Mechanics vs Description (Forked Thread: Disarm rules)

[Mort_Q]

AoO = provoked by picking up weapon.

Picking up a weapon is not on the list of things that provoke OAs in 4e.

It's a short list.

• Using a power that has the ranged or area keyword.
• Moving (not including shifts or forced movement) from a square adjacent to an enemy.

Or am I missing something?

 

[Psychic Robot]

That would probably be because their aren't any disarming rules in 4e. Guess we'll have to lean on its predecessor's rulings, eh?

 

[AverageTable]

AoO = provoked by picking up weapon.

Not in 4th Edition. In 4th Edition an opportunity attack is only provoked by one of two actions:

1. Leaving a square adjacent to an enemy while not "shifting". Forced movment never provokes an attack.

2. Performing an attack of the "Ranged" or "Area" type while adjacent to an enemy.

 

[Psychic Robot]

Not in 4th Edition. In 4th Edition an opportunity attack is only provoked by one of two actions:

1. Leaving a square adjacent to an enemy while not "shifting". Forced movment never provokes an attack.

2. Performing an attack of the "Ranged" or "Area" type while adjacent to an enemy.

That would probably be because their aren't any disarming rules in 4e. Guess we'll have to lean on its predecessor's rulings, eh?

._.

 

[FadedC]

Except that there are disarming rules in 4e. It just requires a power to do so.

Anyway the D&D combat system has always been abstracted. It's assumed people are always trying to do effective things like disarm their foe, cut off their hand, stab them through the eye, lock their weapon with yours, etc. It's just that they don't actually work unless you have a power that allows it or you reduce them to 0 hit points. This has been true for every edition, the only difference is what effects are balanced enough to allow anyone to try. In 4e disarm is not one of them.

There are a million things that are abstracted in the D&D combat system, so I can't see how being temporarily disarmed being abstracted in the same way as parrying, riposting, etc. as something that's assumed to happen sometimes during a miss is giving people so much trouble.

 

[Psychic Robot]

Because disarming one's foe is a valid tactic? Just like trying to trip him or knock him over?

 

[FadedC]

Because disarming one's foe is a valid tactic? Just like trying to trip him or knock him over?

And just like riposting, parrying, locking weapons, throwing your enemy off balance, cutting off his hand, stabbing him through the eye, hamstringing him, or any of 100 other valid tactics that are abstracted in the traditional D&D combat system.

 

[Cadfan]

The problem with disarming foes is that, if you make it something you do during a fight rather than at the end, you have to add all of the following to your game system-

1. A method for picking up dropped weapons.
2. A way to tell, for every single monster that has a weapon, the nature of their unarmed combat prowess, including which abilities work and how well.

3e had these things, but they kind of sucked. I'm looking at the 3e Ogre Mage right now. If you disarm the Ogre Mage, obviously his greatsword attack doesn't work. His base attack is printed in his stat block. His strength bonus is there as well. You can add them together to get his unarmed attack bonus. Then for his unarmed attack damage, you can start with the 1d3 unarmed attack damage of a medium creature, and check the Ogre Mage's size to increase it by the appropriate number of dice. Fortunately none of his powers require weapons (in 3e, nothing actually REQUIRES weapons), so that's all the work you have to do.

And of course to disarm him in the first place involved an arcane set of rules based on weapon size and number of hands holding the weapon.

This is a pain in the neck. The game could make it go more smoothly by adding "abilities while disarmed" to every monster stat block, but that would be an annoying amount of clutter.

Its just too much work for one unusual ability that is far too easily defeated by carrying a backup weapon. It multiplies statblock complexity for very little gain. Far better to concentrate on combat tricks with more efficient payoff.

 

[Psychic Robot]

And just like riposting, parrying, locking weapons, throwing your enemy off balance, cutting off his hand, stabbing him through the eye, hamstringing him, or any of 100 other valid tactics that are abstracted in the traditional D&D combat system.

So the defense for removing features of the game is "it's an abstraction"? What if I removed death? Hitpoints, after all, are merely an ABSTRACTION (!!1!!11!1!) of health. You don't REALLY die when you lose all your hitpoints...nor do you really lose unconsciousness in 4e, but that's another discussion altogether.

As far as the rest go:

Parrying/locking weapons: doesn't happen, since you don't get better at avoiding blows when you get better at fighting. (At least, in 3e. Not sure how 4e works. Not that characters actually deserve such a bonus in 4e, as apparently wizards are just as skilled at swinging a sword as fighters are.)

Cutting off hand/stabbing through eye: disarming is a far more likely (not to mention realistic) technique. Also, called shots don't really work. Disarming does.

Hamstringing: this came late in 3.5, with some of the rogue feats that let you sacrifice sneak attack damage for other effects.

 

[generalhenry]

Also, called shots don't really work. Disarming does.

what is disarming if not a called shot to the weapon?

really, they work about the same. Disarm is just about as problematic.