Missing Rules Grabbing A Weapon

I seen rules for grabbing and disarming, but not for grabbing a weapon. 

I got a few questions to ask and hopefully WOTC can add some rules for it.

1. How easy should it be for grabbing a weapon?
2. When both targets are grabbing the weapon, what options they have with it?
3. If the weapon they grabbing have sharp blade or spikes, should they be penalize for
grabbing it?
4. Do you think there should be any addictional rules?


 
I seen rules for grabbing and disarming, but not for grabbing a weapon. 

I got a few questions to ask and hopefully WOTC can add some rules for it.

1. How easy should it be for grabbing a weapon?
2. When both targets are grabbing the weapon, what options they have with it?
3. If the weapon they grabbing have sharp blade or spikes, should they be penalize for
grabbing it?
4. Do you think there should be any addictional rules?
 

#1 under use item, picking up a scroll is a non-action. Same for a weapon.
#2 The one with the better initiative grabs the weapon and then the other has to disarm them and assuming disarming works and they have a free hand, they get the weapon.
#3 Nope. You can use caltrops and disarm greatswords with your hands with no problems so why would grabbing a weapon?
#4 No, not really. Seems pretty clear and easy to me. 

Make a Dex check for DC tree-fidddy.
2. When both targets are grabbing the weapon, what options they have with it?


It depends.

1.Mundane item? Tug of war it.

2.Magic item? XIAOLIN SHOWDOWN.
 #1 under use item, picking up a scroll is a non-action. Same for a weapon.
#2 The one with the better initiative grabs the weapon and then the other has to disarm them and assuming disarming works and they have a free hand, they get the weapon.
#3 Nope. You can use caltrops and disarm greatswords with your hands with no problems so why would grabbing a weapon?
#4 No, not really. Seems pretty clear and easy to me. 




1. You sure is not an Str or Dex vs Str or Dex save? 
2. You sure that's all the option beside disarming? Can the they use it to attack one another? 
3. What if it's on fire like a flaming sword?
4. You sure? Because I just thought of one. Does the person lose the weapon if he been
forcefully move or do both of them get moved if the person made a successful Str check to hold on?

Edit: As a rule lawyer, this is unexplored land. We need to fix this asap!

1. How easy should it be for grabbing a weapon?

As easy as a Str vs. Str or Dex check (if you seek to grab it out of their hand), or a Dex vs. Str or Dex check (if you seek merely to grab onto it).

2. When both targets are grabbing the weapon, what options they have with it?

They can mutually agree to both have a hand on it, or each try to take control of it by initiating a contest.


3. If the weapon they grabbing have sharp blade or spikes, should they be penalize for grabbing it?

The rules assume competence, so the grabber is assumed to be grabbing for a portion of the weapon that won't cause injury. A penalty for grabbing would only be warranted in situations where grabbing the blade or spikes is unavoidable in the narrative.


4. Do you think there should be any addictional rules?

Not in my opinion, no. I appreciate how comprehensive the rules are despite their simplicity.

Danny

What a very specific and rare situation. I think this should best be handled via dm call. Having a rule for every oddball situation bogs the game down more than it helps it. Better to just have a unified progression for improvised actions and give a ton of examples of things that could be done with the system.

Tl;dr - +1 Model of Page 42 ftw.
What a very specific and rare situation. I think this should best be handled via dm call. Having a rule for every oddball situation bogs the game down more than it helps it. Better to just have a unified progression for improvised actions and give a ton of examples of things that could be done with the system. Tl;dr - +1 Model of Page 42 ftw.



Let say I build a fighter around grabbing the enemy's weapon while stabbing him with his own
weapon. Two DMs might have different opinion on how this grabbing weapon work and it could
make my build useless. 

For example.

One DM might give me a disadvantage for grabbing it with one against two-handed weapon user. 

One DM might give me an advantage to my attack, because he is stationary and using both
hands to hold his weapon. In other words, he can't parry or dodge. 

 #1 under use item, picking up a scroll is a non-action. Same for a weapon.
#2 The one with the better initiative grabs the weapon and then the other has to disarm them and assuming disarming works and they have a free hand, they get the weapon.
#3 Nope. You can use caltrops and disarm greatswords with your hands with no problems so why would grabbing a weapon?
#4 No, not really. Seems pretty clear and easy to me. 




