Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Help me understand sunder
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Kinematics" data-source="post: 7887660" data-attributes="member: 6932123"><p>I'm working on building a vanguard character for a Starfinder game. As I've gone back and forth, I settled on an Aspect that provided the Improved Combat Maneuver (sunder) as the bonus feat (it was chosen for the Acrobatics bonus). I started looking into how viable it was to make use of the sunder maneuver, and I'm left puzzled and frustrated.</p><p></p><p></p><p>The character is being created at level 1, but I looked ahead at level 5 because I figured level 1 might just be underpowered without the Entropic Attunement bonus that allows adding Penetrating to the attack's properties. But no, it doesn't get any better.</p><p></p><p></p><p>We'll set up a level 5 Vanguard with Cascade Aspect (Sunder maneuver feat), Penetrating Entropic Attunement, and a Frost Maul for the sunder special (pretend it's level 5).</p><p></p><p>If he uses the sunder combat maneuver:</p><p></p><p>1) His to-hit will be +6 (+4 from the feat, +2 from the weapon) vs KAC+8, making it a check vs KAC+2. (I'll assume the basic attack is enough to make it a 50/50 hit chance vs normal KAC.) Then I can vaguely approximate this as dropping from a 50% chance to hit to a 40% chance to hit (or a 30% chance without the maul). That's already a significant penalty, and still requires a feat and special weapon just to make it "just a little bit" bad.</p><p></p><p>2) The average hardness of a weapon (p.409) is 5 + 2 * weapon/armor level. Assuming the enemy has a level 5 weapon to match the character, that's a hardness of 15. With the Penetrating Entropic Attunement, that's reduced by the attacker's weapon level (5), so we're at 10.</p><p></p><p>3) The Entropic Strike damage for a level 5 Vanguard is 1d6 + Con. Con at level 5 is likely 19, for a +4 bonus. The maximum possible damage that can be done by the Vanguard is 10 damage. The target weapon hardness reduces damage by 10. It is therefore impossible to ever do any damage with the sunder maneuver.</p><p></p><p>4) Even if something did manage to push the damage result into the net positive, the level 5 target weapon has 15 + 3*weapon level hit points. So for our level 5 weapon, that's 30 hit points. If I add an extra +2 Con augment and manage to roll max damage, I can now do 11 damage, reduced to 1 damage due to the weapon's hardness. So after <em>30</em> attacks (with a 30%-40% hit chance, and rolling max damage each time), I'd manage to finally break the opponent's weapon. Or, using the actual probabilities, it would take me an average of <em>450</em> attacks to break a level 5 weapon.</p><p></p><p>Compare with Entropic Grasp, a level 3 spell which can do 6d6 damage when attempting to sunder an object. That's an average of 21 damage, compared to the maximum of 10-11 (and average of about 8) for the Vanguard's attack. Even that would still take 5 casts to break a level 5 weapon, assuming the full 15 hardness applies its damage reduction. (If it doesn't, then only 2 casts.) </p><p></p><p></p><p>So, baseline, I have a crappy chance to do nothing. This seems beyond ludicrous.</p><p></p><p>Please tell me I'm missing something. Two of the Vanguard's Aspects provide the Improved Combat Feat (sunder), which means two of the Aspects might as well not give any bonus feat at all. Having two such Aspects also suggests that Paizo is leaning towards this being the more intended design goal for the Vanguard class, relative to the other available combat maneuvers.</p><p></p><p>Note: I'm aware it's easier to sunder non-weapon/armor objects, but that doesn't invalidate the issues with what seems the most likely intended use case.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Kinematics, post: 7887660, member: 6932123"] I'm working on building a vanguard character for a Starfinder game. As I've gone back and forth, I settled on an Aspect that provided the Improved Combat Maneuver (sunder) as the bonus feat (it was chosen for the Acrobatics bonus). I started looking into how viable it was to make use of the sunder maneuver, and I'm left puzzled and frustrated. The character is being created at level 1, but I looked ahead at level 5 because I figured level 1 might just be underpowered without the Entropic Attunement bonus that allows adding Penetrating to the attack's properties. But no, it doesn't get any better. We'll set up a level 5 Vanguard with Cascade Aspect (Sunder maneuver feat), Penetrating Entropic Attunement, and a Frost Maul for the sunder special (pretend it's level 5). If he uses the sunder combat maneuver: 1) His to-hit will be +6 (+4 from the feat, +2 from the weapon) vs KAC+8, making it a check vs KAC+2. (I'll assume the basic attack is enough to make it a 50/50 hit chance vs normal KAC.) Then I can vaguely approximate this as dropping from a 50% chance to hit to a 40% chance to hit (or a 30% chance without the maul). That's already a significant penalty, and still requires a feat and special weapon just to make it "just a little bit" bad. 2) The average hardness of a weapon (p.409) is 5 + 2 * weapon/armor level. Assuming the enemy has a level 5 weapon to match the character, that's a hardness of 15. With the Penetrating Entropic Attunement, that's reduced by the attacker's weapon level (5), so we're at 10. 3) The Entropic Strike damage for a level 5 Vanguard is 1d6 + Con. Con at level 5 is likely 19, for a +4 bonus. The maximum possible damage that can be done by the Vanguard is 10 damage. The target weapon hardness reduces damage by 10. It is therefore impossible to ever do any damage with the sunder maneuver. 4) Even if something did manage to push the damage result into the net positive, the level 5 target weapon has 15 + 3*weapon level hit points. So for our level 5 weapon, that's 30 hit points. If I add an extra +2 Con augment and manage to roll max damage, I can now do 11 damage, reduced to 1 damage due to the weapon's hardness. So after [I]30[/I] attacks (with a 30%-40% hit chance, and rolling max damage each time), I'd manage to finally break the opponent's weapon. Or, using the actual probabilities, it would take me an average of [I]450[/I] attacks to break a level 5 weapon. Compare with Entropic Grasp, a level 3 spell which can do 6d6 damage when attempting to sunder an object. That's an average of 21 damage, compared to the maximum of 10-11 (and average of about 8) for the Vanguard's attack. Even that would still take 5 casts to break a level 5 weapon, assuming the full 15 hardness applies its damage reduction. (If it doesn't, then only 2 casts.) So, baseline, I have a crappy chance to do nothing. This seems beyond ludicrous. Please tell me I'm missing something. Two of the Vanguard's Aspects provide the Improved Combat Feat (sunder), which means two of the Aspects might as well not give any bonus feat at all. Having two such Aspects also suggests that Paizo is leaning towards this being the more intended design goal for the Vanguard class, relative to the other available combat maneuvers. Note: I'm aware it's easier to sunder non-weapon/armor objects, but that doesn't invalidate the issues with what seems the most likely intended use case. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Help me understand sunder
Top