Can I hit weapon in hand using ray spell?

[Infiniti2000]

A warlock's EB can and it is treated as a ray. So there is at least some precedent for it.

From the FAQ

On the other hand, you can't sunder armor so that FAQ answer should be deleted.

It's a really bad idea to allow called shots. Maybe it's a problem inherent in the rules, but players would rather have their characters killed than lose their items. I strongly advise against allowing any such rules, particularly if you have to make them up or follow an ill-thought FAQ answer.

 

[irdeggman]

On the other hand, you can't sunder armor so that FAQ answer should be deleted.

It's a really bad idea to allow called shots. Maybe it's a problem inherent in the rules, but players would rather have their characters killed than lose their items. I strongly advise against allowing any such rules, particularly if you have to make them up or follow an ill-thought FAQ answer.

I do think that there is that single error in the FAQ but,

You can sunder a weapon - isn't that an equivalant action (you are basically doing a called shot)

You can use the shatter spell to shatter a single object for another example of something similar.

Hammer blast essence evocation makes the EB do normal damage to objects instead of half. Seems to me it would be pretty useless if it only worked on unattended objects.

 

[Infiniti2000]

You can sunder a weapon - isn't that an equivalant action (you are basically doing a called shot)

No, there's a huge difference between opposed attack rolls (after an AoO) and a touch attack at range, particularly a surprised touch attack (no Dex/dodge).

You can use the shatter spell to shatter a single object for another example of something similar.

No, shatter is irrelevant in my view. Perhaps I wasn't explicit, but I'm sure my intent was obvious. I was discussing magical items. Of course, you could counter with the suggestion of quickened dispel followed by a shatter, to which I say "bah". Shatter's great to destroy that non-magical plot device, but it's useless against the life-sucking greatsword wielded by the evil king.

Hammer blast essence evocation makes the EB do normal damage to objects instead of half. Seems to me it would be pretty useless if it only worked on unattended objects.

Pretty useless? Maybe I need to reread the warlock section to find what I'm missing, but are you really going to defend that position, i.e. that no unattended objects are damaged? Maybe only our group has a dynamic environment, but I'd have to say that unattended objects get damaged every single session and no one uses shatter and no one's playing a warlock. Quite frankly, I'd have to call your assertion hogwash.

 

[irdeggman]

On the other hand, you can't sunder armor so that FAQ answer should be deleted.

Looking this over again, I think you can sunder armor (even worn armor).

Sundering a Carried or Worn Object: You don’t use an opposed attack roll to damage a carried or worn object. Instead, just make an attack roll against the object’s AC. A carried or worn object’s AC is equal to 10 + its size modifier + the Dexterity modifier of the carrying or wearing character. Attacking a carried or worn object provokes an attack of opportunity just as attacking a held object does. To attempt to snatch away an item worn by a defender rather than damage it, see Disarm. You can’t sunder armor worn by another character.

Now if you can find something that specifically says otherwise please point me in that direction.


Armors have hardness and hit points listed in the table (obviously for a reason). (Hardness varies by material and hit points = armor bonus x 5)

 

[glass]

Ranged Sunder in Complete Warrior? The only problem I see is with the slashing, bludgeoning or piercing damage... since these rays aren't either.

I'd allow it with Ranged Sunder*, although it sounds like it is not strictly within the wording. I certainly would not allow it without -the FAQ is...er...being the FAQ again.

EDIT: * Maybe, depending on how balance the combination turned out. I'd have to read CW again first.


glass.

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

A held object has a well-defined touch AC. So why not?

 

[Infiniti2000]

Looking this over again, I think you can sunder armor (even worn armor).
...
Now if you can find something that specifically says otherwise please point me in that direction.

What about that last sentence you quoted is not clear? I can't fathom a clearer way to write "You can't do X."

 

[irdeggman]

Pretty useless? Maybe I need to reread the warlock section to find what I'm missing, but are you really going to defend that position, i.e. that no unattended objects are damaged? Maybe only our group has a dynamic environment, but I'd have to say that unattended objects get damaged every single session and no one uses shatter and no one's playing a warlock. Quite frankly, I'd have to call your assertion hogwash.

Unless applying one of the 2 shape evoactions (you can only have 1 essence and 1 shape on an EB at a time) - each EB attacks 1 specific target. Since it is a SLA it can only be used 1/round - so yeah this would make it pretty much useless to not be able to target a single object - or to only be able to target unattended objects and having to spend one of the limited number of evocations a warlock gets on the ability to do full damge with an EB to a single unattended object in a round. Said object still gets to apply its hardness to damage and its hit points must be whittled down.

 

[irdeggman]

What about that last sentence you quoted is not clear? I can't fathom a clearer way to write "You can't do X."

Doah, that is why I asked.

But the FAQ is not technically wrong since you can sunder armor - just not when worn. If it is carried it can still be done. And armor can't be "weilded".

 

[Deset Gled]

A held object has a well-defined touch AC. So why not?

Because the touch AC of an attended object is only well-defined for a melee attack. It is not defined for a ranged attack.