1. You sure is not an Str or Dex vs Str or Dex save? 
2. You sure that's all the option beside disarming? Can the they use it to attack one another? 
3. What if it's on fire like a flaming sword?
4. You sure? Because I just thought of one. Does the person lose the weapon if he been
forcefully move or do both of them get moved if the person made a successful Str check to hold on?

Edit: As a rule lawyer, this is unexplored land. We need to fix this asap!


#1 Not as I see it. if you mean grabbing from the ground, it's a free action. If it's from a foe, it's already listed under disarm. So both situations are covered.
#2 Initiative can't be the same so someone has to go first. that means that you'll NEVER have two people picking up the weapon at the same time. That means one person has it and one person has to get it out of his hands (ie disarm)
#3 A flaming sword ONLY deals extra damage on a hit with an attack. There is nothing that the person trying to grab/disarm the flaming sword can to to take fire damage.
#4 Yes, I'm sure. There are NEVER two people holding a weapon in combat, at least under the rules. As such, movement id meanless in this debate. One is holding the weapon and the other is trying to disarm them. The person trying to disarm has no hold and doesn't have possesion of the weapon in any way so can't stop the weapon or weilder from moving.

Let say I build a fighter around grabbing the enemy's weapon while stabbing him with his own
weapon.

By RAW, you first disarm the enemy with a disarm, taking an action. Assuming you still have the weapon on your next action you can stab him. That's how RAW works. That's a str check vs enemies str or dex check for the disarm and weapon snatch. Note that the fighters disarm will not work for this. it doesn't allow for the weapon snatch, though you could use a free action to pick it up from the ground before your turm ends.
I seen rules for grabbing and disarming, but not for grabbing a weapon.
 



A weapon with a hand guard is going to be almost too hard to grab.

But we could have a Pin Weapon or Lock Weapon Maneuver where you use your weapon to negate your target's next main or off-hand attack.

Disarm Weapon should be a maneuver which is harder than a Pin/Lock Weapon Maneuver.

Once the weapon is locked, it sould be a contest roll.
The attacker should choose his or her greatest attribute and the target should use his or her greatest attribute.

This could even be a threshold or degree of success roll.

If you roll greater than 5 needed to pin the weapon, the target drops it.
If you roll less than 5 needed, the target pushes you 5 feet.
Something like that.
Let say I build a fighter around grabbing the enemy's weapon while stabbing him with his own
weapon.

By RAW, you first disarm the enemy with a disarm, taking an action. Assuming you still have the weapon on your next action you can stab him. That's how RAW works. That's a str check vs enemies str or dex check for the disarm and weapon snatch. Note that the fighters disarm will not work for this. it doesn't allow for the weapon snatch, though you could use a free action to pick it up from the ground before your turm ends.



Sorry, I said it wrong. I mean....

Grabbing the enemy's weapon while using my weapon to attack him. 
I grab his sword than I stab him with my dagger. 

A weapon with a hand guard is going to be almost too hard to grab.

By the rules, even shields, cestus, and other 'worn' items are just as easy to disarm/grab as any other weapon/item grasped in the hand.

Let say I build a fighter around grabbing the enemy's weapon while stabbing him with his own
weapon.

By RAW, you first disarm the enemy with a disarm, taking an action. Assuming you still have the weapon on your next action you can stab him. That's how RAW works. That's a str check vs enemies str or dex check for the disarm and weapon snatch. Note that the fighters disarm will not work for this. it doesn't allow for the weapon snatch, though you could use a free action to pick it up from the ground before your turm ends.



Sorry, I said it wrong. I mean....

Grabbing the enemy's weapon while using my weapon to attack him. 
I grab his sword than I stab him with my dagger. 


That isn't possible without houserules. You are trying to make two actions at the same time. Might as well let wizards cast twice in a round or have the barbarian charge and fire a bow simultaneously.

 That isn't possible without houserules. You are trying to make two actions at the same time. Might as well let wizards cast twice in a round or have the barbarian charge and fire a bow simultaneously.




It is possible. I even do it in real life.

A spearman lunge his spear at me. I parry it with my dagger, than I grab the spear and stab him.
That why I love fighting spearmen with only a dagger. I litterally hunt for them on the battlefield. 

Meanwhile, back in D&D.

Right now we have to house rule the grabbing weapon thing. I want there to be in game rules for
it so I don't have to be mercy at DM Fiat. 

