Goodman Games

If a character is not specialized in Unarmed Combat, and attacks an armed foe, he is subject to two penalties: 1) the foe gets an attack of opportunity, and 2) the character takes the same amount of potential harm that he gives the armed foe. This seems like a lot of penalty for unarmed attacks! It seems like it would completely eliminate unspecialized unarmed attacks. Is this what was intended? How does this work out in play?

Yes, brutal, eh? He only takes damage if the defender uses Weaponry to defend against the Unarmed attack. But yes, good reason to specialize

Of course one can adjust to taste

I guess I'll have to give it a chance. But it seems too much to me. I favor eliminating the "attacker takes damage if the defender uses Weaponry to defend against the Unarmed attack" part. Possibly one way to rationialize this: If the foe takes an attack of opportunity, he cannot use his Weaponry ADP to defend (because he has used his weapon to attack, not defend).

Doesn't sound like a bad rule to me. So you're playing ERP currently with your group? Would you mind posting some of your campaign events in the forum in the "actual play" forum? I'd love to hear some session descriptions!

No, not yet. I have to convince my current group's GM to let me take over for a while. I think the group will be open to a new game--the last time I took the helm, we tried Lejendary Adventure (which they liked).