Disarm attempt draws AoO...why? [Archive] - Wizards Community

Disarm attempt draws AoO...why? [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
rainy
12-20-07, 10:10 AM Alright, I'm having trouble wrapping my mind around this. Why should trying to disarm someone draw an attack of opportunity? I mean, you are still swinging a weapon essentially "at them," I'm not so sure if you'd even realize that the target of the attack wasn't to hit you in a more generic way. So why the AoO? Maybe there is a balance issue that hasn't occurred to me, but right now it just seems kinda silly and cumbersome to me. I mean you are already expending an attack to try this maneuver which is by no means assured, so why also suffer an AoO.

I have the same problem with Sunder as well.

:confused:

Thanks

-rainy
rainy
12-20-07, 10:11 AM forgot to susbscribe to the thread...:(

I wish that subscribing was the default.
Sigma34561
12-20-07, 10:18 AM Your trying to twist the weapon out of thier hand, or batter it away, or rip it from them. If you arent attacking them, but you are that close, your defenses are down. Theoretically, the whole round you are swinging and parrying, and you have the chance to get one good swing in every few seconds. If you shift your focus away from attacking, while your opponent is still swinging and parrying, he might get a good hit in off turn. Its not that your opponent gets another attack that turn, its that one of his attacks that would amount to nothing, has the chance to break through.
Tordak
12-20-07, 10:22 AM I think it's because you change your attention from hitting something general, like the creature in a threaten square, to something way more specific, the weapon held by the creature in the threaten square. When you attack a creature, you're quickly looking to see opening, from the way it moves and defend, or just trying to overpower its defenses with a huge swing in the general direction. When you try to disarm or sunder, you need more precision as you're are trying to hit something a bit smaller that is being move around by someone else; the hand-eye coordination requires you to focus your attention for a few second on the weapon. Opponent in a fight will quickly see the distraction and take advantage of it. It is also much easier to hit a person than something it is holding; that's why police officer are instructed to shoot at person shooting at them and not a the gun they are holding (you see that in movie, but that does not work too well in real life).

It's like driving a car while talking on a cell phone; studies shows that you loose about 50% of your attention to the road just because your attention is on something else, even with hand-free speaker. In a fight, you need to stay focus on your enemies' moves at all time. That's also why flanking opponent gets bonus to hit, and rogue get their sneak attack when the feint you.
1 ton ghost
12-20-07, 12:56 PM Tordak summed it up pretty well. the cell while driving stat is no joke (good mention on that one); very close in approximation to DUI and i see it every damn day from allegedly "responsible" young urban professionals. and now, w/ the texting while driving. wtf?

anyway, Disarm...

-in a nutshell; you are investing alot more of your attention/energy from the sum total of your combat prowess/perception/whatever into a specific combat action. think of it as an equation. you dedicate more emphasis to 1 specific, you neglect the whole, in this particular case, defense, to which it draws an AoO, save for the feat.
-and think of unarmed vs. armed Disarms. he's gonna get a free slash at you w/ the knife cuz' he knows you want it and means to keep it. simple enough.
-another explanation, game balance. john doe isn't much of a Ftr, w/ a Vorpal Weapon, he is. take it away and it's different, but you gotta' pay the piper
StevenO
12-20-07, 01:37 PM Don't forget that if you practice at using disarm or sunder (take the FEAT) you learn how to avoid giving your opponent that opening along with become better at performing the maneuver.
BENEVOLENT_DM
12-20-07, 01:49 PM Tordak summed it up pretty well. the cell while driving stat is no joke (good mention on that one); very close in approximation to DUI and i see it every damn day from allegedly "responsible" young urban professionals. and now, w/ the texting while driving. wtf?

anyway, Disarm...

