Quote from: Philotomy Jurament;703593I don't think there are any rules of value in the DSG or the WSG.  (In fact, I think some of the rules in those books are detrimental, when used.)  If you never crack the spine of either book, you're not missing anything significant in your AD&D game, and you're probably better off.

About the only part I found useful was the carrying capacities of wagons/carts/chariots and those of certain monsters. Otherwise, it's best to use a little common sense to figure things out.

Quote from: Bill;704368I thought it was a law of the Universe that unarmed combat must be a disaster in all versions of dnd.

The simplest version is the best:

A punch does 1-2 points of damage + STR bonus

A kick does 1-4 points of damage + STR bonus

Half the damage is only temporary.

Quote from: Elfdart;704997The simplest version is the best:

A punch does 1-2 points of damage + STR bonus

A kick does 1-4 points of damage + STR bonus

Half the damage is only temporary.

It's good enough but it needs rules for a shot to the balls.

JG

Quote from: Elfdart;704997The simplest version is the best:

A punch does 1-2 points of damage + STR bonus

A kick does 1-4 points of damage + STR bonus

Half the damage is only temporary.

If a dagger does d4+STR, then d2+STR for all unarmed attacks looks fine to me.

It makes unarmed particularly lethal, especially feet-based styles like savate and tae kwon do. Fine if you want it, but I prefer the 75% non-lethal v. 25% lethal along with the goofy looking table from 2e. Those tables makes those bar fights more about entertaining color and goofy pointless wankery than everyone focusing on kicking over punching or wrestling because "it's the correct mechanical answer."

For those nutters who just *have to* have more styles and special move names during melee, it also gives them a table structure to putter around with and submit for my GM approval. That's a huge mercy in my book as it gets them out of my hair and trying to futz with a table that doesn't obviously look stupid broken. (Most of them never pay attention to the damage and KO% progression along the averaged low level AC & THAC0 failure rates. It's very easy to spot their munchkinism this way.)

Quote from: Opaopajr;705099It makes unarmed particularly lethal, especially feet-based styles like savate and tae kwon do. Fine if you want it, but I prefer the 75% non-lethal v. 25% lethal along with the goofy looking table from 2e. Those tables makes those bar fights more about entertaining color and goofy pointless wankery than everyone focusing on kicking over punching or wrestling because "it's the correct mechanical answer."

For those nutters who just *have to* have more styles and special move names during melee, it also gives them a table structure to putter around with and submit for my GM approval. That's a huge mercy in my book as it gets them out of my hair and trying to futz with a table that doesn't obviously look stupid broken. (Most of them never pay attention to the damage and KO% progression along the averaged low level AC & THAC0 failure rates. It's very easy to spot their munchkinism this way.)

A simple way to reflect high skill in unarmed combat is to allow specialization (and double-spec.) as with other weapons. I've always thought the fighting monk was just a glorified fighter, so why not just have a fighter who specializes (or double) in unarmed combat? The bonuses (+1 to +3) are more than enough to show great skill in punching, kicking, etc.

Oh yeah. The Complete Handbook Fighter introduced style specialization which really supports this, and doesn't even need to step on the fighter's weapon specialization either.

You can easily end up with a solid wrestlemania wizard (who can still use a dagger when the grapple gets nasty). Just be sure to hold your action before lunging in for a submission hold.

But it pales to the horror of a pugilist fighter. Cestii weapon spec, single or double hand weapon style spec, and or punching style spec adds up to a nasty bouncer or pit fighter. Shit versus arrows, but focus sacrifices flexibility.