I am looking at some dark elves I will be DMing soon who have the improved disarm feat. This seems cool thematically but on examining the disarm rules I am having trouble seeing the point of disarm.
As far as I can see the victim of a successful disarm merely spends a move action to pick up his weapon and then can attack with it as normal. Sure he provokes an AoO but the disarmer had to give up a proper attack in place of the disarm anyway, and this assumes that the disarm is successful. So, the worst that happens is denying iterative attacks but at the cost of 2 feats and having to beat the cmd. I can't see the point, unless:-
1)Could the dark elves kick the weapon away as a move action once they have disarmed? Thus forcing a move (provoking AoO) followed by another move action, denying attacks on the round the victim is successfully disarmed (if they pick the weapon up).
2)Pathfinder doesn't seem to state where the disarmed weapon end up- could it end up in the disarmer's space?
Thoughts gratefully received, including other ideas about how to use disarm viably.
|
Look in the section on combat- the weapon ends up in the disarmers hands if they are unarmed, or on the ground by the person disarmed if its done with a weapon.
If you can wrangle it, get them Greater Disarm which is really what your after.
But I would say kicking aside the weapon or picing it up is a reasonable application of a move action. If they can manage the disarm with a one handed weapon and have a hand free, bingo- they have the weapon in their hands after the turn.
Yeh you're right, it's not as useful as say, Imp. Trip. But it can be used well.
First, if you're a Monk (or have the feat Imp. Unarmed Strike) you don't take the -4 to Disarm and you actually end up holding their weapon.
It does state under the 'normal' section in Greater Disarm: Normal: Disarmed weapons and gear land at the feet of the disarmed creature.
So the the other way to make it effective is to give them the Greater Disarm feat and then they can knock it 15ft away, random direction.
*edit* Nice ninja Alex ;)
The higher level you go, the more value iterative attacks have and the more crucial the primary weapon is. Forcing someone to lose attacks for a round can be crucial, as can having them fight with their dagger while you fight with their +5 Sawblade.
Alexander & Tanis, thanks for the input- it looks like the info I needed was under the Greater Disarm feat, and as you say its probably that feat that I am after. Unfortunately my dark elves don't have a high enough BAB!
I suppose that allowing the kick away after the disarm might remove the incentive for greater disarm (although on the other hand it would require a move action, unlike greater disarm, which is important if you have the initiative).
I take the point about the monk being good at disarm, but I am looking at the swashbuckling type of disarm- it really looks like this is only viable if you get greater disarm (unless I allow the kick away). On the other hand, if we look at higher levels (as roguerogue mentions), the villain can disarm with one attack whilst attacking normally with his other attacks, so this might be more useful then?
I think I will allow the kick away if the bad guys have a move action spare and otherwise I will count the PC as prone for the AoO if he picks his weapon back up. Denying any iterative attacks and getting the AoO against a reduced AC makes it feel like it would be something worth the cost.
|
Don't worry about missing Greater Disarm.
First, picking up your weapon does provoke, and if your dark elves are smart, they will surround disarmed opponents. When the opponent goes to pick up his weapon, he'll provoke from multiple opponents. In essence, the dark elf who disarmed his opponent gave up his attack to potentially enable several of his allies to gain extra attacks.
Second, if one of your dark elves disarms an opponent with a standard action, he has a move action with which to pick up his opponent's weapon (you can always pick up an object in your own square, or an adjacent one). This will provoke, of course, but the opponent you disarmed is probably no longer threatening.
Third - if you aren't able to surround your opponent, use your attack of opportunity to disarm his off-hand weapon or shield. Sure, the opponent is holding his sword again, but he's essentially in the same boat that he was in before he picked his item up (missing one critical piece of gear) - and it's cost him his precious move action.
Lastly, if one of your opponents has a hand of the mage (or is a spellcaster with mage hand at-will), readying an action to cast mage hand on dropped or disarmed weapons is a great way to relieve the enemy of their disarmed weapons without provoking. Just be sure to watch the weight limits on the mage hand spell - it won't work on heavier weapons.
Unseen servant, while harder to come by (you'll need a bard or a full spellcaster), is an even better way to use the same tactic.
Second, if one of your dark elves disarms an opponent with a standard action, he has a move action with which to pick up his opponent's weapon (you can always pick up an object in your own square, or an adjacent one).