 That isn't possible without houserules. You are trying to make two actions at the same time. Might as well let wizards cast twice in a round or have the barbarian charge and fire a bow simultaneously.




It is possible. I even do it in real life.

. . .

Meanwhile, back in D&D.

Right now we have to house rule the grabbing weapon thing. I want there to be in game rules for
it so I don't have to be mercy at DM Fiat. 



elecgraystone was clearly not saying that it's impossible in real life.  As for your question, I need further clarity on what you're attempting to do.  You say that you're grabbing the weapon, post-parry, and then attacking.  Are you also continuing to hold onto it so the enemy can't attack you?  Or are you just letting go after you hit?

There are a great many problems that can be circumvented by players and DMs having a mature discussion about what the game is going to be like before they ever sit down together to play.

 

The answer really does lie in more options, not in confining and segregating certain options.

 

You really shouldn't speak for others.  You can't hear what someone else is saying when you try to put your words in their mouth.

 

Fencing & Swashbuckling as Armor.

D20 Modern Toon PC Race.

Mecha Pilot's Skill Challenge Emporium.

 

Save the breasts.


It is possible. I even do it in real life.

And that has what to do with the game? I was talking about the rules as written and going by them it IS impossible.

A spearman lunge his spear at me. I parry it with my dagger, than I grab the spear and stab him.
That why I love fighting spearmen with only a dagger. I litterally hunt for them on the battlefield. 

Nifty but useless in a rules question/debate.

Meanwhile, back in D&D.

yes, thank you.

Right now we have to house rule the grabbing weapon thing.

No you don't. it's right in the rules. to grab a weapon you have to get it out of there hands and that's disarm. You then grap the weapon. Why don't you see that disarm IS the grabbing rule you are looking for. 
I want there to be in game rules for
it so I don't have to be mercy at DM Fiat. 

And that's why they nicely put the disarm/grab rule in the rules already. no DM fiat/houserule needed. Now the two action disarm, grab and stab is going to need DM fiat/houserule.

A weapon with a hand guard is going to be almost too hard to grab.

By the rules, even shields, cestus, and other 'worn' items are just as easy to disarm/grab as any other weapon/item grasped in the hand.




And we've got to consider weapons with hand straps. They must also be difficult to pin, grab or disarm.
  As for your question, I need further clarity on what you're attempting to do.  You say that you're grabbing the weapon, post-parry, and then attacking.  Are you also continuing to hold onto it so the enemy can't attack you?  Or are you just letting go after you hit?



By using two handed fighting. I grab the weapon with my first attack than stab the enemy with 
my second attack. 

By looking at the grabbing and disarm rules, this what I come out. 

1. You grab the weapon unless the target spend a reaction to make a save against it. 
2. The both targets can use an action to make a Str check to disarm the other target.
3. Both target can't use the grab weapon to attack one another. 
4. The grabber takes damage from the weapon if it have magical effect like holy, fire, cold, 
lighting, etc. 
5. If one of the target is forcefully moved, both targets must make Str vs Str check to see who
gets the weapon. 

That as far as I got. How would you guys resolve this grabbing weapon contest?


And we've got to consider weapons with hand straps. They must also be difficult to pin, grab or disarm.



In 3.5e, there a lock gaunlet that let's you get +10 to disarm checks, but it takes longer to 
drop the weapon. 

 That isn't possible without houserules. You are trying to make two actions at the same time. Might as well let wizards cast twice in a round or have the barbarian charge and fire a bow simultaneously.




It is possible. I even do it in real life.

A spearman lunge his spear at me. I parry it with my dagger, than I grab the spear and stab him.
That why I love fighting spearmen with only a dagger. I litterally hunt for them on the battlefield. 

Meanwhile, back in D&D.

Right now we have to house rule the grabbing weapon thing. I want there to be in game rules for
it so I don't have to be mercy at DM Fiat. 




And in real life people don't take turns to do actions, unless they are playing a game... but in general real life and games aren't necessarily synonymous.
  As for your question, I need further clarity on what you're attempting to do.  You say that you're grabbing the weapon, post-parry, and then attacking.  Are you also continuing to hold onto it so the enemy can't attack you?  Or are you just letting go after you hit?



By using two handed fighting. I grab the weapon with my first attack than stab the enemy with 
my second attack. 

By looking at the grabbing and disarm rules, this what I come out. 

