Disarm How?

Right, being aware of the problems of attempting to devine 'designer intent' here is how I believe that the Disarm maneuver is supposed to work (regardless of wording). 1) Roll an attack roll agains the standard TNtbH + 3 Raises for the maneuver. 2) If the attacker successfully make the raises, the defender gets to make an Agility/Weapon Skill or Strength/Weapon Skill roll to maintain a grip on their weapon. The TN is set at the value of the attacker's roll, and is considered to be an opposed roll for purposes of techniques &c. 3) Regardless of whether or not the defender manages to maintain a grip on his weapon, if the initial attack roll succeeded with all necessary raises, roll damage and apply other effects as normal. Whether or not this is actually how the Maneuver is 'supposed' to work really doesn't matter to me. Think of this as a jumping off point for alteration or refinement until the Manevuer is worded in a more concise manner.

When do you apply the damage of the disarm. On the initial attack roll, or after the contested attack roll? If its a contested attack roll why dont I do damage on that? Can I take raises for damage I'm making an attack roll to hit them and taking 3 raises, so if I'm making an attack roll I do damage right..... Screw extra attack, from now on I'm disarming people, it needs less raises!! Assuming the above conclusions are correct (two attack rolls, the first with three Raises against the opponent's TNtbH and the second Contested), it makes most sense to apply damage based on the initial attack roll (meaning you would have to Raise further beyond the three necessary for the Disarm if you want to Raise for damage) and to apply no damage based on the Contested Roll. The latter is only used to figure out if you disarm successfully or not and does no damage. However, even if the Contested Roll fails you still do damage with the initial Roll, provided that's a hit. If you want mechanics rather than common sense: you can only Raise for damage on attack rolls for attacks (as per the text for the Extra Damage maneuver). The disarming part of the attack is not an attack in its own right, even if it's adjudicated by a (Contested) Attack Roll.

The disarming part of the attack is not an attack in its own right, even if it's adjudicated by a (Contested) Attack Roll. This is the way it's going to have to be ruled eventually otherwise the defender would get to damage his attacker and call raises for effects on his attack roll to defend the disarm as well. All in all general stupidness ruleswise.

Re-reading things, I'm inclined to go with Coops interpretation. The attacker makes their roll against TNtbH + 3 Raises. If they succeed, the defender gets to make a saving roll, against a TN set by the attacker's attack roll. A contested roll. It doesn't make sense for the attacker to make two separate rolls, he's making one manoeuvre. It does however make sense for the defender to make a save against that 'attack' once they realise it's for a disarm rather than damage. I've always hated disarms and I think that's how I'll play it. As an aside, |'d probably rule that they do damage if they make the basic TNtbH but not the 3 raises. Strictly homebrew but it fits. A really skilled swordsman would do no damage making a disarm but a botch would lead to injury.

View Full Version: Disarm How?