Sunder -- The most useful useless feat

[BLACKDIRGE]

Ran into a bit of a snag this Saturday with the sunder feat. My players were assaulting a drow outpost and in the heat of battle a powerful drow warrior used the sunder feat on the Arcane Archer's prized bow. Needless to say the player was none too pleased, but it made perfect sense for the situation.

The players were having a tough time with the drow warrior and the only character that was doing any considerable damage was the Arcane Archer. The drow warrior had a 16 int and I felt that his use of the sunder feat to remove the most obvious threat to his person was completely reasonable and in character. The player obviously disagreed.

So I am left with a feat that is highly useful but will never get used. I wont use it again because i dont want to start another hour long argument and players wont use it because they dont want to destroy good treasure even thought it would be "in character" for their charcters to use it sometimes.

Anyone else had trouble with this feat? Any suggestions?

 

[Xarlen]

Tell the player to stuff it.

The Drow did the right thing. He was surrounded, he was in the middle of a fighter, and the only person that was hurting him was the Archer. What'd he do? Take out the bow. Let's see his options:

He was Winning, and the Archer was the only one bothering him. So, he could have

1) Killed the archer.
2) Attacked his quiver.
3) Destroyed his bow.
4) Ran away.

1) He likely couldn't have killed the archer in one smack. The archer was still a threat, and thus, likely would have taken a five foot step back and kept on shooting, so the Drow is still in danger.
2) Hitting the quiver is hard, and depending on the character's setup, may have more then one quiver at his disposal.
3) Archer can no longer hurt him, thus he can focus on slaughtering everyone, and Keep the archer from doign the '5' step dance'.
4) He was winning.

You telling me that if a mage is casting spells at you, you're not going to drop an AMF on him, a Silence on him, Blind him, etc? Well, how come Fighters can't be treated the same way?

He can always have a new bow.

 

[Rackhir]

You have pretty much summed up the dilemma with sunder. No PC is ever going to enjoy having a magic item they have worked slaved and sacrificed for, shattered in front of them.

Magic items are repairable, so it does not need to necesarily be the end of the item if it's sundered. I guess it basically comes down to a question of how much do you want your characters to be able to keep items with what kind of hassle factor over getting them repaired.

Other options would be to add a magic item ability that renders an item immune to sundering (probably about a +1 I'd guess) or possibly just upping the effective + by 5 for purposes of sunder resistance (pretty much the same thing at non-epic levels). Possibly something like permitting coatings of adamantite to increase hardness (at a hefty fee).

Somebody suggested a feat for archers that would let the PC take the damage from the sunder attempt rather than the weapon. That's an option.

But without changing the game at least somewhat, there is really no good solution to the problem.

 

[Aluvial]

I used it when I first DMed a 3e adventure. The Sunless Citadel. I loved it. Smash! There goes your sword. Crack! Goodbye Axe.

Don't let your players be such cry-babies. Drow are nasty! I would have killed the player who got upset at something like that. Oh, boo hoo, your bow is gone. TOO BAD! Sounds like that PC needs to retire and open up an inn in more civilized lands. He could call it the....

need I say it?

Aluvial

 

[cloaker]

Sunder is a nasty feat, but if your players dont want to use it because they will lose the treasure in the end of the combat, thats thier problem.
Its a feat and bad guys and good guys can use it. If they had used it against the Drow, he wouldnt be able to sunder the bow.

I know its horrible to lose a magical weapon, but its not like in 2nd edition anymore, magical weapons are easly replaced or you can just use Magic Weapon and Greater Magic Weapon.

I had an Arcane Archer once and in a certain combat he was the only one capable of doing damage, the rest of the group covered me so my bow couldnt be sundered and that I wouldnt be killed. If only one guy does damage, you have to protect him.
I like the sunder feat, and I will make a fighter with it someday.

cloaker

 

[Kyramus]

First off, Sunder is a useful feat.
second, pc's that hate it. Oh well. Makes a very interesting enemy to occur again and again. The enemy the PC's love to hate.

Now to some discussion. Without breaking any magic itesm, the would would be inundated with weapons +1. A lowly soldier would be walking around with either a dagger +1 or a longsword +1. The value of magic items would be less. The things the pc's are carrying won't be as special since NOTHING gets broken.

Fireball, failed save. Nothing gets broken save your life. Hmmm that's weird.

Lightningbolt failed save, nothing gets broken, but you are burnt.

You enter a dungeon and find tons of daggers +1 untarnished by time. The kobolds use it as toothpicks and throwing weapons. There are so many around that they don't know what to do with them. Players take the daggers to sell and the merchant/weapon smith growls at them and tells them to get lost. Everyone in the village has one, or two, or even a sword or two.

Besides, makes the PC's work hard to earn their stuff back.

Break a weapon, get the gold, find someplace to replace or repair the weapon.

Drows are not easy pickings. Just like Dragons are not easy fights. If the PC's argue that they CAN'T do that. Tell them to read sunder, and what it says, and what it can do. AND THEN tell them that if they haven't taken it, then it's THEIR problem.

 

[Plane Sailing]

It's not even as if you *need* the feat - after all, it is a standard action to attack someones weapon - the feat just protects you from the AoO you would otherwise recieve...

 

[Aluvial]

Guy 1 runs up (without Sunder feat) to Guy 2 with a bow and tries to break the bow. Guy 2 tries to shoot him point blank with AoO. Guy 1 now gets the chance to hit with his AoO for Guy 2 using his bow in a threatened space.

Order of attacks:

Guy 1's AoO
Guy 2's AoO
Guy 1's Original attack.

Correct?

Aluvial

 

[Kae'Yoss]

It was perfectly normal behavior for a drow. They're supposed to be underhanded, evil bastards that do everything to win. (and they probably don't mind destroying that dirt cheap magic bow, since they're used to better stuff) Drow should be enemies whose mention causes the cleaning industrie's profits to go up.

Of course, don't let it be to hard for the Archer to get his bow repaired or another one, but a little time without the priced catch will be O.K.

 

[Plane Sailing]

Guy 1 runs up (without Sunder feat) to Guy 2 with a bow and tries to break the bow. Guy 2 tries to shoot him point blank with AoO. Guy 1 now gets the chance to hit with his AoO for Guy 2 using his bow in a threatened space.

Order of attacks:

Guy 1's AoO
Guy 2's AoO
Guy 1's Original attack.

Correct?

Aluvial

No, I don't think so. Guy 2 doesn't get an AoO with his bow, since it doesn't threaten an area. The event looks like this:

Guy 1 runs up (without sunder feat) to Guy 2 and attempts to break his bow.
Guy 2 watches helplessly (or makes an unarmed AoO such as Trip or Disarm, and thus incurs an AoO himself - unless he is part Monk or has unarmed combat feat)
If Guy 2 made a desparate attempt to keep Guy 1 off, then Guy 1 might get an AoO against him which he takes just before his actual attempt to break the item.