Do you have a rules citation for the proposition that you can pick up an object in an adjacent square? I understand that you can only pick up an object in your own square.
|
|
Second, if one of your dark elves disarms an opponent with a standard action, he has a move action with which to pick up his opponent's weapon (you can always pick up an object in your own square, or an adjacent one).Do you have a rules citation for the proposition that you can pick up an object in an adjacent square? I understand that you can only pick up an object in your own square.
I cannot see where the rules specifically call this out, however:
1.) For what it's worth, that's how it worked in 3.5.2.) You threaten all adjacent squares, even with natural weapons and gauntlets. If you can punch a prone enemy in the face, I should hope you could pick up an object from an adjacent space.
3.) Using Sleight of Hand, you could pick up an item from an enemy's possession. You could also open (and presumably loot) a five-foot treasure chest (or some other container) without standing inside the container.
In other words, no other example of "manipulating an object" (which is an actual action type, according to the table), to include attacking creatures and opening doors, is limited to objects in your own square. I see no evidence to suggest that picking up an object should be different.
|
I cannot see where the rules specifically call this out, however:
1.) For what it's worth, that's how it worked in 3.5.
2.) You threaten all adjacent squares, even with natural weapons and gauntlets. If you can punch a prone enemy in the face, I should hope you could pick up an object from an adjacent space.
3.) Using Sleight of Hand, you could pick up an item from an enemy's possession. You could also open (and presumably loot) a five-foot treasure chest (or some other container) without standing inside the container.In other words, no other example of "manipulating an object" (which is an actual action type, according to the table), to include attacking creatures and opening doors, is limited to objects in your own square. I see no evidence to suggest that picking up an object should be different.
This is how I see it. You threaten areas as unarmed all around you (yes, yes I know how unarmed threatening works) and can reach into them. Therefore logic follows that you can grab something in them without entering them. Of course you would get an AoA from reaching for it, but unless that enemy has quickdraw/ another weapon in hand they will likely only be trying to punch your with their fists.
.
First, if you're a Monk (or have the feat Imp. Unarmed Strike) you don't take the -4 to Disarm and you actually end up holding their weapon.
I'm not sure that this is correct. IUS allows your strikes to be considered armed. In order to end up with the disarmed item automatically you have to perform the maneuver "unarmed." Clearly you could disarm with an unarmed strike, but whether you get the benefit of attacking "unarmed" but don't suffer the penalty is unclear to me.
I'm also not sure if you actually can disarm someone's shield, since it isn't wielded in a hand, but strapped to the arm. In 3.5 you could, but in PF the wording has been changed.
That having been said, disarming an opponent does open a few other options. If they don't have a weapon, then they are vulnerable to other combat maneuvers, like trip and bull rush and don't get the opportunity to make an AoO. Also, since the weapon is now unattended it can be sundered without provoking an AoO, whether the person is armed or not. Also a disarmed person can be grappled without provoking.
Some interesting options are to use it on wands, holy symbols, spell components, etc. as a Ready action and/or AoO.
Also remember that if you're using iterative attacks, you can always make your first attack and then decide whether to continue with your full-attack or abort the rest of your attacks, which leaves you with a move action remaining.
So, full attack with disarms, but if the first disarm lands, you can then decide to abort and pick up the fallen weapon or continue with a full-attack. Which means you don't even have to plan ahead - decide when and as needed.
And yes, you can touch anything, strike anything, or grab anything in an adjacent square, for all the reasons indicated above plus many more.
If you cannot grab a weapon in an adjacent square, then how could you grab (grapple) an opponent in an adjacent square? How could you grab a door latch to open a door if you had to step into the (closed) doorway before you could grab the latch to open the door? How could you un-saddle your horse while standing next to him (surely we don't have to share the space, i.e. mount the horse, in order to remove the saddle while we're sitting on it)?
Etc.
Also, as noted earlier, after you disarm the guy, you almost never have to worry about provoking when you pick up his sword, since now he's unarmed and doesn't threaten you (people with Improved Unarmed Strike or those wielding two weapons are an exception - and be very wary of trying this trick on a Marilith).
Well ... since you can take one 5' step (ie: move action) as part of a full attack anyway, I'd say you could use that to "pick up/grab" the weapon anyway and NOT need to stop trying to attack.
If your target has no back-up weapon, and/or no Improved Unarmed Strike, then he's more or less boned the longer he/she tries to stand and fight you.
Disarm is a GOOD maneuver to use, IMO.
