Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="BryonD" data-source="post: 4935351" data-attributes="member: 957">Should it be more difficult to disarm a Balor's Vorpal sword than to simply strike the Balor?  Is that not a more challenging task?When is it *NOT* the right time to disarm the Balor's Vorpal sword?  If the only choice is what would I prefer, I'll disarm him first every time.  Again, it becomes a boring, anti-climatic no-brainer.And if there is a firepit behind the orc, then that also becomes a no-brainer if there is no less chance of success.There is nothing "smart" about these options if the actual challenge they very rationally present is discarded as a form of PC charity.  If it is purely a question of on Round 1 do you strike or do you disarm the balor, and you have a 30% chance of disarm and a 60% charm of striking, then it just comes down to your assessment of the pot odds and, sure, luck comes in to play.  But at least it is a tactical choice with some consideration.  If the odds are the same there is nothing tactical whatsoever.  You disarm.  Thinking ends before it begins.  "Beating him up" will comes vastly easier without that sword.What *I* want is for the player's to truly think "smart".  Create circumstances where the sword does not come into play.  Or team up and aid another to stack the odds in favor of getting rid of (disarm with lots of pluses) that nasty threat.  Or use the terrain to avoid it.  Or come up with something else.  There is no victory in a game mechanical giveaway.  And every bit of that aside, doesn't it just make obvious sense that it doing something more challenging should have a lower chance of success?</blockquote>

Verification