Quote Originally Posted by Tubercular Ox View Post
Okay, so, I disagree. I see exactly what should be there for Rich showing off that he found a legit way to give Malack a constrict attack, that develops Malack's relationship with Tarquin, and hints that Tarquin is a swordsage. And he chose to do it in a way that doesn't unduly interfere with the plot.

With those objectives achieved, what should he have done differently?
Attributing objectives to the author is not a piece of evidence.

Let's take a step back, and examine the sequence of events:

Step 1: Malack casts a spell that boosts his STR and BAB.
Step 2: Malack avoids an hammer strike.
Step 3: Malack grapples Durkon and disarm him successfully, stating he got training to make grappling more efficient, and that Durkon won't be able to get out of the hold.
Step 4: Durkon, still struggling to escape, tells Malack that neither of them can hurt each other now. Malack agrees the assertion would be correct, if not for his trump card.
Step 5: Malack demonstrates his trump card by dispelling Durkon's warding.

Do you disagree with this description of the events?

EDIT: Also, Malack is wrong about grapples, too, despite his expertise. He can totally choke out Durkon with or without any fancy maneuvers. So same question: Why should Malack being wrong about grapples favor a flavorless solution over the one that accomplishes the objectives listed above?
Because anyone with Crushing Weight of the Mountain, who is currently using Crushing Weight of the Mountain, would not be wrong about this.

Since Crushing Weight of the Mountain exist specifically to make "I'm grappling and can't hurt the other guy" something that won't happen.