As expected "Tribulations" was bound to have more "issues" than any other chapter, and here's two more that I would like to discuss here with you guys.
The first regards the definition "Restraining" attacks or maneuvers, and the extent of its effects.
On page 201 "Note that certain maneuvers are restraining (pg XX). If a restraining maneuver lands before your attack lands, it automatically discards all of the dice allocated for your attack. Likewise, if their attack would disarm the weapon with which you are making your attack or disable the limb wielding it, the effect is the same." The focus here is in the loss of the allocated dice.
Which is different from what we find on...
... page 205 "Some maneuvers are listed as restraining. Any time a maneuver is restraining, a successful attack counts as disabling per the above rules regardless of what was targeted
As I see it what this means is not that any limb will actually be disabled, especially when no limb is actually targeted. What it means is that, like on page 201, any restraining maneuver that lands before your attack lands, it automatically discards all of the dice allocated for your attack. ", no matter where the attack you suffer first lands,.
BUT this seems to contradict what is written a paragraph prior, in the same page 205, "Any time a maneuver successfully disables a limb, the attack will automatically negate any offensive maneuver based on said weapon or limb
yet to be performed in the same tempo. ".
Does this mean that a restraining maneuver has the same effects of a simple disabling maneuver, but expanded to take effect from a maneuver that actually may target any area and not the specific limb or weapon which serves as the base for the offensive maneuver being restrained?
Grappling rules on page 208., state "First, all attacks made while in a grapple are considered restraining." Does it make sense that a maneuver such as Bite to the chest or thigh make the opponent discard all dices allocated in a "counter strike" (lato sensu, not a specificities maneuver) being made by the weapon in his right limb? Or does a Grab or Hold maneuver made on the left limb of a character using the right to attack? In this case the disabled limb bears no direct effect on the limb being used to performa the offensive maneuver. To this effect "However, maintaining does not prevent the opponent from trying to steal initiative and attack with some other limb.", on page 209, which states that you can use another limb to attack, and thus the proving that a restraining maneuver only has the discarding dice effect when applied to the limb used in said maneuver.
It all seems a bit ambiguous, where "restraining" is sometimes treated as "disable", where this seems to apply "stricto sensu", meaning actually disabling a specific limb, whereas other times it applies just to the main effect that derives from such a disable BUT also already introduced the first time restraining is mentioned as a mechanics (page 201). It would greatly benefit from a clear definition of what "restraining" is and it´s precise effects, that makes it coherent under any example and rule its used in, because "Any time a maneuver successfully disables a limb, the attack will automatically negate any offensive maneuver based on said weapon or limb yet to be performed in the same tempo." contradicts " (...)successful attack counts as disabling per the above rules regardless of what was targeted".
Personally I think the rule as stated on page 201 seems to be the most correct and logic choice, meaning, the focus of restraining is to force the opponent to discard allocated dice to attacks declared for the tempo., bearing in mind that "Any time a maneuver successfully disables a limb, the attack will automatically negate any offensive maneuver based on said weapon or limb yet to be performed in the same tempo."
Disabling a limb is a secondary effect, as applicable under the specific situation.
I would also say that "Grappling also has an effect on weapons based on their reach. Hand and Close reach weapons work normally, but Short or longer reach weapons are limited to pommel strikes only. Likewise, grappling requires you to have at least one hand free. Weapons that require two hands cannot be employed at all.", which we find on page 208 also, would fall under the "restraining" mechanics.
Hope I made sense.
Second "issue", which is less an issue and more a lack of understanding the benefit of the maneuver, regards "Heavy Blow".
I've been pondering this and I sincerely cannot see the benefit in trading dice from the CP for damage done, on a 1 for 1 basis, in a system where the MoS directly adds to the damage value.
Meaning the CP dice allocated to the Heavy Blow advanced maneuver, 1 to 3, counts "only" as damage, whereas if the same dice were used to "fuel" the maneuver itself, not only it would raise the chance of more successes, and hence a higher chance of wining the contest vs the defensive maneuver, but if said offensive maneuver was successful it´s MoS would be proportionately higher, which would mean Damage would be higher in the same proportion.
I would understand if the rate was 1AC dice for +2 Damage. That would mean that you sacrificed accuracy for an added bonus to damage.
So, guys, what am I missing here to make investing dice from the CP "Heavy Blow" , as is, more efficient that just add those dice to fuel the offensive maneuver in the first place?