Forums of the Megaverse®

I apologize if this has already been discussed, but I am thinking of banning the boxing skill.

I just think its too powerful a skill. Automatic knockout on a natural 20 without having to declare it and an additional attack?
Every single character I have seen created has had boxing.

What about you other GM's, do you see an overuse of this skill as well? Do you just simply let everyone take it?

edit - forgot to include the question.

It doesn't bother me. What has it really cost you? Or are you just annoyed that it's available to almost everyone?

I adjusted it waay early on for the added attack to only be in affect while boxing (naturally the other perks also only work while fighting unarmed). It pretty much stopped getting taken aside from melee fighters (for the stat buff and if they needed to go unarmed).

MikeM wrote:What about you other GM's, do you see an overuse of this skill as well? Do you just simply let everyone take it?

It's a standard skill that almost everybody takes, but so are HTH Basic, HTH Expert, WP Energy Rifle, and a bunch of other skills.
I don't have a problem with it.

I don't have a problem with it if the character is a man at arms type. Heck, even if the character isn't but is set up to be an adventurer (i.e. - a ley line walker who isn't content to stay in settled country but wants to be an explorer/adventurer) I'll let it pass, the logic being that the character knew he was going to be risking his life, therefore he boned up on a few skills that would come in handy. Learning how to fight (boxing and HtH) is just part of preparing to survive.

Where I have a problem with boxing is when a character's background, as created by the player, would directly conflict with taking it, like a burster who, up until he discovered his in-born powers, was just a regular kids growing up in the fortress city of Free Quebec or the(relatively) peaceful farm lands of the CS. But even then, if the player can come up with something in the background story to make it fit (and fit well/seamlessly) then I'll allow it. For me as a GM, its all about the character. Is it believable? And will it be fun to play?

Personally as a storyteller I enjoy the roar of applause around the gaming table when a Natural 20 hits the table. Knock Out Punch on a 20 is a nice way for someone who is outclassed to pull a win out of their butt when everything else is hopeless just as much as it is an extra slap in the face when the situation is reversed. Personally I think that if we were given a few more skills like Boxing and Kickboxing (which seems mildly underpowered comparatively) it might not seem like such a "staple."

That said I think that it should be policed--not because it is too powerful--but because players are inclined to throw their own concept out the window a lot of the time for extra bonuses in combat. As previously mentioned most Ley Line Walker's and Cyber Doc's aren't likely to spend their free time at the bag polishing their skills.

And still, if it is turning out to be a serious problem for you or you feel it is disrupting play you could always just limit Boxing's bonuses to when the person is unarmed.

The only thing I've done is the player has to declare at character creation that they are either taking the extra attack OR they are taking the auto-knockout on a natural 20. They don't get both in my games, and it's worked so far. Nobody has complained that they don't get both.

Reasoning: Boxers are either fast (more attacks) or powerful (auto-knockout), but 99% of the time they aren't both.

If the player is a warrior it gives him that edge. Thats cool.

It allows the player to have an edge of most of my NPC villains (whom I hose not to have the skill). Thats cool for me.

So I dont mind it.

MikeM wrote:I apologize if this has already been discussed, but I am thinking of banning the boxing skill.

I just think its too powerful a skill. Automatic knockout on a natural 20 without having to declare it and an additional attack?
Every single character I have seen created has had boxing.

What about you other GM's, do you see an overuse of this skill as well? Do you just simply let everyone take it?

edit - forgot to include the question.

You might require the player to come up with a background that includes how they got into boxing.

But I will have to say that the nat 20 auto KO should be only available if the char is going fighting barehanded in a fight. If you are following the spirit of the skill.
Another way of putting that is that the auto KO is not available while using weapons of any sort because the skill only works with the muscle memory that is use while fighting with fists.

As a GM I use to rue the Boxing skill, but it is a pretty restricted skill... Your OCC has to allow it and it can't be taken as a Secondary.

Even if your OCC does allow it it requires the cost of an OCC Related skill, so in effect you lose out on a skill with bonuses. So with skill based games we've found that boxing just isn't worth losing that opportunity. Sometimes a +10% to a skill is worth more than +1 attack.

I agree Boxing is just something most people take to amp their stats they have no justification for it. A vagabond OCC should maybe have this option (of the physical type or in place of a HtH) and possibly a gladiator. Most other OCCs wouldn't have it unless they had an association with one of those OCCs. Boxing is ******* around and most people aren't going to see the point of it if you a have a problem with someone you use a sword or you use a more advanced HtH.

