Teaching Offense and Defense

[SMuz]

But what you cannot teach is flexibility, balance, knowing when exactly to move one way or the other from what the other person is going to do, body learning, programmed reflex etc etc etc. This is what base off/def is.

Sorry, but I'd have to disagree with that. Some brilliant martial arts teachers are able to do that. That classic stuff from Karate Kid ("wax in, wax out", etc) is sort of teaching defense and offense. Ok, fine, Karate Kid was fantasy, but so is this. Point is, I know a good teacher who taught me balance, body control, and little hints like anticipating movement, as well as techniques to learn them faster.

But I think it's pretty damn tough to roleplay teaching offense and defense, so this idea still gets a "whatever" vote from me.

[X-D]

No, it was teaching to block/parry....a skill.


As to the rest of the post, Oh sure, I can tell you how to do that, but it means nothing without practice and lots of it. If I instruct one person on balance and not the other then put them in the ring together, neither are going to be any better.

Though Eloran put my thinking on the matter best.

[SMuz]

Well, since I'm aching for some sparring roleplay and have trouble logging in, here's how I'd consider teaching either

Offense:

Code Select Expand


You give the nubile man a long wooden plank.

You say to the nubile man:
      "Hit me with it!"

Looking quizzically at the long wooden plank, the nubile man says:
      "But I want to learn to use daggers"

You slap the nubile man hard.

You say to the nubile man:
      "If you can hit me with a plank, you can hit me with anything. Just do it!"

The nubile man lunges at you with the long wooden plank.

[30 seconds of misses]

Easily dodging his clumsy moves, you say to the nubile man:
      "Stop fighting so stiff. Loosen yehself."

The nubile man swings the plank in big arcs.

[More misses]

The nubile man says to you:
      "This plank is heavy!"

Casually evading another slow swing, you say:
      "That's coz yeh swinging with yeh wrists."

You say:
      "Swing wit' th' shoulders. Control the plank, don't let it control you."

[Some more misses]

The nubile man jabs the long wooden plank at you.

[Misses]

You easily step aside and laugh.

You say:
      "That how ya use yeh daggers? I've seen elves jab better than that."

Dodging another blow, you say, with a mock jab:
      "Yer strength comes from yeh feet. Root yehself into the ground and force it forward with yeh feet."

The nubile man jumps and swings the plank upwards.

You exclaim:
     "Nah like that! Ya pushing yeh strength into yeh feet t' jump. Push it into the arms!"

You cross your arms in mock parry.

You exclaim:
     "A'ight, break! Get some rest."

You teach 'Offense' to the nubile man.


Defense:

Code Select Expand


You say to the nubile man:
      "Put yeh weapon away. Today, I teach yeh defense."

You draw a bone sparring club.

The nubile man exclaims:
      "Why can't you use a plank?!"

You slap the nubile man hard.

Grinning as you put the club in your palm, you say to the nubile man:
      "Coz I'm th' teacheh and I can do whatever the Drov I want."

You hit the nubile man, barely grazing his body.

You disengage.

The nubile man exclaims:
      "I wasn't ready yet!"

You exclaim:
      "Well, feck you! Them gith ain't gonna wait for yeh to be ready. Lesson one.. always be alert!"

You hit the nubile man, barely grazing his arm.

You disengage.

The nubile man clutches his arm in pain.

You say:
      "Oi, when I pull my arm to the left, tha' means I'm gonna swing it to the right."

The nubile man exclaims:
       "I know, I know, it's so hard to block!"

You say:
      "You don't block it wit' yeh wrists! Yeh get outta the way!"

Jerking his body aside to show a dodge, you say:
      "Yeh turn yer body back a little.. and to the right.. ya time it right and I'll miss."

You hit the nubile man solidly in the head.
The nubile man reels from the blow.

You disengage.

The nubile man shouts:
      "Ow!"

With a frown, you say:
      "What the feck yeh doin'?"

The nubile man says:
      "I tried to dodge that one, by that turning thing."

You say:
      "Yeh, and ya let me hit ya right in th' temple. Stupid."

You say:
      "Ya wearin tha' gith skull helm. Gith.. and human skulls 'r weakest at the temple.
Next time, turn yeh head a bit, at least I'll hit ya in the thicker part. Learn t' use armor."

You nick the nubile man in the abdomen.

You disengage.

You jabs the bone sparring club hard into the nubile man's stomach.

The nubile man grunts, clutching his stomach.

You shout:
      "Stupid fecker!"

You say:
      "It's stupid to jab clubs..."

You exclaim:
      "..but even more stupid to leave yer stomach tensed like that in a fight!"

Shaking your head in disapproval, you say:
      "If ya even feel something against a part of the body, pull tha' part away like when ya pull yeh
hand from a hot grill. If yeh fast, the weapon misses. If not, it just hurts less."

The nubile man nods weakly.

You hit the nubile man solidly in the neck.
The nubile man's eyes roll back in his head.

You disengage.