-in a nutshell; you are investing alot more of your attention/energy from the sum total of your combat prowess/perception/whatever into a specific combat action. think of it as an equation. you dedicate more emphasis to 1 specific, you neglect the whole, in this particular case, defense, to which it draws an AoO, save for the feat.
-and think of unarmed vs. armed Disarms. he's gonna get a free slash at you w/ the knife cuz' he knows you want it and means to keep it. simple enough.
-another explanation, game balance. john doe isn't much of a Ftr, w/ a Vorpal Weapon, he is. take it away and it's different, but you gotta' pay the piper

But the real question is does talking on a cell phone while driving provoke AoO?
rainy
12-20-07, 01:51 PM Okay, well explained inside the RAW...WotC would be proud of you all.

I can totally agree with the AoO on unarmed disarm attempts.

How game breaking would it be to loose the AoO on disarm and sunder attempts? As for 'paying the piper,' 1 ton, like I mentioned it seems to me you already are paying the piper. Instead of using you action to attack and do damage, you are trying a maneuver, that even if successful has limited impact. Drawing a weapon is a free action as long as you at least 5 foot step. And you are putting yourself at risk of being counter disarmed.

So no AoO, unbalancing or not?
rainy
12-20-07, 01:52 PM But the real question is does talking on a cell phone while driving provoke AoO?

Not if you have the improved combat calling feat.

;)
Sigma34561
12-20-07, 01:56 PM how is disarming your opponent not important? Its like the most important thing you can do besides killing them.
Plothos
12-20-07, 02:20 PM Drawing a weapon is a free action as long as you at least 5 foot step.

This doesn't appear to be true. Looking at the SRD, it's a bit unclear, but I think can become clear with some focus on the presentation:

If you have a base attack bonus of +1 or higher, you may draw a weapon as a free action combined with a regular move. If you have the Two-Weapon Fighting feat, you can draw two light or one-handed weapons in the time it would normally take you to draw one.

Two things to note here are the fact that it says "combined with a regular move" which could mean combined with any movement on the grid, or combined with a move action actually used to make a move (be it by flying, tumblining, jumping, whatever). That it's the latter that is intended should I think become clear if we realize that if it would be free to draw when doing a 5-foot step, itself a free action, why should it not be free to draw while standing still? The rationale for letting you do it while moving is you've got time that you've paid for by spending a move action. You can do these two things at once, even thought they both normally take enough time/concentration to demand using up your move action to get it.

Consider, you've been disarmed and you want to close a door to keep the second orc off your back next round. By your thinking, the rules don't let you do A, but they do allow B.

A: You close the door, draw your replacement weapon, and attack (two move actions and a standard)
B: You close the door, draw your replacement weapon while taking a 5 foot step, and attack (one move, two free, and one standard action)

Of course, B should be more difficult to execute, not easier.
rainy
12-20-07, 02:21 PM how is disarming your opponent not important? Its like the most important thing you can do besides killing them.

I didn't say not important, I said limited impact. Adventuring types rarely carry less than three melee weapons, so it will definitely have more of an impact on NPCs and monsters, especially 'poorer' ones who may only have one weapon. But if the disarmed foe is packing a back-up, then all you've effective made them do was switch weapons, again;

* if you are successful
* don't get disarmed yourself
* and you gave up a chance to simply hurt your opponent

Maybe it's just the circle I play in, but I've never seen anyone even try to disarm someone.
Plothos
12-20-07, 02:32 PM Maybe it's just the circle I play in, but I've never seen anyone even try to disarm someone.

I have. I've seen it really hurt too. You're right that many adventurers carry multiple weapons, but they're rarely redundant, and even forcing an enemy to switch to a less-than-ideal weapon (and getting it out isn't as easy as it might seem to some) is non-trivial. Especially when you consider that most fighters have one big uber-weapon as their bread and butter, backed up with masterwork and/or silver and/or alternate damage-type weapons that just aren't as good. In addition, it's not just PCs that get disarmed. Orcs might carry a spear and a bow and that's it. A skeleton probably just his pick or whatever. Players can and do abuse the disarm option as-is.
rainy
12-20-07, 02:52 PM The rationale for letting you do it while moving is you've got time that you've paid for by spending a move action. You can do these two things at once, even thought they both normally take enough time/concentration to demand using up your move action to get it.

