D&D 4E Does 4E have disarm?

[Gort]

For this one case, disarming characters will not really unbalance anything, since by level 4 they'll only have quite low-level magic items. It's only at higher levels, where magic items contribute more significantly to attacks and defenses, that disarm really becomes a problem.

Paradoxically, that's when disarm appears. At higher levels. When it is a problem.

 

[Mallus]

That'll work for a few encounters. After the umpteenth time the characters overturn a fruit cart in the bazaar or swing from a conveniently placed clothesline, it'll be as hackneyed as the stereotypical featureless 20' x 20' dungeon chamber.

Sure... but it sounds like you only need this to work for a few (potential) encounters.

Anyway, LostSoul's excellent slaver stat-up made anything else I might have posted irrelevant, and I'm going to have throw some slavers into the adventure I'm writing just because they're so cool.

 

[the Jester]

Considering the flexible rules for subdual, I'm not sure that slavers need special disarm attacks.

A stunning attack, combined with bolas and manacles to add the 'restrained' condition to someone, worked well for my xvart slavers.

On reflection, the stunning attack ought to be "until the end of the xvart's next turn" or else a recharge 5 6 power or something; at will, save ends is too much.

 

[Dykstrav]

Sorry if my post seemed a bit snarky, Mallus. I didn't mean it to come across that way, I just didn't foresee the disarm issue getting so big.

Anyway, I thought it might be helpful to put up a little more background.

Our ranger got the party's first magic weapon way back in the first adventure, a +1 flameburst scimitar. About level four, he got a +2 frost longsword. The wizard asked him about disenchanting the old weapon, he said, "Nah, I'm going to hang onto it and pick up the Quick Draw feat, in case I ever get disarmed or sundered." Made sense and everyone was happy.

Later on, our rogue and our warlord both got shiny new weapons too, and thought that the ranger had a smart idea. They kept their old weapons and got the Quick Draw feat.

The party is now high 5th/low 6th level, and I figured that it's time to make them feel like that quick draw feat and hanging onto their backup weapons was smart. The campaign is moving into a city notorius as the captial of slave-traing in the region. Hence, the whole disarm scenario seemed both flavorful and reasonable. I'd like to give them a time when they can have one of those, "Oh, that was a good choice," type of moments for picking up Quick Draw. They'll be fighting slavers in one encounter for sure, and could face them elsewhere if they pick fights.

In this particular instance, every party member that is dependent on a melee weapon has a backup weapon (a magical backup weapon, even) and a feat that lets them whip it out as part of an attack. Disarming their main weapons really isn't going to hurt them all that bad--it'll reduce their pluses by one and change the rider effects, but it's certainly something they can deal with a few times. But I can see where it could screw up a game without these exact circumstances.

Thanks to LostSoul, I only have a few tweaks to have a useable slaver for this game. It might be worth looking into making disarm as a feat that grants it to you as an encounter power, similar to the various channel divinity feats.

 

[Vael]

Like I've said earlier, a disarm-monkey monster is appealing because I have three of five characters in the group with the Quick Draw feat, specifically for the possibility of being disarmed. That's the mechanical reason. The characters are going to a decadent, sword-and-sorcery city on their next adventure where slavery is rampant, and I wanted them to be more afraid of being taken as slaves than being killed. That's the fluff reason.

I question your player's creativity. Quickdraw is much better than a simple "anti-disarm" feat ... being able to use the item in the same action to retreive it is much more useful. In an urban environment, looking unarmed until the second you strike is a good thing. Being able to quaff potions in the same action you draw them is a good thing. Using Alchemical items like smokesticks can incite panic without warning is a good thing.

That'll work for a few encounters. After the umpteenth time the characters overturn a fruit cart in the bazaar or swing from a conveniently placed clothesline, it'll be as hackneyed as the stereotypical featureless 20' x 20' dungeon chamber. There are only so many variations of plausible terrain within the limits of the setting. That, and the characters will wonder why the city doesn't pass an ordinance about unsecured fruit carts in the streets or ropes tied from buildings.

And you're not worried about the umpteenth a monster knocks a PCs weapon from their hand?

Honestly, if I were so concerned about disarming, I'd play a warforged with attached weapons.

 

[LostSoul]

Thats a nice bad guy. The implications of such a cool dude are that PC's are going to want to learn how to do that trick. Saying its a "monster" power only is weak considering its being done by a low level human without magic.

That's cool. I would have no problem with the PCs trying to disarm every round. I even built this guy so that disarming him (or slashing his whip) would work. That's why he has the short sword.

As far as slashing his whip, this is how I would handle it.

1. Readied action: "I ready an action to slash his whip in two", which triggers when the slaver hits, I guess, so that it's taut and can be slashed.

2. If I describe the whip as being taut ("His whip wraps around your leg and slows you down"), then you can just cut it without needing the readied action.

3. Just a regular attack to slice it in two, though it's harder to do and I'd give a -2 to the attack roll. If the player describes something cool - "After he lashes out at me, I wrap the whip around my now-free hand and draw a dagger with the other, cutting the whip in two" - I'd erase the -2 penalty.

