Sundered Weapons are BROKEN!

[Kai Lord]

Doesn't work with bows or crossbows though.

Sure it does. If someone isn't attacking you with a bow or crossbow, then they aren't holding it in such a way that it can be Sundered. The archer's attack doesn't represent so much him swinging his weapon in a manner that can be Sundered, just holding it out far enough for it to be vulnerable to an enemy's attack.

 

[IceBear]

I want to Sunder an item hanging from someone's belt. How could I do it with this rule? Just because it isn't being weilded doesn't mean it can't be broken.

IceBear

 

[Rel]

Before this moves to the house rules forum, I'll say that there are two very good reasons not to do this...

I have not seen Sunder used extensively in the games we have played so I don't have a very strong opinion about it one way or the other (which means I'd probably just leave it alone). But I wanted to comment that this post by Elder-Basilisk is one of the most well presented and well reasoned arguments that I've seen on the boards in a long time.

Good job.

 

[Kai Lord]

Sundering an item from someone's belt would just have to be a new feat that builds off the Sunder tree.

 

[IceBear]

Or, we just leave the rule alone

Sundering is just a special form of breaking an item. I'd leave sundering alone for attacking a bow or crossbow, and maybe use your house rule for melee. I don't like your explanation for sundering bows that you gave.

IceBear

 

[Bastoche]

Sundering an item from someone's belt would just have to be a new feat that builds off the Sunder tree.

Two feats to break something your opponment isn't using ?!?! I don't see the point.

 

[Ravellion]

Sure it does. If someone isn't attacking you with a bow or crossbow, then they aren't holding it in such a way that it can be Sundered. The archer's attack doesn't represent so much him swinging his weapon in a manner that can be Sundered, just holding it out far enough for it to be vulnerable to an enemy's attack.

Move 30 ft, 10 ft of which not in a straight line, fire one arrow. Guy who want's the sunder can't use his ready action if in Heavy armour. Very balanced.

Rav

 

[Kyramus]

Sunder the feat only allows you to NOT get an AoO when doing the actual action.

Otherwise ANYONE can do the action and break a weapon if they are willing to take the AoO.

 

[Cheiromancer]

I wanted to comment that this post by Elder-Basilisk is one of the most well presented and well reasoned arguments that I've seen on the boards in a long time.

Good job.

One of the perq's of being a community supporter of ENWorld is that you get access to the search function. I think that being able to read everything Elder_Basilisk has written is, in itself, worth the price.

 

[Marshall]

I want to Sunder an item hanging from someone's belt. How could I do it with this rule? Just because it isn't being weilded doesn't mean it can't be broken.

IceBear

Why stop there? For a -13 to-hit penalty(-8 Size, -5 Held object bonus), according to the rules, I bypass that Dragons +26 nat armor bonus and put an arrow thru his eyeball.

Whats the difference between that and attacking the potion on the guys belt?

For that matter whats the AC? 10+DEX+DEF? So its actually easier to hit a potion vial(Size -8 ) on a guys belt than sitting on a table if the guy has no DEX/DEF bonus? AC 13 vs AC 10? Huh?!?
(Size is irrelevant[apparently] if the item is carried).

Nope, sorry. Youre into the realm of 'called shot' rules here and that is definitely a no-no in the 3e abstract combat system.