Can Dominate disarm a person's weapon?

[holywhitetrash]

Yeah, that's pretty tame (at least until they throw Orcus' rod) - I was more worried this thread would be like:

Okay, as a standard action I want him to charge that guy over there, provoking OAs from my 3 allies, and as a free action he'll drop his greataxe into that pit he passes by.

And yeah... that's a much more rude possibility.

isn't orcus' rod an artifact
and i might be wrong but i thought in 4th that all artifacts were sentient and had the ability to teleport
so wouldn't his rod just port back to his hand

 

[Jhaelen]

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.

Well, this isn't really a problem since monsters are strictly DM territory. If a player started abusing disarming monsters, I'd simply let them continue to use their attack powers, albeit with a minor disadvantage (like a -2 to attack rolls and/or lower damage).

There's also no reason why monsters couldn't use maneuvers as detailed in DMG p.42.

 

[UltimaGabe]

Although I don't think that disarming should be an option in 4e, I think that disallowing this use of Dominate by claiming "dropping an object isn't a power" is a stupid, invalid argument. Movement isn't a power either, but there's nothing stopping Dominated characters from moving.

 

[Gort]

Well, this isn't really a problem since monsters are strictly DM territory. If a player started abusing disarming monsters, I'd simply let them continue to use their attack powers, albeit with a minor disadvantage (like a -2 to attack rolls and/or lower damage).

There's also no reason why monsters couldn't use maneuvers as detailed in DMG p.42.

Agreed. Players aren't the only people allowed to push guys into fires.

 

[Amaroq]

I'm not sure why everybody thinks this is such an unbalancing power.

Okay, my Lvl 3 Goblin Skullcleaver loses his Battleaxe: +6 v AC; 1d10+5 damage. If I assume he is constructed like a player character would be, he was receiving a +2 to hit thanks to his proficiency with the axe. So, disarmed, I'd assume he got: Unarmed attack: +4 v AC; 1d4+5 damage.

On the surface, that sounds like a lot, but its only dropping his average hit by 3 points (5.5 becomes 2.5), and reducing his to-hit by 2. That's not .. awful. Sure, it sucks, but it isn't debilitating. If the weapon remains on the battlefield, it even creates an interesting tactical challenge, as the skullcleaver tries to get it back. Alternately, some other monster is likely to have dropped in this battle; the skullcleaver might try to get to their bodies to recover their weapon (putting him back to +6 v AC, and with the appropriate damage-die by weapon.)

My Lvl 14 Salamander Lancer is even less effected - he loses his Reach 3 longspear; +18 v AC, 1d12+6 damage, 5 ongoing fire .. but he still has a secondary at-will, the tail lash; +16 v AC, 1d10+6 damage, slide target. Losing his 5 ongoing fire at-will sucks, but his biggest problem is actually the "requires longspear" line of his 5/6 recharge power - which gives him a massive incentive to try and fight his way back to his spear.

This doesn't work at all on my Lvl 17 Elder White Dragon solo - his at-wills are Bite and Claw.

. . .

I wouldn't be too concerned with the "lose weapon" bit; some quick adjudicating on the DM's part can recalculate the monster's abilities; they should always have access to a d4, and for many monsters, a d6 or a d8 "bite" might be an appropriate response.

The disarmed monster can still "Grab", "Bull Rush", and "Aid Another"; it might also take the "Total Defense" standard actions before moving to its weapons and provoking Opportunity Attacks.

Not to mention, for many monsters, this might be a good cue to cut and run .. possibly re-arming itself for appearance in a later encounter, possibly setting up a chase scene as the party tries to prevent it from "sounding the alarm".

I'd say, good, creative use of the Dominate power, which creates added awesomeness to the scene and less predictable tactics from the monster affected. Great!

For key villains, you may want to set in place some villain-specific countermeasures: he has a second similar weapon sheathed or available in the room; there is a weapons rack in the room; he bellows to any of his cohort to give him THEIR weapon; etc. The only place I'd really worry about it is if I had the Big Bad wielding the magic item that the party are trying to recover .. then you have a problem, but one you can always come up with some creative solution to.

 

[Infiniti2000]

If I assume he is constructed like a player character would be, ...

You assume incorrectly. He was not constructed in any way similar to a PC at all. His Attack bonus and damage roll is the same regardless of weapon used. The problem is that he might not even have a power usable without the Weapon.

So, you need create unarmed powers on the fly, not allow disarming, precalculate unarmed powers for every monster out there, or perhaps create a houserule that glosses over the lack of a weapon.

I'd say, good, creative use of the Dominate power, which creates added awesomeness to the scene and less predictable tactics from the monster affected. Great!

Just so you understand that this tactic will soon be the ONLY use of the dominate power against any villains with weapons or implements.

For key villains, you may want to set in place some villain-specific countermeasures: he has a second similar weapon sheathed or available in the room; there is a weapons rack in the room; he bellows to any of his cohort to give him THEIR weapon; etc. The only place I'd really worry about it is if I had the Big Bad wielding the magic item that the party are trying to recover .. then you have a problem, but one you can always come up with some creative solution to.

