Forums of the Megaverse®

Okay, here’s the issue. Sarcasm has been a fan of the art of Shaolin Chin Na for years now. He first acquired Analysis of Shaolin Chin Na by Dr. Yang Jwing-Ming in the latter half of the eighties. Now far from it for Sarcasm to belittle Mr. Wujcik’s excellent breakdown into understandable game mechanics that Ninjas & Superspies represents, but, and this is a little but, the breakdown of Chin Na seems, eh, uncompleted.

On page 87 of the revised edition is Ch’in-Na: The art of seizing. It starts off great, but Chin Na is a fairly open art not conducted “[…] in the strictest of secrecy.” Besides that, it’s a question of understanding the game terms. Can anyone utilize Joint Locks? As he understood it, only the arts that list that in it’s description can use Locks, but there is only like one or two arts that do, and Chin Na is not one of them. That is ridiculous.

Dr. Jwing-Ming’s book has hundreds of joint locks! Literally hundreds, from Moo Jyy Ya (thumb press) to Joan Joow (Turning Elbow). According to page 88 of N&SS Chin Na is only open to holds! Specifically, arm hold, leg hold, neck hold, and automatic hold. Where are the locks? Why is the “art of seizing” lockless?

In addition, the Tien-Hsueh Touch Mastery, which Sarcasm knows nothing about, seems to focus on the many missing aspects of Shaolin Chin Na! Chapter 8 and 9 of Dr. Jwing-Ming’s book focuses on Muscle Grabbing Chin Na and Cavity Press. Picture someone grabbing those large muscles that run along the side and back of the neck; that is what muscle grabbing is all about. The Cavity Press is also lacking, as there are pages of “Tien Hsueh” (Cavity Press) and “Tien Shiee” (blood press)!

Should Sarcasm do as he was planning, and give Chin Na the locks? As well as allowing more Cavity Presses and/or strikes like “Da Hsueh Far” (Cavity Striking Method)—how else do you get to pop in that Governing Vessel in with a smashing strike?

Thanks, man. The locks were the thing that was bothering Sarcasm the most, not really going to invent new moves perse, but he is going to give Chin Na all the versions of Locks, including the automatic lock.

ExcuseMySarcasm wrote:Okay, here’s the issue. Sarcasm has been a fan of the art of Shaolin Chin Na for years now. He first acquired Analysis of Shaolin Chin Na by Dr. Yang Jwing-Ming in the latter half of the eighties. Now far from it for Sarcasm to belittle Mr. Wujcik’s excellent breakdown into understandable game mechanics that Ninjas & Superspies represents, but, and this is a little but, the breakdown of Chin Na seems, eh, uncompleted.

You didn't actually read Disclaimer #1 on page 6, did you?

Every style in the book is fictional. Some share the same name as real world styles, and may have some similarities to their real world namesakes, but ultimately they are products of the author's imagination.

Ain't that quaint.

Originally posted by ExcuseMySarcasm.
Dr. Jwing-Ming’s book has hundreds of joint locks! Literally hundreds, from Moo Jyy Ya (thumb press) to Joan Joow (Turning Elbow).
{snip}
Chapter 8 and 9 of Dr. Jwing-Ming’s book focuses on Muscle Grabbing Chin Na and Cavity Press. Picture someone grabbing those large muscles that run along the side and back of the neck; that is what muscle grabbing is all about. The Cavity Press is also lacking, as there are pages of “Tien Hsueh” (Cavity Press) and “Tien Shiee” (blood press)!

So do you have any ideas for new holds/locks/attacks that aren't in N&S?

Tinker Dragoon wrote:You didn't actually read Disclaimer #1 on page 6, did you?

Every style in the book is fictional. Some share the same name as real world styles, and may have some similarities to their real world namesakes, but ultimately they are products of the author's imagination.

In addition to stressing the standard reply, I suggest that if you don't like the way it's done in N&S, do your own version of the style. Everyone here likes to see new, well-done martial art styles, as well as fixes to the ones in the book.

So do you have any ideas for new holds/locks/attacks that aren't in N&S?

Not really, his idea was more of pointing out that Chin Na is the art of seizing, and as such should be allowed the locks as well as the holds.

Everyone here likes to see new, well-done martial art styles, as well as fixes to the ones in the book.

That’s nice.

In fact, this is a fix of one of the martial arts that the author “invented,” one that just happens to match nearly to a tee an existing art form. That style of martial arts, Shaolin Chin Na, is chock full of locks, and as those nifty questions in the original post indicate, like this one, “Can anyone utilize Joint Locks?” And these two, “Where are the locks? Why is the “art of seizing” lockless?” And finally, this question, “Should Sarcasm do as he was planning, and give Chin Na the locks?”—it’s very clear that is the purpose of this thread. Sorry you were confused.

As such, you should have quite deftly understood that what Sarcasm was asking for was community advice on whether or not the martial art Chin Na, as represented in N&SS, is lacking in something, specifically locks. There is not a need to create a completely new template for Chin Na when the existing one will suffice. Though, to better represent the art that it is imagining to represent, it should have had the locks.

The art of seizing, as represented by the imaginary Ch’in-Na does not do it’s real world inspiration justice, and as this post states, adding “[…]all the versions of Locks, including the automatic lock” will help to alleviate that issue.

