Even the Success result is pretty good, but the fact that it hits your MAP makes it compare poorly to Demoralize and Feint. I think you're right that building for disarm is a poor idea, but the nice thing is that if you're building for one of the more reliable maneuvers you can have it in your back pocket as an option against characters weak to it - Rogues, for example.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
On success, it would apply that -2 penalty to any reactions that they use with that item/weapon.
The possibility of the critical failure result is somewhat intimidating though.
There is also the possibility of an entire party using the attack on a single enemy. That would make the chances of eventually succeeding much better.
I bet swashbucklers are going to be good at it.
Is the success result that good? The penalty lasts only until the start of their turn.
Not really. It would affect their reactions that they take before the start of their turn.
So disarm (aka 'weaken grip') before running away so that the enemy has an additional -2 penalty during the AO from your movement.
Hmmm.... Comparing it to other Demoralize/Feint...
Compared to Demoralize basic Success it gets 2x the penalty to it's attacks and more Disarms get 2x the bonus against it,
while it's Critical Success is critically impactful in way Demoralize can't compete with usually,
and targets are Immune to further Demoralize regardless while Disarm Success helps future Disarms.
Compared to Feint basic success granting bonus to ONE attack against it of any kind, the same numeric bonus is granted to ALL Disarm attacks against it AND same numberic penalty to ALL it's own attacks with that weapon.
While Feint critical success grants same bonus to ALL your OWN attacks against it, Disarm negates all attacks with that weapon (without spending action, provoking? etc)
MAP can hurt it's use as 2nd/3rd action (or hurt attacks used after it), but with Agile (or other MAP reducers) that's not that bad, especially if 1st Disarm is regular Success (boosting next attempt, yours or ally's) and considering all attack bonuses also apply to it. You have real chance of negating it's combat efficacy. Disarming an opponent may reasonably trigger it to surrender.
AFAIK Crits should also apply any Weapon Crit Specialization since it's an attack?
IMHO it's not at all bad, especially for a baseline which specialized abilities can improve. If it was much stronger, creating such abilities would be more difficult without becoming overpowered. If normal attacks aren't strong option, the game gets unbalanced with these type of things ALWAYS used (if VS weapon armed enemy).
Of course Disarm targers Reflex, while normal Attack targets AC while Demoralize targets Will, while Feint targets Perception.
If facing enemy with high Armor and disastrously lethal weapon attack, Disarming might easily be good option,
maybe using Demoralize or Feint first to soften them up a bit?
I also see alot of analysis just looking at vanilla math, Hero Points as Core Assumption really changes alot of things, you can use those on-demand for a re-roll when a Crit really matters, for example. So vanilla math looking a certain way doesn't mean something can't be great on-demand surge ability used with Hero Points.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Is the success result that good? The penalty lasts only until the start of their turn.
Oh, I misread it as "the start of your next turn". That's hot f%**in garbage.
I'm not sure it is that bad.
It doesn't actually require any character build in order to attempt it. So the players could use it as a team effort as a last-ditch effort to take on something out of their league.
With the entire party making several disarm attempts - especially if they individually have a decent chance of success (50% or so) - then they could very reliably disarm someone in one round.
Granted, it would take practically the entire round of the entire team...
So certainly still not great. Probably not even something that a character should build for.
But it is something to keep in mind as being available.
Having the entire party go Three Stooges to try to disarm a weapon-using enemy, only for that enemy to spend a single action to pick it back up, must be a tragedy.
Tragedy? LOL, I'm getting out the popcorn and pulling out the lawnchair cuz that's going to be an entertaining show. When do the clowns come out? *munch*
Having the entire party go Three Stooges to try to disarm a weapon-using enemy, only for that enemy to spend a single action to pick it back up
Not if one of the party picks it up first. Or if the character that finally succeeded did so with an empty hand.
Granted, I still don't consider this to be a good option or one that players should build for or plan on using.
I just don't consider it to be completely useless either.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It would be really bad if you had to take a feat to do disarm, but getting trained in athletics is the only requirement, and there are a lot of other things that come along with being good at athletics. If you are ever in a situation where you need disarm, you have it and haven't really lost anything to get it, unless you only ever use athletics to disarm.
Mind you, the only situation where I can think of someone trying disarm is either being a fighter with disarming twist or being completely unarmed and needing to steal the enemy's weapon to kill them with it. But still, it'll be a neat trick in the latter case. That will maybe happen once in a specific sort of campaign.
Yeah, I don't have problem with it's over-all situation, and in a game where AoOs have been made specialist option, trying to make Disarm a universally equal option to normal attacking when facing any weapon armed opponents would just drastically change style of game. It's not supposed to replace them, it is supposed to be situational, and it is intended to leave scope for specialization to make it powerful.
I do agree the [attack penalty] "until beginning of their next turn" is dubious considering AoOs and Reactions are supposed to be rare, yet those are basically only way that mechanic will ever be expressed. I mean, just at level of mechanics shouldn't be wasting their time on marginal stuff, that shouldn't really be written like that.