1. You grab the weapon unless the target spend a reaction to make a save against it. 
2. The both targets can use an action to make a Str check to disarm the other target.
3. Both target can't use the grab weapon to attack one another. 
4. The grabber takes damage from the weapon if it have magical effect like holy, fire, cold, 
lighting, etc. 
5. If one of the target is forcefully moved, both targets must make Str vs Str check to see who
gets the weapon. 

That as far as I got. How would you guys resolve this grabbing weapon contest?


It depends.  I would rule that you could grab it as part of your offensive/defensive motions.  However, the spearman would retain control of the spear unless you used an action and beat him in an attribute contest.  If you still had the spear grabbed when the spearman attacked you, I'd let you use a reaction to impose disadvantage on the attack.

There are a great many problems that can be circumvented by players and DMs having a mature discussion about what the game is going to be like before they ever sit down together to play.

 

The answer really does lie in more options, not in confining and segregating certain options.

 

You really shouldn't speak for others.  You can't hear what someone else is saying when you try to put your words in their mouth.

 

Fencing & Swashbuckling as Armor.

D20 Modern Toon PC Race.

Mecha Pilot's Skill Challenge Emporium.

 

Save the breasts.


It depends.  I would rule that you could grab it as part of your offensive/defensive motions.  However, the spearman would retain control of the spear unless you used an action and beat him in an attribute contest.  If you still had the spear grabbed when the spearman attacked you, I'd let you use a reaction to impose disadvantage on the attack.



I like this. This what I am talking about. 

@elecgraystone. There a differents between grabbing your target, grabbing the target's weapon, and
disarming the target's weapon. Right now in the current 5e, there is NO GRABBING WEAPON RULES. 

Right now, I am trying to figure out how to balance grabbing the weapon compare to disarming 
the weapon. Grabbing the weapon should be a lot easier than trying to rip it out of your enemy's hands. 

A weapon with a hand guard is going to be almost too hard to grab.

By the rules, even shields, cestus, and other 'worn' items are just as easy to disarm/grab as any other weapon/item grasped in the hand.



And we've got to consider weapons with hand straps. They must also be difficult to pin, grab or disarm.

That could be added, but ATM there is none of that.
  As for your question, I need further clarity on what you're attempting to do.  You say that you're grabbing the weapon, post-parry, and then attacking.  Are you also continuing to hold onto it so the enemy can't attack you?  Or are you just letting go after you hit?



By using two handed fighting. I grab the weapon with my first attack than stab the enemy with 
my second attack. 

By looking at the grabbing and disarm rules, this what I come out. 

1. You grab the weapon unless the target spend a reaction to make a save against it. 
2. The both targets can use an action to make a Str check to disarm the other target.
3. Both target can't use the grab weapon to attack one another. 
4. The grabber takes damage from the weapon if it have magical effect like holy, fire, cold, 
lighting, etc. 
5. If one of the target is forcefully moved, both targets must make Str vs Str check to see who
gets the weapon. 

That as far as I got. How would you guys resolve this grabbing weapon contest?


OK, you got quite a bit wrong.
#1 No reaction, it's a straight up action to disarm/grab. 
#2 you disarm/grab with a str ve str or dex check. It's NOT just str vs str.  
#3 you can only attack with the disarmed weapon if the other side failed to disarm you on there turn.
#4 Magic damage ONLY works with an attack and as stated in #3, you can't ise the weapon to attack during the disarm/grab.
#5 In a forceful move the person that has the weapon keeps it since the both can't hold the weapon at the same time. You are trading possession the weapon back and forth not  grasping the weapon at the same time.

It depends.  I would rule that you could grab it as part of your offensive/defensive motions.  However, the spearman would retain control of the spear unless you used an action and beat him in an attribute contest.  If you still had the spear grabbed when the spearman attacked you, I'd let you use a reaction to impose disadvantage on the attack.



I like this. This what I am talking about. 

@elecgraystone. There a differents between grabbing your target, grabbing the target's weapon, and
disarming the target's weapon. Right now in the current 5e, there is NO GRABBING WEAPON RULES. 

Right now, I am trying to figure out how to balance grabbing the weapon compare to disarming 
the weapon. Grabbing the weapon should be a lot easier than trying to rip it out of your enemy's hands. 


Well, grabbing the weapon doesn't actually need any balancing.  It's the control part that you have to worry about.  You can grab your enemy's weapon all day, but as long as you don't exercise any control over it then it shouldn't take any actions at all.  It's only when you try to exercise control that actions and rolls need to come into play.

