The Absurdity of Disarm

[Archnon]

So I have been having trouble wrapping my head around the disarm feat. As the NWN wiki states:

Specifics: The character can attempt to disarm an opponent in melee combat. Attempting a disarm applies a -6 penalty to the character's attack roll, and the combatant with the larger weapon gains a +4 bonus per size category of difference. A successful hit deals normal damage, and if the opponent fails a discipline check then the weapon flies from the opponent's hands.

You also incur an attack of opportunity. Improved disarm eliminates the attack of opportunity and drops to the penalty to -4.

Now the problem as I see it is the size category issue. There are 4 categories. Tiny, small, medium and large. That means and each shift is +4. That means that a Large Weapon attacking a Tiny weapon gets +12 to their attack……

That nets you a +6 to your attack. +8 if you take improved disarm and no risk of Attack of Opportunity. For small weapons it is a +2 or +4.

My question is, why wouldn’t someone with a large weapon not spam disarm on all small and tiny weapons. Keep in mind that small races pretty much exclusively use small and tiny weapons. In addition, remember that the server already has big benefits for large weapons, including +2 AB and 1.5X damage and as a result, 2 hand large weapons are the norm. To add more weight to this, a number of small weapons have been moved to tiny on this server.

Now add on top of all of this the immersion problem. I don’t understand why I should be more likely to hit a character with my greatsword if I am aiming directly for his dagger. If anything I should be less likely. I get that they wanted to increase the likelihood of the disarm check being successful as the larger weight provides more force to knock a weapon away. However, it really just seems like lazy coding to increase the AB. Then they just need one number for attack to hit and the discipline check, when there are two dynamics at play. First, you should be less likely to hit a dagger if you are trying to hit it with a greatsword. Then you should be more likely to knock it away. Large weapons aren't designed for precision moves like hitting a dagger. They are designed for caving in a skull, or shoulder, or hip, or whatever you manage to get.

All in all, this just seems like a crazy way to benefit large weapons that is built into the software, when large weapons are already dominant on the server due to their other benefits. Am I reading this wrong or are my concerns misplaced?

[garrbear758]

Working as intended.

1: You are giving up 6 AC to use a large weapon, which is very significant.

2: Small races are very strong and this is one of their only weaknesses.

[Drowboy]

That 6 AC (2 more for clerics!) Makes or breaks characters without guards in pve, and without a fast enough build to delete someone in one or two rounds.

There's definitely some niche two-handed imp disarm builds that look very threatening but they're also niche for a reason.

[Baron Saturday]

The one case where this might be worth looking at is quarterstaff, which really has enough going for it already.

[Scurvy Cur]

2: Small races are very strong and this is one of their only weaknesses.

This can't be said loudly enough. Right now, just about every mainline archetype works better dex-based than str-based (there are a couple of notable exceptions, but not a ton). If you're dex based, you may as well go halfling for effectively +2-3 AB and +2 AC, +4 hide, +6 ms with very few downsides you really care about. My heartstrings are not tugged by "won't someone think of the poor halflings?". Very strong race already.

In addition, remember that the server already has big benefits for large weapons, including +2 AB and 1.5X damage and as a result, 2 hand large weapons are the norm.

What are you on and why won't you share?

The only really good build right now that wants to use a 2h large weapon, imo, is barb/wm. Everything else that does so is making a mistake. I don't think your damage spikes are big enough without WM levels to justify trashing your AC. The other WM build that's meta-competitive is CoT/WM, and I actually don't think you go 2h on that build because then you're a 2h build with a 1.5 round windup and basically condemn yourself to the AC/AB trade game, which you're actively bad at.

are my concerns misplaced?

Yes.

2h weapons are still, by and large, a bad choice. About the only time I'd take 2h weapons on non-qstaff a build is if I was looking to switch up between DPS and tank and was planning on doing scythe/spear + shield or falchion/bsword + shield. In which case, 1h + shield would be my default, and the 2h beatstick would only come out during -guarded pve. The +2 AB bonus is mandatory to make them sometimes worth taking, since trading 6 AC for, on average 10-11 damage (due to both extra str mod and bigger damage dice) is, by itself, a very shitty trade.

