Question about Disarm and Reach

[Stalker0]

I know that when your using a reached weapon to disarm an opponent, the opponent can't make an AOO against you if he does not also have a reached weapon. However, can he still make an AOO against the weapon, allowing him to attempt to disarm the weapon itself?

 

[Artoomis]

I know that when your using a reached weapon to disarm an opponent, the opponent can't make an AOO against you if he does not also have a reached weapon. However, can he still make an AOO against the weapon, allowing him to attempt to disarm the weapon itself?

Technically, no, as he does not threaten you.

I'd allow it, however, as the weapon is clearly within his threatened area.

I might be tempted to apply a -2 penalty to the attempt to disarm, since he cannot reach you to strike at your hands or anything like that, but I would not apply any penalty to attempts to break the weapon.

 

[AGGEMAM]

No, the opponent doesn't get an AoO. That is one of the advantages of a reach weapon. However it doesn't protect you from the counter-disarm if you fail.

 

[Christian]

However, can he still make an AOO against the weapon, allowing him to attempt to disarm the weapon itself?

Disarm the ... I mean ... what?

If anyone ever attacked me with an armed weapon, that would really scare me. What are we talking about, a fighter attacking with a longspear armed with a dagger?

(OK, OK-I know what he meant. But the mental image was too priceless not to share. )

 

[Spove]

Sunder

I think he meant sunder.

 

[Tony Vargas]

Technically, no, but it's not a bad idea to allow an AoO vs the weapon - it could be used to disarm or strike the weapon. Note, however, that this also opens up the possibility of characters taking AoOs on long-armed critters like ogres by striking thier limbs while thier body is not in thier threatened areas... which may or may not strike you as desireable.

In any case, the reach weapon is still subject to the counter-disarm if it's wielder is unsuccessful in the initial disarm attempt.