Sunder -- The most useful useless feat

[Marshall]

Also, unless he has improved sunder the attack will generate an AoO. Use the AoO to trip the sunderer or grapple.

IceBear

No, Its just Sunder that removes the AoO. ImpS doubles the damage!!

And last I checked a bow wasnt a 'trip' weapon, so unless you want your 'unarmed strike' AoO to provoke an AoO, no go. Grapple is even worse and disarm is impossible.

E-B : Who needs rogues? One rank in tumble is a non-exclusive skill, Two skill points and ANY character is an unstoppable juggernaut.

OK, thats a little much. But truly, 2 SP for any class lets you waltz right thru up to 4 ranks of 'protection'.

Aid another? OK youve added 2 to his AC or his attack roll. By the rules the only thing you could do to try to block an attack.

Cover? Get in the way? Doesnt do any good. To grant cover you have to be adjacent to the target, 5 foot step either way and youre irrelevant. See Tumble above for the rest.

And yes your allies could make a Sunderer hurt After the attack, but the Sunder still has already succeded.

 

[Darklone]

I'll grant that it's quite difficult when you're facing a party of rogues. It's quite difficult to keep a group of rogues from doing anything. However, when facing groups of fighters or groups of monster, or spellcasters using touch spells, it's quite possible to protect your fellow party members.

Good stuff about staying between the archer and the enemies. Though it gives them cover.

I admit that it's a bad idea usually in dungeons, but my players don't put their archers closer than 80ft to the enemies. IMHO archers who stay within 30ft to an enemy to make use of sneak attacks and PBS are just suicidal.

That idea to allow the PC to take the damage to the weapon himself: like it.

But I still think: Put archers on trees, rocks or somewhere else where noone can get close to them.

 

[tburdett]

Good stuff about staying between the archer and the enemies. Though it gives them cover.

I admit that it's a bad idea usually in dungeons, but my players don't put their archers closer than 80ft to the enemies. IMHO archers who stay within 30ft to an enemy to make use of sneak attacks and PBS are just suicidal.

That idea to allow the PC to take the damage to the weapon himself: like it.

But I still think: Put archers on trees, rocks or somewhere else where noone can get close to them.

I instituted the reflex save rule because the mere threat of a sunder attack prevented any one from wanting to play an archer character.

That's not necessarily a bad thing, but two of the players had expressed an interest and then decided not to when they realized how easy it is to attack and destroy a bow.

They had both played archer type characters in a previous 1E/2E campaign and hoped to give it a go under the new rules. This change seemed to be the best way for us to handle it.

We've been using the rule for about 6 months now and it hasn't caused any problems for us.

This rule and the +1 weapon special ability mentioned earlier (Unbreakable) work well together.

With this pair of rules in place I no longer have any qualms about attempting to sunder their weapons.

 

[IceBear]

I'm getting a little sick of this topic. Answer me this question Marshall - what's the motive behind wanting to change sunder? Are you having a *real* problem with it in your game or does it just look bad on paper to you. If it's the 1st do what you have to, but if it's the second then there are just many, many examples of this on the board where in practice it isn't an issue.

I'm sorry I forgot to look up the Sunder feat, but you *can* trip someone without a trip weapon without provoking an AoO.

Trip an opponent [Varies][AoO: No]

A combatant can try to trip an opponent as a melee attack. A combatant can only trip an opponent who is one size category larger than a combatant, the same size, or smaller.

Making a Trip Attack: Make a melee attack as a melee touch attack. If the attack succeeds, make a Strength check opposed by the defender's Dexterity or Strength check (whichever ability score has the higher modifier). A combatant gets a +4 bonus for every size category he is larger than Medium-size or a -4 penalty for every size category he is smaller. The defender gets a +4 stability bonus on his check if he has more than two legs or is otherwise more stable than a normal humanoid. If a combatant win, a combatant trip the defender. If a combatant lose, the defender may immediately react and make a Strength check opposed by a combatant's Dexterity or Strength check to try to trip a combatant.

A tripped combatant is prone. Standing up from prone is a move-equivalent action.

A combatant may make a trip attack against a mounted opponent. The defender may use his Ride skill in place of his Dexterity or Strength check. If a combatant succeed, a combatant pull the rider from his mount.

This attack form substitutes for a melee attack, not an action. As a melee attack, it can be used once in an attack or charge action, one or more times in a full attack action, or even as an attack of opportunity.

I know the rules on trip are muddied with the Sage's ruling on unarmed attacks, but that's what's in the SRD and the PHB. An actual unarmed *strike* would cause an AoO, but not an unarmed trip.

I also have this rule clarification in my notes at home:

Trip Attacks: It was officially clarified by Sean Reynolds and Skip Williams. The base Trip attack assumes you are making an unarmed touch attack. (It did not clearly state this in the PHB, but that is the official clarification.).
Certain "Trip" weapons can also be used to make a Trip attack, these are noted in their descriptions.
The advantages to using a Trip weapon are several: You can drop the weapon to avoid being tripped in return, and you can use Weapon Focus and the weapon's enhancement bonuses on your melee touch attack when tripping.

