Can Dominate disarm a person's weapon?
- Thread starter Stalker0
- Start date
DarkLord Of DForce
First Post
Spark Of Hatred for the Avenger:
Encounter
Charm, Divine, Implement
Minor Action Ranged 5
Target: One enemy that is not your oath of enmity target
Attack: Wisdom vs. Will
Hit: The target is dominated until the start of your next turn. Until this domination ends, the target can attack only your oath of enmity target.
Ranged and a minor action... hmm...
Encounter
Minor Action Ranged 5
Target: One enemy that is not your oath of enmity target
Attack: Wisdom vs. Will
Hit: The target is dominated until the start of your next turn. Until this domination ends, the target can attack only your oath of enmity target.
Ranged and a minor action... hmm...
Last edited:
eriktheguy
First Post
This is a good catch Stalker. The rules seem to indicate that the characters can do this. Technically, dropping a weapon is not a 'power', so you might go for a very literal interpretation of dominate and disallow it, but I'm not certain if this is true. In your case you can't even make this argument, since throwing a weapon is one of those 'everyone has it' powers.
Even if it is allowed, I say it is imbalanced. Regardless of whether a power is a daily or not, disarming many opponents is equivalent to defeating them. It is an unnecessary game mechanic that is not balanced for 4e. If you consider that attack value probably drops by 2 and damage drops substantially without a weapon, it simply isn't right. If the dominated person is a character with a magical weapon, this becomes uber imbalanced.
How should you respond to your creative but troublesome player? Let them get away with it this once, and make a clear ruling that domination cannot be used in this way in the future.
And also, thanks for the skill challenge system.
No offence, but I avoid this solution like the plague. From the player's point of view, they are being punished for innovation. If my PCs used a clever idea on some monsters, and the next batch of monsters suddenly and independently came up with the same idea and used it against the players, they would think to themselves "Gee, I better stop trying to use my brain, the DM doesn't like that!"
When my players find a new way to exploit a power or ability or even the rules that upsets balance I usually:
1: Reward them, usually by letting them get away with it for this one encounter
2: Fix the problem, usually with a house rule. In this case I would rule that dominating can only use movement and actual attack or utility at-will powers. The player cannot command the monster to drop his weapons, strip his armor, or lock himself in a cage.
This way the players are given a small reward for thinking, and the game doesn't have to be ruined in the long run.
When your players decide not to push a monster off a cliff because they are worried that other monsters will suddenly start pushing them off cliffs from now on, that's metagame and not really fair to the players.
Even if it is allowed, I say it is imbalanced. Regardless of whether a power is a daily or not, disarming many opponents is equivalent to defeating them. It is an unnecessary game mechanic that is not balanced for 4e. If you consider that attack value probably drops by 2 and damage drops substantially without a weapon, it simply isn't right. If the dominated person is a character with a magical weapon, this becomes uber imbalanced.
How should you respond to your creative but troublesome player? Let them get away with it this once, and make a clear ruling that domination cannot be used in this way in the future.
And also, thanks for the skill challenge system.
No offence, but I avoid this solution like the plague. From the player's point of view, they are being punished for innovation. If my PCs used a clever idea on some monsters, and the next batch of monsters suddenly and independently came up with the same idea and used it against the players, they would think to themselves "Gee, I better stop trying to use my brain, the DM doesn't like that!"
When my players find a new way to exploit a power or ability or even the rules that upsets balance I usually:
1: Reward them, usually by letting them get away with it for this one encounter
2: Fix the problem, usually with a house rule. In this case I would rule that dominating can only use movement and actual attack or utility at-will powers. The player cannot command the monster to drop his weapons, strip his armor, or lock himself in a cage.
This way the players are given a small reward for thinking, and the game doesn't have to be ruined in the long run.
When your players decide not to push a monster off a cliff because they are worried that other monsters will suddenly start pushing them off cliffs from now on, that's metagame and not really fair to the players.
Camelot
Adventurer
I agree with Unan Oranis. I would rule that "dominating" means magically or otherwise convincing the target that it is on your team for the specified period of time, instead of gaining control of the target like a puppet. So, you could "suggest" actions that it could make, but it would do what it thinks would be logical, i.e., fight the enemies instead of making myself vulnerable to them. However, the little part of their brain that still knows its where its true loyalty lies refuses to use its especially painful attacks on its true allies.
Orcus Porkus
First Post
There is only one power in the game that let's PC's steal weapons from monsters in a fight. It's Excorcism of Steel (Fighter 17).
Like with the dominating trick, if a player uses it frequently and has a tendency to "abuse" it, I would come up with some house rules covering the issue, and also make him feel the pain when monsters get the same idea.
For dominating, how about the PC needs to do a diplomacy check in order to make the monster throw a weapon at a target, knowing that it won't return. Simply commanding the monster to drop the weapon should not be allowed at all. Dropping a weapon, in any fight (real world included) is a signal of defeat. The fight is over. This can't be possibly intended by the rules.
The next time the party meets an aboleth or mindflayer, let him dominate the character with the strongest at-will power (a howling strike charging barbarian with vanguard weapon and horned helm + possible rampage is the best possible target) and simply pay it back.
Other than that, the creative use of dominating makes combats more fun. The monster lost his weapon? He'll go after it once he "wakes" up. He might command his allies to focus fire on the dominator. It's no fun to lose your dignity, monsters have feelings too.
Like with the dominating trick, if a player uses it frequently and has a tendency to "abuse" it, I would come up with some house rules covering the issue, and also make him feel the pain when monsters get the same idea.
For dominating, how about the PC needs to do a diplomacy check in order to make the monster throw a weapon at a target, knowing that it won't return. Simply commanding the monster to drop the weapon should not be allowed at all. Dropping a weapon, in any fight (real world included) is a signal of defeat. The fight is over. This can't be possibly intended by the rules.
The next time the party meets an aboleth or mindflayer, let him dominate the character with the strongest at-will power (a howling strike charging barbarian with vanguard weapon and horned helm + possible rampage is the best possible target) and simply pay it back.
Other than that, the creative use of dominating makes combats more fun. The monster lost his weapon? He'll go after it once he "wakes" up. He might command his allies to focus fire on the dominator. It's no fun to lose your dignity, monsters have feelings too.
DracoSuave
First Post
One thing as well to remember with monsters and their weapons is that losing thier weapon is at most a temporary loss of a couple powers. For many monsters, it does nothing.
For players, it's a virtual loss of -all- of their powers.
Let's take a Storm Giant as an example. Disarm it, and it's lost its basic attack, and its Sweeping Sword power. However, it still has access to a ranged at-will, and its recharge power. And it's a controller, so it's not even that put out.
A Bugbear Strangler loses it's basic attack... but the -real- threat is its Strangle power. It's not meaningfully affected at all!
Now this isn't to say that -all- monsters have this resiliency against disarming... but let's just say disarming one monster won't be as much of a swing in battle as disarming a party member.
Chances are, it's better to use that weapon than discard it.
Infiniti2000
First Post
I disagree with this because I think most monsters actually only have a couple of powers. Thus, for most of them this means that they have zero attack actions after being stripped. In fact, the rules on monster creation recommend using only a couple of powers. Granted, my experience is only lower levels so if higher levels monsters don't follow this trend I'll stand/sit corrected.
Similar Threads
