D&D 5E Disarm RAW OP?

[auburn2]

So reading the rules it would seem a character can use an action to disarm another character (as detailed in the DMG). If his attack roll beats his opponents athletics or acrobatics check the weapon falls to the ground. Same character can then use a free object interaction to pick the opponents weapon up off the ground (assuming he did not use this free action before the disarm). Finally, if there is a size disparity like say a human disarming a halfling, he can do this with advantage.

That is RAW and it seems way overpowered. Am I missing something?

 

[iserith]

It's situational in my experience. Sometimes it's good, sometimes there are better options. Like most things.

In any case, it's an optional rule and needn't be included in the game.

 

[Flamestrike]

That is RAW and it seems way overpowered.

How so?

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

Does the weapon automatically fall into the space of the disarming character, or does it drop into the space of the character what was holding it?

Firstly the DM would have to allow this variant rule in the first place.
Then the character has to actually successfully disarm.
Then the DM would have to rule that a character can reach down into the space of an opponent who is actively fighting them in melee to pick up something on the ground, without any unfortunate consequences.

 

[tommybahama]

Then the DM would have to rule that a character can reach down into the space of an opponent who is actively fighting them in melee to pick up something on the ground, without any unfortunate consequences.

There are numerous examples of disarming techniques on YouTube that end with the weapon in possession of the attacker and not on the floor. I think it would be fair to say that the attacker was using one of those techniques.

Here is an example.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Does the weapon automatically fall into the space of the disarming character, or does it drop into the space of the character what was holding it?

Firstly the DM would have to allow this variant rule in the first place.
Then the character has to actually successfully disarm.
Then the DM would have to rule that a character can reach down into the space of an opponent who is actively fighting them in melee to pick up something on the ground, without any unfortunate consequences.

Then you have to be fighting an armed opponent in the first place - a majority of the Monster Manual enemies do not use weapons.
Then the disarmed opponent needs to not have a backup weapon they can pull out of their boot using their "free action*". (I really can't imagine a goblin not having dozens of knives concealed about their person).

*technically 5e doesn't have free actions, it's "part of your move action".

 

[iserith]

I believe it's also an action to do this which may not be a good trade-off for some characters.

 

[SuperTD]

What stops the enemy simply doing the same thing back to them immediately on their turn?

 

[billd91]

Then you have to be fighting an armed opponent in the first place - a majority of the Monster Manual enemies do not use weapons.
Then the disarmed opponent needs to not have a backup weapon they can pull out of their boot using their "free action*". (I really can't imagine a goblin not having dozens of knives concealed about their person).

*technically 5e doesn't have free actions, it's "part of your move action".

Well, technically it doesn't have move actions either. Rather, you get a free interact as part of your move or action.

 

[Charlaquin]

Well, technically it doesn't have move actions either. Rather, you get a free interact as part of your move or action.

5e really twisted its combat jargon in knots trying to pretend it only had one kind of action without losing the robustness of 4e’s action economy.