So disarming... how does it work exactly? I have a battlemaster in my group who took the manuver and I am not exactly sure how it works. We have been running it that attacks against a disarmed oppenent have advantage (unless they have a shield), and it is an action for a creature to pick up a weapon. Is this even close to RAW? I can't find it in my PHB.
Attacks against an unarmed opponent are not with an advantage. First, no one is defenseless while unarmed. Unarmed Strike (a.k.a punching people) can be used. Second, running an advantage on attack rolls against unarmed opponents would absolutely DESTROY casters.
Edit: I want to further this comment.
A general guideline for advantage/disadvantage: the advantage/disadvantage is on the d20 roll, it is not an advantage/disadvantage in combat. This is a subtle but meaningful distinction. The advantage/disadvantage is granted because of a conditional state.
Look at the conditional states in the book for guidance on the threshold needed for an advantage/disadvantage is granted. Being disarmed isn't on that level.
There are very few rules about disarming in the PHB. I think giving attacks against them Advantage may possibly be making that too much of a powerful tactic. Also, note that anyone proficient with Simple Weapons is also proficient with unarmed attacks, so there's always a back-up option.
Take a look at "Other Activity on Your Turn" on page 190 of the PHB - normally, you can interact with one object on your turn without costing any movement or action. However, the DM is free to rule that picking up a dropped weapon while an enemy is near you and trying to attack you is sufficiently difficult as to require an action. Different groups may run this differently. Most foes of even low to moderate intelligence should also have a back-up weapon such as a dagger, which they can definitely draw for free as part of their movement or attack action according to the rules.
Of course, a very effective tactic may be to spend an action (or one of your attacks, maybe, if you get multiple per round) kicking the foe's dropped weapon away from them after you've disarmed them, and keep doing this to any back-up weapons. Then they'd risk opportunity attacks if they move away to go get it. Faced with that much of a tactical disadvantage, some weaker foes might even just surrender.
Mostly agree with what you've said - and am eagerly awaiting the critical miss of someone attempting to kick a sword away and ending up with a sword in their foot.
As written - the ability is kind of weak unless you're stripping off their shield - since I believe it takes an action to re-don a shield, and in the meantime their AC is reduced by 2. Other items they may be holding could also be useful (Torch into water, blinding them... or maybe an environmental affect... dropping a sword into fast moving water where it is hard to find).
Something that is open to interpretation, but I think would be doable given you can interact with objects in/on the border of an adjacent square (door), would be to disarm the opponent, and using your own (or someone else's) interact with object to pick up their weapon in a free hand. Kicking a small stone is also an example of an item interaction - so kicking a sword may qualify as an interact with an object as well.
I'm 100% in agreement with this. The item interaction freebie goes both ways.
Picking up a weapon from the ground counts as "free" interacting with an object in tandem with a move/action.
I don't have the PHB handy, but I don't believe a disarmed foe would receive any other issue other than that they've now got to pick up their weapon/shield/held item.
While it's true that picking up something in tandem with your movement/action is easily permissible, I would just like to point out that kicking away the weapon is also something that would be in line with the free interactions as well, thus the attacker could kick the weapon away after disarming the opponent. This makes it MUCH more useful.
Yep - I actually noted that in my response to someone else on here - completely agree.
Wouldn't the weapon still be in the opponent's square though?
Well, yeah, but characters routinely interact with things that are in another square around them. That and it's not entirely unreasonable to assume that if they're close enough within their square for you to knock their weapon out of their hand that it would also be close enough for you to interact with.
Is it the superiority dice mechanic that isn't clear, or something else?
Weapons don't confer any advantage in terms of defense, so not having a weapon can't be treated as a disadvantage (RAW, at least). Presumably a creature's ability to parry is comparable to their ability to dodge, and not holding a weapon doesn't make their armor any less effective.
This can be done as part of movement or an action. That being said, I would rule that the battlemaster would be able to kick a weapon away as part of a movement or action, assuming they hadn't already interacted with an object on their turn.
From what I'm seeing, it's difficult, but doable RAW to deny an enemy their weapon.
'Shove a Creature' bit on pg 195: "Using the Attack Action, you can make a special melee attack to shove a creature, either to knock it prone or push it away from you. If you're able to make multiple attacks with the attack action, this replaces one of them." The push from this is 5ft, and would be one of your attacks, so you could use the Disarm maneuver to strip them of a weapon and knock them away from it, dealing your superiority die as damage. You'd have to make an opposed Athletics check to succeed though. You could then stand over the weapon, and DM permitting, continue your attacks.
There's also using the Pushing Attack maneuver as a followup to the disarm attack, pushing the creature 15ft away instead. It'd use up an extra superiority die and use up 2 of your attacks at full damage, but you could stand between the enemy and his weapon.
I'd rule that the weapon is still in the opponent's square so out of (convenient) reach. If someone could shove the opponent away they could pick up their weapon/kick it alway provided they could walk into their square.
I think the question is, once the target has been disarmed, how does that affect their ability to defend themselves, since they've got nothing to parry with? There's no RAW to say it makes any difference. The other question was whether or not it takes an action to pick up the weapon, which I believe is open to interpretation. See my other comment on this thread.
Parrying is only one way to avoid getting hit. Unless there is an ability that specifically references parrying as a combat option it shouldn't really have any negative impact on defence. In such a case they couldn't use that ability.
It's a good ability for reducing the lethality of the target's attacks of opportunity or preventing an enemy from using potions and stuff. It isn't limited to weapons.
I like the idea of kicking a disarmed weapon away by spending half your movement. Possibly a DEX check to determine where it goes (to an ally, off a cliff, etc.) The opponent is forced to draw a lesser-dmg weapon or risk an OA to retrieve it.