I do see scope for that to be Errata'd to apply attack penalty to their next attack whether Reaction or on their next turn.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think there's a certain conservatism in a core rulebook where you want to be careful and make sure that tactics which have the potential to be incredibly powerful do not start out that way. So you probably err on the side of "being pretty weak" because you can always boost them later.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think there's a certain conservatism in a core rulebook where you want to be careful and make sure that tactics which have the potential to be incredibly powerful do not start out that way. So you probably err on the side of "being pretty weak" because you can always boost them later.
Yeah, I'm fine with the default maneuver being mediocre. I'd rather have someone have to go out of their way to be good at them by paying an opportunity cost.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Exactly... And ultimately, if you want to Disarm somebody, it works good enough at that purpose. If you and your buddies team up, you'll probably pull it off. It's just a matter of opportunity cost, so EXPECTING it help you to be just as effective at normal D&D hack&slash goals is really grasping at straws.
It doesn't need to convince you to not just use your standard D&D combat tactics. Maybe if you Disarm them they will surrender. Maybe you're fighting on a narrow bridge and Disarming them will drop it in a river. Maybe they're possessed by cursed sword, and getting it out of their hands is best option. Well, now the game allows for those scenarios.
It doesn't turn vanilla D&D RPG into swashbuckling simulation RPG but who expected it to? You can go down that route with more specialization if you choose, at normal opportunity costs. I don't even think a swashbuckling simulator RPG would make it much easier. Really, obvious upgrades to it would be like also doing damage along with normal success, that would be good but less disruptive AKA 'autowin' in any sword vs sword combat.
EDIT: If I recall, the plan for Swashbuckler class (besides "suck my mobility, monk") is using skills for combat... like this does.
I think there's a certain conservatism in a core rulebook where you want to be careful and make sure that tactics which have the potential to be incredibly powerful do not start out that way. So you probably err on the side of "being pretty weak" because you can always boost them later.
I agree that it's totally fine for a proper Disarm to only happen on a critical success, but the success being as weak as it is really puts a damper on ever using it. Making it -2 to attack rolls until the disarmer's next turn would have been fine as it's directly comparable to the grabbed condition.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
It is sort of satisfying now that Demoralizing and Feinting are more effective tactics in combat than Tripping or Disarming, and thus are going to occupy more real estate in combat. This is probably as it should be. It's hard to get someone to drop their weapon; it's much easier to misdirect them or get in their head.
(though for the life of me. I can not yet figure out ~how~ to get proficiency in that... If only it was some k ind of ancestral weapon)
Human [Unconventional Weaponry:Derro].
Disarm can't be easy as a base line skill.
It should have a decent opportunity cost as the effect of pulling it off is pretty damn huge against NPCs with magical weapons if you can get it away from them.
Big risk big reward, minimal investment to just try.
Is it just close enough? (I originally assumed so. but was told no, Aklys is uncommon due to being unusual use method, not because of culture or ancestry--and that feat specifies race or another culture)
(this was in a random one shot game on roll20 though. So not the best source)
Aklys are uncommon because you find them underground and used by the Derro.
Pathfinder RPG Bestiary pg. 70 "A typical derro fights with a short sword or a repeating light crossbow with plenty of poison bolts. Some derros also carry an aklys—a hooked throwing club attached to a 20-foot- long cord. This cord limits the club’s range, but allows the derro to retrieve it as a move-equivalent action after it has been thrown."
Classic Horrors Revisited "Derro Weapons
The derros use several signature weapons designed to incapacitate foes for easy capture, but also enjoy using weapons that make
clean slashing wounds that do not overly damage tissue on the mass scale that large bludgeoning weapons tend to do. Listed below
are four of the more unusual weapons utilized by derros—all derros gain proficiency in the use of these weapons for free.
Aklys: The aklys is a short throwing club, usually of wood or bone, attached to a 20-foot-long cord. Most aklyses feature short
iron hooks as well. An aklys has a maximum range of 20 feet, allowing the user to retrieve the thrown aklys as a move action
after it has been thrown. Some derros wield aklyses drilled with holes so that, when thrown, they make eerie whistling sounds
that can alert nearby derros of danger."
A search through monsters shows every instance of aklys is on a Derro. This of course requires th use of PF1 material but doing so makes it clear it's an uncommon culture or ancestry that makes it uncommon.
Oh neato.
huh I did not find any of that when I tried searching the nethys listing... but I guess thats because there is no beastry like thing yet.Thank kindly.
No problem: you can find the Bestiary info on nethys if you click on the Pathfinder 1E under the archives of nethys name at the top of the screen. The Classic Horrors Revisited info requires pulling out that book to find though. ;)
At level 10, fighters have access to Disarming Twist which lets them disarm on a successful strike. Has the press trait, though, so MAP applies, and it can only be used with a one-handed weapon while your other hand is free.