Interesting distinction, though that's a very fine distinction since one more step (i.e. moving 10 feet) gives you plenty of time to combine it with the draw. I see your point though. I'll have to give that point some thought.

But you could still just stand there, burn a move action to draw a new weapon (which doesn't trigger an AoO) and attack. So by disarming them you've robbed them of the opportunity to take a full round action devoted to hitting you with their weapon.

I'm still not seeing how houseruling no AoO on disarms would be unbalancing.
Slimgauge
12-20-07, 02:52 PM If you don't have improved disarm (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/feats.htm#improvedDisarm), the time to make a disarm attack (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/specialAttacks.htm#disarm) is when your opponent is flat-footed (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/conditionSummary.htm#flatFooted) and thus cannot make an Attack of Opportunity (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/attacksOfOpportunity.htm).

If I were playing in your campaign with your house rule, I'd have a locked gauntlet and spiked gauntlets, because disarm attempts are going to be much more common. If someone gets disarmed, they have to spend a move action to get out another weapon (barring quick-draw (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/feats.htm#quickDraw)) and thus can't full-attack, so they lose any interative attacks they may otherwise qualify for.
1 ton ghost
12-20-07, 03:45 PM But the real question is does talking on a cell phone while driving provoke AoO?

heh...nice.
it should. sometimes, you have to answer it; directions, emergencies, and the like. still, i've seen ppl die cuz' some self-important jag-off couldn't set his Nokia down for 1 sec to hit his damn turn signal, etc. a little girl was killed in my neighborhood cuz' some kid was texting, doing 45 in a 25, and God knows what else.
and don't ever let me catch you talking or texting in a theatre. they have some goofy PSA now w/ jack black soapboxing that and for good reason. it's like cracking jokes at a funeral, terribly bad form.

as for the Disarm (sorry for the rant) it should draw an AoO cuz' it's a specialty attack and changes the dynamic of the fight. maintains game integrity and makes one plan ahead. also encourages weapon diversity. switching between your Excalibur to a flail might be wise when your enemy is wielding a poisoned blade. plus, it makes Quick Draw more attractive which is capitol. it lost alot of it's pinache between editions.
Mojo_Rat
12-20-07, 04:16 PM Interesting distinction, though that's a very fine distinction since one more step (i.e. moving 10 feet) gives you plenty of time to combine it with the draw. I see your point though. I'll have to give that point some thought.

But you could still just stand there, burn a move action to draw a new weapon (which doesn't trigger an AoO) and attack. So by disarming them you've robbed them of the opportunity to take a full round action devoted to hitting you with their weapon.

I'm still not seeing how houseruling no AoO on disarms would be unbalancing.

The reason game mechanicaly you get the Aoo is the game has a Feat to remove this /and/ the feat represents advanced skill. You can assume that anyone without improved Disarm only 'sort of' knows how to disarm an oponent int he same way that somone without improved unarmed combat sort of knows how to throw a punch but still leave themselves open.

Its a special attack and without a feat there is a drawback to that attack. Its not unreasonable to have a feat for it and the fact that all the other special attacks (bull rush trip overun) have an improved version to remove their drawbacks as well.
Tordak
12-21-07, 08:52 AM Not if you have the improved combat calling feat.