Peering dubiously at the body, you say:
      "Lesson over."

You teach "Defense" to the nubile man.



On not being able to teach the good stuff, I suppose it would be realistic to have a max on how much offense or defense can be taught. Maybe up to 15% or so.. the rest from then on is practice.

On not having anything to do aside from sparring, well, teaching sessions are a lot more fun than coded sparring

[spawnloser]

Making offense and defense teachable skills would make sparring obsolete

Yeah, I'd really, really, REALLY miss the endless sparring. Without sparring, what else would there be to do in a military clan? Having off/def be teachable would make the game more interesting and mutually involving, and possibly open up new avenues of RP and new roles, therefore I vote no.

So because you're annoyed with combat RP, we should remove combat from the equation?  Why exactly?

Why shouldn't people in an organization led by a master of combat be better than your average indie who's just been out fighting scrabs on his own?

They can be better, on average, by having better weapon skills which can be taught.

I can 'know' everything there is to about say, kung fu... but without going through the motions and training my own body, myself, so that my reaction times in live situations match that knowledge, I'm still useless.

QFT.

[Synthesis]

I think almost every argument against the idea could be used against the 'teach' command in general, with respect to combat-related skills.

That is, if we didn't have the ability to teach weapon skills, and someone was suggesting that we gain this ability, the arguments in question would readily defeat the suggestion.

I just don't think there's anything especially powerful, special, or mystical about base offense and defense.  It should be able to be taught to a certain (low) level.

[Qzzrbl]

I guess could live with it of the teachability of offense and defense were capped at a relatively low level.

[Eloran]

I also have to agree with the man.

I'm actually a female. Just for future reference so you can call me a bitch instead of a dick.

[hyzhenhok]

A whole lot of crap.

I almost considered taking the time to explain to you what a logical fallacy was, but I don't think it'd do any good.

In short, don't simplify my argument like that. Please.

Offense and defense can best be summed up like in two words:

1) Experience.

2) Intangibles.

You can teach skill. You can teach tactics. You cannot impart experience on your pupil. You cannot impart intangibles on your pupil.

Allow me to dignify you with a response.

LOL

[Is Friday]

My favorite part of the thread was someone trying to impart knowledge about fighting through their experience watching The Karate Kid.

[Qzzrbl]

A whole lot of crap.

I almost considered taking the time to explain to you what a logical fallacy was, but I don't think it'd do any good.

In short, don't simplify my argument like that. Please.

Offense and defense can best be summed up like in two words:

1) Experience.

2) Intangibles.

You can teach skill. You can teach tactics. You cannot impart experience on your pupil. You cannot impart intangibles on your pupil.

Allow me to dignify you with a response.

LOL

So are you saying there aren't any intangibles involved with combat experience?

[hyzhenhok]

A whole lot of crap.

I almost considered taking the time to explain to you what a logical fallacy was, but I don't think it'd do any good.

In short, don't simplify my argument like that. Please.

Offense and defense can best be summed up like in two words:

1) Experience.

2) Intangibles.

You can teach skill. You can teach tactics. You cannot impart experience on your pupil. You cannot impart intangibles on your pupil.

Allow me to dignify you with a response.

LOL

So are you saying there aren't any intangibles involved with combat experience?

No, Eloran completely misread my post and overreacted. I was trying to insinuate that surely there is some knowledge an experienced warrior can impart to someone inexperienced with combat, even if there is little to no overlap in their guild-given combat skills. I was trying to ridicule the current game situation, and apparently Eloran though my redicule was aimed at the post that she authored.

Are you saying that there are only intangibles and unteachables involved with learning to fight, generically? It doesn't make much sense to me that an axe-wielding veteran warrior wouldn't be able to teach anything to a newbie, just because that person doesn't have chopping weapons, shield use, parry, etc. in their skill list.

[Is Friday]

Are you saying that there are only intangibles and unteachables involved with learning to fight, generically? It doesn't make much sense to me that an axe-wielding veteran warrior wouldn't be able to teach anything to a newbie, just because that person doesn't have chopping weapons, shield use, parry, etc. in their skill list.

Uh, they can teach a number of skills.

[spawnloser]

There are plenty of combat and weapon skills that can be taught.  You can teach someone how to hold a sword, the correct posture to adopt when lashing out with your foot, the principles of balance when you're slamming your body into someone so that the other person falls down and you don't.  You can not teach someone what they learn through practice, experience.  That is Offense and Defense.  Does this have to be said again, really?

[Synthesis]

There are plenty of combat and weapon skills that can be taught.  You can teach someone how to hold a sword, the correct posture to adopt when lashing out with your foot, the principles of balance when you're slamming your body into someone so that the other person falls down and you don't.  You can not teach someone what they learn through practice, experience.  That is Offense and Defense.  Does this have to be said again, really?

