Disarm too Easy?

[argo]

The problem develops when D&D combat turns into trips, disarms, sunders, and grapples, rather than regular attacks. Pretty soon, every battle follows the same format and every bad guy needs to be tricked out to counter the same ol' tactics. It gets boring pretty fast.

So a combat made up of a series of trips, sunders and grapples is booring and stale while a combat of nothing but regular attack following regular attack (against an enemy who has "tricked out" his AC no doubt) is dynamic and exciting?

I have no problem with disarms, it is an opposed attack roll so the fighter with the superior combat skill will win. Anything that makes the players put down their favorite weapon and improvise something else from time to time is a good thing.

Later.

 

[Stalker0]

My problem with disarms is the same with a lot of the combat maneuevers.

Without the feat, noone in there right mind is going to try to disarm another character...but with the feat it becomes very easy.

 

[Ogrork the Mighty]

So a combat made up of a series of trips, sunders and grapples is booring and stale while a combat of nothing but regular attack following regular attack (against an enemy who has "tricked out" his AC no doubt) is dynamic and exciting?

When seemingly every other opponent ends up tripped, disarmed, weapons sundered, in the first round of combat, yeah it becomes boring. How fun would it be for your Fighter if you got disarmed of your speciality weapon in the first round of every battle? Even worse, if your favourite weapon got sundered? Or you spend most of every battle trying to get up against a trip-monkey?

Variety is fine, but these three forms of attack in particular are easily min-maxed to the point that they become overpowering and boring.

 

[iwatt]

My only issue with disarm/sunder involves the Duelist. When he goes fight defenseively and full combat expertise (typically as a delaying tactic while other deal ranged damage) you have a PC with an inordinately high AC (and very high touch AC). The only option in most cases is to disarm him or sunder his weapon. Because of the mechnic of these actions (opposed attack rolls) the Duelist will usually get shafted. I can see it somehow for Sunder (the guy is so concentrated at parrying that he leaves himself open to have his sword broken). But for disarming, I just don't "see" it. The Zorro always seemed to disarm all oponents (even skilled ones) and I think all of us agree that Zorro probably had elaborate parry .

 

[Squire James]

For starters, I think a general -4 to attack rolls should apply when one is trying some sort of special maneuver, and the defender gets to double his AC bonus due to Combat Expertise and/or fighting defensively (to simulate "being ready for it"). The Improved feats only remove the AoO and counter options, and do not provide an attack bonus. A "Greater" feat might be made available (needs the +11 BAB and the cooresponding Improved feat) that negates the -4 penalty, but that's as far as I go.

Trips, disarms, and sunders should be dramatic, not routine. If you disarm a foe, it is because you are not merely better, but MUCH better!

 

[Squire James]

Zorro probably wasn't using Combat Expertise when he was Disarming, and he was probably fighting guys 4 or more levels below him (including the BBEG's in most cases).

 

[iwatt]

Zorro probably wasn't using Combat Expertise when he was Disarming, and he was probably fighting guys 4 or more levels below him (including the BBEG's in most cases).

I beg to differ, his skill was such that I'd guess he always had all his defenses on. That's why he wasn't skewering everybody left and right. And i didn't say (i think) that he was using combat expertise while disarming, I said he was using it when he was been disarmed.

Example aside, i still think it's too easy to disarm a duelist. And once you've disarmed him he's pretty darn useless.

Believe me, I like the resolution system for the special maneuvers (except trip, but that's a whole other thread ) in the fact that they take into account the releative skill of each oponent. But visually, I don't see how parrying attacks effectively somehow makes me a blatant target for disarming.

To avoid this I've house ruled that attack penalties for fighting defensively (and Combat expertise) don't apply to disarm attempts. Haven't applied it to sunder yet because my players don't go around sundering too much.

 

[Aust Diamondew]

The problem develops when D&D combat turns into trips, disarms, sunders, and grapples, rather than regular attacks. Pretty soon, every battle follows the same format and every bad guy needs to be tricked out to counter the same ol' tactics. It gets boring pretty fast.

And the I "I swing my sword you swing your sword" routine doesn't get boring?

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

The problem develops when D&D combat turns into trips, disarms, sunders, and grapples, rather than regular attacks. Pretty soon, every battle follows the same format and every bad guy needs to be tricked out to counter the same ol' tactics. It gets boring pretty fast.

Perhaps if you play in a game very heavy into fighting Medium Humanoids, I could see this happening.

In the games I play I am seeing plenty of opponents that are:
(a) Large or Huge
(b) very strong
(c) have high BAB
(d) have natural weapons (or equivalent backup weapons)

If your opponent has 3+ of the above qualities, those special tactics are pretty much wasted feats.

From my POV I would like to see the potential for the game to be other than a boring HP slugging match. Have not seen a probem, although I do see the potential for Sundering used against PCs to be worrisome.

 

[Kemrain]

We might fix the problem with a "Greater Disarm" feat that allows you to disarm foes who have Improved disarm and fail to disarm you, and give a bonus against being disarmed..

- Kemrain the Armless.