There are a great many problems that can be circumvented by players and DMs having a mature discussion about what the game is going to be like before they ever sit down together to play.

 

The answer really does lie in more options, not in confining and segregating certain options.

 

You really shouldn't speak for others.  You can't hear what someone else is saying when you try to put your words in their mouth.

 

Fencing & Swashbuckling as Armor.

D20 Modern Toon PC Race.

Mecha Pilot's Skill Challenge Emporium.

 

Save the breasts.

@elecgraystone. There a differents between grabbing your target, grabbing the target's weapon, and disarming the target's weapon. Right now in the current 5e, there is NO GRABBING WEAPON RULES.

Disarm IS the grabbing rules. disarming = grabbing weapon. it's right in how to play page 12. You win, you snatch the weapon.
Enemies can't hold the same weapon, they can only trade possesion back and forth. If you don't take it away you can't stop them from attacking you with it. If you DID make a houserule for weapon grappling (gets NOT call it grabbing, since that's disarming), it's just be str vs str or dex for each party until one fails. If you fail, they hit you. If they fail, well nothing happens since you aren't trying to disarm them. Seems to me you might as well try to disarm to their failure does something.  
Right now, I am trying to figure out how to balance grabbing the weapon compare to disarming the weapon. Grabbing the weapon should be a lot easier than trying to rip it out of your enemy's hands.

it should be harder not easier. You are in a continual grapple for the weapon instead of trading off attacks to disarm. At best, it'd work like grapple in the how to play PDF. It covers the rolls and movement (If a force, such as the blast created by the spell thunderwave, removes a grappled creature from your reach, the creature is freed, unless the force also targets you and moves you with the creature.). So is you are moved apart, they keep the weapon.
@elecgraystone. There a differents between grabbing your target, grabbing the target's weapon, and disarming the target's weapon. Right now in the current 5e, there is NO GRABBING WEAPON RULES.

Disarm IS the grabbing rules. disarming = grabbing weapon. it's right in how to play page 12. You win, you snatch the weapon.


What you're describing isn't grabbing.  "You win, you snatch the weapon" means taking control of the weapon not simply maintaining contact with it.

There are a great many problems that can be circumvented by players and DMs having a mature discussion about what the game is going to be like before they ever sit down together to play.

 

The answer really does lie in more options, not in confining and segregating certain options.

 

You really shouldn't speak for others.  You can't hear what someone else is saying when you try to put your words in their mouth.

 

Fencing & Swashbuckling as Armor.

D20 Modern Toon PC Race.

Mecha Pilot's Skill Challenge Emporium.

 

Save the breasts.

@elecgraystone. There a differents between grabbing your target, grabbing the target's weapon, and disarming the target's weapon. Right now in the current 5e, there is NO GRABBING WEAPON RULES.

Disarm IS the grabbing rules. disarming = grabbing weapon. it's right in how to play page 12. You win, you snatch the weapon.


What you're describing isn't grabbing.  "You win, you snatch the weapon" means taking control of the weapon not simply maintaining contact with it.



What MechPilot said.

The reason why I am trying to find a balance between grabbing and disarming, because
with disarm all you need is make a check and the weapon could end up in your hands.
With grabbing, it should take less effort and get an auto grab unless the targe spends an reaction.

The reason why I suggest spending a reaction, because the target's weapon is busy trying to evade
being grab so he won't have time parrying or make AoO. 

If picking a weapon off the ground is a free action, doesn't that make Disarm something of a trap option? Not only have you not done damage, but you haven't even cost them any actions. 
Race for the Iron Throne - political and historical analysis of A Song of Ice and Fire.
A character with great strength will try to use her strength to overpower and control the contested weapon.
Another character with good dexterity will use his speed and agility to try to get the weapon.
If picking a weapon off the ground is a free action, doesn't that make Disarm something of a trap option? Not only have you not done damage, but you haven't even cost them any actions. 


If you disarm with an empty hand then you gain hold of the weapon.

There are a great many problems that can be circumvented by players and DMs having a mature discussion about what the game is going to be like before they ever sit down together to play.

 

The answer really does lie in more options, not in confining and segregating certain options.

 

You really shouldn't speak for others.  You can't hear what someone else is saying when you try to put your words in their mouth.

 

Fencing & Swashbuckling as Armor.

D20 Modern Toon PC Race.

