Sunder -- The most useful useless feat

[Henry]

Do I believe a DM should go out of his way to sunder the PC's weapons? No. That would be silly, counterproductive, and petty.

Do I believe the DM should not be afraid to sunder a PC's weapon? ABSOLUTELY!

If it makes sense for an NPC to try and break a PC's weapon (for instance, that weapon is the only thing hurting them, or if it is a famed bane weapon of your race, or if doing so will demoralize or hurt the PC's for some perceived slight), then I say go ahead and do it.

In my opinion, we often have too much attachment to personal belongs, real or imagined (myself included.) In the end, that sword can be reforged - that bow can be re-mended. Several instances of this are present in literature. It was an act often symbolizing the starting anew of a hero, or that hero fixing something that was wrong in their lives to begin with.

 

[Shard O'Glase]

I don't use sunder because I hate the rules for it. It is way too easy to break weapons under the rules, and until I come up with a rule I find better it isn't even in my game.

 

[Kai Lord]

I don't use sunder because I hate the rules for it. It is way too easy to break weapons under the rules, and until I come up with a rule I find better it isn't even in my game.

Exactly. In all but the most climactic of fights, Sunder is complete Metagame cheese on the part of the DM. It isn't cinematic to have weapons breaking left and right, it isn't cool, it isn't a prolific historical tactic, its just a cheesy way for people to use the "rules" to do something lame. And that in itself is lame. It should be noted that the original poster isn't necessarily a metagame cheeseball.

My primary character is a bow guy, and I'm weary to whip that thing out in melee combat, because that would honestly be something that a bad guy would think to take out. Big wooden bow that's kicking your ass within sword range. Sure take the thing out if you can.

But going chop-socky on the PC's prized melee weapons on a regular basis is just gay. Not "intelligent" on the part of the NPC's, because they don't know how cheap and easy the Sunder rules are, just lame on the part of the DM.

 

[hammymchamham]

I guess the one time I used sunder as a DM I had an awesome group, since they imediatly began to strategize how to kill the Vampire. The druid threw down his sword and used some spell (Flame blade I think). Someone else picked up the Scimitar and the wizard turned him invisible (improved I think). Needless to say, the barbarian and Paladin lost their swords, but the druid lost his life.

I was then a nice DM and gave them a reward from the city in repairing the weapons and reserecting the druid. But it was all worth it to see the lock from the Paladin as I told him his weapon lay shattered at his feet. I was nice because it was going to be one of the last sessions with that group.

The druid was completly fine at the time his charecter died (he pushed the wizard to cast Ivis. on the Paladin, not himself. ) No one tried to tell me I did wrong. I miss that group

 

[IceBear]

But going chop-socky on the PC's prized melee weapons on a regular basis is just gay. Not "intelligent" on the part of the NPC's, because they don't know how cheap and easy the Sunder rules are, just lame on the part of the DM.

I agree with this BTW. I wouldn't be using this tactic all the time, because that just would be too annoying. I was reserving my comments to the original poster in that I don't think he did anything wrong, and that it's a fair tactic to use when the situation calls for it. In my case, I've never sundered anyone's weapons yet because I've been able to do something equally "intelligent" in those cases.

IceBear

 

[Marshall]

What they were reacting to was a player that got so upset at the use of good tactics against him that it made his DM reluctant to use good tactics in the future (not necessarily sunder). I don't know the full situation that happened in game, but it seems to me that the only character the drow had to fear was the archer, and since the archer allowed the drow to get close enough to sunder the bow, then that seems like the smart thing for the drow to do.

No, The bitch is that its impossible to defend against someone who decides to Sunder.

Standing behind a rank of Fighters?
A: 1 rank in Tumble. Blow off the AoOs, they cant hurt you anyway! And even the failed roll allows you to waltz right up to the Archer.

AoO from the defender?
A: Not according to the rules, Bows dont threaten an area. Almost the stupidest rule I've seen. Running up to a guy with a loaded bow and he DOESN'T put an arrow between your eyes? Yeah, Right.

Opposed attack roll?
A: Lets see, A) Its a melee attack roll, so we go from the Ranged BAB to the generally lower Melee BAB. Ad-Attacker.
B) Using a bow in melee is automatically non-proficient so a -4 penalty to the defender. Ad-Attacker
C) Size doesn't matter. Unlike all the other special attacks weapon size has no bearing on the rolls. So the bows large size is aced out. Ad-attacker
D) Hands are irrelevant. Two handed weapon vs one handed, Who cares? Again the bow is aced out. Ad-attacker.

Takes alot to destroy something, right?
A: Hah! Were looking at probably hardness 5 and 2HP. A good +3 bow would still only take 13points to destroy. And thats if you rule that the attacker has to take out the haft, and not the lowly String that would at best be 7HP.

Nope. Sorry, its way to easy to Sunder anything. The rules are waayyy to lenient.

 

[IceBear]

No, that's the bitch NOW. The orignal bitch was whether or not he made the right decision.

As I've never sundered anyone's weapons I don't have any first hand experience on whether or not it's too easy, so I have nothing concrete to add to the CURRENT bitch. I'll leave that up to people who have the experience.

IceBear

 

[Storm Raven]

Takes alot to destroy something, right?
A: Hah! Were looking at probably hardness 5 and 2HP. A good +3 bow would still only take 13points to destroy. And thats if you rule that the attacker has to take out the haft, and not the lowly String that would at best be 7HP.

Umm, first off, you need a +3 weapon just to even have a chance to do this sort of thing. (And no, you can't attack the "string" because weapons, like other targets, do not have hit locations). So, you need a fairly powerful magical weapon just to pull this sort of thing off to begin with. Otherwise, you can't even hurt the bow.

And if you do have a powerful magic weapon, what's the big deal? You have a powerful magical melee weapon, that should could for something when it comes to breaking things.

Nope. Sorry, its way to easy to Sunder anything. The rules are waayyy to lenient.

For the average individual, it is virtually impossible to sunder a weapon. An average warrior with a longsword has no chance at even coming close to breaking his opponent's weapon. An average warrior with a greatsword has a modest chance to do some damage.

But we aren't talking about average warriors: we are talking about exceptional heroes and villains. They should be able to do extraordinary things, like break their opponents' weapons.

 

[Stalker0]

If your using sunder sparingly, then by all means go for it. Its part of life, suck it up.

For those who think sunder is too strong you could try having sunder damage only 3/4 your normal damage, and then maybe improved sunder 1.5 or so. I've used sunder before with one of my old characters and it really isn't cake to just do it, especially when I know when I could be doing damage. But I agree that once you get to improved sunder, it gets a little too easy.

Another thing you could try to prevent sunder from getting out of hand if you wish, is to say that the immunity to sundering that magic gives a weapon compared to a lower class weapon is seperate from the actual enhancement bonus. It is a part of the weapon, one which has to be dispelled seperately from the normal magic (or may be immune to dispels) and that cannot be granted by GMW.

That way the only way your +3 sword is getting broken is by another +3 sword, no spell help. And in that situation I would expect a climactic battle to be going on, and if your sword gets broken in that scenario then that makes for good roleplaying. It also makes sure that you don't fling around GMW to make your weapon invulnerable either.

 

[Stalker0]

One suggestion I would give to Dms who want to include sunder in their campaigns is to wean them into it. Have an orc or something try to sunder a +1 weapon with just a plain old battleaxe. you introduce sunder, your player feels kind of cool that he just took the attack like that, and it fits the "reality" or roleplaying

But from then on they should be aware that the possiblity for sunder exists, and when something gets broken, they'll have less reason to complain.