Sundered Weapons are BROKEN!

[Bastoche]

You know...I wasn't gonna go there. Well, ok, I've done it before, but I only do that when I think the rule-change is pretty bad.

tsk tsk tsk you're a naughty boy

 

[Kai Lord]

You know...I wasn't gonna go there. Well, ok, I've done it before, but I only do that when I think the rule-change is pretty bad.

Yep, besides I see that as the calling card of a flailing argument. "Um, yeah, but....but....uh you're in the wrong forum!"

 

[kreynolds]

Yep, besides I see that as the calling card of a flailing argument. "Um, yeah, but....but....uh you're in the wrong forum!"

Actually, it is better interpreted as..."Oh yeah! Well...you're stupid!! Yeah! Yeah, that's it!! You're just silly-stupid! Ha! HAHAHA!! I got you! No gettin' outta that one!! Ha..uh..right...

 

[Bastoche]

Yep, besides I see that as the calling card of a flailing argument. "Um, yeah, but....but....uh you're in the wrong forum!"

Well actually, I don't think your tweak is necessary. But that's just me. And that is by far the strongest no-argument that can be .

 

[kreynolds]

And that is by far the strongest no-argument that can be .

And the second strongest is...

Poster 1: "Show me where in the rules it says you can do that!"
Poster 2: "Show me where it says you can't!"

 

[Bastoche]

lol

 

[IceBear]

Good point. Because recognizing that the official Sunder rule is among a select few that stretches the bounds of what's plausible in a fantasy setting and adjusting it accordingly is pretty much equivalent with filling two binders full of house rules.

Well, I guess we have a differing opinion on the sunder rule then It might be a little too easy (ie unrealistic) but it is plausible.

I said I like parts of your house rule, but I find it even more unrealistic that I can't stand beside someone with a longbow and I can chop it to pieces without him trying to shoot me with it. Or I can't try to split his shield unless he tries to bash me with it.

That's what I don't like. As I said before, maybe I misunderstand your house rule as written (I am stupid) so if you can address how your rule would handle that I might come on board.

Here's what I understand your rule as being - If you ready an action then when someone attacks you with a weapon you can attempt to sunder it with an AoO (why an AoO and not the readied action). Where I have an issue is with how to sunder something that no one attacks you with. I see lots of people saying that archers are too strong, so if you're forcing people to spend two rounds (one to get close enough and a second to use a readied action) in order to sunder the bow then I don't like it.

IceBear

 

[Xarlen]

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.

 

[kreynolds]

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.

Easy fix: No sundering of bows.

 

[Kai Lord]

Well, I guess we have a differing opinion on the sunder rule then It might be a little too easy (ie unrealistic) but it is plausible.

I said I like parts of your house rule, but I find it even more unrealistic that I can't stand beside someone with a longbow and I can chop it to pieces without him trying to shoot me with it. Or I can't try to split his shield unless he tries to bash me with it.

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.

That's what I don't like. As I said before, maybe I misunderstand your house rule as written (I am stupid) so if you can address how your rule would handle that I might come on board.

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.

Here's what I understand your rule as being - If you ready an action then when someone attacks you with a weapon you can attempt to sunder it with an AoO. Where I have an issue is with how to sunder something that no one attacks you with.

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