Mecha Pilot's Skill Challenge Emporium.

 

Save the breasts.

@elecgraystone. There a differents between grabbing your target, grabbing the target's weapon, and disarming the target's weapon. Right now in the current 5e, there is NO GRABBING WEAPON RULES.

Disarm IS the grabbing rules. disarming = grabbing weapon. it's right in how to play page 12. You win, you snatch the weapon.


What you're describing isn't grabbing.  "You win, you snatch the weapon" means taking control of the weapon not simply maintaining contact with it.

It's either grappling or disarm. A sustained grab is grappling and a snatch is disarm. For the life of me though, I don't understand why you'd grapple a weapon when you could just take it.

@elecgraystone. There a differents between grabbing your target, grabbing the target's weapon, and disarming the target's weapon. Right now in the current 5e, there is NO GRABBING WEAPON RULES.

Disarm IS the grabbing rules. disarming = grabbing weapon. it's right in how to play page 12. You win, you snatch the weapon.


What you're describing isn't grabbing.  "You win, you snatch the weapon" means taking control of the weapon not simply maintaining contact with it.

It's either grappling or disarm. A sustained grab is grappling and a snatch is disarm.


Well, it's only grappling if you're taking control of the grabbed item/person.  Just maintaining physical contact with something shouldn't require an action if you aren't trying to control it.

For the life of me though, I don't understand why you'd grapple a weapon when you could just take it.


Sometimes you can't take the weapon.  Consider the situation differently.  Imagine if the weapon and enemy in question wasn't a spear wielded by a humanoid enemy.  Instead, imagine if it was a necromancer's skeletal minion with a sword grafted to it's arm bones.

There are a great many problems that can be circumvented by players and DMs having a mature discussion about what the game is going to be like before they ever sit down together to play.

 

The answer really does lie in more options, not in confining and segregating certain options.

 

You really shouldn't speak for others.  You can't hear what someone else is saying when you try to put your words in their mouth.

 

Fencing & Swashbuckling as Armor.

D20 Modern Toon PC Race.

Mecha Pilot's Skill Challenge Emporium.

 

Save the breasts.

 For the life of me though, I don't understand why you'd grapple a weapon when you could just take it.




Disarming takes up an action. 

I can use my free hand to hold his weapon and stab him with my dagger.
If my enemy have parry or deflect, he can't use it because I am holding his weapon. 

 For the life of me though, I don't understand why you'd grapple a weapon when you could just take it.




Disarming takes up an action. 

I can use my free hand to hold his weapon and stab him with my dagger.
If my enemy have parry or deflect, he can't use it because I am holding his weapon. 



Admittedly though, you get no bonus for that in D&D.  Anything you could do to give yourself that bonus would really cost you an action of some sort.

There are a great many problems that can be circumvented by players and DMs having a mature discussion about what the game is going to be like before they ever sit down together to play.

 

The answer really does lie in more options, not in confining and segregating certain options.

 

You really shouldn't speak for others.  You can't hear what someone else is saying when you try to put your words in their mouth.

 

Fencing & Swashbuckling as Armor.

D20 Modern Toon PC Race.

Mecha Pilot's Skill Challenge Emporium.

 

Save the breasts.


Well, it's only grappling if you're taking control of the grabbed item/person.  Just maintaining physical contact with something shouldn't require an action if you aren't trying to control it.

But that's not what we are talking about since TheOneWhoCallCrow was talking about str vs str checks. Not sure why you'd hold a weapon and not control it, since it could still hit you.

For the life of me though, I don't understand why you'd grapple a weapon when you could just take it.


Sometimes you can't take the weapon.  Consider the situation differently.  Imagine if the weapon and enemy in question wasn't a spear wielded by a humanoid enemy.  Instead, imagine if it was a necromancer's skeletal minion with a sword grafted to it's arm bones.
yep, that'd be grapple. Why would it be different from grabbing a bulls horns to grapple it?


Well, it's only grappling if you're taking control of the grabbed item/person.  Just maintaining physical contact with something shouldn't require an action if you aren't trying to control it.

But that's not what we are talking about since TheOneWhoCallCrow was talking about str vs str checks. Not sure why you'd hold a weapon and not control it, since it could still hit you.


Well, you don't need to try to control the weapon until they're trying to hit you with it.  Which is the reason for maintaining physical contact with it.