One recent game we had a situation where my character (all about disarming btw) and the party were trapped by a freakin' huge golem chasing us, and some enemies trying to stop us. The solution: My character leading the way, disarm, and move to the next guy - rinse, wash, repeat. I disarmed like 5 guys in a row in that session and my "armed" party just waltzed right through them ... then ALL of us were running when the golem busted through to chase us (yeah, running w/the bad guys - hilarity ensues!!).
Good times, and fantastic use of disarm!!
|
|
There are also situations where just getting the weapon into someone's square is useful
Admittedly, using trip to disarm the opponents Geckos from the celing was probably more effective. And satisfying...
Well ... since you can take one 5' step (ie: move action) as part of a full attack anyway, I'd say you could use that to "pick up/grab" the weapon anyway and NOT need to stop trying to attack.
This is incorrect.
A 5-foot move is a "Miscellaneous" action with special rules (never provokes, can't do it in rough terrain, can't do it if you've moved, can do it any time in your round, etc.). It is not a move action.
Sure, you could use an ordinary move action to just move five feet if you want, but that would not be a "5-foot move". It would just be a move action, it would provoke normally, you could do it through rough terrain, you could even do it if you had already used one move action to move this round.
Two different things.
And it's only the "Miscellaneous action" 5-foot move that can be done during a full attack. And that miscellaneous action cannot substitute for picking up an item from the ground because that always requires an actual move action.
Second, if one of your dark elves disarms an opponent with a standard action, he has a move action with which to pick up his opponent's weapon (you can always pick up an object in your own square, or an adjacent one).Do you have a rules citation for the proposition that you can pick up an object in an adjacent square? I understand that you can only pick up an object in your own square.I cannot see where the rules specifically call this out, however:
1.) For what it's worth, that's how it worked in 3.5.
2.) You threaten all adjacent squares, even with natural weapons and gauntlets. If you can punch a prone enemy in the face, I should hope you could pick up an object from an adjacent space.
3.) Using Sleight of Hand, you could pick up an item from an enemy's possession. You could also open (and presumably loot) a five-foot treasure chest (or some other container) without standing inside the container.In other words, no other example of "manipulating an object" (which is an actual action type, according to the table), to include attacking creatures and opening doors, is limited to objects in your own square. I see no evidence to suggest that picking up an object should be different.
This has changed in PF. An unarmed character can’t take attacks of opportunity (p.182 Core).
As to whether you take the -4 penalty for being unarmed, look directly below that line i quoted and you'll see what i mean:
“Armed” Unarmed Attacks: Sometimes a character’s or creature’s unarmed attack counts as an armed attack. A monk, a character with the Improved Unarmed Strike feat, a spellcaster delivering a touch attack spell, and a creature with natural physical weapons all count as being armed.
I'm not sure that this is correct. IUS allows your strikes to be considered armed. In order to end up with the disarmed item automatically you have to perform the maneuver "unarmed.".
First, if you're a Monk (or have the feat Imp. Unarmed Strike) you don't take the -4 to Disarm and you actually end up holding their weapon.
Besides the fact that Improved Unarmed Strike simply makes your Unarmed attack "considered" armed (and thus would fulfill both requirements of being unarmed and armed), you have the wording of the rules wrong:
"If you successfully disarm your opponent without using a weapon, you may automatically pick up the item dropped."
The word "unarmed" isn't used... it's "without using a weapon".
So you are considered armed (and thus no penalty), and are not using a weapon (empty hand), thus you can pick up the weapon for free and have no penalty.
I'm not sure that this is correct. IUS allows your strikes to be considered armed. In order to end up with the disarmed item automatically you have to perform the maneuver "unarmed.".
First, if you're a Monk (or have the feat Imp. Unarmed Strike) you don't take the -4 to Disarm and you actually end up holding their weapon.
Besides the fact that Improved Unarmed Strike simply makes your Unarmed attack "considered" armed (and thus would fulfill both requirements of being unarmed and armed), you have the wording of the rules wrong:
"If you successfully disarm your opponent without using a weapon, you may automatically pick up the item dropped."
The word "unarmed" isn't used... it's "without using a weapon".
So you are considered armed (and thus no penalty), and are not using a weapon (empty hand), thus you can pick up the weapon for free and have no penalty.
And, again, it isn't anywhere near as clear as you want to make it out to be. There's nothing in the Disarm rules about how it interacts with IUS, and there's nothing in the IUS (or Monk) rules about how it interacts with Disarm.