;)

I think it's unbalancing enough to required taking a feat. (Oups, I only noticed now that the previous post says that already :))

Also, it's not all bad to have an AoO agaisnt you for some trick like this. Most opponent only have one AoO per round. If you yourself have combat reflexes, you can make AoO from some other feat when someone makes one against you; for example, if you have karmic strikes, you could try to sunder, provoke the AoO, get an AoO yourself, resolve both AoOs, resolve the sunder attempt then move away, or try again. Also, using reach weapon usually gets you away from enemies AoOs.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
rainy 12-20-07, 10:10 AM	Alright, I'm having trouble wrapping my mind around this. Why should trying to disarm someone draw an attack of opportunity? I mean, you are still swinging a weapon essentially "at them," I'm not so sure if you'd even realize that the target of the attack wasn't to hit you in a more generic way. So why the AoO? Maybe there is a balance issue that hasn't occurred to me, but right now it just seems kinda silly and cumbersome to me. I mean you are already expending an attack to try this maneuver which is by no means assured, so why also suffer an AoO. I have the same problem with Sunder as well. :confused: Thanks -rainy
rainy 12-20-07, 10:11 AM	forgot to susbscribe to the thread...:( I wish that subscribing was the default.
Sigma34561 12-20-07, 10:18 AM	Your trying to twist the weapon out of thier hand, or batter it away, or rip it from them. If you arent attacking them, but you are that close, your defenses are down. Theoretically, the whole round you are swinging and parrying, and you have the chance to get one good swing in every few seconds. If you shift your focus away from attacking, while your opponent is still swinging and parrying, he might get a good hit in off turn. Its not that your opponent gets another attack that turn, its that one of his attacks that would amount to nothing, has the chance to break through.
Tordak 12-20-07, 10:22 AM	I think it's because you change your attention from hitting something general, like the creature in a threaten square, to something way more specific, the weapon held by the creature in the threaten square. When you attack a creature, you're quickly looking to see opening, from the way it moves and defend, or just trying to overpower its defenses with a huge swing in the general direction. When you try to disarm or sunder, you need more precision as you're are trying to hit something a bit smaller that is being move around by someone else; the hand-eye coordination requires you to focus your attention for a few second on the weapon. Opponent in a fight will quickly see the distraction and take advantage of it. It is also much easier to hit a person than something it is holding; that's why police officer are instructed to shoot at person shooting at them and not a the gun they are holding (you see that in movie, but that does not work too well in real life). It's like driving a car while talking on a cell phone; studies shows that you loose about 50% of your attention to the road just because your attention is on something else, even with hand-free speaker. In a fight, you need to stay focus on your enemies' moves at all time. That's also why flanking opponent gets bonus to hit, and rogue get their sneak attack when the feint you.
1 ton ghost 12-20-07, 12:56 PM	Tordak summed it up pretty well. the cell while driving stat is no joke (good mention on that one); very close in approximation to DUI and i see it every damn day from allegedly "responsible" young urban professionals. and now, w/ the texting while driving. wtf? anyway, Disarm... -in a nutshell; you are investing alot more of your attention/energy from the sum total of your combat prowess/perception/whatever into a specific combat action. think of it as an equation. you dedicate more emphasis to 1 specific, you neglect the whole, in this particular case, defense, to which it draws an AoO, save for the feat. -and think of unarmed vs. armed Disarms. he's gonna get a free slash at you w/ the knife cuz' he knows you want it and means to keep it. simple enough. -another explanation, game balance. john doe isn't much of a Ftr, w/ a Vorpal Weapon, he is. take it away and it's different, but you gotta' pay the piper
StevenO 12-20-07, 01:37 PM	Don't forget that if you practice at using disarm or sunder (take the FEAT) you learn how to avoid giving your opponent that opening along with become better at performing the maneuver.
