Fist and Kick Damage

[JohnK]

Hullo, Ovid,

I think punches and kicks should do a flat 1 point of damage, i.e. if you hit, you do 1 point with no modification for how much you hit by.

The only exception would be if you have levels in the Unarmed Fighting Discipline, in which case you can do up to another point for every level you have in that.

I've been thinking about this, and I'm inclined to go a somewhat different route. Punches and Kicks will do a flat 0 point of damage, modified by 1/2 your success margin, rounded down. A character who has the Strong Advantage will do 1 point of damage, 2 points of damage if he's Very Strong or Colossal or whatever they call it. (The reason for using the margin of success is that this is the idea that one got through the opponent's defense abilities, perhaps by finding a weak spot or whatever, but not as effectively as using a weapon of some sort.) If you have the Unarmed Combat Discipline under Close Combat, you do another point for every level that you have in that (as you wrote up above).

That should allow someone to do damage with their fists, while keeping weapons much more dangerous.

I don't agree with this point at all, since people who are fighters with their fists and feet can be equally as dangerous as someone with a weapon, but not as dangerous. However, that's another matter entirely which I won't argue/debate with you here. The real problem with this for me, however, is that weapons don't have enough granularity when it comes to damage. Again, something that belongs in another thread as well.

(I'd also give an unarmed character -5 Defense against an armed one: he has to rely purely on his Ways. In addition, he should take damage from an armed opponent successfully using Parry: it should be a really, really bad idea to try to punch someone who has a sword.)

I pretty much agree with this assessment, although I can see an Unarmed Parry Fighting Art developed at some point, but I'm not going to be the one to write it up or use it, because at that point, it's almost like fancy wire-fu and martial arts being introduced, not something I want to see in the game.

[Dragoslav]

I think I would just give Fists/Kicks 0 damage and leave everything else as-is. The margin of success on your attack roll is already a measure of your technique and careful maneuvering, and the extra damage granted by weapons is just a measure of how a weapon is always going to be potentially more lethal than a fist or kick (blades are more effective at cutting the skin, blunt weapons are sturdier and won't break like your hand or foot might if you punch/kick someone improperly). Each point of skill in Close Combat or the Unarmed Combat discipline essentially translates into an extra (potential) point of damage, anyway.

The Strong advantage already gives you +1 to Close Combat, so I don't think it needs to give any extra damage, since the bonus it gives is essentially an extra point of damage anyway.

[iznurda]

I'm agree with Dragoslav, and use if necessary a discipline with wrestling or boxing. Eventually, -1 damage with fist et 0 with kick, but I don't do it myself.

iz

[Ovid]

The reason I limited extra successes to having an Unarmed Fighting Discipline is that I don't think it does matter if an unarmed attacker found an opening unless he knows how to use it. I'm no boxer - someone could stand in front of me and not move and I still wouldn't know how to hit him to do much damage. Compare that to having a pointy metal thing - even a lesser trained person has a big chance of doing horrible damage if he gets an opening. (And this isn't a wire fu setting, after all.)

Grappling's a different matter entirely. I'm talking here of punches and kicks.

[Clovis]

Still, you can do a lot of damage with a "mere" punch: after all, if you're good enough at it (or if you land a particularly lucky blow), you can break your opponent's nose or send him unconscious on the floor... actually, a really tough and competent brawler can make someone puke his guts with a well-aimed punch in the belly.

I think that it makes sense that weapons do not make for much in a fighter's abilities: even with a claymore, a clumsy weakling remains a clumsy weakling, while a big mean cutthroat will be able to plant a dagger in your innards with very fatal effects!

[JohnK]

Hullo, Dragoslav,

[...]
The Strong advantage already gives you +1 to Close Combat, so I don't think it needs to give any extra damage, since the bonus it gives is essentially an extra point of damage anyway.

Hmm, you're right about this point.

I think I'm just going to use the Damage 0 rule, and keep the rules intact as they are without any muss or fuss. There just doesn't seem to be a point to it, when all is said and done.