Rules for disarm illogical?

[Balord]

Disarm, Step 2: Opposed Rolls. You and the defender make opposed ATTACK ROLLS with your respective weapons.

So, if I'm the defender and I happen to be fighting defensively (-4 to attack), I am easier to disarm than if I hadn't been fighting defensively? What is the logic behind this? Shouldn't it be MORE DIFFICULT to disarm me if I am on the defensive? Shouldn't defending yourself from a disarm attempt (and sunder as well, I suppose) be based more on defensive ability rather than offensive?

 

[Infiniti2000]

When you're fighting defensively, why would you be considered to be protecting your weapon more than your body? After all, you gain a bonus to AC, not to your weapon. In fact, does your AC apply to disarm attempts at all? You don't get a Dex bonus to your opposed disarm attempt (sans weapon finesse).

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

So, if I'm the defender and I happen to be fighting defensively (-4 to attack), I am easier to disarm than if I hadn't been fighting defensively? What is the logic behind this?

Because when you're fighting defensively, you're focusing more on parrying than you otherwise would be.

If you're parrying more, your weapon's encountering your opponent's weapon more.

If your weapon's encountering your opponent's weapon more, there's a better chance for him to hook it out of your hand.

 

[FEADIN]

Logic?!
Difficult to explain, maybe because on the defensive your parrying more with your weapon and it is more exposed to be sundered or disarmed, but in truth it's simply because you have a malus from another action.

 

[Pickaxe]

Because when you're fighting defensively, you're focusing more on parrying than you otherwise would be.

If you're parrying more, your weapon's encountering your opponent's weapon more.

If your weapon's encountering your opponent's weapon more, there's a better chance for him to hook it out of your hand.

I think that makes sense, but presumably a character doing total defense is doing those same things, but with no attack penalty.

--Axe

 

[FEADIN]

I think that makes sense, but presumably a character doing total defense is doing those same things, but with no attack penalty.

--Axe

Total defense is more on dodging because you don't have to be as close as in the defensive fighting, you don't strike back.
I practice martial arts and when I make a total defense I move a lot more around and I try to stay out of reach from the opponent, when I must strike, I move less but I use arms and legs to block strikes.

 

[Balord]

When you are actively trying to defend yourself, you are paying more attention to the attacks made against you, so you should be more alert against such special attacks as disarm and sunder. I still think DEFENDING yourself against such attacks should be based on DEFENSIVE ability rather than offensive. When you are going soley on offense, you are more reckless and not concentrating as much on the attacks coming against you, so you should be more vulnerable to them. Someone using the dodge feat for example should be harder to make a sunder attack against because he's actively avoiding your attacks. His weapon is likewise harder to hit because the weapon is basically an extension of him as long as he's using it. Also, picture trying to disarm someone using the sword/board style. I would think it rather more difficult to attack the sword when the shield is constantly held forward in defense.

Ask anyone who has fenced. Attempting to disarm a reckless opponent who throws caution to the wind is easier than doing so against an opponent who is paying close attention to your every move and defending against it accordingly.

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

I think that makes sense, but presumably a character doing total defense is doing those same things, but with no attack penalty.

They also no longer threaten.

 

[Infiniti2000]

When you are actively trying to defend yourself, you are paying more attention to the attacks made against you, so you should be more alert against such special attacks as disarm and sunder.

See, that's just the thing. Those attacks aren't actually against you. They're against your weapon. It's a big difference. If they were against you, then they wouldn't provoke an AoO.

 

[Synthetik Fish]

Ask anyone who has fenced. Attempting to disarm a reckless opponent who throws caution to the wind is easier than doing so against an opponent who is paying close attention to your every move and defending against it accordingly.

Fencers... don't really "disarm" each other... that's movie sh*t. Fencers parry and riposte