BENEVOLENT_DM 12-20-07, 01:49 PM	Tordak summed it up pretty well. the cell while driving stat is no joke (good mention on that one); very close in approximation to DUI and i see it every damn day from allegedly "responsible" young urban professionals. and now, w/ the texting while driving. wtf? anyway, Disarm... -in a nutshell; you are investing alot more of your attention/energy from the sum total of your combat prowess/perception/whatever into a specific combat action. think of it as an equation. you dedicate more emphasis to 1 specific, you neglect the whole, in this particular case, defense, to which it draws an AoO, save for the feat. -and think of unarmed vs. armed Disarms. he's gonna get a free slash at you w/ the knife cuz' he knows you want it and means to keep it. simple enough. -another explanation, game balance. john doe isn't much of a Ftr, w/ a Vorpal Weapon, he is. take it away and it's different, but you gotta' pay the piper But the real question is does talking on a cell phone while driving provoke AoO?
rainy 12-20-07, 01:51 PM	Okay, well explained inside the RAW...WotC would be proud of you all. I can totally agree with the AoO on unarmed disarm attempts. How game breaking would it be to loose the AoO on disarm and sunder attempts? As for 'paying the piper,' 1 ton, like I mentioned it seems to me you already are paying the piper. Instead of using you action to attack and do damage, you are trying a maneuver, that even if successful has limited impact. Drawing a weapon is a free action as long as you at least 5 foot step. And you are putting yourself at risk of being counter disarmed. So no AoO, unbalancing or not?
rainy 12-20-07, 01:52 PM	But the real question is does talking on a cell phone while driving provoke AoO? Not if you have the improved combat calling feat. ;)
Sigma34561 12-20-07, 01:56 PM	how is disarming your opponent not important? Its like the most important thing you can do besides killing them.
Plothos 12-20-07, 02:20 PM	Drawing a weapon is a free action as long as you at least 5 foot step. This doesn't appear to be true. Looking at the SRD, it's a bit unclear, but I think can become clear with some focus on the presentation: If you have a base attack bonus of +1 or higher, you may draw a weapon as a free action combined with a regular move. If you have the Two-Weapon Fighting feat, you can draw two light or one-handed weapons in the time it would normally take you to draw one. Two things to note here are the fact that it says "combined with a regular move" which could mean combined with any movement on the grid, or combined with a move action actually used to make a move (be it by flying, tumblining, jumping, whatever). That it's the latter that is intended should I think become clear if we realize that if it would be free to draw when doing a 5-foot step, itself a free action, why should it not be free to draw while standing still? The rationale for letting you do it while moving is you've got time that you've paid for by spending a move action. You can do these two things at once, even thought they both normally take enough time/concentration to demand using up your move action to get it. Consider, you've been disarmed and you want to close a door to keep the second orc off your back next round. By your thinking, the rules don't let you do A, but they do allow B. A: You close the door, draw your replacement weapon, and attack (two move actions and a standard) B: You close the door, draw your replacement weapon while taking a 5 foot step, and attack (one move, two free, and one standard action) Of course, B should be more difficult to execute, not easier.
rainy 12-20-07, 02:21 PM	how is disarming your opponent not important? Its like the most important thing you can do besides killing them. I didn't say not important, I said limited impact. Adventuring types rarely carry less than three melee weapons, so it will definitely have more of an impact on NPCs and monsters, especially 'poorer' ones who may only have one weapon. But if the disarmed foe is packing a back-up, then all you've effective made them do was switch weapons, again; * if you are successful * don't get disarmed yourself * and you gave up a chance to simply hurt your opponent Maybe it's just the circle I play in, but I've never seen anyone even try to disarm someone.
Plothos 12-20-07, 02:32 PM	Maybe it's just the circle I play in, but I've never seen anyone even try to disarm someone. I have. I've seen it really hurt too. You're right that many adventurers carry multiple weapons, but they're rarely redundant, and even forcing an enemy to switch to a less-than-ideal weapon (and getting it out isn't as easy as it might seem to some) is non-trivial. Especially when you consider that most fighters have one big uber-weapon as their bread and butter, backed up with masterwork and/or silver and/or alternate damage-type weapons that just aren't as good. In addition, it's not just PCs that get disarmed. Orcs might carry a spear and a bow and that's it. A skeleton probably just his pick or whatever. Players can and do abuse the disarm option as-is.
