Help: Evil DM sundered my wand :(

[zlorf]

Hi,

Any suggestion in preventing this very expensive pasttime from happening to often, apart from the obvious, ie dont get into melee.

The DC to hit the wand was about 13 (DC10+Dex(+1)+object size(+2 )- not sure where this number came from))

So pretty easy, a normal wand has a hardness of 5 and 5 hitpoints and break DC of 16 I think, so its not that difficult to break.

The sunder rules dont really seems to take into consideration that the object is magical and probably still get some sort of saving throw, saving throws for objects seem to be only related to spell effects, ie fireball going off.


btw where does it list the size of object in the DM's or PHB for size modifier? maybe the wand is tiny and should of had a greater AC!

Is a wand consider a weapon? A leg of bar stool is, a poke in the eye with a wand could hurt, and lets say the wand was made of metal, it would curtainly hurt. If so maybe i should have got a AOO before the sunder. if so i could have accidently dropped the wand so it would be harder to hit.


Maybe I should just purchase wands made of better materials, heh?

Happy gaming
Z

 

[Caliban]

Hi,

Any suggestion in preventing this very expensive pasttime from happening to often, apart from the obvious, ie dont get into melee.

The DC to hit the wand was about 13 (DC10+Dex(+1)+object size(+2 )- not sure where this number came from))

Object size of Tiny is +2 AC.
Object size of Diminutive is +4 AC.
Object Size of Fine is +8 AC. (See Table 9-10 on page 166 of the PHB.)

Diminutive is the size of a scroll, while Fine is a potion bottle. I think a Wand would count as Diminutive. In the end, it's the DM's call.

In 3.0 they had a a few extra steps to the formula:

Item is held in hand: +5 AC
The user's dodge and deflection bonuses applied to the AC.

However, I don't see any mention of it in the 3.5 rules, which is a pity. I think they made a lot of sense.

I may have to start attacking Spell Component Pouches now that I know how easy they are to target.

 

[Obscure]

According to the RAW, you should get an AOO whenever someone makes a sunder attempt on you, whether they are sundering a weapon or a held/worn object (unless the attacker has Improved Sunder). The size modifier for Tiny is +2. Personally, I would allow the defender to make an opposed attack role if the item being sundered is held in the hand -- I think you've got a point about that (the RAW says otherwise). Saving throws shouldn't apply to physical attacks, though, IMHO.

 

[frankthedm]

So the DM is evil because an NPC used common sence?

 

[STARP_JVP]

Players always hate that. They like to feel like they're smart and everyone else is dumb. It really annoys them when an NPC does something smart. They tend to feel the DM is picking on them...

 

[dcollins]

Help: Evil DM sundered my wand ...

Everything the DM did was correct by the rules. None of your objections have support in the rules. In fact, in my PHB, "an evil sorcerer's wand" is actually the example given for using the "strike a held object" rules. From the (3.0) SRD, taken from the DMG:

Physical Description
A typical wand has an AC of 7, 5 hit points, a hardness of 5, and a break DC of 16.

- Sizes are in PHB Combat chapter, "Table: Size and AC of Objects". (Also start of MM.)
- Listed immobile AC shows it's officially calculated at 10 -5 (No Dex) +2 (Tiny size).
- Combat blows never generate saving throws; all durability is listed via AC and hp, above, and takes into account any magical qualities.
- A wand is not a weapon, because it is not listed as such under Equipment or anywhere else. No AOO (under 3.5 rules, if you're unarmed).

 

[zlorf]

Evil DM

So the DM is evil because an NPC used common sence?

No, the title is a bit tongue in cheek and not to be taken seriously, maybe i should have thrown in a few to make it abit more obvious.

I was mainly looking for an advantage the next time it happened, apparently the 3.5 rules on sundering are alot easier that in 3.0. I thought it was a good move by the DM and didnt even question the rules, i was happy to look them up later

Though he does come from New Zealand so maybe theres some truth in the title. Not from NZ are you?

Z

 

[zlorf]

Help: My Friendly NZ DM sundered my wooden wand

Everything the DM did was correct by the rules. None of your objections have support in the rules. In fact, in my PHB, "an evil sorcerer's wand" is actually the example given for using the "strike a held object" rules. From the (3.0) SRD, taken from the DMG:



- Sizes are in PHB Combat chapter, "Table: Size and AC of Objects". (Also start of MM.)
- Listed immobile AC shows it's officially calculated at 10 -5 (No Dex) +2 (Tiny size).
- Combat blows never generate saving throws; all durability is listed via AC and hp, above, and takes into account any magical qualities.
- A wand is not a weapon, because it is not listed as such under Equipment or anywhere else. No AOO (under 3.5 rules, if you're unarmed).

Not even one Objection?

Thanks, for the info, I did have a good look through the books, might be able to convince the DM the next wand is diminitive (scrolls and wands to me look like they could be a similiar size. If i remember correctly the DM rolled a 20 and probably backed it up, so the wand was going to take 2d8 damage + str , actually not sure whats rolled.

- Not all weapons are listed under Equipment, you can usually improvise most items into weapons at -4 to Attack, but yes a wand is streatching it abit, if i do say myself

Zlorf

 

[Tiberius]

While inconvenient, a sundered wand is not a total loss. If I remember correctly, damaged magic items may be repaired by those with the appropriate feats for half the cost of creating the item in the first place.

 

[Shin Okada]

Try not to be in melee with enemies. Basically, if a party caster is in melee with strong enough melee combatant, that is the tactical fault of the PC party.

And, if your opponent sunder and break your wand, think like this; it is better than your own body