So I was looking through the martial arts section of arsenal recently, wanting to create a defensive type fighter, and figured that Aikido would make a good choice since it is all about redirecting enemy attacks and defenses and throws and such (As far as I know). I noticed however that the +1 die it grants when using full defense is only to dodge or parry, and not block.

Does Full Parry mean to include a full block? Because looking through SR4 I noticed that in the table about defense it says "Defender using Full Defense: Reaction + weapon skill/Dodge + Dodge" It also separates weapon skill from unarmed combat via parry v block.

It also indicates that you can do a full defense using Reaction + unarmed skill + dodge in the text on the same page... so did unarmed combat suddenly get included under weapon skill and count as a parry when doing a full defense?

It seems even weirder because I've never thought of Aikido/Judo as being a martial arts that makes any use of weapons.

Also, while we're on the subject, why would you want to take the Aikido +1 to Full Dodge over the Capoeira +1 to melee dodge? Since melee dodge gets included into Full dodge, it seems like the Capoeira bonus is had all the time while the Aikido one is limited only to when you use a full defense.

That's one of the flaws of the SR hand to hand system. The various Martial Arts are in-balanced. The only reason to take anything other then Krav Maga is for thematic reasons.

I have heard that judo incorporates katana technique at the dan level, but I never observered or heard of this while I was studying the style. I do know someone who uses a katana in Akido, though I'm not too sure this is common practice.

Mechanics wise, it seems like unarmed combat is in fact the weapons skill that's called for. The text may be in need of errata, but even if they are intended to be seperate skills, an unarmed block and parry are close enough that I'd rule them as being mechanically the same thing.

Judo does not practice with weapons. Even blocks is a misnomer, you redirect the force of the attack in judo into your own throws, locks and ultimately pins.

Right, that is what I always figured (and experinced), and kinda why I thought parry might have been meant to include Unarmed combat because you can totally parry a blow with limbs (I mean I really don't want to 'block' a sword with my arms... it might be just as bad as letting him hit me.')

Your mileage may vary. Feel free to use a bonus to blocks instead of parries if you want to.

Judo is derived from Jujitsu, which has lots of close-range weapon techniques as it was, at the root, essentially grappling in armor on a battlefield. The people I knew who did akido did practice with a sword as part of akido, though I have no idea whether they had any ability to use it defensively.

Weapon training is integral to aikido. All techniques come from sword or short staff and to gain an indepth understand of the art you have to study weapons.

Also aikido and judo both trace their roots back to the same ancient Japanese art sometimes called yawara which almost certainly included weapons training. Modern judo deemphisizes these aspect of the techniques but they are there if you know what to look for.

Yea reading through Arsenal it was hard to miss the Krav Maga fetish. I also found it extremely amusing that it's more effective for a shooter then firefight which is a terrible martial art.

As an illustration, here are a few video clips of T.K. Chiba Sensei, an 8th dan aikido instructor who's weapon system is integral to his style of aikido.

HERE he is demonstrating a basic aikido technique called shihonage (which means 4 directional throw) against an overhead attack (such as that from a sword).

HERE he is demonstrating the same technique against an attacker trying to take control of his sword.

And HERE is a more recent clip of him explaining (if you can decipher his english) the evolution of the movement.

Note the footwork, the body position and the cutting movement of his arms in all three.

So yeah, it makes sense to me that you can use your unarmed/aikido skill to defend against a weapon and at in terms of mechanics aikido and judo are the same.

melee dodge applies all the time when you're in melee. for obvious reasons, it doesn't apply when you're at range. full defense should.

My entire group are MA nuts. So we let people put there own edges and flaws to there style as long as it comes out to zero.

I have 2nd dan brown belt and the wepaons were VERY limited and usually it was defensive moves to defend against a weapon.

Jujitsu was the main japanese martial art. In the 19th century it split into Judo and Aikido. They have similar moves and some basics but the split is really what the practiioner needs to learn.

As a rule of thumb Judo is throwing and choking. Aikido is joint locks. Yes I know they have stuff that crosses over but that's the best way to keep them straight. The best media version of aikido is Steven Seagal. I have toruble watching those films because I knw how horrible those things can be.

