Sunder/Improved Sunder

Astalanya

First Post
Is sunder attack too strong in your campaigns/games?

This question came up in my gaming group, so let me paraphrase:

Player said:
In my opinion, sunder attack -- not to mention improved sunder -- is very powerful. A character with a two-handed weapon and a decent strength, common with just about any fighter, can snap just about any mundane or magic weapon in 1 or 2 attacks. The rules make it painfully simple to just walk up to an opponent, declare a sunder, and just whack their sword/staff/wand, etc. It's fine for breaking the monster's weapon but used against other players and such [in a mixed campaign], this ability becomes really strong.

I suggest making a sunder attack a full attack action. Or something, it's just too strong as it is.

When you think about a character who does a sunder attack over and over vs an opponent, the opponent eventually runs out of weapons and ways to defend himself unless he's a caster. Higher level battles shouldn't be decided by who can sunder the other's weapon more efficiently.

I should make a note or two here for clarity:
1. Monks are surpassingly rare in our campaign world. Most people don't have Imp Unarmed Strike.
2. Our campaign has a mix of evil, good and neutral characters.

Sunder attack seems pretty strong; march up, swing, snap. I'm not sure if it needs to be adjusted, and if so, how to properly do that. Thoughts?
 

log in or register to remove this ad


Infiniti2000

First Post
I don't see it as being too strong. It takes away a weapon, sure, but any character without a backup weapon or other options is not thinking things through. What about comrades?

I certainly wouldn't develop any houserules based on PvP though. That's a mistake.
 

Artoomis

First Post
nittanytbone said:
Ack! Why would you ever want to sunder? It destroys the treasure!! :)

That, indeed, is the truth.

This is similar to training that horse-back sabre-wielding combatants got to attacks the rider - not the horse. A trained horse is valuable! Just as a captures weapon is valuable.
 

darthkilmor

First Post
Sunder doesnt really seem that bad. Getting through the hardness of stuff would be the more difficult thing for most weapons, not really going to get done with one attack typically.

Mentioning the monk thing though, can you sunder a monk's unarmed strike?(I'm sure its no but i dont know why and, the idea just seems funny to me) :O
 

Nebulous

Legend
I'm up in the air about Sunder/Improved Sunder. On paper, it looks too easy to do. In pratice, i had an NPC attack a PC about 10 times in a row trying to Sunder his weapon. Never worked. NPC got himself killed trying it. But it terms of what is "realistic" (I know, i know, we're talking DnD here) i think actually sundering a weapon in medieval times was either a) an accident or b) result of a shoddy weapon. Deliberately doing it seems weird to me. But if the enemy's weapons are big, dangerous, and not worth loot $$, sundering round after round might be worth it.
 

frankthedm

First Post
Sunder is a valid tactic, and honestly it is not that bad against PCs unless they foolishly sell off every extra weapon they find or always use thier best weapon against foes who are likly to use sunder.
 

Eloi

First Post
Players would generally rather Disarm - that way, the nice expensive weapon is loot, not busted scrap. :)
 

Infiniti2000

First Post
Either way, it's not scrap. The busted weapon can be rebuilt for half the price.
SRD said:
You can also mend a broken magic weapon, suit of armor, or shield if it is one that you could make. Doing so costs half the XP, half the raw materials, and half the time it would take to craft that item in the first place.
 

dcollins

Explorer
Astalanya said:
I suggest making a sunder attack a full attack action. Or something, it's just too strong as it is.

Actually, there's a good many of us that go by the letter of the "Actions in Combat" table where it lists Sunder as a Standard Action (not simply a melee attack). I agree that that feels about right.
 

Remove ads

Top