Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Amalthea 04-03-05, 09:42 AM	With my grasp of DnD rules, I imagined the following scenario. A brute, specialised in dealing copious amounts of damage and fighting multiple enemies, versus a swashbuckler, master duelist who specialises in neutralising single foes. Logic would say that subtlety would win in this case, but observe : Swashbuckler wields weapons specially designed to disarm, trip and sunder. Brute wields weapons that dish out lots of damage. Swashbuckler wins initiative. Round 1 Swashbuckler : Makes a successful disarm. Brute : Draws secondary weapon, makes a successful attack. Round 2 Swashbuckler (angry) : Makes a successful sunder. Brute : Draws dagger, makes a successful attack. Round 3 Swashbuckler (****** off) : Makes a successful trip. Brute : Gets up, takes a successful attack of opportunity, makes a successful attack. Round 4 Swashbuckler (badly beaten) : Full attack. Brute : Full attack. Swashbuckler buys the farm. Is it me, or the DnD system of subtlety only allows you to buy time? One would think that a neutralised enemy would be powerless, but really, it's all about attacking and inflicting damage. The swashbuckler sacrifices his damaging attacks to disarm the brute who, in turn, only has to spend a move action to get back in position and still has a standard action to perform one single, damaging attack against his foe. Am I missing something? One of my friends strongly believes that there is no other way in DnD : a constantly attacking character will win over a subtle one. Having played Rolemaster, I can tell you that I prefer a system where a disarmed character is really in danger, and should consider surrendering. Can anyone prove this wrong?
Saint Sinister 04-03-05, 10:30 AM	Well lets see here, The fact is the Dnd system was made with a group of pc's working together. Dos'nt mean you can't have fun with solo adventures but what you described is a streetfighter senerio. During round 1 when the swash disarmed the brute the swash's rouge buddy could have walked around the brute for a flank{ you cant make aoo with unarmed unless your a monk or whatever}
questionc 04-03-05, 11:09 AM	Trip, Disarm, and Sunder are all attack actions, not to be confused with standard actions. There's no reason the fight couldn't go like this... Round 1: Swashbuckler makes a succesful disarm and trip. Brute draws secondary weapon and then gets up, provoking an AOO. Swashbuckler disarms secondary weapon using his AOO. Round 2: Swashbuckler sunders the Brute's carried weapon and trips him again. ... The swashbuckler's fate really relies on the fact that he has good luck, but I think he has a chance.
Savras 04-03-05, 01:12 PM	Aye. Or let's look at it like that: Round I: Swash- Disarm, attack, hits. Brute- either picks up his weapon (Standard action, no more attacks that round and provokes an AoO) or draws a secondasry weapon (with which he hasn't got any unique feats and is less powerful than his main weapon) and attacks, but is less useful. See, when you add in these few tiny facts, suddenly the swashbucker seems a bit more of a worthy adversary, no? Savras
Purkake 04-03-05, 01:19 PM	The real fun begins when the strong brute grapples the poor swashbuckler and easily breaks his spine.(you just need spiked armor and/or improved unarmed strike)
siriusranger87 04-03-05, 01:20 PM	or the swahbuckler gets spring attack and uses most likely superior speed if brute character is wearing heavy armor to run circles around him while using his disarm and the like a swashbuckling character would not stand in front of the brute character and take the hits
Purkake 04-03-05, 01:22 PM	Mr. brute can ready an attack to bash the swashbuckler silly.
CaoSlayer 04-03-05, 01:24 PM	I have to learn about reading well before posting. deleted.
arson 04-03-05, 01:24 PM	note that in the 1st example by o.p., the swashbuckler was only doing one attack as a standard action , while the brute made full use of his turn actions. If he fights like this, he deserves to lose. the swashbuckler could easily make a full attack, executing multiple control maneuvers (as mentioned above) or damaging strikes. or he could make use of his move action, which coupled with spring attack denies the brute his draw-and-attack. usually one's secondary weapon is nowhere near as effective (or enchanted) as his primary, so the brute after disarm/sunder is already at a disadvantage. yes, this is possible in d&d, and both combat styles are still useful
Nuntius128 04-03-05, 03:52 PM	Swashbuckler and Brute make opposing Diplomacy checks to influence their reaction. Swashbuckler has a new friend :D To do his dirty work.