Of those magick extra hands

[Carnage]

Sounds like everyone's problem with it is -only- that the disarmer's hands might be full.
So does anyone see any problem with it if the disarmer sheaths a weapon,emotes what they are doing and then picks up the dropped weapon?
It would give the one disarmed more time to pick up their dropped weapon and solve the problem of the disarmer's hands being full.

Nope, I don't.

[SpyGuy]

Sounds like everyone's problem with it is -only- that the disarmer's hands might be full.
So does anyone see any problem with it if the disarmer sheaths a weapon,emotes what they are doing and then picks up the dropped weapon?
It would give the one disarmed more time to pick up their dropped weapon and solve the problem of the disarmer's hands being full.

Nope, I don't.

I agree with Carnage and jhunter here.  If someone sheathes the weapon they free up their hand and then are able to get anything on the ground.  If code supported this it would definitely be more realistic and balanced IMO.  In addition, emoting this out would go that extra step and in my mind would be able to perfectly justify the practice in most cases.

Sadly this doesn't seem to be the case as it is.

[John]

So does anyone see any problem with it if the disarmer sheaths a weapon,emotes what they are doing and then picks up the dropped weapon?

If the disarmee can do it why can't the disarmer?

[Dracul]

So does anyone see any problem with it if the disarmer sheaths a weapon,emotes what they are doing and then picks up the dropped weapon?

If the disarmee can do it why can't the disarmer?

Uhh...because the disarmee just dropped that very weapon in a hand which is no longer full because of that.

...

*sigh*

[John]

Uhh...because the disarmee just dropped that very weapon in a hand which is no longer full because of that.

But if the disarmer has just sheathed a weapon, they too have a free hand. You might want to read what I quote next time.

[Dracul]

Uhh...because the disarmee just dropped that very weapon in a hand which is no longer full because of that.

But if the disarmer has just sheathed a weapon, they too have a free hand. You might want to read what I quote next time.

I'm not sure, I paused for a moment here to reread it a few times. Maybe it's how both are phrased as questions, but you seemed to be contrasting his statement.

*sigh* I'm confused now....

[John]

I was agreeing with him

[Dracul]

Ahh...well then.

I think because you put a question mark also it looked like you were disagreeing. Damn...I really am not in an intelligent mood tonight.

[sacac]

A certain creature does that, disarm snatch deal.

[Kukichiro]

Well, you know, if you -really- wanted it both ways you could...

1. Not allow people to pick up anything while in combat, or just increase the penalty so it discourages people more.

2. Code a new skill that branches from disarm, called like 'de-weaponize' or something and instead of disarm the person, you actually grab the weapon out of their hand. Maybe at low levels of the skill, you have to have a free hand to do it, but when you are a de-weaponize master you could have two weapons equipped, and flip the weapon into your inventory. (I could see myself catching a bat if I had a bat in each hand, provided it was coming towards me in a way that I would be ready for it, ie. I flipped it to myself)

heh, deweaponize. Me fail english.  

[John]

1. Not allow people to pick up anything while in combat, or just increase the penalty so it discourages people more.

Increase the penalty to it causing you to die? Cause unless you flee, your going to die if you have no weapon

[grog]

Sounds like everyone's problem with it is -only- that the disarmer's hands might be full.
So does anyone see any problem with it if the disarmer sheaths a weapon,emotes what they are doing and then picks up the dropped weapon?
It would give the one disarmed more time to pick up their dropped weapon and solve the problem of the disarmer's hands being full.

That's exactly what I want!!!!

[Dracul]

disarm victim
:slashes at %victim exposed wrist with a vicios sideswipe
The victim's weapon clashes to the floor
:raises both blades menacingly at ~victim as he leaps towards the downed weapon
get weapon
:smirks at ~victim as his foot pins the weapon to the road.

[Quirk]

disarm victim
:slashes at %victim exposed wrist with a vicios sideswipe
The victim's weapon clashes to the floor
:raises both blades menacingly at ~victim as he leaps towards the downed weapon
get weapon
:smirks at ~victim as his foot pins the weapon to the road.

Your coded actions are at variance with your emotes. If they score a couple of hits to drive you back, or bash you, are you going to drop the weapon to signify your foot being forced off it? Even if you intend to, the lag from being bashed won't let you. This would be abusive, IMO.

Quirk

[jhunter]

disarm victim
:slashes at %victim exposed wrist with a vicios sideswipe
The victim's weapon clashes to the floor
:raises both blades menacingly at ~victim as he leaps towards the downed weapon
get weapon
:smirks at ~victim as his foot pins the weapon to the road.


Your coded actions are at variance with your emotes. If they score a couple of hits to drive you back, or bash you, are you going to drop the weapon to signify your foot being forced off it? Even if you intend to, the lag from being bashed won't let you. This would be abusive, IMO.

Quirk

A. Very little chance their going to manage to hit you without a weapon and if they are good enough to, most likely you'd wouldn't have successfully disarmed them.

B. What's to stop you from dropping the weapon as soon as bash lag wears off?

[SpyGuy]

disarm victim
:slashes at %victim exposed wrist with a vicios sideswipe
The victim's weapon clashes to the floor
:raises both blades menacingly at ~victim as he leaps towards the downed weapon
get weapon
:smirks at ~victim as his foot pins the weapon to the road.


Your coded actions are at variance with your emotes. If they score a couple of hits to drive you back, or bash you, are you going to drop the weapon to signify your foot being forced off it? Even if you intend to, the lag from being bashed won't let you. This would be abusive, IMO.

Quirk

A. Very little chance their going to manage to hit you without a weapon and if they are good enough to, most likely you'd wouldn't have successfully disarmed them.

B. What's to stop you from dropping the weapon as soon as bash lag wears off?

I have to disagree with jhunter here, Quirk is right that your coded action and emotes disagree with one another.

A)  What if they pull out a second weapon or were dual wielding and then hit you?  Or when you used "get" what if they got the free hit off, wouldn't that signify they hit you and if in RL (likely) would have blocked you from standing on the weapon?

B) Its more a matter of your coded actions disagreeing and therefore not being IC.  I'm not going to say this is bad RP because the code doesnt allow any "guard weapon" stuff but it requires the person getting the weapon to pay close attention to the fight and drop the weapon the second he would realistically have his position moved.

[Quirk]

A. Very little chance their going to manage to hit you without a weapon and if they are good enough to, most likely you'd wouldn't have successfully disarmed them.

Very likely they have a second weapon or a shield in their off hand, or perhaps even might draw a backup weapon if they were disarmed of a two-handed weapon (a somewhat ludicrous notion in the first place, as I'm sure X-D would point out). Don't assume a successful disarm leaves your opponent defenceless.

B. What's to stop you from dropping the weapon as soon as bash lag wears off?

Provided you do not stand up before dropping the weapon, that would be somewhat adequate, although by delaying the recovery of the weapon you're getting a free strike or two at their expense from the prone position. If you do stand before dropping the weapon, you're negating the breathing space they should have had to pick the weapon up.

Quirk

[jhunter]

If they do draw another weapon or have another one, then doing any of this to begin with wouldn't make any sense, so I assumed they didn't.

I think it's rather ridiculous to think one would try this if the other had a weapon still.


Exactly my point, if you do it correctly. it's fair for both parties and somewhat interesting.