Edit: Saturday is actually entirely correct. Qstaff checks a lot of niche boxes, so might be an exception to the 2h weapon generalization.

[Jencent]

So I have been having trouble wrapping my head around the disarm feat. As the NWN wiki states:

Specifics: The character can attempt to disarm an opponent in melee combat. Attempting a disarm applies a -6 penalty to the character's attack roll, and the combatant with the larger weapon gains a +4 bonus per size category of difference. A successful hit deals normal damage, and if the opponent fails a discipline check then the weapon flies from the opponent's hands.

You also incur an attack of opportunity. Improved disarm eliminates the attack of opportunity and drops to the penalty to -4.

Now the problem as I see it is the size category issue. There are 4 categories. Tiny, small, medium and large. That means and each shift is +4. That means that a Large Weapon attacking a Tiny weapon gets +12 to their attack……

That nets you a +6 to your attack. +8 if you take improved disarm and no risk of Attack of Opportunity. For small weapons it is a +2 or +4.

My question is, why wouldn’t someone with a large weapon not spam disarm on all small and tiny weapons. Keep in mind that small races pretty much exclusively use small and tiny weapons. In addition, remember that the server already has big benefits for large weapons, including +2 AB and 1.5X damage and as a result, 2 hand large weapons are the norm. To add more weight to this, a number of small weapons have been moved to tiny on this server.

Now add on top of all of this the immersion problem. I don’t understand why I should be more likely to hit a character with my greatsword if I am aiming directly for his dagger. If anything I should be less likely. I get that they wanted to increase the likelihood of the disarm check being successful as the larger weight provides more force to knock a weapon away. However, it really just seems like lazy coding to increase the AB. Then they just need one number for attack to hit and the discipline check, when there are two dynamics at play. First, you should be less likely to hit a dagger if you are trying to hit it with a greatsword. Then you should be more likely to knock it away. Large weapons aren't designed for precision moves like hitting a dagger. They are designed for caving in a skull, or shoulder, or hip, or whatever you manage to get.

All in all, this just seems like a crazy way to benefit large weapons that is built into the software, when large weapons are already dominant on the server due to their other benefits. Am I reading this wrong or are my concerns misplaced?

Don't worry. Most of PC don't use large weapon.

[Tarkus the dog]

Yeah if I'm gonna be playing a 40ish ac character in today's high ac high ab+damage meta I might as well get something out of it.

I also don't believe large weapons are that dominant ( not counting dex+quarterstaff). Most of those builds can't PvE on their own and in PvP one wrong move and they're dead. If anything, I wish I'd see more of strength two handers being played.

Not applying to falchions, though. Falchions are just absurd. At least they are exotic.

As for the logic part, I hear you, and I mostly agree. But that's one huge can of worms that's not worth opening in nwn.

[Rico_scorpion]

Not entering the meta subject, others cover it better.

Let's however point out that disarm in pve is "infuriating". A lot of creatures or even humans that come at you, while obviously holding a weapon in their hand, are immune to the feat's effect, so to me if we start the discussion on disarm it would be first to restore its primary function in a pve context.

Does the +ab shows on the log? It doesn't seem so.

[Archnon]

Thanks for clarifying all this for me. It makes a lot of sense.

I'm not sure that I agree that two-handed weapons are rare. I feel like the Quarterstaff and the Naginata had been the dominant weapons on the server for a while, though the latter was recently nerfed and everyone seems to agree that the quarterstaff is overdue for a nerf.

However, a medium to a tiny weapon still gets a +2 on attack or +4 with improved disarm. Those medium weapons are more common, and can be used with shields so you can still net a +4 ab and your 6AC.