Hey Sarcasm, I like your style. You remind me of someone who used to go by the name Zero.

Hook us up. Strait. I love seeing styles revamped by people who are familiar with them.

As it sits, you have two routes you can go with.

1: Make it more like the unrevised N&S, which is a lot less limp-wristed when it comes to the distribution of bonuses (God forbid a dedicated martial artist be able to strike, parry, and dodge better than a McDojo graduate)

2: You can stick with the "revisions". Which is a lot more restrictive; however Agent K is very helpful if you go this route. Even though he seems to like the unrevised system better (as do most of us that have had the pleasure) he is not biased about either system.


I might even be willing to post my Wing Chun Kung Fu, complete with a few modifications that have been added since the last time I posted it.

ExcuseMySarcasm wrote:

So do you have any ideas for new holds/locks/attacks that aren't in N&S?

Not really, his idea was more of pointing out that Chin Na is the art of seizing, and as such should be allowed the locks as well as the holds.

Everyone here likes to see new, well-done martial art styles, as well as fixes to the ones in the book.

That’s nice.

In fact, this is a fix of one of the martial arts that the author “invented,” one that just happens to match nearly to a tee an existing art form. That style of martial arts, Shaolin Chin Na, is chock full of locks, and as those nifty questions in the original post indicate, like this one, “Can anyone utilize Joint Locks?” And these two, “Where are the locks? Why is the “art of seizing” lockless?” And finally, this question, “Should Sarcasm do as he was planning, and give Chin Na the locks?”—it’s very clear that is the purpose of this thread. Sorry you were confused.

As such, you should have quite deftly understood that what Sarcasm was asking for was community advice on whether or not the martial art Chin Na, as represented in N&SS, is lacking in something, specifically locks. There is not a need to create a completely new template for Chin Na when the existing one will suffice. Though, to better represent the art that it is imagining to represent, it should have had the locks.

The art of seizing, as represented by the imaginary Ch’in-Na does not do it’s real world inspiration justice, and as this post states, adding “[…]all the versions of Locks, including the automatic lock” will help to alleviate that issue.

1. The art in the book is not your idea of "Shaolin Chin Na", never has been, and never will be. It is a fiction having only a passing similarity to reality.

2. It isn't lacking anything in so far as it does exactly what the author intended. Actually making it realistic however (as it is not sufficient at all in this regard) would take more than simply adding one class of combat moves. It would require a full revision to it's available combat moves, martial art powers, alignment restrictions, history, etc.

If Sarcasm wants more locks, then FWaNK suggests he add them.

ExcuseMySarcasm wrote:That’s nice.

In fact, this is a fix of one of the martial arts that the author “invented,” one that just happens to match nearly to a tee an existing art form. That style of martial arts, Shaolin Chin Na, is chock full of locks, and as those nifty questions in the original post indicate, like this one, “Can anyone utilize Joint Locks?” And these two, “Where are the locks? Why is the “art of seizing” lockless?” And finally, this question, “Should Sarcasm do as he was planning, and give Chin Na the locks?”—it’s very clear that is the purpose of this thread. Sorry you were confused.

There was no confusion, except maybe by yourself. It's obvious you feel there is something missing, so the advice given was to go ahead and do something about it. But to ensure that you are no longer confused about any of your questions, let's take them one at a time.

Q: “Can anyone utilize Joint Locks?”
A: NO.

Q: "Where are the locks?"
A: In the hand to hand combat section, under the part entitled "JOINT LOCKS."

Q: "Why is the “art of seizing” lockless?"
A:

Revised N&S, page 6 wrote:DISCLAIMER NUMBER ONE: The martial arts described here, even those with real names, are not to be confused with those in the real world.
...
Second, since there are dozens of variations on most martial arts, I've just made up my own version that best fits the game. And, where I didn't have reliable data, I would just make up facts.

As such, you should have quite deftly understood that what Sarcasm was asking for was community advice on whether or not the martial art Chin Na, as represented in N&SS, is lacking in something, specifically locks. There is not a need to create a completely new template for Chin Na when the existing one will suffice. Though, to better represent the art that it is imagining to represent, it should have had the locks.

*Sigh* You've obviously missed the points made. 1) The FICTIONAL Chin Na in N&S isn't 'missing' anything (editting problems and missing technical data aside). 2) If you feel it doesn't work for you or your games, fix it.

The art of seizing, as represented by the imaginary Ch’in-Na does not do it’s real world inspiration justice, and as this post states, adding “[…]all the versions of Locks, including the automatic lock” will help to alleviate that issue.

It's not supposed to do the real world inspiration justice. WHICH is the entire point of the note at the very beginning of the book.

RoadWarriorFWaNK wrote:If Sarcasm wants more locks, then FWaNK suggests he add them.

Slagg is just tired of posters refering to themselves in the third person...

That was FWaNK's point, wasn't it?

(if so: AMEN BROTHEREN!)

acreRake wrote:That was FWaNK's point, wasn't it?

(if so: AMEN BROTHEREN!)

I was just saying, "If you want locks, add locks." It's really a simple solution.

Sarcasm has! Thanks!