I'll also add that I really don't like this option. I absolutely HATED having to do this with every single bad guy in the previous version to make sure they weren't screwed by disarms or sunders. Once this tactic is viable, it will happen ALL the time to every monster.

 

[LostSoul]

I let the bard do this in play. It was pretty effective against higher level monsters - I think they were 5th or 6th level fighting some eladrin bladedancers, who can't do much without their swords.

I applauded the move (after I groaned, "oh crap"), but I'm the sort of DM who lets people jam immovable rods into lich's mouths to keep them from spellcasting.

I can't find any rule that says you can't do this. You can't normally make basic ranged attacks with melee weapons, but the Ranged Improvised Weapon entry reads "Any".

 

[bagger245]

I agree that DMs shouldn't "get back" at the players simply because he creatively used dominate.

How about when monsters are disarmed, they now attack unarmed using the damage by level table, either lowering it down a level or simply -2 attacks, as a reward to the player who manages to disarm it.

Example a Hobgoblin Soldier Lvl3 gets disarmed and loses his flail. His damage, previously from 1d10+4 goes down a level, but since it's the minimum, I choose 1d6+3 instead. For a Sorrowsworn Deathlord Lvl28, without its scythe (4d10+9) becomes 4d8+8 or 2d8+9 (using the limited damage table) and you might still include its weakening and necrotic damage to show its innate instead from weapon, I dunno.

It's simply creating a unarmed attack power on the fly but "de-powered" to favour the players for disarming it. Have to bear in mind if you create a Level 30 skinny guy who only knows how to slap people, he will do minimum of 2d8+10 damage with his slap.

 

[Amaroq]

You assume incorrectly. He was not constructed in any way similar to a PC at all. His Attack bonus and damage roll is the same regardless of weapon used. The problem is that he might not even have a power usable without the Weapon.

So, you need create unarmed powers on the fly, not allow disarming, precalculate unarmed powers for every monster out there, or perhaps create a houserule that glosses over the lack of a weapon.

Just so you understand that this tactic will soon be the ONLY use of the dominate power against any villains with weapons or implements.

Sure - create unarmed powers on the fly seems to be the "right" solution for a DM (to this approach). In exactly the same way as it is the DM's job to adjudicate the difficulty when the player says she wants to leap in the air, grab the chandelier, swing on it over the raging fire below, and jump to the far side of the room, it is the DM's job to adjudicate the effects of the character's actions if they combine elements of the RAW into something that the game designers didn't explicitly cover.

In this case, though, the game designers DID explicitly cover it; there are specific rules for the effects that a weapon has. Proficiency in greataxe adds +2 to hit. Greataxe does d10 damage. So its pretty easy for a DM to "reverse engineer" all of the bonuses, etc., that were built into the creature, and adjudicate what the creature's unarmed attack powers might look like.

In fact, the Salamander Lancer example seems to provide explicit confirmation of this: the long spear attack is +18 v AC; the tail attack is +16 v AC. The proficiency bonus for using a long spear is +2.

Regarding implements - any power with the Implement keyword is usable without the implement (PHB1, pg 56), so no harm done. In fact, that's a great opportunity for a villain to laugh at the PC's.

As noted in my previous post, giving the monster an unarmed melee basic attack is *simple*, and prevents "disarmed" from equaling "totally useless", while still giving the PC a benefit for a "cool" use of their power. It doesn't even violate RAW, as it could easily fall under the "customizing monsters" chapter of DMG1.

That leaves you only the question of how to cope with it. "Unarmed = d4" is certainly one approach, but it is also quite plausible for the monster to grab an improvised weapon from somewhere in the room; that would get them a d8 damage die. Finally, there's the option to go with the appropriate "Low damage expression" entry off of DMG1 p 185. Done and move on; the PC gets a benefit without totally nerfing the monster.

Finally, there's the logic by counterexample. Let's look at the Death Knight.

The Lvl 25 Death Knight (Dragonborn paladin)'s Terrifying Smite includes the entry "Requires soulsword".

a.) Why would the designers include the note "Requires soulsword" if there isn't any way to disarm the monster?

Further, in the discussion of a Death Knight's "Soul Sword" (MM1 p 51), "The Death Knight is dazed and weakened while it doesn't have possession of its soul weapon."

b.) Again, why include such an entry if there is no way to disarm the monster?

Finally, if this is the ONLY good tactic my party are getting out of Dominate, they are wasting a very cool power: as noted above, they can move the creature in ways that provoke plenty of Opportunity Attacks (and Run to guarantee CA for said OAs); they can use the creature to attack the creature's allies; they can move the creature into any trap, terrain feature, or ongoing effect .. as somebody else noted, they may be able to manage multiple such by having the enemy Charge through an ongoing effect, provoking OAs, to a worse location on the field of battle where it attacks one of its allies ..

I think intelligent use of Dominate can cost "the opposition" a lot more HP in one round than simply disarming it is going to do for its DPR.

 

[bagger245]

I think intelligent use of Dominate can cost "the opposition" a lot more HP in one round than simply disarming it is going to do for its DPR.

I think most players would use it this way. Only once a while do you get things like throwing away their weapons.