Against a pve mob, i can see that loss of AC being an issue. However, in PVP when it is a race to kill, then it can be a big advantage. If we assume that the average AC is 60 (this is likely low) and the Average AB is 50 (probably high) then someone has a 50% chance to hit. However, a +8 makes it a 100% chance to hit. Now add to this that if your disarm hits (with a DC of 61 or more) the opponent loses 10AB and their weapon (usually +3 ab) for 6 seconds. Then they have a small debuff penalty once they get it back up. That is 12 seconds where you can't fire back at full strength, which more than offsets the loss of 6 AC. and 12 seconds is enough to end a lot of PVP fights. The question is, can you deal with leveling this character in the PVE environment. It seems like the ability to switch between sword and board and 2 handed is key.

I agree that quarterstaffs are just insane in this regard. They get the same 6-12 seconds, but their attack rate is way higher due to UBAB.

[Wethrinea]

Now add on top of all of this the immersion problem. I don’t understand why I should be more likely to hit a character with my greatsword if I am aiming directly for his dagger. If anything I should be less likely. I get that they wanted to increase the likelihood of the disarm check being successful as the larger weight provides more force to knock a weapon away. However, it really just seems like lazy coding to increase the AB. Then they just need one number for attack to hit and the discipline check, when there are two dynamics at play. First, you should be less likely to hit a dagger if you are trying to hit it with a greatsword. Then you should be more likely to knock it away. Large weapons aren't designed for precision moves like hitting a dagger. They are designed for caving in a skull, or shoulder, or hip, or whatever you manage to get.

As far as reality goes, the longsword (which fantasy in general calls "greatsword") is neither heavier nor less accurate than the rapier, and is an excellent weapon for disarming smaller weapons, such as a dagger, because of longer reach and the ability to project more momentum. For example with a slap or cut to the wrist. This is true for more or less any weapon used by two hands, as they are easier to control, and thus more accurate, not less.

If we wanted reality to influence D&D, the spear (in two hands) would be the most popular and powerful weapon in 1v1 fights, pole-arms for just about everything else, and anything "exotic" being just that, curious weapons that requires enormous amounts of training to be as effective as a simple spear.

I actually wanted to play a "greatsword" WM in the style of a 14th century European master, with the benefits of disarm being one of the perks. But it simply does not make up for the the pitiful AC he would have. Which is a shame, because two-handed weapons have a lot going for them RL, with lore and examples to draw on when fleshing out the character.

[malcolm_mountainslayer]

Now add on top of all of this the immersion problem. I don’t understand why I should be more likely to hit a character with my greatsword if I am aiming directly for his dagger. If anything I should be less likely. I get that they wanted to increase the likelihood of the disarm check being successful as the larger weight provides more force to knock a weapon away. However, it really just seems like lazy coding to increase the AB. Then they just need one number for attack to hit and the discipline check, when there are two dynamics at play. First, you should be less likely to hit a dagger if you are trying to hit it with a greatsword. Then you should be more likely to knock it away. Large weapons aren't designed for precision moves like hitting a dagger. They are designed for caving in a skull, or shoulder, or hip, or whatever you manage to get.

As far as reality goes, the longsword (which fantasy in general calls "greatsword") is neither heavier nor less accurate than the rapier, and is an excellent weapon for disarming smaller weapons, such as a dagger, because of longer reach and the ability to project more momentum. For example with a slap or cut to the wrist. This is true for more or less any weapon used by two hands, as they are easier to control, and thus more accurate, not less.

If we wanted reality to influence D&D, the spear (in two hands) would be the most popular and powerful weapon in 1v1 fights, pole-arms for just about everything else, and anything "exotic" being just that, curious weapons that requires enormous amounts of training to be as effective as a simple spear.

