Yet another Sunder question(s)

[TYPO5478]

Is it just me, or can you only make a sunder attack against attended items?

Also, steps one and three specifically refer to "weapon or shield" but step two only refers to weapons. Does this mean you get the bonus or penalty described in step two regardless of whether your shield or weapon is being attacked?

 

[Meeki]

Step two refers to weapons and shields, remember you can attack with a shield. Shields are technically armor and a weapon so if someone attacks your shield you would make an opposed attack roll using the shield.

Not sure what you mean by your first statement. If the object isn't carried, worn, or held you can still sunder it it just doesn't get at attack of opportunity.

 

[TYPO5478]

Step two refers to weapons and shields, remember you can attack with a shield. Shields are technically armor and a weapon so if someone attacks your shield you would make an opposed attack roll using the shield.

Here's what I mean. I'm wielding a longsword and you have a greatsword and a buckler. If I attempt to sunder your buckler, it appears (according to step two) that you still get the +4 bonus simply because you're wielding a two-handed weapon even though I'm not attacking it.

Not sure what you mean by your first statement. If the object isn't carried, worn, or held you can still sunder it it just doesn't get at attack of opportunity.

Well, there are separate rules for breaking objects (through damage or sheer force) that appear to relate specifically to unattended objects. Conversely, the sunder description mentions several times that a sunder is an attack against an object that someone is holding, carrying or wearing. My question is whether this is intentional and whether other references to sundering items (like the spell shatter) specifically mean attended items.

 

[Meeki]

You only get that +4 when making a sunder attempt not for the opposed roll. So if you sunder the greatsword he gets no additional bonus. The defender could get a bonus if he was a size category larger.

As far as I can tell there are two sunder actions, as displayed on the actions in combat table in the combat section. The first is Sunder a Weapon (attack) and the second is Sunder an Object (attack). To me this means that Sunder a Weapon is the same thing as the sunder attack that is described in the combat section; meaning it covers sundering weapons, shields, and worn/carried objects. Sunder an object is not described since it requires no additional attack rolls and is covered in the rules for breaking objects.

Also if someone was attacking a shield I would make the defender's opposed roll use the shield as the weapon instead of a weapon in their other hand. I'm not sure if this is 100% correct, but as you pointed out in the second step of sundering it doesn't mention shields as it does in the first.

 

[TYPO5478]

You only get that +4 when making a sunder attempt not for the opposed roll. So if you sunder the greatsword he gets no additional bonus. The defender could get a bonus if he was a size category larger.

That's interesting. I don't interpret the second step that way. The descriptions of bonuses refer to wielders and combatants, not attackers and defenders. It seems that you'd get the bonus (or penalty) regardless of whether you're making the attempt or defending against it. Otherwise, we wind up with the strange situation that attacking a longsword with a greatsword has a total +8 bonus over attacking a longsword with a dagger, but attacking a greatsword with a longsword is no different than attacking a dagger with a longsword. That doesn't seem right to me.

As far as I can tell there are two sunder actions, as displayed on the actions in combat table in the combat section. The first is Sunder a Weapon (attack) and the second is Sunder an Object (attack). To me this means that Sunder a Weapon is the same thing as the sunder attack that is described in the combat section; meaning it covers sundering weapons, shields, and worn/carried objects. Sunder an object is not described since it requires no additional attack rolls and is covered in the rules for breaking objects.

That's not entirely accurate. The initial description of sunder states that it is an attack against "a weapon or shield that your opponent is holding." Furthermore, it says that if the attempt is made against a weapon or shield, that the steps described apply, but that if it is against an carried or worn object, only an attack roll is needed.

So you're right that sundering a weapon or shield is a different attack than sundering a carried or worn object, but in turn, both of those are different than damaging an unattended item. You still have to make an attack roll against an unattended object, but the object takes a cumulative -7 penalty (-5 for Dex 0, and an fixed -2 unnamed) to its armor class; taking a full round action with a melee weapon is an automatic hit (an option not available when making a sunder attempt). On the other hand, a sunder attempt against an attended object uses the Dex modifier of the possessor and doesn't incur the arbitrary -2 penalty.

Also if someone was attacking a shield I would make the defender's opposed roll use the shield as the weapon instead of a weapon in their other hand. I'm not sure if this is 100% correct, but as you pointed out in the second step of sundering it doesn't mention shields as it does in the first.

That was part of the reason that I chose the buckler example: a buckler can't be used as a weapon.

 

[Hypersmurf]

That's interesting. I don't interpret the second step that way. The descriptions of bonuses refer to wielders and combatants, not attackers and defenders. It seems that you'd get the bonus (or penalty) regardless of whether you're making the attempt or defending against it.

I read 'on a disarm attempt' to mean 'during the resolution of the disarm' as well - so it applies to both parties.

But I can mee where Meeki's coming from, and I hadn't looked at it that way before.

-Hyp.

 

[TYPO5478]

I read 'on a disarm attempt' to mean 'during the resolution of the disarm' as well - so it applies to both parties.

That was my interpretation as well. Like you, I understand Meeki's reasoning, but I don't think that was the intent of the authors.

Just out of curiosity, were you referring to disarm analogously or did you mean to say "sunder"? Either way, I think the analogy is apt. There's no reason only the attacker's side of the opposed roll should be modified based on weapon category.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Just out of curiosity, were you referring to disarm analogously or did you mean to say "sunder"? Either way, I think the analogy is apt. There's no reason only the attacker's side of the opposed roll should be modified based on weapon category.

I looked up Disarm to see what language was used there, and it was the same as Sunder, so I had both on my mind as I replied.

Whichever ruling one makes for one must necessarily apply to the other.

-Hyp.

 

[TYPO5478]

Whichever ruling one makes for one must necessarily apply to the other.

Agreed.

So what do you think about my previous question: if a sunder attack is specifically directed against an attended item, does that mean that other usages of the term "sunder" (like shatter) imply a similar target?