Does it really have to be said again that the PROBLEM here is that there's really only 1 reliably overlapping skill between most combat mentors and their recruits?  POSSIBLY two if the Sergeant in question took the time to practice a whole lot with piercing weapons.  If you could teach base offense and defense, that increases the total number of skills a warrior can teach -anyone- to three, four for combat-oriented non-warriors.  Furthermore, post defense-nerf, it seems like teaching someone a weapon skill does ZERO to improve their defense, unless they already have the parry skill to work with.  Thus, the only thing you can 'teach' your non-warrior recruits is how to desperately attack something and hope they kill it before it does too much damage.

All the "intangibles" in question here would be what happens AFTER teach is no longer possible with base offense and defense.  That is, the minimal level you could teach someone codedly would allow them a small head-start on becoming competent.  To become anything more, yes, they would STILL HAVE TO PRACTICE A LOT.

[Riev]

Syn, it seems though that what you're suggesting, would allow long-trained warriors the ability to give, say, NEW pickpockets a leg up in combat.

If they wanted to get -any- significant leg up in combat, they can special app it. If you say that it wouldn't be significant, this entire argument is null.

[Synthesis]

Syn, it seems though that what you're suggesting, would allow long-trained warriors the ability to give, say, NEW pickpockets a leg up in combat.

Yes, that's exactly what I'm saying.  Why shouldn't a pickpocket who's being trained by the Champion of Allanak -not- be better at fighting than your average newb?

If they wanted to get -any- significant leg up in combat, they can special app it. If you say that it wouldn't be significant, this entire argument is null.

Why bother with special applications when there's a command (teach) available that readily accomplishes the task?

[Majikal]

Eh, I'm of the mind that off/def represents your pc's experience over time, the hard skills (parry, weapon types, dual wielding etc) represent the things your pro warrior can give you tips on, tweak your style and help you perfect. More things to be taught for the purpose of beefing up pc's adds little to the game, the teach skill is effective enough as it is IMO. You would have people giving sparring lessons, throwing in some blurbs about how to parry and then following with a teach of both parry and defense or showing someone a proper kick then teaching kick and offense. This is all a change like this would amount too.

[Qzzrbl]

Syn, it seems though that what you're suggesting, would allow long-trained warriors the ability to give, say, NEW pickpockets a leg up in combat.

Yes, that's exactly what I'm saying.  Why shouldn't a pickpocket who's being trained by the Champion of Allanak -not- be better at fighting than your average newb?

Because codedly, a pickpocket wouldn't be able get that good at combat even if he spent 30+ hours  of non-stop sparring on his own.

I take that as a sign that the Staff don't want pickpockets to be good at combat.

If you want a character who's familiar with combat, pick a combat class.

[Sephiroto]

Though I have yet to vote I'll say that I believe off/def is more of an innate skill that one learns through experience.  It is not so much a technique in particular, but the ability to read opponents and situations then augment ones position for success against what they think comes next.  Off/def is sort of like Spidey Sense or street smarts, but in a manner likened to combat.  Without a clear example of just what off/def is, aside from the ability to hit or avoid being hit, it is very hard to put a make a decision.  Though, based on what I do know, off/def takes a long time to train and has such a great effect on combat that I'm not too sure I am comfortable with it being teachable.

[hyzhenhok]

Syn, it seems though that what you're suggesting, would allow long-trained warriors the ability to give, say, NEW pickpockets a leg up in combat.

Yes, that's exactly what I'm saying.  Why shouldn't a pickpocket who's being trained by the Champion of Allanak -not- be better at fighting than your average newb?

Because codedly, a pickpocket wouldn't be able get that good at combat even if he spent 30+ hours  of non-stop sparring on his own.

I take that as a sign that the Staff don't want pickpockets to be good at combat.

If you want a character who's familiar with combat, pick a combat class.

So under the current code, a class merchant can teach cook to a warrior and get him beyond what his class would naturally allow? Main guilds can teach subguilds beyond a level than the subguild would normally allow?

Your argument doesn't work unless teach is already broken, which AFAIK it is not. It is quite limited. People who use teach are not automagickally uber twinks who are out to max their characters and their clanmates.

EDIT: Maybe a little too much in coded detail.

[mansa]

Offence and Defence are secret skills that increase incredibly slowly.

I think that its fine how it is.  A chance to increase one percent in five thousand fails.

[mansa]

//pulls percentages out of his ass

[The7DeadlyVenomz]

I also have to agree with the man.

I'm actually a female. Just for future reference so you can call me a bitch instead of a dick.

Man, you are still a dick. Bitch.

No, I'm playing, but really, pardon the assumption on your sex. Your opinion is no less right or wrong in my book. You obviously have some brains, and you think with them, and that's something I respect.

And, for the record, I have to agree with the woman. I meant to say that, actually, but I forget the 'wo' part.

[spawnloser]

If you could teach offense and defense I predict seeing more hidden magickers joining the Byn.

[Eloran]

If you could teach offense and defense I predict seeing more hidden magickers joining the Byn.

Saaaaad but truuuuuuueooooah![/hetfield]