Actually I guess you could take boxing just for the physicals. "Hey how'd that guy get so big and strong? He took boxing. Oh maybe I should too." The problem with that is you should probably be able to get at least some of that with a HtH.

MikeM wrote:I apologize if this has already been discussed, but I am thinking of banning the boxing skill.

I just think its too powerful a skill. Automatic knockout on a natural 20 without having to declare it and an additional attack?
Every single character I have seen created has had boxing.

What about you other GM's, do you see an overuse of this skill as well? Do you just simply let everyone take it?

edit - forgot to include the question.

I've made a few characters that didn't have the skill.

drewkitty ~..~ wrote:You might require the player to come up with a background that includes how they got into boxing.

But I will have to say that the nat 20 auto KO should be only available if the char is going fighting barehanded in a fight. If you are following the spirit of the skill.
Another way of putting that is that the auto KO is not available while using weapons of any sort because the skill only works with the muscle memory that is use while fighting with fists.

Why only barehanded? IIRC, the addition of gloves to the sport of boxing allows the person to hit with more force because they won't have the psychological barrier of "I'm gonna hurt my hand" when they throw a punch. Unless of course you just meant that they only get that when fighting without a weapon, in which case I agree with you.

Anyway none of my groups ever had a problem with it.

The Beast wrote:

drewkitty ~..~ wrote:You might require the player to come up with a background that includes how they got into boxing.

But I will have to say that the nat 20 auto KO should be only available if the char is going fighting barehanded in a fight. If you are following the spirit of the skill.
Another way of putting that is that the auto KO is not available while using weapons of any sort because the skill only works with the muscle memory that is use while fighting with fists.

Why only barehanded? IIRC, the addition of gloves to the sport of boxing allows the person to hit with more force because they won't have the psychological barrier of "I'm gonna hurt my hand" when they throw a punch. Unless of course you just meant that they only get that when fighting without a weapon, in which case I agree with you.
Anyway none of my groups ever had a problem with it.

Barehanded, like fist fighting, not like a knife-fighter, or a gunslinger.

MikeM wrote:I apologize if this has already been discussed, but I am thinking of banning the boxing skill.

I just think its too powerful a skill. Automatic knockout on a natural 20 without having to declare it and an additional attack?
Every single character I have seen created has had boxing.

What about you other GM's, do you see an overuse of this skill as well? Do you just simply let everyone take it?

edit - forgot to include the question.

The knockout is for a nat20 punch that leaves an opponent dazed, it can't really apply to all attacks, or to all creatures. Also, stick with what the combat section says a knockout/stun attack does. Not unconscious, just down to 1 apm and no bonuses for 1d4 rounds.

I don't see much overuse of it. More combative characters will take it, but the ones that value skill slots will often skip it.

Kevin has mentioned before in an interview that he is a fan of professional boxing and the strategies involved in that sport. That preference is why this particular skill is potent and arguably front-heavy. I wouldn't ban it from all games, but it might clash with the tone of certain campaigns. For example, in a modern warfare-like scenario in which fighting is done exclusively with modern weapons, the free attack from boxing doesn't make a lot of sense. If a GM were to ban it from the table, I would have no objection.

We have never banned it or had a problem with it, the only changes we have made to it are, the player get's a free punch/elbow/pommel strike (this is the +1 apm). Our group also limits how many stat enhancing skills classes can take, Wizards can only take two for example, while Mercenary's can take as many as they want, Thief's can take four and so on. If a Wizard takes boxing, they are probably only doing it for the stats and no other reason.

If they play their Wizard like Harry Dresden, then I could see the player having boxing. If they are playing their wizard like Harry Potter, then it was for the stats.

Hi there,

my two cents:

- I have never banned boxing and see no need to do so.

- At my table, the boxing skill gives one additional attack in any form of melee (conversely, not for using any form of missile weapon).

- I tend to demand an explanation for any skill chosen and will - but that is rare - disallow a certain choice if the story behind a certain skill choice is not reasonable.

- I find that even a tendency of players to (over)load themselves with physical skills equals out just fine bottom line. I have never encountered a player who could not have used a couple more skill slots. If you chose "too many" physical skills, your character will tend to be underdeveloped in other areas. That may be acceptable for a man at arms, but for all other classes ... not so much ... and that is a great equalizer.

- If I wanted to nerf boxing I would allow the skill, leave it as it is but would restrict the addition attack to the use of unarmed melee.

Cheers
Hendrik

Players use it and so do NPC's. I don't see the problem.

For the record, I've run characters that didn't use the skill but they were the ones that weren't combat oriented. Combat oriented characters who are physically buff definitely take it.