I actually wanted to play a "greatsword" WM in the style of a 14th century European master, with the benefits of disarm being one of the perks. But it simply does not make up for the the pitiful AC he would have. Which is a shame, because two-handed weapons have a lot going for them RL, with lore and examples to draw on when fleshing out the character.

while adding to polearm realism, one can never sheathe their long arse polearms, and will still be asked as non gaurds to not walk around in tavern with their freaking spears in hands. We both know NWN greatswords and zweihanders and true longswords just do not exist in DnD as longswordmanship could never be captured in a game of dice and ab and ac anyways.

[Wethrinea]

Realism would wreck any game, so I am certainly not suggesting that it should be implemented. I just wanted to clear up the misconception that two-handed weapons are heavy and inaccurate.

If there is one thing I would change, not just in NwN, but in RPG's in general, is to better represent the two-handed weapons defensive advantages (excluding vs ranged attacks obviously), perhaps at the cost of their overblown offensive capabilities, ie the higher damage dice. In terms of killing power, there really is no great difference between a spear, a "greatsword" and a rapier. All three deliver more or less equally deadly thrusts, perhaps with the spear coming out on top.

Perhaps two-handed weapons could get some (half?) of the parry AC bonus to reflect this? And disable synergy with monk and divine shield?

[Hazard]

I think the disarm bonus comes from an idea of .. big weapon, hits hard and knocks the other person's weapon out of their hand.
Think less realism and more movie physics.

I'm just thankful disarm no longer throws our weapon to the ground. The griefing that was possible with that was just awful.

[msterswrdsmn]

Realism would wreck any game, so I am certainly not suggesting that it should be implemented. I just wanted to clear up the misconception that two-handed weapons are heavy and inaccurate.

If there is one thing I would change, not just in NwN, but in RPG's in general, is to better represent the two-handed weapons defensive advantages (excluding vs ranged attacks obviously), perhaps at the cost of their overblown offensive capabilities, ie the higher damage dice. In terms of killing power, there really is no great difference between a spear, a "greatsword" and a rapier. All three deliver more or less equally deadly thrusts, perhaps with the spear coming out on top.

Perhaps two-handed weapons could get some (half?) of the parry AC bonus to reflect this? And disable synergy with monk and divine shield?

Technically speaking, this entire thread and disarm gaining an AB bonus against smaller weapons would, in fact, be a fairly accurate way of representing the difference in length and the advantages of such. It is very, very hard to effectively close a gap using a small weapon like a knife or dagger against a weapon such as a spear, which is not only longer, but able to be manipulated easily to keep an opponent back.

Instead of it being an innate advantage like passive AC, think of disarm being representative of training to explicitly exploit the length advantage.

If you're really interested in an example of how this might play out, I found this enjoyable to watch.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uLLv8E2pWdk
Bear in mind, the people using spears in this video have never practiced with them before. Imagine what ye olde Arelith large weapons master would be like.

[Archnon]

Realism would wreck any game, so I am certainly not suggesting that it should be implemented. I just wanted to clear up the misconception that two-handed weapons are heavy and inaccurate.

If there is one thing I would change, not just in NwN, but in RPG's in general, is to better represent the two-handed weapons defensive advantages (excluding vs ranged attacks obviously), perhaps at the cost of their overblown offensive capabilities, ie the higher damage dice. In terms of killing power, there really is no great difference between a spear, a "greatsword" and a rapier. All three deliver more or less equally deadly thrusts, perhaps with the spear coming out on top.

Perhaps two-handed weapons could get some (half?) of the parry AC bonus to reflect this? And disable synergy with monk and divine shield?

Technically speaking, this entire thread and disarm gaining an AB bonus against smaller weapons would, in fact, be a fairly accurate way of representing the difference in length and the advantages of such. It is very, very hard to effectively close a gap using a small weapon like a knife or dagger against a weapon such as a spear, which is not only longer, but able to be manipulated easily to keep an opponent back.

Instead of it being an innate advantage like passive AC, think of disarm being representative of training to explicitly exploit the length advantage.

See this explanation I like! That makes sense to me for the AB increase.