rainy 12-20-07, 02:52 PM	The rationale for letting you do it while moving is you've got time that you've paid for by spending a move action. You can do these two things at once, even thought they both normally take enough time/concentration to demand using up your move action to get it. Interesting distinction, though that's a very fine distinction since one more step (i.e. moving 10 feet) gives you plenty of time to combine it with the draw. I see your point though. I'll have to give that point some thought. But you could still just stand there, burn a move action to draw a new weapon (which doesn't trigger an AoO) and attack. So by disarming them you've robbed them of the opportunity to take a full round action devoted to hitting you with their weapon. I'm still not seeing how houseruling no AoO on disarms would be unbalancing.
Slimgauge 12-20-07, 02:52 PM	If you don't have improved disarm (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/feats.htm#improvedDisarm), the time to make a disarm attack (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/specialAttacks.htm#disarm) is when your opponent is flat-footed (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/conditionSummary.htm#flatFooted) and thus cannot make an Attack of Opportunity (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/attacksOfOpportunity.htm). If I were playing in your campaign with your house rule, I'd have a locked gauntlet and spiked gauntlets, because disarm attempts are going to be much more common. If someone gets disarmed, they have to spend a move action to get out another weapon (barring quick-draw (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/feats.htm#quickDraw)) and thus can't full-attack, so they lose any interative attacks they may otherwise qualify for.
1 ton ghost 12-20-07, 03:45 PM	But the real question is does talking on a cell phone while driving provoke AoO? heh...nice. it should. sometimes, you have to answer it; directions, emergencies, and the like. still, i've seen ppl die cuz' some self-important jag-off couldn't set his Nokia down for 1 sec to hit his damn turn signal, etc. a little girl was killed in my neighborhood cuz' some kid was texting, doing 45 in a 25, and God knows what else. and don't ever let me catch you talking or texting in a theatre. they have some goofy PSA now w/ jack black soapboxing that and for good reason. it's like cracking jokes at a funeral, terribly bad form. as for the Disarm (sorry for the rant) it should draw an AoO cuz' it's a specialty attack and changes the dynamic of the fight. maintains game integrity and makes one plan ahead. also encourages weapon diversity. switching between your Excalibur to a flail might be wise when your enemy is wielding a poisoned blade. plus, it makes Quick Draw more attractive which is capitol. it lost alot of it's pinache between editions.
Mojo_Rat 12-20-07, 04:16 PM	Interesting distinction, though that's a very fine distinction since one more step (i.e. moving 10 feet) gives you plenty of time to combine it with the draw. I see your point though. I'll have to give that point some thought. But you could still just stand there, burn a move action to draw a new weapon (which doesn't trigger an AoO) and attack. So by disarming them you've robbed them of the opportunity to take a full round action devoted to hitting you with their weapon. I'm still not seeing how houseruling no AoO on disarms would be unbalancing. The reason game mechanicaly you get the Aoo is the game has a Feat to remove this /and/ the feat represents advanced skill. You can assume that anyone without improved Disarm only 'sort of' knows how to disarm an oponent int he same way that somone without improved unarmed combat sort of knows how to throw a punch but still leave themselves open. Its a special attack and without a feat there is a drawback to that attack. Its not unreasonable to have a feat for it and the fact that all the other special attacks (bull rush trip overun) have an improved version to remove their drawbacks as well.
Tordak 12-21-07, 08:52 AM	Not if you have the improved combat calling feat. ;) I think it's unbalancing enough to required taking a feat. (Oups, I only noticed now that the previous post says that already :)) Also, it's not all bad to have an AoO agaisnt you for some trick like this. Most opponent only have one AoO per round. If you yourself have combat reflexes, you can make AoO from some other feat when someone makes one against you; for example, if you have karmic strikes, you could try to sunder, provoke the AoO, get an AoO yourself, resolve both AoOs, resolve the sunder attempt then move away, or try again. Also, using reach weapon usually gets you away from enemies AoOs.