Sundered Weapons are BROKEN!

[Xarlen]

Easy fix: No sundering of bows.

You're not helping.

Seriously. You telling me that a frilly little piece of wood that the girly elf is using is impossible to shatter with a melee weapon, but the Barbarian's GREATSWORD can be hit and broken?

And in the persuit of realism, we bridge the gap to obscenely off the wall.

 

[IceBear]

That's not exactly how it would work as you can take a 5ft step with a readied action. But if the archer double moved away and the fighter had readied an action to sunder the bow, then all the fighter could do was a partial action. The next round the archer shoots and moves back. Without the readied action, the bow could have been destroyed.

Anyway, I know the archer would eventually get pinned down and all the movement would help keep the archer from attacking, so I can see why this would work in some people's campaign. Since sundering is such a rare occurence in mine, I don't see the need of making it even harder to perform. That's all I was stating.

IceBear

 

[kreynolds]

You telling me that a frilly little piece of wood that the girly elf is using is impossible to shatter with a melee weapon, but the Barbarian's GREATSWORD can be hit and broken?

Damn right, and what's furthermore, the greatsword can be hit and broken WITH THE BOW.

 

[Xarlen]

Someone who isn't holding his bow in front of him and aiming it at you is taking the same maneuvers to prevent it from being hacked in two as he is to ensure you don't get to make a called shot at his head.

I gotta ask, how in the HECK are you going to stop an axe chop with a *Bow*? I don't see how you can deflect a hit with it.

Notice that it's Not a melee weapon. It's a ranged weapon. Thus, you do not threaten a square. What does this mean? You Cannot Defend Yourself From An Attack.

When you shoot a ranged weapon in melee, you are not guarded, because you can't use it to 'block an attack'. Thus you draw an AoO. So I don't see how you can defend using a bow to move out of the way, if by the rules, using a bow in melee Opens a hole in your defenses.

 

[Kai Lord]

I have to agree with Icebear on this situation, atleast in dealing with a Sunder-Bow.

Let us take the example of Billy the archer, and Mack the Knife. Mack is wielding a Big Ol' Axe. Billy is well... an archer, duh.

Billy is firing at Mack. Mack, the tank, does the obligatory 'Moving in to attack'. He's within threat range and attacks Billy, becuase Billy doesn't have a threat range, so no AoO.

Billy moves back five feet, and fires again. Mack decides to Sunder.

Mack moves up five feet, and readies an action to sunder Billy's Bow when he fires.

BUT, Billy can't fire at Mack so close without drawing an AoO period, so he moves back five feet, and shoots again. Mack's attempt is foiled.

Mack tries this again. He moves forward, readies an action, and Billy moves back, and fires again.

Rense, Repeat.

Moral of the story: Don't be stupid when fighting an archer. As for the archer, the Readied Sunder is great against those cocky Order of the Bow Initiates who like to fire in melee as well as epic archers with Combat Archery. Or any archer who thinks he's tough enough to just soak up an AoO.

 

[IceBear]

This is where the "no called shot" rule of D&D comes in. Someone who isn't holding his bow in front of him and aiming it at you is taking the same maneuvers to prevent it from being hacked in two as he is to ensure you don't get to make a called shot at his head. Sunder already is an exception to the called shot rules, making it a Readied Action prevents abuse.



Eh, House Rules are hardly "convert the masses" endeavors. I ran it by my DM, he thought it was great. Its the rule we'll use. I posted it here, take it or leave it.



For that I'd just say DM's call as to which rule to use. Its pretty situational.

Why does everyone keep throwing the "no called shots" thing in my face? I know there aren't called shots in D&D, but that's what the sundering rules are for - to break OBJECTS, ANY OBJECT.

See, I know that you're going to go with the "He's just saying it's a house rule" line, but as this is the rules forum I wasn't trying to argue house rules.

You're whole premise that the archer is protecting his bow until the he shoots is just wrong. I know that you didn't people arguing rounds with you, but that's the bottom line - the round is 6 seconds and it is simulataneous. Your archer isn't hiding the bow behind his back until it's his turn, he's busy getting ready for his next shot - hard to do that with a bow behind his back.

I'll pass on this house rule as written.

IceBear

 

[IceBear]

Moral of the story: Don't be stupid when fighting an archer. As for the archer, the Readied Sunder is great against those cocky Order of the Bow Initiates who like to fire in melee as well as epic archers with Combat Archery. Or any archer who thinks he's tough enough to just soak up an AoO.

But without your rule I could destroy the bow in round #1. I could also MORE easily sunder the bow of any of those archers that you mentioned. Your house rule just makes it harder, and that's why I don't like it. I like your rule for making it harder to sunder swords and such, but not for bows. If you want it to be harder to sunder bows then I can understand why you like this rule.

IceBear

 

[Kai Lord]

I gotta ask, how in the HECK are you going to stop an axe chop with a *Bow*?

The same way you stop an axe chop with your head; move it out of the way. Reread my post. I really do believe I was quite clear. An enemy can't make a called shot to your head. Now he can't make a called shot to your bow unless you wave it in front of him.

 

[Xarlen]

That's because you can't make called shots in D&D.

 

[Xarlen]

Well, gee. You can sunder someone's Potion on his belt, and he's not waving his Pelvis around in front of you, is he?