Unarmed Combat

[Stonegiant]

Two questions
1. What issue of Dragon magazine did Roger Moore's unarmed combat rules appear in?

2. What are your preferred unarmed combat rules?

Thanks!

[benjoshua]

There was an unarmed combat system article in Dragon Magazine #83 by Roger Moore. My unarmed combat rules were: roll to hit and do 1d2 damage, plus strength bonus. A similar system was used in the Castle Amber adventure for a boxing match in one of the early rooms.

“I do have one severe problem with my own game system. I got talked into doing the complicated and time-consuming series for grappling, pummeling, and overbearing in a weak moment. I have regretted them ever since. I tend to use a very simple system which we initially developed for such close-quarters combat in about 1974.” --Gary Gygax, Dungeon #67, p.66

[Falconer]

2. What are your preferred unarmed combat rules?

UA Method I, internalized and used as the basis for on-the-fly rulings.

[Ratbreath]

I use the UA II system.

If someone wanted to use the DMG system for human/demi human versus human/demi-human I'd be okay with that. Hasn't come up so far.

[T. Foster]

UA. System I where I just want to get a quick result, system II when more detail feels warranted.

[EOTB]

I use the UA If someone wanted to use the DMG system for human/demi human versus human/demi-human I'd be okay with that. Hasn't come up so far.

I've never used it in play, but the more I re-read it - I don't think the system is all that time consuming or complicated, though it's presented in a disorganized fashion and isn't an extension of any other AD&D system.

[Geoffrey]

I use Unearthed Arcana's Weaponless Combat System I.

[Philotomy Jurament]

I use the UA system. Usually the simpler version, but informed by the more complicated version (and there might be situations where I used the more complicated version).

“I do have one severe problem with my own game system. I got talked into doing the complicated and time-consuming series for grappling, pummeling, and overbearing in a weak moment. I have regretted them ever since. I tend to use a very simple system which we initially developed for such close-quarters combat in about 1974.” --Gary Gygax, Dungeon #67, p.66

I imagine Gary was referring to the approach described in the example combat from the D&D FAQ in Strategic Review. I've used something like that for quick results, too (i.e., dice based on hit dice).

[Guy Fullerton]

The Strategic Review grappling rules suck, in how it changes how creatures should try to overcome enemies:

Mid/high level character odds of succeeding in combat when wounded are often better if they grapple, as opposed to using regular melee. That is, all other things being equal, your best chance to win a battle is to melee when at high hp and grapple when at low hp.

From a verisimilitude standpoint, that may not be what you want in a grappling rule.

[Philotomy Jurament]

I'd say the Strategic Review D&D example combat doesn't even present a system. It's more like a hint that some sort of system was used. Maybe.

[artikid]

I use UA version II. It's one of the few things I save from the UA, and I was a little surprised it didn't make the cut in OSRIC.

[T. Foster]

I use UA version II. It's one of the few things I save from the UA, and I was a little surprised it didn't make the cut in OSRIC.

Well, it's implicitly included in the example of play, where the elf is first overborne then grappled by a pack of war dogs

[ThirstyStirge]

My own quickie system:

Average STR and DEX for both combatants.
Apply the average to a d20 roll for both sides.
Highest roll wins that combat round with the desired outcome effected.
If a tie: new combat round.
Wookies get +10 to their rolls.

[Ratbreath]

I use the UA If someone wanted to use the DMG system for human/demi human versus human/demi-human I'd be okay with that. Hasn't come up so far.

I've never used it in play, but the more I re-read it - I don't think the system is all that time consuming or complicated, though it's presented in a disorganized fashion and isn't an extension of any other AD&D system.

It runs into serious problems with non-PC races. Look at grappling. "Base Score to Grapple: Multiply attacker’s armor class by 10". The less armor you're wearing the better your base chance of grappling someone. Fine. Except with monsters, where an AC better than 10 could be from quickness or tough hide or something. Reading further, you need to know the strength and dexterity of the combatants. Most monsters don't have a listed score.

[austinjimm]

I'd say the Strategic Review D&D example combat doesn't even present a system. It's more like a hint that some sort of system was used. Maybe.

I've used my version of the Strategic Review rules for several years. While I kind of see the theoretical problem that Guy mentions, I have never seen that play out in actual game play. For me simplicity and playability are key, so long as a rule "seems to work" about 90 pct. of the time. The other 10 pct. can be dealt with through common sense rulings. So, verisimilitude seems to be a non-issue, at least in my games. And these rules do get fairly frequent usage.

One thing to consider. The Strategic Review rules require 2 dice rolls from the initiator(s) of the grapple. First "to hit," and then to overcome the target (HD roll-- which results in the initiator(s) being "thrown off" and stunned if he fails). The defender only rolls his HD (no chance of stun). This tends to make most players wary of using it in lieu of straight melee. (You might not want to risk the chance of being stunned for a combat round when you are low on hp.)