Just because IUS allows a character to avoid AoOs, doesn't mean that it automatically grants every single other benefit of using a weapon in every single other situation. And it certainly doesn't mean that you get to choose between "armed" and "unarmed" based on which is the most beneficial at any given time.
Personally, I hope you're right, since I almost always take IUS for any character I play, but being able to avoid all the penalties of a maneuver and enjoy all the bonuses as well is pretty rare.
I'm not sure that this is correct. IUS allows your strikes to be considered armed. In order to end up with the disarmed item automatically you have to perform the maneuver "unarmed.".
First, if you're a Monk (or have the feat Imp. Unarmed Strike) you don't take the -4 to Disarm and you actually end up holding their weapon.
Besides the fact that Improved Unarmed Strike simply makes your Unarmed attack "considered" armed (and thus would fulfill both requirements of being unarmed and armed), you have the wording of the rules wrong:
"If you successfully disarm your opponent without using a weapon, you may automatically pick up the item dropped."
The word "unarmed" isn't used... it's "without using a weapon".
So you are considered armed (and thus no penalty), and are not using a weapon (empty hand), thus you can pick up the weapon for free and have no penalty.
And, again, it isn't anywhere near as clear as you want to make it out to be. There's nothing in the Disarm rules about how it interacts with IUS, and there's nothing in the IUS (or Monk) rules about how it interacts with Disarm.
Just because IUS allows a character to avoid AoOs, doesn't mean that it automatically grants every single other benefit of using a weapon in every single other situation. And it certainly doesn't mean that you get to choose between "armed" and "unarmed" based on which is the most beneficial at any given time.
Personally, I hope you're right, since I almost always take IUS for any character I play, but being able to avoid all the penalties of a maneuver and enjoy all the bonuses as well is pretty rare.
Just because a rules interaction, like the one above, isn't spelled out in a class description doesn't mean it isn't viable. The designers couldn't include all of those situational rules or the book would be twice the size it is now.
Edit - Its really up to the DM in the game, but I'd say that the monk or anyone with the feat ignores the penalty. The penalty is based on whether someone is "unarmed". Picking up the weapon is not, it just requires free hands.
Well ... since you can take one 5' step (ie: move action) as part of a full attack anyway, I'd say you could use that to "pick up/grab" the weapon anyway and NOT need to stop trying to attack.This is incorrect.
A 5-foot move is a "Miscellaneous" action with special rules (never provokes, can't do it in rough terrain, can't do it if you've moved, can do it any time in your round, etc.). It is not a move action.
Sure, you could use an ordinary move action to just move five feet if you want, but that would not be a "5-foot move". It would just be a move action, it would provoke normally, you could do it through rough terrain, you could even do it if you had already used one move action to move this round.
Two different things.
And it's only the "Miscellaneous action" 5-foot move that can be done during a full attack. And that miscellaneous action cannot substitute for picking up an item from the ground because that always requires an actual move action.
Hmm ... interesting. I hadn't noticed the difference before.
So, I note the change, observe the change, and give THE FINGER to the change. ;-)
I like it my way better.
Useful bit for rule-nazi's, though. :-p
:shrugs:
So, I note the change, observe the change, and give THE FINGER to the change. ;-)
I like it my way better.
Useful bit for rule-nazi's, though. :-p
:shrugs:
I think invoking the Third Reich here might be a bit premature...
Just curious then, how would you respond to a player who wanted to move 5', pick up a sword from the ground, and hit an orc with it (assuming the orc was in range)? Could that be done in a single round by your interpretation?
By RAW, the 5-foot move is a misc. action, picking up the sword is a move action, and making the attack is a standard action, all of which can be done in a round.
But if you rule that the 5-move is a move action, and picking up the sword is a move action, then the player has no more actions to make his attack, right?
Sure, it works either way as long as everyone at the table understands the same rules/houserules/interpretations - I'm just wondering if your interpretation results in reducing the overall number of options available to combatants during a single round of actions.
the Third Reich
Gotcha.
the Third ReichGotcha.
Got who? Me? I was the one telling the other guy he needn't have used the reference.
Go get him, Mr. Godwin Gestapo. Not me.
lol ... yeah. I wasn't thinking about any "baggage" that comes along w/"rules nazi" when I used it.
Game table use that doesn't come across on the net I guess. My bad - seriously, though - NOT calling anyone *anything* other than overly strict on rules interpretations.
As for the "how do they work at your table" piece, I guess I'd have 'em move their 5' step and pick the thing up (maybe trade their iterative attack/one attack/something) and then move along.
