DM's. To sunder or not to sunder?

[KnowTheToe]

Sunder is a great and exciting aspect of combat if used rarely and in the right situation. PCs have to feel threatened on all fronts. If they cannot be harmed or their gear lost, why adventure. So many battles are ho hum for PCs that this sweet little tactic will make them sit up and pay attention.

 

[Shard O'Glase]

I don't like sunder. 2 reasons as a general rule it is a dumb tactic, though in some very specific situaitons it can be useful. And 2 it is far too easy. Weapons just break like glass, anything with a decent str snaps steel like twigs, I think that is utter lameness.(can't some up with more similies so I'll just say I never tried to break a steel sword before, so I can't say for sure, but metal and even wood is kinda tough to just break especially when it is wielded and not held rigid somehow.)

 

[evileeyore]

675 gp is expensive? It is a very cheap way to have effective backup weapons in the party.

Firstly according to the DMG its 700 gp. Secondly that is only a +2 enchantment. For me to waste my time casting it (let alone carrying it) it will need to be much more powerful, minimum +3, more like +4.

Now we are talking 900gp (+3) and 1,200 gp (+4) respectively.

A little bit more expensive... after I start spending that repeatedly, I would just rather have just purchased a back up weapon...

*unless you were refering to having your pet, err party cleric scribing them for less... Then hey if you can convince him to shed that excess exp he's carrying around more power to ya...


Editted to add: Oh yeah there was a point to this thread... Personally I approve of the sundering. Sunder away!

 

[Black Omega]

Sunder away, but make it a special tactic. It shouldn't be something the PC's face all the time. And it's not a good desperation tactic. It's much better as a 'first action, sunder weapon' as part of a planned strategy. And if you want to create a hated PC, have one that specifically uses sundering. Maybe they have a jitte or some other weapon well suited to breaking weapons.

And for a strong reaction the sunder doesn't even need to succeed. Just cracking a PC's beloved (Winonaaaaaaa!) will be enough to get a definite reaction.

 

[Oracular Vision]

Sunder if it is a good idea for the bad guys always, bad guys already at a disadvantage unless they have many character levels anyway. Sunder especially characters wielding magic bows and large melee weapons, those characters typically don't carry back-ups for themand they will have to think for a change.

 

[Frosty]

In a famous module my players encountered a big old earth elemental. In order to give my players a fighting chance I had the elm sunder rather than kill. The good thing was that I managed to destroy a weapon that was too good (due to misinterpretation of the rules) but the bad thing was sundering the dwarf's waraxe. After losing his axe he went suicidal and and opened every door in sight until he was killed by monsters. Suicide by monster, who knew?

 

[Zappo]

Sunder is boring, I prefer Mordenkainen's Disjunction...

 

[Lord Ben]

Yeah, but that's a 9th level spell and they're only 5th level PC's. That's kind of harsh.

I prefer the Earth elem route.

 

[Quickbeam]

The only reason that just a single PC of mine has feats like Sunder and Improved Trip is that our campaign rarely has us facing foes wielding weapons. I'm perfectly content roleplaying a character that isn't completely min/maxed or munchkined to the nth degree, but I'd prefer my feats to not be a total waste of time.

From a DM's perspective, there is no reason not to use feats like Sunder. IMO, it's the equivalent of poorly playing a dragon during an encounter with the party -- it cheapens everything. The game is meant to be challenging, and I want my group to feel like they've accomplished something when they prevail in an encounter.

 

[Katerek]

I as a DM have used Sunder to great effect on three separate occasions, and even though it was my players that suffered from the dickery-fest that ensued they totally loved it.

The first occasion was when the dwarf in the party made his first master work item. He whipped it out for it's first combat and the villain he was facing destroyed the shaft of the weapon. Not a permanent blow but it disabled the weapon for the combat. I didn't do it to be spiteful, in fact I had set a ready action and the poor dwarf just happened to be a target.

The second occasion was when they were facing down a group of evil monks. The paladin of the party, wielding a spear, rushes this monk. She disarms him, snaps the weapon in half, and then proceeded to beat the dickens out of him with his form weapon-now-turned-beating sticks.

The third occasion was by a demon. The demon was gloating and laughing because they couldn't hurt him (thanks to DR). When one of the PC's finally did get through, the Demon was very surprised so he promptly destroyed the weapon.

The party eventually defeated the demon but not before he whomped the tar out of them. He is forver remember as "That demon that broke my weapon".

All of my players have given nothing but positive feedback on each occasion, because each circumstance "made sense".