Trip, Disarm, Sunder

[Mouseferatu]

I refuse to believe that anyone actually believes that only people specially trained can trip people.

A more powerful or effective trip? Sure. But anyone can attempt to trip somebody else. This is just a no-brainer.

This is true. But let's look at something more complex, like disarm.

I've practiced a bit of swordplay. I'm not even remotely good at it, but I know the basics.

If I attempt to disarm someone who actually knows what they're doing? Assuming he's not also sick, horribly injured, or distracted by a bus full of Playboy bunnies, I'm going to fail. Every time.

So while I agree that it's not 100% realistic to say "You must have this maneuver even to try," it's not so unrealistic as to be a major flaw in the design, IMO.

But all that said, we have no idea how it'll work. Even if it is a maneuver, that doesn't necessarily mean you can't try to disarm without said maneuver. It may just mean you'll suck at it.

 

[Olaf the Stout]

I don't mind if they make the penalties for trying to trip/sunder/disarm quite large, so that if you don't have the skill/feat/manoeuvre, it is very, very unlikely to succeed. What I don't like is the rules saying you can't even attempt it. Players should always be allowed to try and do things.

Olaf the Stout

 

[JustinA]

If I attempt to disarm someone who actually knows what they're doing? Assuming he's not also sick, horribly injured, or distracted by a bus full of Playboy bunnies, I'm going to fail. Every time.

Now, let's talk about the situations where:

(a) You do know something about swordfighting, you just haven't selected the appropriate maneuver.

(b) You're fighting someone who doesn't "actually know what they're doing".

The correct mechanic for what you're describing is, of course, an opposed check.

Justin Alexander
http://www.thealexandrian.net

 

[Mouseferatu]

Now, let's talk about the situations where:

(a) You do know something about swordfighting, you just haven't selected the appropriate maneuver.

(b) You're fighting someone who doesn't "actually know what they're doing".

The correct mechanic for what you're describing is, of course, an opposed check.

Well, one could argue that if you don't have the maneuver, you don't know what you're doing in terms of disarming someone, because you never learned how.

But that aside, I'm not advocating for a system where you can't try if you don't have the maneuver. I just said that if that were the case, it wouldn't be a deal-breaker for me. I'd vastly prefer the rules to allow anyone to try, but only those with the maneuver are likely to succeed most of the time.

 

[wedgeski]

Whenever Trip, Disarm, Sunder, Grapple etc. are used in my games it tends to be by players who have built their characters to excel at those abilities. My own game would see virtually no change if those tricks were moved into the realm of 'special abilities'.