Sundering items

[JacktheRabbit]

Your arguement breaks down when you put a knife in your foes hand. Now instead of wildly swinging you are making the same kinds of precise strike as you would to strike a potion vial.

So by your "flavor" rule you would not allow anyone to sunder a weapon that a fighter is not likely to use to protect himself.

As for the prospect Sunder being used on attended objects to avoid AoO, I'd like to interject a personal opinion, a flavor explanation of the existing mechanics, if you will.

I suppose I've always seen the Sunder feat as subtle, disguised, and/or intelligent attack placement that does not leave yourself open to blows from the defender.

If you strike at a weapon or shield with the Sunder feat, you're attempting to break (or break through) an opponents defenses. Essentially, it almost seems like you're attacking your foe, but all you're really trying to do is smash the hell out of his sword or shield. On top of that, he can't start waving his sword and shield all about to avoid the blows, because that would leave him wide open for an attack.

On the other hand, if you start swinging at that nifty potion in his hand, it becomes obvious that you're focused on the item, not your foe, leaving you open to attacks of opportunity.

Anyhow, I could understand a reasonable house rule allowing Sunder to avoid AoO's while attacking attended objects. The fluff above is merely my personal justification as to why I do not have such a house rule.

 

[Ristamar]

Your arguement breaks down when you put a knife in your foes hand. Now instead of wildly swinging you are making the same kinds of precise strike as you would to strike a potion vial.

So by your "flavor" rule you would not allow anyone to sunder a weapon that a fighter is not likely to use to protect himself.

Actually, that's not too hard to justify. The Sunder attempt is simply well placed (intelligent attacks, as I mentioned), not providing openings for the defender. The opponent can't retaliate but still has to get the knife out of the way of the blow, or the bulk of the blow.

Of course, if you have two guys knife fighting and trying to Sunder each others knives, things can get a bit silly. Sundering a knife with a knife is ridiculous, IMO, so visualizing or rationalizing it can become difficult, yet it's legal within the rules. Chalk it up to the quirks of D&D.

 

[hong]

I agree.

Any reasonable interpretation would read "weapon or shield" as simply a synonym for "attended object", IMO.

However, "attended object" is broader than just items in hand. A belt or vestment, for example, is also an attended object, as is a luckstone in your pocket.

 

[chilibean]

However, "attended object" is broader than just items in hand. A belt or vestment, for example, is also an attended object, as is a luckstone in your pocket.

Fair enough. The luckstone in a pocket has 100% concealment ...

But actually I didn't mean things like this. I really meant objects in your opponents hands, like a wand. But if you can break a masterwork longsword with a well aimed blow from a club, surely a heavy mace ought to me able to smash that potion bottle on your enemies belt.

The rules on sundering and smashing things are very unrealistic and simplistic because anything else would be cumbersome during play. But simply a liberal reading of the sunder rule to allow a person to target any particular item that they see, not just the weapon and shield example cited, seems plausable and reasonable to me.

 

[kreynolds]

But simply a liberal reading of the sunder rule to allow a person to target any particular item that they see, not just the weapon and shield example cited, seems plausable and reasonable to me.

Alright...well...have fun with that.