So unless the oppoent has the Sunder feat you can attempt to trip him to avoid the attack. If he has the Sunder feat, well, that's what feats are for so good for him.

IceBear

 

[IceBear]

I instituted the reflex save rule because the mere threat of a sunder attack prevented any one from wanting to play an archer character.

That's not necessarily a bad thing, but two of the players had expressed an interest and then decided not to when they realized how easy it is to attack and destroy a bow.

They had both played archer type characters in a previous 1E/2E campaign and hoped to give it a go under the new rules. This change seemed to be the best way for us to handle it.

We've been using the rule for about 6 months now and it hasn't caused any problems for us.

This rule and the +1 weapon special ability mentioned earlier (Unbreakable) work well together.

With this pair of rules in place I no longer have any qualms about attempting to sunder their weapons.

The problem with that house rule is that it makes sunder THE attack choice. If you're having a hard time hitting someone keep trying to sunder their weapon - if they make the reflex save you do damage to them and if they don't you do damage to their weapons I'm sure that your group is using it as you intended it and not abusing it like that, but other people might not be so inclined to follow the spirit of the rule.

IceBear

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

Really?!? Short of the devoted defender there is no way to prevent Villain A from attacking Weakling B.[/B]

You are correct there is not foolproof method to protect someone.

But even if you have a DM that hasn't houseruled Tumble, your little Tumbling Sunder maneuver will generate 2 to 4 AoOs when used against a properly protected archer. That warrior will need to a pretty tough cookie not to be Tripped, Grappled, Disarmed, or Dead, or all of the above.

That's a pretty risky maneuver. If a DM chooses to have NPCs act suicidally in order to screw PCs over, I think the real problem is not the Sunder rules.

I do have issues with the Sunder mechanics, but what you are describing is not one of them. YMMV.

 

[Marshall]

I'm getting a little sick of this topic. Answer me this question Marshall - what's the motive behind wanting to change sunder? Are you having a *real* problem with it in your game or does it just look bad on paper to you. If it's the 1st do what you have to, but if it's the second then there are just many, many examples of this on the board where in practice it isn't an issue.

Actually, we have, by mutual consensus, banned it.

Why? Because if someone spends the 2-3 feats necessary to do it, it becomes the attack of choice.

But even if you have a DM that hasn't houseruled Tumble, your little Tumbling Sunder maneuver will generate 2 to 4 AoOs when used against a properly protected archer. That warrior will need to a pretty tough cookie not to be Tripped, Grappled, Disarmed, or Dead, or all of the above.

Go ahead with all your grapples and disarms, just give the Tumbler attacks on the way past...

And all that is based off the others saying that you can protect an Archer to prevent Sunder attempts on his Bow. I just listed a bunch of ways to bypass any "protection". YMMV

 

[IceBear]

Obviously our mileage does differ. No one in my group uses sunder and I don't use sunder on them. Why? There's been no need. If it was that much of a problem for your group then by all means ban it. My last question is - did you *have* people using it all the time or did you look at the rules and say "Oh, if someone gets these few feats they would use sunder all the time"?

IceBear

 

[Krail Stromquism]

FEATS Galore!

Well taking 2 or 3 feats to focus can make anything the attack of choice!

What about Disarming people? Take a few Feats and your gonna be stripping people of their weapons all the time!

Thats 1000 times better than breaking thier weapons, you can take it and kill them with it!

Try doing that to a PC! It REALLY gets them angry.

Also, your assuming the attacker has all these Feats that'll make him unstopable, what about the Archer and his/her defenders? DO they have feats or what? Do they use tactics? Couldnt defenders Ready attacks and try and grapple/trip/disarm anyone that comes near?

Just about every Feat has an Opposite.

As for Tumble-mania. Are you using Armor Check Penalties or Weight/encumberance penalties? No it isnt anywhere near automatic for tumblers to go thru theatened areas.

OH! heres a great House Rule, for your Tumble checks, have it be the base # (10 or 15) plus the BAB of the creature whos Threatened Area you are going thru. For creatures whos areas overlap use the highest and +2 for each additional creature. Then you could have Combat Reflexes give an additional bonus to those checks, +1 or +2. must write this down...

I dont think its Sunder thats broken but the tactics surrounding its use, Marshall.

Playtest some different stuff out. Use Opposed Tumble checks. Use Readied Attacks for Defenders. Give the Archer Improved Unarmed Strike. Give the option to the defender to Drop thier weapon. Use different Materials in the construction of Weapons. Blah Blah Blah! theres a Ton of things you can do and try!

Sunder works. Now Make it work for YOU!

 

[IceBear]

He does have a point with Tumble - even if the Tumble check fails the character still gets to move to where he wants.

My tumble houserule (which I can't remember the details of right now ) actually has a chance where the tumbler may have his movement stopped if he fails the tumble check.

IceBear