Sundering a Bow?

[PaulKemp]

I disagree. If the bow is magical, I'd rule its magical if swung as a club, also.

Frex, if you swing a 2h sword as a non-lethal weapon using flat of the blade, you get your magical + to hit.

But if that were true, you'd think that you also would get a shield's enhancement bonus when you used it to bash. But you don't. After all, the shield is magical so why shouldn't you get its enhancement bonus when using it as a weapon? Obviously, you might counter with something like: well, the shield's magic is designed to protect, not to attack; therefore when you use it to attack, the protective magic has no role; the bow, on the other hand, has magic is designed to attack and not protect. It therefore should apply even if the bow is being used in a way for which it is not designed.

Reasonable minds can disagree about that issue. In the end, it's tangential to the larger question -- namely, is the roll for the bowman treated as a ranged attack roll (such that all his modifiers to a ranged attack roll would apply) or is it treated as a melee attack roll with an improvised weapon?

 

[Seeten]

If you arent comfortable giving him a ranged attack, and it seems the rules are against it, I'd rule he'd be making a melee attack with the improvised weapon rule. I'd give him the magical bonus to hit, also, but he's gonna be at the proficiency penalty and all anyway, so he is in a bad spot.

 

[Ferrix]

Having done a lot of ruling in the past to attempt to make thing realistic, I've found that sometimes even though it doesn't fully make sense, I'll go with the simpler. That is instead of having to calculate all the changes from the bow as a ranged weapon to the bow as an improvised melee weapon, etc., etc. I'll just leave it as a ranged weapon. But that's mostly because I don't really care to push that line too much after having bothered players with but my rules are more realistic notions which just makes life more difficult.

I can see the argument on either side, I just figured I'd come down on one side and let it be.

 

[PaulKemp]

Thanks, all. Helpful insights.

 

[S'mon]

A bowman counts as unarmed for melee purposes (unless he's a bowman-monk & can kick?). The attacker just rolls to hit vs the bow's AC, I can't recall what this is but probably 14+wielder's DEX bonus is fair, if hit then damage. Common sense dictates you can't sunder a bow with a piercing weapon but IRL & per (3.0?) RAW they're otherwise easy to break, though magic bows get extra hardness & hp. The opposed attack roll is for sundering enemy's wielded weapon, sensibly enough.

 

[S'mon]

BTW a bow isn't going to be an effective melee weapon. Just punch the guy.

 

[S'mon]

3.5 SRD:
Sundering a Carried or Worn Object: You don’t use an opposed attack roll to damage a carried or worn object. Instead, just make an attack roll against the object’s AC. A carried or worn object’s AC is equal to 10 + its size modifier + the Dexterity modifier of the carrying or wearing character. Attacking a carried or worn object provokes an attack of opportunity just as attacking a held object does. To attempt to snatch away an item worn by a defender rather than damage it, see Disarm. You can’t sunder armor worn by another character.

- I just do it like this, it makes sense. If the RAW changed I'd still do it like this.

 

[Thanee]

Just do not sunder bows... noone would do that, anyways. Sundering bows is metagaming at its finest.

And likewise do not use bows in melee... draw a proper weapon to fight or run away.


The 5-ft. step rule is a "big problem" here, since it allows effective use of a ranged weapon in a pure melee situation.

Bye
Thanee

 

[Ferrix]

Thanee, some days it feels like you are just trolling.

 

[Thanee]

Hey, that's actually meant in a serious way.

Bye
Thanee