Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Mustrum_Ridcully" data-source="post: 4487074" data-attributes="member: 710">Actually, Disarm in 3E can be game-breaking, too (imagine taking a Balors Vorpal Sword, or a Fighters +3 Holy Evil Outsider Bane Bastard Sword). It is a general problem that weapons grant bonuses to attacks (and damage). I don't know how it would work in AD&D or OD&D...In Shadowrun, it's very hard to really disarm someone - most Runners will be armed to the teeth (which might include cybered-up teeth <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" /> ). In Torg, characters often have non-weapon skills they can use to attack (Trick, Taunt, Intimidate, Test of Wills, Maneuver), and most replacement weapons they can get would work fine. If disarming is your primary concern, it is definitely not the best system.On the other hand, is a system that makes disarming inconsequential a good system, either? The biggest problem with disarm is that - unlike in fiction - it is hard to measure when you get your weapon back. In fiction, typically one of the following two things happen: - The disarmed picks up a suitable replacement weapon.- The disarmed surrenders or retreats. If someone was willing to accept that disarm just "weakens (save ends)" or causes "-2 to attacks (save ends)", disarm would be feasible. But would it feel "real" enough? Disarming comes close to the territory of "called shots" that ablative hit points don't support well enough.</blockquote>

Verification