disarm/grip and related

[Briek]

Hi there

I've been reading up on disarm and I'd like to ask a few questions and suggest a few things.


Firstly then a suggestion:

According to the players handbook an unsuccessful disarm provokes a counter disarm from the opponent without an attack of opportunity. I would like to suggest that a failure in a disarm (that which produces the echo "you've failed") there should be a percentile chance of this happening to explain in an echo...

You fail to disarm your opponent and your weapon is knocked from your hand!

The pencentile would be dependant on your skill with disarm. Secondly a question, do opponents with weapons in both hands get +4 and those with light weapons -4?

Lastly on the subject of grip, why don't all warrior classes get this? it's not a canon skill and disarming is far too easy without it.

Thanks

[Aldren]

Comment on the last bit that it's pertaining to balance. My ranger does not get it, for he has curative prayers and assistive prayers alike, and other skills that other warrior classes do not get.

[Briek]

Comment on the last bit that it's pertaining to balance. My ranger does not get it, for he has curative prayers and assistive prayers alike, and other skills that other warrior classes do not get.

All of which is canon, grip is not though.

[Lylena]

Even as a balancing part...give them at least a slight chance? Make it to where they can only skillup to a point? On DoT codebases, some skills were available up to a certain % depending on class/race/other factors so it'd be more balanced. Not sure how it goes around here, but...yeah. Logically, they spend their time around weapons often enough to be holy knights, they'd over time get a better grip of their weapons as their skill progresses in the weapon they use.

[Lathander]

Lastly on the subject of grip, why don't all warrior classes get this? it's not a canon skill and disarming is far too easy without it.

Personal opinion here, not official word: I too think it should be available to all warrior classes. It is just, now that I think of it, never come up for discussion.

[Dovan]

I'd throw my name in the hat for the heavy plate warrior bases having grip. I'm remiss to say rangers as how I'm envisioning it as, both paladin / squires / fighters would almost always be using heavy armor with an arming gauntlet to retain their weapon in combat. Grip to those make the most sense, but seeing it go to rangers wouldn't be a horrid thing either. Beyond that, no other classes.

[Selveem]

Personally I wouldn't cry if grip was completely removed from the game. It's not D&D based and its only real purpose was to try to differentiate fighters from the other warrior-based classes. From what I can see, it just makes players of classes that don't get it be wish they did.

I've seen a lot of discussion about this, but I don't really care about the skill and it's a pain in the ass to increase.

I suggest getting rid of grip altogether. Instead of grip, allow full plate gauntlets to be modified at the armories to be "locked." Instead of using grip to differentiate fighters, put trainers for the remaining "fighter bonus feats" in the game.

I wish I could suggest punch and kick being removed, too, but unfortunately those are the only way for a fighter to try to stop a wizard/priest from casting their death (and even then, it only works if the wizard/priest has crap for concentration or very, very unlucky) since readied actions aren't practical in FK's fluid combat.

[Lathander]

This may show too much of my ignorance, but from what Dovan mentions, grip is based on the type of armor one wears. I always assumed it was skill based. Here is the way I see it, and code experts please correct me if I am wrong. The success of a disarm attempt is determined based on a random number modified upward by the skill in disarm and downward by the opponent skill in grip. Here are a couple of thoughts along those lines.

• 1. If grip is based on armor type, it should only be the type worn on hands at the moment.
  2. Any warrior classes get the skill, but rangers would be limited in the type of armor they wear (as now).
  3. If it is based on skill level rather than armor, warrior classes should get it as they are all, uh, warriors.
  4. Consider doing away with the grip skill altogether. Make the check for a successful disarm against the opponent skill level in the wielded weapon, dexterity, strength, wisdom and luck.

[Briek]

The only thing in relation to grip in the players handbook is:

- Holding your weapon with more than one hand offers you a bonus of +4.
- Having a locking gauntlet offers you a bonus of +10

4. Consider doing away with the grip skill altogether. Make the check for a successful disarm against the opponent skill level in the wielded weapon, dexterity, strength, wisdom and luck.

According to the book it does just seem to be an opposed roll, so this does seem to be the proper approach to the special attack should we do away with grip.

[Selveem]

This may show too much of my ignorance, but from what Dovan mentions, grip is based on the type of armor one wears. I always assumed it was skill based. Here is the way I see it, and code experts please correct me if I am wrong. The success of a disarm attempt is determined based on a random number modified upward by the skill in disarm and downward by the opponent skill in grip. Here are a couple of thoughts along those lines.

• 1. If grip is based on armor type, it should only be the type worn on hands at the moment.
  2. Any warrior classes get the skill, but rangers would be limited in the type of armor they wear (as now).
  3. If it is based on skill level rather than armor, warrior classes should get it as they are all, uh, warriors.
  4. Consider doing away with the grip skill altogether. Make the check for a successful disarm against the opponent skill level in the wielded weapon, dexterity, strength, wisdom and luck.

You're pretty much right. Grip, in D&D, is not a skill. It's a gauntlet called a "locked gauntlet" (sometimes referred to as "spiked gauntlet," I think, in d20.org) - here's D20's info on it:

Gauntlet, Locked

This armored gauntlet has small chains and braces that allow the wearer to attach a weapon to the gauntlet so that it cannot be dropped easily. It provides a +10 bonus on any roll made to keep from being disarmed in combat. Removing a weapon from a locked gauntlet or attaching a weapon to a locked gauntlet is a full-round action that provokes attacks of opportunity.