Both styles are very good defensive forms because they take the oppenents energy and redirect it. judo it is usually taking their mommentum and getting htem airborn-trust me, hitting the ground with your full wieght from even 4-5 feet up can hurt, and if the person who does the redirecting, holds on to your 175 pounds at the wrist as the rest of you keeps going...well lets just say the mass hits all the weak points in the limb. In aikido the momentum of the attacker is redirected to press the limbs agaisnt their usual angles, just press the back of your elbow lightly and feel how unpleasant that is.

There is another aikidoka here??
I find so few around
Weapons were used a lot, but they were more teaching aid that the point of the training. lots of disarms.
5hrs a day 5days a week for a year i was in an aikido dojo. Need to find a new dojo...

I find Judo and aikido are very good for women to learn for self defense since it thrives on balance and low centers of balance, pretty much a given for most women facing a mugger. I get so amazingly po'ed at defense classes that teach women to shout and throw a punch. Sure they need confidence but when that punch from a 110 pound girl fails to take down the 200 lb dipstick, they are in trouble, he's po'ed or amused and they find that confidence slipping away.


It was when I was in New York. and I'll agree for the disarms, but I didn't want someone to think we were running around learning to attack with weapons. I was taught that when you have a weapon in your hand you've stripped away options because you can't do anything else with that hand.

That's why you kick them between the legs, not punch them

Never practiced Judo, but when I did Tae-Kwon-Do we had a Judo student visit for a few weeks. Those weeks involved alot of being flipped in the air and finding ourselves on our backs. Good fun, we learned to breakfall alot better after that Even with one arm in the opponent's grip.

Thanks for all the help and such so far everyone.

Now, on a similar vein, is there any real way to make someone who would be able to do Judo/Akido moves as they are supposed to be done? Throw requires a high str on your part and low on your opponents, but the whole point of Judo is that you use your low strength and their high strength against them. Nothing else seems designed to give you any kind of advantage for fighting defensively (Other than being harder to hit of course). Riposte just lets you attack a bit sooner than you might otherwise, and only if you've defended sucessfuly, but gives no bonus for having done so. Disarm is the closest you get, but that of course only works on people with weapons.

Licking that high? guys tend to expect it and guard against it. Hit the shin and srape down to the ankle bone- hurts more, surer hit and even if not perfect you've got them off balance.

The best martial arts system I've enountered was in the @nd Ed AD&D oriental adventures system., That doesn't help here but still it shows how difficult it can be to find this stuff.

I would have to disagree with some of your assertions. It sounds to me like some of these things are specific to the style or dojo in which you trained. Aikido is not just joint locks by any means- in fact aside from the osai waza aikido is all about throws (we even turn the osai waza techniques into throws.

The degree to which weapons are emphasized varies from between dojos and styles, but it is fundamental to understanding the techniques on all but a cursory level. Not just defense against weapons, but the actual martial application of aikido. It is as fundamental as "Why do we practice against wrist grabs?" (hint- a better question is "Where is the weapon?" because there is always a weapon). For some teachers, like the aforementioned Chiba Sensei it impossible to really understand their aikido without understanding their weapons. The two are inseparable and the only distinction is whether he actually has a stick in his hands at any given time.

Aikido and Judo both come from jujitsu, but the concept of using your attackers energy against him predates these modern arts by a very long time. The concept comes down from ancient japanese arts like yawara (note- in modern Japanses MA parlance yawara refers to an art that utilizes a short stick... this is not the same as the ancient predecessor of jujistsu, aikido and judo). Judo and aikido are similar in that both were developed by forward thinking individuals (Jigoro Kano and Ueshiba Morihei respectively) to modernize older more-martial arts into a "post-war" era. Ueshiba did this by incorporating a philosophy of non-violence and Kano by developing a competitive sport. This lead to the differences as they are today- judo assumes a resistant attacker- one who equally intent on throwing you as you are him, where as aikido assumes an attacker who is unaware and "neutralized" by the interaction. And further more, there was active exchange of students between Ueshiba and Kano, and many (almost all) of the preeminent aikido shihan where highly ranked in judo before training with Ueshiba. Kanai Sensei for example routinely used judo names for some of the aikido throws he taught.