I have found both as a player and a GM that when a character is overly focused on combat skills, they suffer in other areas. That's not a bad thing if they're the 'brick' in a group environment and there are others who can cover off those weaknesses. The trouble crops up when everyone in a group focuses on combat. It doesn't seem to be as big a problem with the groups I play with as it was when I was younger. Probably because the people I game with are generally older and more experienced gamers who know there's more than combat to worry about.

Not yet.

The extra attack I use only for hand-to-hand combat and the knock out also.

NPC can also have this skill and what goes for the player goes for NPC .

My group has adopted the rule that the knock out only works unarmed, but that the "extra attack" isn't a full extra attack. It is a special move that can be used in one of two ways each round.

1. As a dodge. Instead of using a normal attack to dodge, the PC can use their "boxing attack" instead.

2. When making a melee (armed or unarmed) the character can choose to make a 'double-tap' style attack. It is basically the same effect as the 'Speed Weapon' spell.

The PC can decide in the moment which he wants to do.

This makes it still useful, but not the be-all end-all that a flat out +1 attack usable for anything is.

C. Chopps

Doesn't bother me.
It's one less skill that's useful outside of combat...

Boxing does not bother me.

That said ... Both Boxing and Wrestling should be HtH types not seperate skills.

One of the RIFTERS wrote boxing, wrestling, kick boxing up as HtH skills using the Ninjas and Super-spies rules for HtH combat.

Great write up btw.

Personally, i think N&SS's HtH combat methods should be used in all Palladium Games.

MikeM wrote:I apologize if this has already been discussed, but I am thinking of banning the boxing skill.

I just think its too powerful a skill. Automatic knockout on a natural 20 without having to declare it and an additional attack?
Every single character I have seen created has had boxing.

What about you other GM's, do you see an overuse of this skill as well? Do you just simply let everyone take it?

edit - forgot to include the question.

1) I make boxing cost two skill selections.
2) In my games, the extra attack only applies in H2H combat.

If you really don't like auto KO on a nat 20 make a rule so that the target gets to make a save vs KO. If he/she makes the save they just take double damage. Fail and they get KO'd.

I leave boxing.... but I restrict it to characters that have a reason for having it. but that only means that some has to have been a amateur boxer or a boxer in the military or in collage, or in a historic game a prize fighter

I see no point in banning it...
Yes it seems to be an automatic skill for some folks.
But that just means that's one skill slot burned on a combat only skill.

I think the boxing should be limited to special classes in PF.
But then also add in a (Bar) Brawling skill that most of the chars can take that gives different bonuses.

I'm running along the mindset that boxing should only effect melee and movement type actions, not ranged weapon fighting. The only issue with this idea is keeping track of all the statistics, of which Rifts has a plethora of. Lets say someone makes a PA pilot with boxing as one of his skills using the above restrictions. If the player goes with the power armor option, then he has to keep track of his general combat statistics, his melee combat statistics, his flying PA combat statistics, his flying PA melee combat statistics, his ground PA combat statistics, and his melee ground PA combat statistics. That's a lot of stats to keep track of with all the other things a player has to manage.

My comment, would be how often are characters in your game actually punching stuff? To me, the knockout on a Natural 20 would only apply if punching. If they are shooting or using a sword or something, to me that wouldn't make any sense. And to me, I always thought you had to declare you were trying to knock them out? Maybe that was just a house rule though...

But I'd say, if you have a character running around punching stuff, then why not let it knock people out, I mean, depending on the setting, you've have to be on crack cocaine to run around with just your fists...

But for games where characters ARE running around on crack/cocaine...

I like boxing though I do only apply the bonuses when fighting in hth and the knock out only when uses fists one of the best pc fights I had started with two demo men with hth expert and boxing ( another npc also dull pained them) fighting on stage in a bar for a raise it eventually went of the stage outside with amazing rolls on both sides until one finally rolled nat 20 it also saved on of those charis life when a agumented strength npc power punched him leaving one up and he with his last but of force knocked him out. If there is a skill with a issue it is fencing.

Is it just me or does the auto KO on 20 kind of ruin the thematic nature of the skill?
With Boxing, a character has a minimum of 5 attacks per melee, that means that on average it would take 4 melees to score that natural 20.

Boxing matches typically last a lot longer than a minute... There needs to be some kind of defense.

Giant2005 wrote:Is it just me or does the auto KO on 20 kind of ruin the thematic nature of the skill?
With Boxing, a character has a minimum of 5 attacks per melee, that means that on average it would take 4 melees to score that natural 20.