The price given is for a single locked gauntlet. The weight given applies only if you're wearing a breastplate, light armor, or no armor. Otherwise, the locked gauntlet replaces a gauntlet you already have as part of the armor.

While the gauntlet is locked, you can't use the hand wearing it for casting spells or employing skills. (You can still cast spells with somatic components, provided that your other hand is free.)

Like a normal gauntlet, a locked gauntlet lets you deal lethal damage rather than nonlethal damage with an unarmed strike.

[Kallias]

Disarm is a busted skill.

Fortunately, it rarely comes up other than PC vs. PC conflict. But the areas where mobs are coded to disarm, it's very apparent how busted it is.

All that said, unless you're focus is PvP, I can't imagine this being an issue that has serious consequences.

[Selveem]

Disarm is a busted skill.

Fortunately, it rarely comes up other than PC vs. PC conflict. But the areas where mobs are coded to disarm, it's very apparent how busted it is.

All that said, unless you're focus is PvP, I can't imagine this being an issue that has serious consequences.

You know, you bring up the most valid concern for leaving things as they are.

There are only a few aggressive mobs in the entire game that actually even bother with attempts to disarm. This is one of the reasons that grip is such a PITA skill to increase.

Besides, FK doesn't allow PVP, only CVC. ;D

Briek, what are your concerns? Are you just looking for Paladins to become a more powerful class against other player characters who are melee combatants?

[Briek]

Honestly my main gripe is:

A PVP situation properly role-played out is then resolved by whoever can produce...

someone DISARMS YOU
you get a sword
you wield a sword
someone DISARMS YOU
you get a sword
you wield a sword
someone DISARMS YOU
you get a sword
you wield a sword
someone DISARMS YOU
you get a sword
you wield a sword

you get the picture, I'd just like to see it move away from this, not saying I haven't done it and I bet the person I did to was probably irked that they had to spend the whole fight rearming themselves.

[Dovan]

I've been the recipient of the scenario Briek is describing on my squire and at a 20 level difference between him and the fighter, the fighter almost came out on top. It's frustrating yes, but I'm not going to let that issue or emotion influence backing my argument.

I'd hate to think of using an item like the peaceknot that would fit loosely over a gauntlet as an option / solution. You'd end up seeing clerics and wizards getting them from various people and then we'd be opening up a whole new can of worms.

As well, I don't know if removing grip and revisiting the disarm system is exactly the answer.

Is it possible to provide a healthy bonus against disarm for wearing heavy plate and being of the warrior class without having to pull up every last vnum and adding it to them? I'm guessing no from the little I do understand. I'm thinking IF we want to make a solution of anything, it would be to open grip up to all warrior classes.

That said, if it remains fighter only I can respect that decision. Painful to see the scenario Briek has described, but it can't all be buttercups and not everyone wins in life.

[Gwain]

Disarm could be changed to a skill that can ony be used one or two times during battle?

[Aldren]

I would agree wholly with Gwain. I think disarm as it is now is more of an annoyance than anything, given the fact that you can spam the living hell out of it with very little consequence (besides attacks of opportunity which can be avoided with feats). I think it should function like stun or bash, but perhaps with 2 or 3 successes before it becomes unavailable during the fight.

Cheers.

[Anthalas]

Disarm could be changed to a skill that can ony be used one or two times during battle?

This!

In tabletop D&D, a disarmed character would need to:
start of round
- move action: Disengage (5ft step) (attacks of opportunity) or
- move action: go to the disarmed weapon (attacks of opportunity)
- standard action: retrieve and re-wield the item
end of round

[Selveem]

This is going to come off as really gruff and I hope you all can take it for what it is rather than any emotion it may evoke:

The reason disarm is used so often in combat is because that's the ONLY fighter skill that really helps them in battle against other melee combatants.

Punch and kick are utterly worthless skills (cause 1% whittling away at an opponent while encumbering yourself with lag is so cool). Bash damn near never hits and, even when it does, there is no more damage bonus for incentive. On top of that, it can only be used once in an entire fight. Useful.

So... let's disengage fighters from combat even more? I think that sounds like a horrible solution. If it devolved into just looking at the combat echoes with no interaction, you might as well be giving yourself some paper cuts to the tongue while waiting for the fight to end.

[Briek]

There has to be some middle ground Selveem I don't think anyone is suggesting we remove it entirely as your post seems to imply. You have to admit though that being disarmed constantly throughout a fight is unrealistic.

[Gwain]

The reason disarm is used so often in combat is because that's the ONLY fighter skill that really helps them in battle against other melee combatants.

Punch and kick are utterly worthless skills (cause 1% whittling away at an opponent while encumbering yourself with lag is so cool). Bash damn near never hits and, even when it does, there is no more damage bonus for incentive. On top of that, it can only be used once in an entire fight. Useful.

So... let's disengage fighters from combat even more? I think that sounds like a horrible solution. If it devolved into just looking at the combat echoes with no interaction, you might as well be giving yourself some paper cuts to the tongue while waiting for the fight to end.

Pvp should not be heavily reliant on the disarm skill in order to win. It might be simple enough to ask for a reevaluation of other fighter skills for balance or two ask coders to look at what makes the other 'melee combatants' so potent. I recently went against a fighter in combat whom used disarm, and won, I have no doubt that they still could have won straight hand-to-hand combat with me without disarming.