And for the record, I have training in aikido for about 12 years at numerous dojos around the US with some of the best teachers in the world. I'm not here to say "you're doing wrong" to anyone, but if you don't see the weapons in aikido then its because you don't know what to look for.

As someone pointed out to me on karate, if you look at kata and all you see are strikes and blocks you are not seeing what is really going on.

sometimes i find myself thinking that krav maga gets the press because its supposedly ruthless, and fits perfect into the latest MMA/NHB "gladiatorial" entertainment wave...

Krav maga is more like taking cheap shots, disarming oponents and doing nasty underhanded stuff thats great in a real unarmed/armed fight but not applicable in combat sport like MMA that has rules etc.

For your defensive fighter get Wrestling/BJJ (Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu, sometimes called Gracie Jiu-Jitsu), use the option for subdual combat, take the opponent down and beat his ass on the ground with low risk for yourself (if you score many hits on the subdual roll that is).

Very much not true, as expressed by the historical tend for warriors and those who use combative arts professional to use weapons rather than fight unarmed. Generally speaking, if two people get into a fight, the one with the weapon wins. Unarmed techniques against weapons are always acts of desperation, when flight is not an option. Many of the German wrestling master from the Middle Ages and Renaissance talked about this.




The problem with BJJ is that it sucks against multiple attackers. You lose mobility once you hit the ground, and if you are fighting multiple people, that's a really bad thing. In the Army, they tell us the whole point of groundfighting is to tie up an opponent so that our buddy can walk up and put a bullet in his head. Problem is, that works both ways. Groundfighting is great for single combat and competitive fighting because you don't have to actually harm your opponent the way you do with strikes and it is easier to "win" because you can just "subdue" him with a joint-lock.

Ironically, the whole Historical Western unarmed fighting paradigm from the pre-Renaissance can be summed up in "throw them to the ground and stab them with a knife."

uh, yeah, clearly weapons give you an advantage, that's why we started using them as a species once some monkey figured out beating on someone with a bone was better than using your hands, and yeah, God made man, Samual Colt made men (and women) equal. If the drek goes down again, I would rather use my Berretta than bare hands BUT if sparing with someone, the knife in my hand does limit my possibilities. If I am bare handed and the punk has (in RL had) a knife I know that is the hand he is leading with. and so that is the point to watch. scary as hell but when he moved, it was what I was expecting and was ready for.

Method, I know I was not quite on when deviding Judo into throwing and choking and Aikido into locks and holds.I was painting in very broad strokes for the owver all themes of the styles. like saying TKD is punches and kicks. there's lots of other stuff in there too but that is what most schools have in common. For example think of movie fighters who really known what they are doing. Chuck Norris and Steven Seagal are clearly using different styles.

norris supposedly learned from bruce lee, so i guess the apperance of multiple styles comes from mr. lee's own "style" that boiled down to "take what works, toss the rest" from all manner of styles...

that is, if anything about the man can be trusted to be accurate, historically...

I chose Norris instead of Lee for the example because Lee's style was so unique, the same for Jackie Chan. He's so mixed martial arts that he doesn't have a single style. Norris is clearly karate based.

People who lead with their knife hand deserve the broken wrist. Most of the Italian and German historical manuals that I've surveyed pretty clearly show you don't do that.

With really dangerous people who intend to kill you you'll never see the knife until he strikes, sometimes not even then. I've read accounts of cops getting in fights who didn't realize the guy had a knife until after they were stabbed multiple times.

If you see the knife at a distance it's typically a threat display, which basically says "I'm willing to kill you if you push this." It certainly doesn't mean that the guy is bluffing, or that he's unable to kill you if he chooses, it means he doesn't want to kill you this at this time.

But yes, using a weapon does significantly limit the way someone can move and attack. There are maneuvers you can do unarmed that you can't do using a sword or a staff. However, this doesn't really matter because the somewhat limited range of things a swordsman or a guy with a staff can do are all done with incredible power and speed, and are mostly delivered from outside the range where you can hurt him unarmed.

The street meat usually is not that well trained and the knife hand is still limited. it can strike or cute, maybe block but it can't grab. For the record it was a broken wrist, dislocated elbow and shoulder and the Yonkers ADA decided I acted in self defense.

I'll bet he hedged on that when his prison buddies asked him what happened.....