs. armed combat and how history reflected on martial arts practicality was refuted with

As someone currently studying Chinese language, culture, and history ... I feel confident in assuring you that you're entirely wrong in almost 100 percent of what you just posted. Sorry.

And nothing else.


On the whole Bilanthri I have agreed with much of what you've stated. (As well as I am now reading some intresting new things on Pankration I was not aware of.)

Kudos to both of us gettin' our learn on!

[musashi]

I do have one question I want you to answer. How the hell does studying Chinese culture, language, and history qualify you to speak on Martial Arts as a whole?

It doesn't, and I never said it did.

The reference to China was just because you brought up Bruce Lee as the "beginning" of martial arts as a functional way to fight against someone who was armed, and he was Chinese American, and learned what he knew about martial arts from Chinese influence.

That asumption is incorrect. Also, Bruce Lee faces crticitism from a lot of Chinese folks mainly for being born in America, not because he wanted to learn more than 1 style of martial arts.

You then kindly ignored all the other examples I brought to your attention, unless you meant to say that every Okinawa was a master martial artist and every single Japanese that they ousted was a complete newbie with a sword.

As for the rest of all that, dude just do a bit of reading. Chinese, Japanese, and Korean history are all ripe with examples of people who espoused the "don't limit yourself to a single way of thinking or doing if you want to win" philosophy. The idea was widespread. I agree with you that Bruce Lee innovated the idea and marketed it to western people, he just was absolutely not the inventor of it of it, or it's "beginning", as you said.

I'm in no way saying that knowing anything about Asia is the be-all-end-all of martial arts, I'm saying that Bruce Lee did not start that movement (he just made it popular in the states), and martial arts (read: unarmed combat) had already been used to overcome armed opponents without an enourmous skill gap as you claim, several times throughout just Asian history, not counting other examples I'm sure you could pull from other cultures.

[fourTwenty]

The reference to China was just because you brought up Bruce Lee as the "beginning" of martial arts as a functional way to fight against someone who was armed

Actually, you should pay more attention. I brought up Bruce Lee as the main driving force behind the "way of no way" philosophy.

As for the rest of all that, dude just do a bit of reading. Chinese, Japanese, and Korean history are all ripe with examples of people who espoused the "don't limit yourself to a single way of thinking or doing if you want to win" philosophy. The idea was widespread.

No, it wasn't. And I've done the reading. More than you apparently. In fact, in Chinese culture (this is what your supposedly studying, remember) it was -literally- sacrilege to question certain forms of a martial art.

I'm in no way saying that knowing anything about Asia is the be-all-end-all of martial arts,

This being your entire rebuttal

As someone currently studying Chinese language, culture, and history ... I feel confident in assuring you that you're entirely wrong in almost 100 percent of what you just posted. Sorry.

certainly implied otherwise.

[Qzzrbl]

How the hell did this turn into an all-out discussion of the origins of unarmed combat?

Damn.

People have been kicking other people's asses without weapons since the dawn of time, no matter what the particular method or style was called.

/thread

[musashi]

Yeeeah, I'm good with ending it too.

EDIT: Or go to PM's, anyway.

[Qzzrbl]

And this here should sum up the main question of the thread.

Unarmed combat is functioning at exactly the level we want it to. There is no Bruce Lee, Royce Gracie, or Chuck Norris in Armageddon, and we like it fine that way.

Is unarmed combat underpowered? Against razor-sharp obsidian blades, yes. That staff want it that way, and that's how it is.

If you really just can't go on without a character who can't disarm people with his dick and kill with his pinky, try writing up a special application.

[FantasyWriter]

Carlos
The mulleted, thick-bearded man

Special skills requested:
Any blows to the head of face will be absorbed by his mullet and beard of awesomeness.
Hidden offense skill boosted to 300% of normal human max. (I promise I will never use weapons)
All kicks will result in a round house kick echo.
All round house kicks will succeed 100% if the time and will have a 25% chance of striking critically.

Special items requested:
A blue denim shirt with cut-off sleeves
A pair of "Wranglers"
A Shiny belt buckle
Cowboy boots

[brytta.leofa]

A pair of "Wranglers"

With hidden gusset.