:shrugs:
It's actually not really come up. I can't see it being *worth* a full standard action to lean over, pick it up - and stop there. That's just ... weird. Maybe just letting it 5' MOVE action, pick up as *part* of a standard action that follows that would be ok, though?
I'm not really sure ... I supposed I'd lean towards the "you used a move action already, but this is not a normal situation, so full attack is off the table for options." So .. I guess it'd flow like
1) step to move 5'
2) pick up weapon (loss of full attack option - as you're unarmed and really NOT in a position TO full attack - unless you're a monk or IUS type - even then, you're STILL trading a fully "ready" attack position to pick up a weapon)
3) Provoke AoO from anyone threatening that square (if anyone is present/able/whatever - common sense here)
4) With weapon in hand, ready to make 1 standard action (all that's left, really)
I will point out that I'm *really* tempted to say that if the AoO successfully strikes the unarmed person, that unarmed person basically loses the ability to pick up their weapon or something - kind of to try and help the disarm maneuver out in general. If the weapon is tossed aside, and the guy just walks over and picks it up - it's not much of an advantage in that case.
I'd say that if the AoO hits the IUS/Monk character in the same fashion (ie: reaching for a disarmed/whatever weapon), then those characters *can* pick up the weapon regardless (ie: better prepared/trained for dealing w/weapons in general w/none in hand - so I'll tip odds in their favor).
I haven´t seen anyone bring this up (sorry if someone did), but it seems there´s a major advantage about disarm, specially on higher levles, that hasn´t been mentioned:
If your enemy spends a move action to get the weapon from the floor, then he no longer can make a full-attack action.
Picture two fighters with 3 attacks per round each. The first fighter disarms his opponent and then makes two additional attacks for damage. The disarmed opponent then spends a move action to pick up the weapon (thus granting another attack - AoO - to his opponent) and can only attack once. The first fighter made 4 attacks - 1 disarm, 2 strikes, 1 AoO. The second, disarmed fighter striked only once.
So, by disarming an opponent, you force him to forego at least one attack (if he´s got 2 or more), and possibly more at higher levels, while keeping all of yours.
Just because IUS allows a character to avoid AoOs, doesn't mean that it automatically grants every single other benefit of using a weapon in every single other situation. And it certainly doesn't mean that you get to choose between "armed" and "unarmed" based on which is the most beneficial at any given time.
That's fine. However, the line I quoted doesn't say "unarmed" at all. It says "without using a weapon".
With IUS you are considered armed, and you aren't using a weapon, so you qualify for both aspects of disarm.
You are getting hung up on a phantom "unarmed" that doesn't exist in the disarm rules.
|
With IUS you are considered armed, and you aren't using a weapon, so you qualify for both aspects of disarm.You are getting hung up on a phantom "unarmed" that doesn't exist in the disarm rules.
There is a rather idiotic listing of Unarmed Strike as a Simple Weapon. If you accept that, you would have to assume that all unarmed attempts to disarm with were with weapons. So unless you cut off your hands you couldn't take what they were holding and if you did (Cut off your hands) you couldn't hold the weapon anyways.
I would house rule this that if you are using Natural, Unarmed (including Spiked Gauntlets), or any appendage that could conceivably hold a weapon you successfully take the weapon from them if you roll 4 higher than CMD (with no possibility to get 2 items if you roll a 14). With that 4 or higher it still allows you succeed on disarm with a possibility of NOT getting the item you disarmed and instead having it drop at their feet.
|
|
Some interesting options are to use it on wands, holy symbols, spell components, etc. as a Ready action and/or AoO.
Mage Hand also works for most weapons, as they fall under the 5lb limit; the sorcerer in my party uses it all the time. Most importantly, ye olde longsword weighs just 4 lbs. So, even better -- sync up actions, let your buddy disarm the foe, and then you yank the weapon 15' away via Mage Hand.
If you're truly evil, you ready an action to do that just as the foe is using his move action to pick the thing up. :-D
This has changed in PF. An unarmed character can’t take attacks of opportunity (p.182 Core).
Actually I believe that it was spelled out in 3.5 this way as well.
-James
huh. You're right, dammit, good to know i've been playing unarmed AoO's wrong :(
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
That is mean. A bunch of drow surround some poor character and disarm. When they pick up the weapon that provokes a ton of free attacks. And to top it off the PC now has only one attack. Who needs to move that sword away. Leave it right where it is.