Boxing matches typically last a lot longer than a minute... There needs to be some kind of defense.

Don't forget a clever combatant will try to roll with the knockout punch so it's not an auto-KO.

MikeM wrote:I just think its too powerful a skill. Automatic knockout on a natural 20 without having to declare it

I guess a literalist reading of that would be too much - ie, walking up to a ancient dragon and punching it out with ones bare SDC fist.

Depends if your players really, really imagined boxing would mean being able to KO anything outside the boxing ring. If so, I guess you came to the table with really differing views.

Noon wrote:

MikeM wrote:I just think its too powerful a skill. Automatic knockout on a natural 20 without having to declare it

I guess a literalist reading of that would be too much - ie, walking up to a ancient dragon and punching it out with ones bare SDC fist.

Depends if your players really, really imagined boxing would mean being able to KO anything outside the boxing ring. If so, I guess you came to the table with really differing views.

I like this scenario. Doing it how I run it, would be epic. 1st level character walks up to a sleeping dragon in it's lair on a pile of treasure in sweat pants, a sweatshirt and a skully cap. The dragon wakes up and pulls back slightly to breathe fire, the 1st level character says "I declare I'll try to knock this punk out." Epically rolls a natural 20 after declaring it, and knocks the dragon out cold in a single hit and then says something like "Adrain" To me that is perfectly acceptable, because like Babe Ruth, if you can call it and then hit it and plays out just like you said, why not let it happen. I mean, it's only a 5% chance of happening, unless my math is off...

I've been posting about RPG's for a long while and I was kinda half waiting for the 'Geez, that sounds great!' to come in at even the slightest hint of something not being koshur.

Personally I like symmetrical worlds.

I can't imagine many players who'd like to play a dragon (let alone an ancient one), then get punched out by a NPC squishie in a flannelette shirt. Let's say we don't allow it then. Okay, so when they aren't playing one, how come the rules change?

Generally I think the idea of the KO seems thrilling if your playing a game of talking yourselves up, pretty much making sure how all rules used are used only in the players favour, not an equal favour to both PC and NPC.

Not like you can't play that way. I guess I would only dig at someone who likes to KO the dragon, but would conveniently forget that rule when it came to a player run dragon.

And I think Adrain is the name of the ranger in our 4E campaign...Adrian, though, is not taken

They way I do it I only let my players knock somebody who is knockoutable logically for the dragon example I would treat the twenty as the lucky boxer full force punching him straight into the eye.

How often do your players punch?

Now how often do your players use any kind of melee?

Now on top of that how often do your players roll natural 20s?

http://www.palladiumbooks.com/questions/combat.html

30. Does the boxing skill add an attack at all times or just during melee that doesn't involve missile weapons?
Answer: Only during melee weapons combat it does not apply to any form of ranged combat.

popscythe wrote:Answer: Only during melee weapons combat it does not apply to any form of ranged combat.

They really need to work on their technical writing skills. As written, that means the boxing bonus doesn't apply in no weapons/bare or gloved fist attacks.

popscythe wrote:How often do your players punch?

Now how often do your players use any kind of melee?

Now on top of that how often do your players roll natural 20s?

http://www.palladiumbooks.com/questions/combat.html

30. Does the boxing skill add an attack at all times or just during melee that doesn't involve missile weapons?
Answer: Only during melee weapons combat it does not apply to any form of ranged combat.

Right.
Except that guns typically have a ROF of "equal to the number of combined melee attacks."
So by adding to melee attacks, you necessarily add to gun attacks.
Which is why that answer is stupid.
Also, the old FAQ was just answered by some fans, not by Kevin or Palladium staff. It's not canon.

Cinos wrote:I adjusted it waay early on for the added attack to only be in affect while boxing (naturally the other perks also only work while fighting unarmed). It pretty much stopped getting taken aside from melee fighters (for the stat buff and if they needed to go unarmed).

Yeah I think it was always implied but never flat out stated the skill only applies when in melee combat. I dont see how boxing would make you a better shot or even a faster shot.

Oh, and I made up some character sheets a while back that keep separate track of melee and ranged bonuses along with generic bonuses. Makes combat a lot easier, you dont have to remember whats what.

Shorty Lickens wrote: I dont see how boxing would make you a better shot or even a faster shot.

The exact same way that leveling up in Martial Arts or Basic HTH skill would.

Actually, instead of banning boxing, you could have the skill add combination parry/attack and only give a +1 melee attack action if the person already has the combination parry/attack option. Combo parry/attack or dodge/punch does sound like something a boxer would do anyway in a normal fighting situation.

