Called Shot Disarms

[Tor]

Let's discuss how called shot strike rules work with disarms. Wasn't there something about stacking disarm bonuses on top of strike bonuses when you're doing a called shot to disarm a weapon?

[Damian Magecraft]

Let's discuss how called shot strike rules work with disarms. Wasn't there something about stacking disarm bonuses on top of strike bonuses when you're doing a called shot to disarm a weapon?

Not that I can recall.
AFAIK disarm bonuses are separate from strike rolls.
If someone can provide a book cite that refutes this notion I will stand corrected.

[drewkitty ~..~]

Let's discuss how called shot strike rules work with disarms. Wasn't there something about stacking disarm bonuses on top of strike bonuses when you're doing a called shot to disarm a weapon?

Not that I can recall.
AFAIK disarm bonuses are separate from strike rolls.
If someone can provide a book cite that refutes this notion I will stand corrected.

Unless there is something in DR I don't think the mechanics of the 'attacking disarm' is talked about in any of the books. All the text I've seen explains what it is, but does not stray into mechanics until it talks about using a disarm as a defensive move.

[Which is one of the many reasons I would like a fully fleshed out "Combat Book" which talks about the mechanics of each "move" and "type of action" that has been mentioned in any of the books.]

I've always listed the disarm bonus separate from the strike bonus. But has never used it before cause a majority of what I have played is rifts and 99% of the fighting in rifts is shooting modern weapons.

[Damian Magecraft]

I would (pure opinion here...)
Allow PP strike bonuses to apply to the disarm but the only other bonuses I would allow from additional sources would have to be clearly labeled as Disarm bonuses.

[Prysus]

Let's discuss how called shot strike rules work with disarms. Wasn't there something about stacking disarm bonuses on top of strike bonuses when you're doing a called shot to disarm a weapon?

Not that I can recall.
AFAIK disarm bonuses are separate from strike rolls.
If someone can provide a book cite that refutes this notion I will stand corrected.

Greetings and Salutations. Like everyone else, I'm not sure if there's anything solid on this one. However, I'll provide a couple of references that may imply you add in your strike bonuses.

1: RUE; page 345: "Roll a disarming strike to attack as usual ..." Now it says "as usual" which implies things stay the same. The wording in PF2 is also different. PF2, page 45 says: "A disarming strike requires the usual strike roll ..." Now this one goes so far as to say "usual strike roll." Was RUE rewritten to clean this up (indicating it's "disarm" strike bonuses only)? Just a random change? Other?

2: Rifts New West; Gunfighter, page 91: "+3 to disarm on a 'called' shot ..." Now does this imply you add in your bonuses for a "Called Shot"? Not only does this add in the bonuses from Sharpshooting, but also from the W.P. (which is basically ALL of the strike bonuses at the time of the book's printing). Sure looks like it does to me. However, I was never really certain either. Also, could this be an exception instead of the usual rule? I don't know.

For the record, I've always played it as Disarm bonuses were separate from normal Strike bonuses. However, I'm actually NOT sure about the rules. I just wanted to provide the quotes that came to mind, and help others form their own conclusions on the material presented. Thank you for your time and patience, please have a nice day. Farewell and safe journeys for now.

[drewkitty ~..~]

1) Yep, all mushy words describing the attacking disarm w/o any examples or hard statements like "only using the PP and Disarm bonuses when making a disarm attack". And the disarm given as a h2h is a melee move.

2) You are reaching to make a rule from one specific class to cover everyone.
Why do I mention this....cause when I do the same with other things, EVERYONE tends to imply (or all but says) I'm crazy for trying the same with their followup posts in response to mine.
There is also that the "New West" book is Pre-RUE, and the modern weapons rules were changed in RUE.
[note: was only pointing out that he was reaching to stretch the rule, not that I disagreed with said reaching.]

[Tor]

Rather than remaking "Vampire Kingsdoms Revised", based on the naming structure of RUE, perhaps Palladium should just copy Marvel Comics and remake all their books with titles like "Ultimate New West" =/

Of course I'm not going to buy that because it's lame, it would be easier to just publish an "Ultimate World Books Errata" including any changes that need to be made, or better yet, include any changes to the World Books based on RUEL changes as free FAQ errata much like when something is left out or updated in later printings. A lot more efficient than cluttering Rifters or new versions of setting books with them.