Seeking the Game System with 'Soft' Rock-Paper-Scissors-Lizard-Spock Effects in Combat

Question

I vaguely recall that somewhere between 2000 and maybe 2010, I've seen attempts in some system* to implement a mechanic in combat where one physical manoeuvre or style would be stronger against some manoeuvre/styles and weaker against others (but it was a 'soft' effect, not a complete infallible superiority of one over the other). Now I'm trying to find this system because I intend to research the idea for inspiration in a homebrew project I'm contemplating (i.e. I'm considering designing a system from scratch and am currently trying to research various worked examples of system designs which may teach me something I'll need later).

Does anyone happen to know what system that might be?

Features of the system that I vaguely remember:

• Either learned styles (bought during character creation and/or development), or dynamically chosen manoeuvres (once per turn or the like), are grouped into five categories, with each category being stronger against one pair of other categories and weaker against another two. It probably predates the rise of actual Rock-Paper-Scissors-Lizard-Spock in the public memory, but the point is that unlike usual tactical rock-paper-scissors, it had five categories. I do not remember whether the asymmetry was applied to things that could be bought, chosen dynamically, or both.
• The categorisation is primarily aimed at mêlée combat, as the game was fighting-themed, in some ways reminiscent of White Wolf's Street Fighter game.
• The categorisation is sufficiently generic that it is region- and weapon-agnostic, as the system allowed PCs to have whatever styles they came up with (since it was meant to be used in a cinematic, weirder version of our modern world IIRC). Despite this, the game seemed to focus more on the unarmed subset of mêlée combat.
• The justification of the mechanic at least superficially focused on the materialistic properties of various approaches to combat, not elemental or other mysticism. (After reading about the similar categorisation of approaches to combat in real-life boxing and fencing sports, I'd say there is a similarity between the two.) This isn't to say that there weren't mystical aspects in the system, but they weren't required for everyone.
• It existed over a decade age, maybe even longer than that. I think it was one of the earlier 'indie' or small-company games.

* == There's a small chance that I may be conflating more than one system in my memory. If so, I apologise.

Answer 1

Legends of the Wulin

Legends of the Wulin is an wuxia RPG that was originally published in 2014 which is set in a mythical version of China. Most notably, its mechanics are heavily inspired by the five elements of Taoism, and the cycles between them - allowing you to buff and debuff people by using the sort of five-sided rock-paper-scissors mechanic described. Note that this doesn't have to be explicitly magical - one of the example Wood-elemental buffs/debuffs presented is just getting really angry, for instance.

Additionally, each of the game's Martial arts styles grants you bonuses against styles it "Laughs At", and penalties against styles it "Fears" - for instance, the Flying Red Silk style Laughs At styles that use Brute force or excessive motion, and Fears styles based around deception.

Answer 2

Possibly 'Kung Fu Fighting' Card Game

Kung Fu Fighting is a reissue of SlugFest’s very first title. It is a fast, hilarious, action-packed card game for 2-6 players in which you are a combatant in a free-for-all martial arts movie fight scene. Unleash a Magnificent Fast Flying Spinning Punch on your opponents, but be careful to hang onto a Block or two for when they try to do the same to you!

The current rules say it is a 2019 reboot, but RPG.net archives has reviews from September 2004 so the original release would predate that.

"Stance" is one of the mechanics in the game (emphasis mine):

Stance: You may play Stances during your turn, but not while attacking. Place a Stance in the Stance slot next to your Chi Tracker Card. Your Stance stays in play and gives you various bonuses. Most Stances are strong against one other Stance, giving an Attack bonus against players in that Stance. You may have at most one Stance in play. If you play a new Stance, discard your previous one. You may choose to discard your Stance during your turn, even if that would leave you with no Stance. You may not do this during an Attack, however.

Each stance is strong against one other stance but vulnerable to a different one. In the pictured example in the rules, Dragon Stance gives a bonus against Crane Stance, but is vulnerable to Drunken Stance. Here it is shown that Drunken Stance gives a bonus when used against Dragon Stance, but is vulnerable to Tiger Stance. I have been unable to verify that there are precisely five stances, however, and their bonus and malus applied to only one other stance, not two.

Either learned styles (bought during character creation and/or development), or dynamically chosen manoeuvres (once per turn or the like), are grouped into five categories, with each category being stronger against one pair of other categories and weaker against another two.
Yes, these are chosen maneuvers. This is a card game, not a RPG, so there is no character creation; you play cards from your hand to represent your current in-game status while they are on the table, and these cards are discarded when you are done using them. I am unsure whether there are specifically five stances.

It probably predates the rise of actual Rock-Paper-Scissors-Lizard-Spock in the public memory, but the point is that unlike usual tactical rock-paper-scissors, it had five categories.
I first heard about RPSLS as an undergraduate in the 90's. Even the first version of the game is more recent then that.

I do not remember whether the asymmetry was applied to things that could be bought, chosen dynamically, or both.
The stances are chosen dynamically, but chosen from among the cards in your hand, so they may not be freely adopted.

The categorisation is primarily aimed at mêlée combat, as the game was fighting-themed, in some ways reminiscent of White Wolf's Street Fighter game.
Definitely melee combat. I have not played WW Street Fighter and have no point of comparison.

The categorisation is sufficiently generic that it is region- and weapon-agnostic, as the system allowed PCs to have whatever styles they came up with (since it was meant to be used in a cinematic, weirder version of our modern world IIRC).
The stances may be used in combination with any other cards (weapons, attack types). The stances are pre-existing and pre-defined; the players do not 'come up' with them but play them from cards they draw.

It existed over a decade age, maybe even longer than that. I think it was one of the earlier 'indie' or small-company games.
Yes on both counts.