On any successful hit, the whip is cut and can't be used. You'd need a sharp weapon, of course, not just any weapon. A mace wouldn't do it.

That brings up another point about how I look at description and how it's important to me. If you describe "wrapping the whip around my PC's arm" I think I'd let you Pull him 1 square with a Str vs. Fort attack as just a move action. You can't normally pull a guy, especially one who's at range, but the fictional situation and how things are described makes this move make sense, makes it possible, so it should be allowed.

(I think a move action's okay because it's similar to shifting next to him, but slightly better so you have to make the attack. And on a failure he might pull you or knock you prone.)

 

[Mouseferatu]

Dance...

1) You're ignoring backup weapons. Maybe your experience is different, but I've never seen a high-level melee combatant without at least one.

2) Provoking an OA early isn't really a viable solution, because it still gets the attacker hit a bunch of extra times.

3) Most importantly, you're arguing from the assumption that the disarm attempt even works. If we're talking about something with maybe a 25% chance of success, we're talking about a tactic that, on average, is going to take four attempts.

From a creature with an expected lifespan of six rounds? That's an average of two rounds of worthwhile action before death (at which point, even if they're holding the enemy's weapon, he can take it back, so they aren't even helping their allies that much by dying).

I don't know about your combats, but in the ones I've seen, the PCs would probably willingly accept a -2 to -4 penalty (the difference between primary and backup weapon) for the last few rounds of combat, if it meant the enemy wouldn't do anything for the first few rounds of combat. And that, on average, is what this amounts to. Yes, it'll work occasionally; but those instances will be outnumbered 3-to-1 by the number of times it basically translates into the enemy standing around getting pounded.

The only way this works, mathematically, is if you have a whole bunch of enemies swarm a single melee fighter, all trying to disarm him at once and deliberately sacrificing themselves in the process. And leaving aside questions as to whether most sentient creatures are willing to do that, that's leaving them all wide open to attacks from the other PCs, who aren't in any danger since nobody's focusing on them.

 

[ExploderWizard]

That's cool. I would have no problem with the PCs trying to disarm every round. I even built this guy so that disarming him (or slashing his whip) would work. That's why he has the short sword.

As far as slashing his whip, this is how I would handle it.

1. Readied action: "I ready an action to slash his whip in two", which triggers when the slaver hits, I guess, so that it's taut and can be slashed.

2. If I describe the whip as being taut ("His whip wraps around your leg and slows you down"), then you can just cut it without needing the readied action.

3. Just a regular attack to slice it in two, though it's harder to do and I'd give a -2 to the attack roll. If the player describes something cool - "After he lashes out at me, I wrap the whip around my now-free hand and draw a dagger with the other, cutting the whip in two" - I'd erase the -2 penalty.

On any successful hit, the whip is cut and can't be used. You'd need a sharp weapon, of course, not just any weapon. A mace wouldn't do it.

That brings up another point about how I look at description and how it's important to me. If you describe "wrapping the whip around my PC's arm" I think I'd let you Pull him 1 square with a Str vs. Fort attack as just a move action. You can't normally pull a guy, especially one who's at range, but the fictional situation and how things are described makes this move make sense, makes it possible, so it should be allowed.

(I think a move action's okay because it's similar to shifting next to him, but slightly better so you have to make the attack. And on a failure he might pull you or knock you prone.)

I like the whip slashing stuff, good visuals in a fight scene with the Bad guys cracking thier whips trying to trip/disarm and the heroes cutting through the whips. Sounds like the makings of a fun fight.

 

[Mallus]

Sorry if my post seemed a bit snarky, Mallus. I didn't mean it to come across that way...

You didn't seem snarky at all. And I was trying to offer a different perspective, on the off chance this was an issue for you that could be solved by merely looking at it in another light.

 

[Lord Zardoz]

Untrue, because being disarmed doesn't impose a penalty for the rest of the combat. It imposes a penalty for as long as it takes the character to regain the weapon. That requires either picking it up, or attempting a disarm back.

I'm not sure where people got the idea that being disarmed was a long-term thing. Frankly, one of the reasons why it's not a great tactic in the game is because it's just as easy to undo as it is to do. It's a good way for getting the McGuffin out of the villain's hands, or making the victim spend a round or two scrambling, but that's really about it.

If the weapon is disarmed, and nothing more done, you are correct. The villain can simply spend a turn regaining the weapon, at worst suffering an Opportunity attack.

However, one of the tactics I liked using as a DM in 3rd edition used a two man team. The primary would disarm the PC. There would be one mook who held his action until just after the villain. He would then pick up the weapon before the PC could. The result of this is that the PC would lose a great deal of combat capability. All bonuses for specialization and magic weapon enhancement are negated.

I miss having Disarm as a combat option, but I believe understand why it, and Sunder and Trip basically disappeared. They were cut to remove situations that are very difficult to balance properly in a mechanical system without situation specific modifiers. Running this as a simple Attack vs Defense value would allow people to be disarmed a little to easily. The designers opted to protect the 'Every defense is Ability modifier + (Level / 2) + misc'. They are all to powerful to allow as at will abilities.

END COMMUNICATION