Disarm and cover, concealment, etc.

[Titus Flavius]

A monk with improved disarm attempts a disarm against someone around a corner (cover).

How does disarm interact with cover?

Cover prevents AoO, but Improved Disarm doesn't allow for AoOs anyway. Also cover is only an AC bonus which doesn't work with the opposed roll in disarm. Likewise for prone or flanking?

How does concealment effect disarm? When do you roll the miss chance?

 

[Jhaelen]

A monk with improved disarm attempts a disarm against someone around a corner (cover).

How does disarm interact with cover?

Cover prevents AoO, but Improved Disarm doesn't allow for AoOs anyway. Also cover is only an AC bonus which doesn't work with the opposed roll in disarm. Likewise for prone or flanking?

How does concealment effect disarm? When do you roll the miss chance?

IIRC, standing around a corner grant total cover, thus the monk cannot attack at all (so, no disarm attempt either)!
If the target had concealment you'd roll the miss chance after the opposed attack roll required for the disarm attempt.

 

[Nyarlathotep]

IIRC, standing around a corner grant total cover, thus the monk cannot attack at all (so, no disarm attempt either)!
If the target had concealment you'd roll the miss chance after the opposed attack roll required for the disarm attempt.

I'm not sure about that. If you are both adjacent to the corner, then you can attack, but your opponent has cover (+4 bonus to AC). If you can attack, then you can disarm. The rules don't say specifically, but I would give the opponent gets a +4 bonus on their opposed roll (it would be a house rule on the fly, but I think it's sound).

 

[Jhaelen]

I'm not sure about that. If you are both adjacent to the corner, then you can attack, but your opponent has cover (+4 bonus to AC). If you can attack, then you can disarm. The rules don't say specifically, but I would give the opponent gets a +4 bonus on their opposed roll (it would be a house rule on the fly, but I think it's sound).

Hmpf, for some reason I can never find the definition of 'line of effect'. Judging from the FAQ rules for using tower shields you're probably right. A line between the squares' centres goes through the corner - thus it would be only cover, not total cover.
I guess, I've not been applying that rule correctly at least some of the time...

 

[Titus Flavius]

Hmpf, for some reason I can never find the definition of 'line of effect'.

Line of effect is defined in the PHB glossary. It is essentially line of sight ignoring invisibility etc.

I've thought it over and the rules seem to make sense.

So of the four possibilities (ignoring the Improved Disarm feat):

• Non-total cover - line of effect so disarm can happen. However cover prevents AoOs, so no AoO for the defender in Step 1 of disarm, unless the cover is asymmetrical. The reactionary disarm attempt in Step Three is still possible, since it is not an AoO.
• Total cover - no line of effect thus no disarm.
• Non-total concealment - line of sight, just 20% miss chance.
• Total concealment - no line of sight so 50% miss chance on attacking the square. Maybe no AoO for the defender in Step 1 of disarm if the concealment is symmetrical.

What concerned me was Table 8-6: Armor Class Modifiers. Since disarm is an opposed attack roll, no AC adjustment is allowed. So being behind non-total cover provides no benefit to the defender, only penalties, namely no AoO in Step 1 of disarm and no cover bonus to AC.
It would then follow that being blinded, cowering, helpless, kneeling, pinned, prone, squeezing or stunned also has no effect on disarm attempts since disarm has nothing to do with AC.

So there it is clear as mud.

In the original instance the defender was actually in the same square as a stone column which provided some unknown (to the player, not to the DM) form of cover to the defender, but not vice versa. I still don't know how you can have asymmetrical cover, but this was a case.

Thanks.

 

[Kmart Kommando]

The reactionary return disarm attempt after a failed disarm attempt (barring the Imp Disarm feat) is not an AoO, so is unaffected by the rules for AoOs, and therefore not negated by cover.

Much like Trip, you try to trip someone, there's a chance you can be tripped back, even around cover. The feat negates the AoO you would take, and the extra attack the feat gives you is also not an AoO, so it wouldn't be negated if you tripped someone around cover.

 

[Titus Flavius]

Disarm is like Trip except for the requirement in Trip to make an armed (with special weapons) or unarmed melee touch attack first and only if that attack succeeds does the attempt continue.

This implies that all situational AC modifiers, such as non-total cover, blinded, pinned and oddly enough prone apply, since they would modify the touch attack AC. Presumably you could trip someone who is already prone.

Disarm however is only an opposed attack roll, and does not allow any AC modifiers in the check. Thus Disarm can ignore all armor class modifiers, situational or otherwise.

 

[wildstarsreach]

Isn't there something such as soft cover in which an opponent is in the way and standard cover which could be a door or wall or some barrier that is solid?

 

[Titus Flavius]

Soft cover is for ranged attacks, and thus for reach attacks, because any attack against a non-adjacent enemy uses the ranged cover rules.

So you could disarm with a reach weapon against someone non-adjacent to you and the cover AC modifier still wouldn't apply because Disarm doesn't allow for AC modifiers.

I think there is a Ranged Disarm and/or a Ranged Trip in Complete Warrior. Ranged Disarm call into question the validity of the reactionary return disarm attempt provided for in Step 3 of the Disarm rules. So Ranged Disarm is the cheesiest of the cheese, no AC modifiers, no AoOs, and probably no reactionary return disarm attempts.