[msterswrdsmn]

One more reply I missed

Let's however point out that disarm in pve is "infuriating". A lot of creatures or even humans that come at you, while obviously holding a weapon in their hand, are immune to the feat's effect, so to me if we start the discussion on disarm it would be first to restore its primary function in a pve context.

Does the +ab shows on the log? It doesn't seem so.

Yes. or at least, it used to. It was a very significant jump too, letting me hit 20 AB against dagger npcs at level 4. That said, this was very much needed, as again, two handed and my AC was absolute trash. Mostly I used imp. disarm as a means of keeping a semi-okay AB while I hate expertise/imp expertise up.

[AstralUniverse]

Might be a silly question but are you guys sure this AB bonus applies to your attack roll at all? in KD, it only applies to your attack roll in regards to the target's discipline check if you've already hit the initial attack and I'm pretty sure it's how it's supposed to work for disarm as well.

[Archnon]

Might be a silly question but are you guys sure this AB bonus applies to your attack roll at all? in KD, it only applies to your attack roll in regards to the target's discipline check if you've already hit the initial attack and I'm pretty sure it's how it's supposed to work for disarm as well.

From the Disarm page on the wiki:

The bonus due to weapon size affects the actual attack roll, making it possible to have a higher attack bonus with disarm than without. This makes disarm particularly useful to those wielding two-handed weapons.

https://nwn.fandom.com/wiki/Disarm

[AstralUniverse]

So regardless if you're successful in disarming your opponent or not, by having improved disarm (and using it) and fighting something with weapon the size of your weapon or smaller you just get an ab bonus, just like that? How is it not being abused by pretty much everyone?

[Wethrinea]

Technically speaking, this entire thread and disarm gaining an AB bonus against smaller weapons would, in fact, be a fairly accurate way of representing the difference in length and the advantages of such. It is very, very hard to effectively close a gap using a small weapon like a knife or dagger against a weapon such as a spear, which is not only longer, but able to be manipulated easily to keep an opponent back.

Instead of it being an innate advantage like passive AC, think of disarm being representative of training to explicitly exploit the length advantage.

If you're really interested in an example of how this might play out, I found this enjoyable to watch.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uLLv8E2pWdk
Bear in mind, the people using spears in this video have never practiced with them before. Imagine what ye olde Arelith large weapons master would be like.

HEMA experiments are fun I have done some longsword vs spear-alike bouts, and it is infuriating just how difficult it is to close against one wielding a spear. And that is with the longsword, ie "greatsword". With a short blade like the dagger, or even an arming sword, ie "longsword", it is nearly impossible unless you have a targe and know how to use it.

Ironically, the reason why spears are not in HEMA tournaments (which usually have longswords, rapiers, sword & buckler etc) is that they are simply too dangerous. The amount of force projected through that tip, even when just the rounded end of a stick, is too great for any protective gear that we use.

[msterswrdsmn]

So regardless if you're successful in disarming your opponent or not, by having improved disarm (and using it) and fighting something with weapon the size of your weapon or smaller you just get an ab bonus, just like that? How is it not being abused by pretty much everyone?

Because none of the cookie-cutter builds have it! I can't copy+paste something that isn't there!

Serious note, its a 2 feat investment and most optimized builds are already pretty feat starved. And unlike, say, knockdown, basic disarm is just asking for a quick death since it triggers an attack of opperunity against everything in melee range. You -must- burn two feats to take advantage of this. Twohanded weapons are also considered the red-headed stepchild of builds, so the number of people that even -could- taken advantage of this is comparatively smaller.

Doesn't get a bonus against -everything- that is smaller than your weapon either. With a large weapon, you essentially don't get bonus AB unless they're using a small or tiny weapon. Medium weapons are one size smaller, so the size AB bonus essentially just cancels out the AB penalty for attempting to disarm.

[AstralUniverse]

With a large weapon, you essentially don't get bonus AB unless they're using a small or tiny weapon. Medium weapons are one size smaller, so the size AB bonus essentially just cancels out the AB penalty for attempting to disarm.

Ok thats why.