We ditched the extra attack from boxing and house ruled that you can instead make one unarmed attack per round as a power punch for the cost of one attack total (as opposed to two).

As to the k.o., I thought if the victim was expecting the attack it was just a stun, which I don't see as a game breaker. Although that might just be a another house rule we instituted. Not near a book right now to check it out.

For me and my players, Boxing has never really been an issue. I have players that swear by it, taking it with every character they make, others who take it occassionally according to what they want to develop, taking it for their fighter types but tending to avoid it when making mages, priests or other basically non-combat types, and even a rare few who see no need for it. I do impose a few basic common sense restrictions though. For example, while i let the extra attack apply to pretty much any form of combat, including ranged combat, the Auto KO I only let happen when fighting unarmed and even then only against an opponent reasonably vulnerable to getting KO'd from a punch to the chin. A Human going toe to toe with a Dragon, for example... not gonna happen. But that same Human dancing around a ring with an Ogre or possibly even a Troll... I can see it. Of course, the taller the target is in comparison to the attacker, the harder it'll be to actually get that Knockout punch in, but that's where some pretty dynamic descriptions of a character's actions can come in to play. (One player I had decided to try and score a KO against a Troll with his Human assassin by having him ride full tilt at the Troll on horseback and make a flying Superman punch to the its jaw. Sadly, he botched the roll and ended up eating a couple pounds of dust at the Troll's feet, but the idea was sound so I let him give it a shot. Made for a great laugh around the table afterward, too) Either way a little common sense can go a long way toward managing characters with the Boxing skill.

i was thinking about making the extra attack only apply to hand to hand......what used does it have with guns anyways

Chronicle wrote:i was thinking about making the extra attack only apply to hand to hand......what used does it have with guns anyways

The way I see it, Boxing's extra attack isn't so much a focus on throwing punches faster as it is speeding up a person's combat reflexes to the point of just attacking faster in general. And it takes considerably less effort to pull a trigger than to throw a punch.

Chronicle wrote:i was thinking about making the extra attack only apply to hand to hand......what used does it have with guns anyways

Logically, boxing doesn't make you shoot faster.
But logically, learning Hand To Hand: Martial Arts doesn't make you shoot faster either.

Since learning how to judo-chop somebody an extra time (or kick them, or flip them, or whatever) in Rifts also lets you shoot them an extra time (or mind-blast them, or breathe fire at them, or whatever), why wouldn't the extra punch from boxing?

Killer Cyborg wrote:

Chronicle wrote:i was thinking about making the extra attack only apply to hand to hand......what used does it have with guns anyways

Logically, boxing doesn't make you shoot faster.
But logically, learning Hand To Hand: Martial Arts doesn't make you shoot faster either.

Since learning how to judo-chop somebody an extra time (or kick them, or flip them, or whatever) in Rifts also lets you shoot them an extra time (or mind-blast them, or breathe fire at them, or whatever), why wouldn't the extra punch from boxing?

Of course! If it wasn't for all that physical punching energy weapons would stop working entirely! However, it should be noted that only the WEAPON benefits from punching it. Unfortunately, as many a hapless soul has demonstrated already, punching an energy clip does not allow the e-clip to hold more energy blasts... yet.

point taken, but an offer to resolve the problem none the less.

Chronicle wrote:point taken, but an offer to resolve the problem none the less.

The only way to really fix the number of attacks for ranged weapons being based off of the number of hand to hand attacks of the character would be to rework how the number of attacks for ranged weapons is calculated. Tracking the number of melee attacks separate from the ranged attacks would be one tactic and probably the simplest, since ranged attacks already ignore strike bonuses from hand to hand combat skills and Physical Prowess.

On a high up concept kind of view: Ranged attacks would be based on whether the character in question is proficient with the ranged weapon and their character level. Melee attacks would be calculated and handled as they are right now.

On a closer design view: Since the typical number of starting attacks a character has is four if he has a hand to hand combat skill, four attacks would be the base for a character with a modern weapon proficiency, while an untrained character would possess half that amount. The number of attacks with ranged weapons would improve statically and independently of the hand to hand skill at a rate similar to hand to hand: Basic. Attack actions would be counted against the maximum number of melee / movement actions the character has available.

The one caveat with this method is that it is possible for a character to run out of ranged attacks before he has used up all his melee/movement actions, so you end up with a situation where for some reason the person can't pull the trigger on his gun, but he can move x number of feet or punch someone in the face. It also complicates the character sheet even further and makes the process of making and maintaining a character more tedious.