For the life of me though, I don't understand why you'd grapple a weapon when you could just take it.


Sometimes you can't take the weapon.  Consider the situation differently.  Imagine if the weapon and enemy in question wasn't a spear wielded by a humanoid enemy.  Instead, imagine if it was a necromancer's skeletal minion with a sword grafted to it's arm bones.

yep, that'd be grapple. Why would it be different from grabbing a bulls horns to grapple it?


Well there is a difference.  A grapple can lead to a pin.  Just grabbing the bull by the horns for deflection won't.  Also, a grapple reduces the opponent's speed to 0.

There are a great many problems that can be circumvented by players and DMs having a mature discussion about what the game is going to be like before they ever sit down together to play.

 

The answer really does lie in more options, not in confining and segregating certain options.

 

You really shouldn't speak for others.  You can't hear what someone else is saying when you try to put your words in their mouth.

 

Fencing & Swashbuckling as Armor.

D20 Modern Toon PC Race.

Mecha Pilot's Skill Challenge Emporium.

 

Save the breasts.

 For the life of me though, I don't understand why you'd grapple a weapon when you could just take it.




Disarming takes up an action. 

I can use my free hand to hold his weapon and stab him with my dagger.
If my enemy have parry or deflect, he can't use it because I am holding his weapon. 


Why would they be unable to parry, deflect? You are just holding the weapon NOT controling it via grapple/disarm. Second, they can always parry with an unarmed attack so the move is meaningless there. Add to that the fact that those are PC abilities and you most likely will not see them use against you.

Well, it's only grappling if you're taking control of the grabbed item/person.  Just maintaining physical contact with something shouldn't require an action if you aren't trying to control it.

But that's not what we are talking about since TheOneWhoCallCrow was talking about str vs str checks. Not sure why you'd hold a weapon and not control it, since it could still hit you.


Well, you don't need to try to control the weapon until they're trying to hit you with it.  Which is the reason for maintaining physical contact with it.

But you'd need to take an action to get any use out of this, so again, what is the point. The only way you get to do something like a reaction would be to ready an action and that takes your action up before hand, making the stab them and hold their weapon undoable.

For the life of me though, I don't understand why you'd grapple a weapon when you could just take it.


Sometimes you can't take the weapon.  Consider the situation differently.  Imagine if the weapon and enemy in question wasn't a spear wielded by a humanoid enemy.  Instead, imagine if it was a necromancer's skeletal minion with a sword grafted to it's arm bones.

yep, that'd be grapple. Why would it be different from grabbing a bulls horns to grapple it?


Well there is a difference.  A grapple can lead to a pin.  Just grabbing the bull by the horns for deflection won't.  Also, a grapple reduces the opponent's speed to 0.
I don't see the difference. Grabbing it's horns is grabbing it's horns. You either control them with some kind of action/check or you have no say in what those horns do. You can't have your cake and eat it too. You either spend the action to do something or you don't get any benefit.

 Second, they can always parry with an unarmed attack so the move is meaningless there.



You have to be wielding a melee weapon or a shield. Plus, why would you try to parry it with
your arms? Are you trying to lose a limb or something?


Well, it's only grappling if you're taking control of the grabbed item/person.  Just maintaining physical contact with something shouldn't require an action if you aren't trying to control it.

But that's not what we are talking about since TheOneWhoCallCrow was talking about str vs str checks. Not sure why you'd hold a weapon and not control it, since it could still hit you.


Well, you don't need to try to control the weapon until they're trying to hit you with it.  Which is the reason for maintaining physical contact with it.

But you'd need to take an action to get any use out of this, so again, what is the point. The only way you get to do something like a reaction would be to ready an action and that takes your action up before hand, making the stab them and hold their weapon undoable.


If we assume that the rules have covered every option, then yes you'd be correct.  Crow proposed an improvised action, I would adjudicate it as I have already said, which means getting a reaction for a reason not specified in the current how to play pdf.  I'm a witch!  Burn me! 

There are a great many problems that can be circumvented by players and DMs having a mature discussion about what the game is going to be like before they ever sit down together to play.

 

The answer really does lie in more options, not in confining and segregating certain options.

 

You really shouldn't speak for others.  You can't hear what someone else is saying when you try to put your words in their mouth.

 

Fencing & Swashbuckling as Armor.

D20 Modern Toon PC Race.

Mecha Pilot's Skill Challenge Emporium.

 

Save the breasts.