D&D 4E Does 4E have disarm?

[ExploderWizard]

On the other hand, if you allow a system to just bypass hit points and end conflicts without them, why have hit points?

My suggestion in these cases is not to find a solution in the rules, but find a solution in the scenario. Be it a special stunt (still very "combaty") or just open up negotiations. Most opponents that can use weapons are also intelligent enough to negotiate - you just have to convince them that it's worth it.

Bypassing hit points isnt (or shouldn't be) something thats going to happen with a routine disarm. On the other hand magical effects like paralyzation, hold person, and martial abilities such as pinning which prevent the use of powers or attacks are more interesting than just a slugfest every time.

With HP attrition being the only option there is little incentive to leave anyone alive after chewing through so many hit points to drop them unless you want to interrogate them. Its simply not worth the trouble because the captives will 1) just bring trouble, 2) heal, and 3) have to be beaten on for 50 rounds again due to 1 and 2.

 

[Dykstrav]

My game is on for Saturday, and the characters could easily run afoul of the slavers. Just thought I'd post the stats for those who might be interested.

Special thanks to LostSoul, who came up with the slaver tormentor that inspired the stats for the slavers. I "seasoned to taste," but he really came up with the stats.

 

[LostSoul]

Those are cool, Dykstrav.

You might want to allow the Elite to make 2 attacks - one broadsword, one whip - to buff him up a bit.

 

[Wormwood]

Every once in a while its nice to gain a victory without hacking through hundreds of hit points.

I agree. Which is why we routinely stop combats when they get boring.

 

[Craw Hammerfist]

If the players want a disarm option, I have to grant the monsters a disembowel option to balance things out.

Why not de-shield the opponent? Or cut off his foot? Or hamstring him. Or give him a columbian necktie. I know, poke him really hard in that spot behind the ear that hurts so much.

Why bother to design a rule for something that has been abstracted out of the game? If you need something for the scene to work, dm fiat is the best way to handle it. Give your BBEG slaver an encounter power. Problem of over-use by opponents or pcs goes away.

Edit: exactly like you already did. This is why 4e npcs and monsters are light years ahead of 3e. Need a cool power? Make it up!

 

[Saeviomagy]

I agree. Which is why we routinely stop combats when they get boring.

I agree - elites seem just about right, but solo elite fights seem to traipse on long past the "ok, we've got a tactic that works, so lets just repeat it round after round" stage.

Having pondered this, I think the solution is possibly to have less "boss" encounters automatically fight to the death once engaged. By the time you've gotten the typical solo elite to half hitpoints, it's usually pretty plain that he's going to lose. Why would he keep fighting the same fight at that point?

Taking a leaf out of WOW and similar games, there are not very many boss fights that use the same tactic from beginning to end. They usually have time or status dependant stages, where the tactic of the fight shifts. Introducing extra minions, having the BBEG flee or use some defensive tactic or simply swapping him out for something totally different.

This would allow the fight to avoid stagnation: once the players have started reliably grinding him down, the fight changes so they have to adapt.

 

[Hairfoot]

The basic concept of disarm is "I knock your weapon out of your hand and put my blade to your throat." It's an 'I win' button, really.

I won't get involved in the mechanics debate, but I disagree with this fluff entirely.

The basic concept of a disarm is to force an opponent to retreat or use an inferior weapon - all part of a fun tactical fight. I would have little respect for a DM who allowed a disarm to be an "I win" button, or a player who thinks it should be.

 

[Kordeth]

I won't get involved in the mechanics debate, but I disagree with this fluff entirely.

The basic concept of a disarm is to force an opponent to retreat or use an inferior weapon - all part of a fun tactical fight. I would have little respect for a DM who allowed a disarm to be an "I win" button, or a player who thinks it should be.

Actually, if you go by the kind of cinematic fight scenes D&D is trying to emulate, Disarm almost invariably falls into one of either of those categories.

1) If it's a temporary setback for the hero, or villain, it almost never happens more than once per fight.

2) If it's a dramatic "flip the bad guy's sword out of his hand and order him to yield" moment, it always happens at the end of the fight scene--at least until the disarmed character suddenly and heroically springs back into action (you might say "gains a second wind").

Ergo, it seems the happy medium is to have both options:

1) Once per encounter, a character may make a Str vs. Fort or Dex vs. Ref attack. On a hit, the target is disarmed, its weapon landing in a square of the attacker's choosing up to a number of squares away from the target equal to the attacker's Strength modifier. Situations like Danceofmask's "take the player's weapon away and keep it from him" can be solved remarkably well by the guiding philosophy of 4th Edition DMing: Don't be a jerk to the players. The same philosophy that tells us "don't put 100-foot pit traps in a 1st-level adventure" tells us "don't hamstring players for the entire fight."

And if players try the keep-away trick on bad guys, so what? Have them carry a backup weapon, and reward the player for a potentially risky tactic (wasting an attack) by putting one monster's attack and damage slightly below where it should be for its level, it's not the end of the world. Elite and solo "legendary swordsmen" types can be kitted out with powers to help them recover their weapons if they're disarmed.

2) In lieu of killing or knocking out an armed target that reaches 0 hp, you can automatically disarm the target as part of the attack that reduced it to 0 hp. The weapon lands in a square of your choosing, up to your Str modifier away. The target is conscious and not dying, but is utterly at your mercy. Until its hit points rise above 0, you may deal a killing blow as an immediate interrupt if it takes any action. This killing blow is a basic attack that automatically hits and automatically kills the target (or knocks it out, if you so desire).

 

[lukelightning]

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.

That's when you say that due to some special property of magical weapons, you can't use an improvised disarm maneuver on them (maybe the same magic that makes magical throwing weapons return to your hand).