Mechanics vs Description (Forked Thread: Disarm rules)

[Psychic Robot]

And that's what 4E does.

No. 4e turns those things that anyone could do into magic powers that only some classes can use.

It stops the fight?

*Sighs.*

This is...painful for me.

Please explain to me how a 1,000 HP monster is defeated once it loses its weapon. Please explain to me how an opponent INSTANTLY LOSES THE FIGHT when he drops his weapon.

And an annoying one. Hence banning it.

Oh, God.

You, hong, make me sad. Very, very sad. Because I know I'm wasting my time with you, since you obviously think that 4e can do no wrong. But, allow me to try with gritted teeth:

My dear hong--my good lad--would you please take a few moments to elaborate on your statement that disarm mechanics are "annoying"? I'm not quite sure how they are any more annoying than the bland "damage + condition" or "damage + movement" powers in 4e. I would gladly appreciate any clarification you could provide.

Correct?

Your reasoning causes me pain.

Surely, a mechanic cannot be abstracted because it's in 4e. Conversely, any mechanic not in 4e can be abstracted. This is because 4e is the Alpha and Omega of RPGs.

 

[Psychic Robot]

He doesn't? Odd. I can see it. Only one action: his attack forces you to spend the rest of it scrambling for your weapon. Grant combat advantage? You were surprised to lose your weapon and are an easy target. No flanking? Lost the weapon you were planning on flanking with, now you cannot. The attack that dazed you forced your action, in a narrative way.

And he can choose to fight with other weapons he might have, or his natural attacks, or he can flee, or he can pick up his weapon. Well, in real-life he can.

I assure you, being stabbed in the eye would blind you. I'm trying to do you a favor here by replying, go ahead and tell me if I should stop.

Sugar plum, I'm going to go easy on you by pointing out a couple of things without mocking you:

1. Most people have two eyes.
2. The 4e HP system doesn't allow for such things to occur.

Now, could you be a dear and go on with doing that "favor" thing by replying to me? Thanks.

 

[Eldorian]

Sugar plum, I'm going to go easy on you by pointing out a couple of things without mocking you:

You have failed.

 

[hong]

No. 4e turns those things that anyone could do into magic powers that only some classes can use.

Nonsense. Everyone can do them.

*Sighs.*

This is...painful for me.

Obviously you're doing it wrong.

Please explain to me how a 1,000 HP monster is defeated once it loses its weapon. Please explain to me how an opponent INSTANTLY LOSES THE FIGHT when he drops his weapon.

It stops the fight?

Oh, God.

You, hong, make me sad. Very, very sad. Because I know I'm wasting my time with you, since you obviously think that 4e can do no wrong. But, allow me to try with gritted teeth:

Far be it from me to tell you to stop wasting time.

My dear hong--my good lad--would you please take a few moments to elaborate on your statement that disarm mechanics are "annoying"?

Disarm mechanics are annoying, just like sundering mechanics. That is why they are banned.

Except for... the bit where everyone can do them. It just takes the right circumstances.

I'm not quite sure how they are any more annoying than the bland "damage + condition" or "damage + movement" powers in 4e. I would gladly appreciate any clarification you could provide.

Your reasoning causes me pain.

That's your problem, not mine.

Surely, a mechanic cannot be abstracted because it's in 4e. Conversely, any mechanic not in 4e can be abstracted. This is because 4e is the Alpha and Omega of RPGs.

No, not really.

 

[hong]

1. Most people have two eyes.
2. The 4e HP system doesn't allow for such things to occur.

Of course it does. You just need not to think too hard about fantasy.

 

[Psychic Robot]

Of course it does. You just need not to think too hard about fantasy.

1. Most people have two eyes.
2. Regenerating eyes in a six-hour period is not something that happens.

In fact, an actual eye wound would end up with the person losing the eye, what with the antigens and whatnot.

 

[hong]

1. Most people have two eyes.
2. Regenerating eyes in a six-hour period is not something that happens.

See, you wouldn't have these problems if you didn't think too hard about fantasy.

In fact, an actual eye wound would end up with the person losing the eye, what with the antigens and whatnot.

"Antigen"?

 

[Psychic Robot]

See, you wouldn't have these problems if you didn't think too hard about fantasy.

So 4e relies on not thinking.

Interesting.

"Antigen"?

Given your previous statements, I'm not going to bother explaining it to you. It would be a waste of time for both of us.

I also have the feeling that you're trolling me. If so, I applaud you into goading me into responding.

 

[Terwox]

How disarm ends the fight:

Someone disarms a monster.

Wizard, who was delaying, uses a minor action to mage hand it away.

Fight is trivialized, unless monster has other attacks.

Personally, I think disarming should be an option, but it should also be a remarkbly difficult option... something along the lines of STR -2 to -12 vs. AC as a non-weapon power, with particular weapons gaining their proficiency bonus to disarm as specialty text.

Disarm makes the game run slower. I don't see anyone crying foul about encumberance being abstracted. Disarm added about as much to my 3E games as encumberance did.

More importantly, the rules for disarm are in the DMG on pg. 42.

 

[Hypersmurf]

hong, Psychic Robot, I'm removing both of you from the thread.

Psychic Robot, less condescension, please.

hong, just less hong.

-Hyp.
(Moderator)