Disarms..how are you guys ruling it?

jh

We play with own location rules, if a combatant wants to hit a specific location the GM adds misfortune dice(s).

For example: I you want to hit the weapon arm you add a Challange dice, if the opponent is using a active defense an additional misfortune is added.

acrobatic strike has disarm as option, better use that card if want to disarm ?

Lautrer said:

i forgot:

Opponent has chance to make strength test vs successes

Emirikol said:

If a player wants to try disarming I would let him use the Perform a stunt card with as an opposed Weapon skill test (if armed) with one challenge die added, perhaps more if he tries it more than once. Then add some outcomes to the roll:

*S* Opponent is disarmed. His weapon falls to the ground, requiring one manouevre to pick up.

*SSS* Opponent is disarmed and takes 2 wounds (unsoakable).

*C* If opponent is disarmed the weapon can be either thrown away, landing at close distance, but not engaged or you can grab it (if you have a free hand).

{BB} You take 2 wounds (unsoakable)

{C} You drop your weapon.

Something like that perhaps, not playtested at all, nor compared to existing actions, so take it for what it is.

The rulebook says : fight against a 1d difficulty or more, or use opposed check. I use standard checks when fighting normal foes and opposed checks when fighting important opponents.

To disarm, I ask for Perform A Stunt (Weapon Skill) checks :

• Disarm an anonymous opponent = vs difficulty check average 2d or hard 3d depending of the adversary's talent to use weapons.
• Disarm a big bad guy = opposed check + 2 misfortune dices for the disarming attempt.

As Acrobatic Strike exist to disarm, I think it's important to keep it harder without that card.

willmanx said:

Definitely. Action cards represent tricks that you've mastered. Improvising it on the spot needs to be harder. Not sure by how much, though. (An extra challenge die? Worse bane effects?)

As Acrobatic Strike exist to disarm, I think it's important to keep it harder without that card.

Well, you can't really say that Acrobatic strike "exist to disarm", it's an attack using AG instead of ST that will do damage if it succeeds. The disarm effect is a side effect from two boons.

I agree on the principle though, stunts should be harder if they try to mimic action cards. In fact, I think it would be ok for the players to use most non-reaction actions (well, they have to fulfill any requirements naturally) as a stunt if you add one challenge die.

gruntl said:

Gruntl's observation here is correct. It is used as a 2 boon side effect. As a general guide, you can also check what else exists in the game as a 2 boon side effect. +1 critical is a typical effect, regain 1 fatigue/stress, or perform 1 maneuver.

The way we run it is as follows:

Actions cards are specifically designed to do two things: Deal Damage/Influence a target. As long as what a player wants to do is not described as directed damage or Influence, then there really is no need to count it as an action onto itself. Disarm we run as a maneuver or a double - triple boon effect. Fact is, disarm as a maneuver means a player gives up 1 round of damage, while they face a round of damage themselves. By necessity of a combat situation, damage is always more vital than disarming (except in the rarest of cases), so it becomes a non-option. Adding disarm as a maneuver gives players more options, encourages creativity, and also allows it to spin off of boon/bane effects. What happens when a player rolls 4-5 banes on a to hit roll? What happens with all those left over boons when they roll 4-5 boons, and only have an action card that gives out 2 boon description. The RAW itself has two different ideas for this, which gives players and GMs the freedom to do as they wish. If you think about it, in encounter mode 4-5 boons create a better effect than one or two. It scales. Do not be afraid to let your combat scale as well. So on 4 boons, why not allow them to do +1 Critical after they spend 2 boons to knock the sword out of the target's hand. Regardless if the card says so, it gives the players and GMs a freedom unmatched in any other system to generate great narrative and really cool effects in game.

The only counter balance is when the disarm might effect an important item/weapon, such as a demon blade. Obviously, it's a beast of a weapon. If you take a step back and look at something as awesome as a Demon Weapon they are rare and have generally, a narrative impact (regardless of how tied to the plot they actually are, the meta-plat states it upfront). Therefore disarming that could easily be ruled as an action or as an opposed check between the wielder and the attacker. The RAW allows for such flexibility and it should be used to the fullest extent, just to maximize not only your enjoyment, but your immersion into the game as well.

That's just my two cents on this, and in summary: Make it a maneuver or a 2-3 boon/bane side effects if players/gm want it to work that way.

commoner said:

This!

Having disarm as a standard 2 boon effect (or even 3) would in my opinion be way too good, but it could easily be appropriate when faced with random villagers or goblins. Trying to disarm a demon or Diestro could be ruled impossible, 2+ purple or as an opposed check as appropriate.

Getting your players used to the fact that the rules are flexible as befits the story and situation is really important with 3E and one of the great things about the system.