PDA

View Full Version : Sundering Stuff



Tyrael
2007-04-12, 10:45 PM
Ahoy, folks. Quick question: What do you guys think about Sundering and Shattering stuff? Enemy weapons, armor, magical items, etc? Personally I think it's a rather nifty way of equalizing things in combat and making your opponent feel rather foolish very quickly. Heck, maybe it's a way for fighters to counter lower-level casters; by smashing their oh-so-shiney items to bits.

What do all of you think of that sort of thing? Is it a viable tactic in battle? Is it good? Bad? Gimped? Cheesy?

Furthermore, how exactly does Shatter work? Say someone casts Shatter on a Greatsword. Does the thing just instantly explode? No damage rolls, no hardness to overcome, no saving throw, nothing? Considering it's a 1st or 2nd level spell, that seems INSANELY overpowered.

Edit: My DM just found out that an "attended" item gets a Will save to negate it. My question is, what exactly constitutes attendance?

Jasdoif
2007-04-12, 10:51 PM
My DM just found out that an "attended" item gets a Will save to negate it. My question is, what exactly constitutes attendance?An attended item means it's in a character's possession; either held, worn or carried.

A nonmagical attended item uses its owner's saves; a magical item uses its own saves if they're higher then the owner's. A magic item also makes saves even if it isn't attended.

Roethke
2007-04-12, 11:29 PM
It's pretty situational. First of all, any attacks spent sundering are not doing damage, and against a high level foe (whom you're working hard to hit at all) it can be iffy. It's somewhat comparable to save-or-suck. Of course it's useless against most monsters.

Another catch is, with the opposed attack roll mechanic, if it's a critter who's much lower level than you, you're probably better off just killing it in one good blow. If it's much higher (i.e. the whole party fighting a big bad guy), chances are you won't successfully sunder.

It can be a good tactic if you've got an enemy who relies on equipment, that you can reach, in a battle you must win at all cost. Yet another limitation is that you may earn the enmity of your party for breaking all the good loot :). But it is fun and satisfying.

From a RP perspective, I'd say go with it. It makes for a neat concept warrior. Crunch-wise, the feats and equipment required to be an effective sunderer are probably not worth it for the relatively few situations where it's applicable.

Merlin the Tuna
2007-04-12, 11:35 PM
Again, the big problem with being a sunder-monkey is that you're basically breaking your future treasure. In terms of feat and action expenditure, though, you're not necessarily in bad shape if you've got Complete Warrior; the Combat Brute tactical feat allows you to cleave into an opponent after a successful sunder (thus gaining your attack back, more or less) and it also provides some general Power Attack boosting, making its non-sunder-related viability acceptable.

Sardia
2007-04-13, 03:53 AM
Again, the big problem with being a sunder-monkey is that you're basically breaking your future treasure.

Not a bad idea against a Balor, though.

kpenguin
2007-04-13, 04:36 AM
Well, with equipment that isn't held, no opposed attack roll is required. Just a direct attack to the object in question. Try doing this on that pesty heavy armor or magic robes. Even if it kills your loot, it still can make the enemy far less effiecient. Same goes for magic amulets, necklaces, rings, cloaks. Those wings of flying bothering you? Cut 'em down. They're techinicaly equipment. How about that spell component pouch. *Slash* Sorry batman, you can't use any spells with material components. What about that cleric? *slash* goodbye divine focus. Heck, you could cut of that backpack. Goodbye any backup potions/wands/equipment. That being said, that AoA could be bad. And its useless against the generic natural attacking monsters. And you loose potential loot. If you want to keep it, try disarming them instead.

Merlin the Tuna
2007-04-13, 05:26 AM
How about that spell component pouch. *Slash* Sorry batman, you can't use any spells with material components. What about that cleric? *slash* goodbye divine focus.The problem with this is that as soon as anyone starts doing this -- PC or DM alike -- everyone just starts carrying twelve of each, as it's not any real financial investment. I'd advise against this route.

Grr
2007-04-13, 06:58 AM
The fighter I'm playing in a campaign on Tuesdays is a "sunder monkey". I break most things in one hit since I'm using an adamantine great sword. I almost broke a Demon Lords adamantine bastard sword in one hit... and would have if I'd rolled average damage. Instead I rolled snake eyes. >_<

Sundering armor should do damage to the creature wearing it though.

Lord Lorac Silvanos
2007-04-13, 07:14 AM
Yes, Adamantine weapons are very effective when sundering, just remember that Adamantine does not bypass teh hardness of Adamantine.

Person_Man
2007-04-13, 10:37 AM
Any mid level full BAB build should be able to deal enough damage to kill any single foe in 1 turn. Unless you have Combat Brute, Sundering their weapon wastes an action you could have used to just kill them. And Combat Brute, while nifty, is not as nifty as some other feat combos.

Also, as Merlin points out, you're just destroying your future treasure. I have no idea why you would choose to do that unless its the Evil Artifact of Baby Killing, and in that case, it will probably have a Save that's too high for you to Sunder.

spotmarkedx
2007-04-13, 01:26 PM
As a side note, sundering is an effective tool for a DM that is looking to have the party lose a few items of equipment (i.e. stuff the party perhaps got too early in level or the like). Do this with a recurring NPC and you'll have PCs with even more of a grudge than normal when you have the final showdown :D

Be careful to spread this type of sundering around though. Don't just gimp the party fighter because he is the one in combat.

Well, with equipment that isn't held, no opposed attack roll is required. Just a direct attack to the object in question...
Perhaps a house rule, but I ended up calling all items on a person a "held" item in this case. Otherwise: "Sorry, Mr.20th-level Fighter. You can't dodge the blow aimed for your belt of giant strength. It wasn't aimed at you, it was aimed at your belt. Those 20 levels of experience matter for naught in this situation, despite the fact that if you weren't wearing the belt, you'd be able to dodge an attack aimed at your abdomen."

Indon
2007-04-13, 01:42 PM
Hmm. A thought.

Say you're a sunderer and you're up against an enemy cleric. Could you ready an action to sunder the cleric's holy symbol if he tries to cast a spell with a divine focus, or turn/rebuke undead? I'm thinking yes, but I'd like confirmation.

kamikasei
2007-04-13, 01:50 PM
Yup. At least, I have no idea why you wouldn't be able to; and the old Gamestoppers (http://wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/gs/20011116a) articles at wizards.com had a druid disarmed of her holy symbol, at one point, so they were certainly valid targets for that sort of thing back then...

Mewtarthio
2007-04-13, 02:01 PM
"Sorry, Mr.20th-level Fighter. You can't dodge the blow aimed for your belt of giant strength. It wasn't aimed at you, it was aimed at your belt. Those 20 levels of experience matter for naught in this situation, despite the fact that if you weren't wearing the belt, you'd be able to dodge an attack aimed at your abdomen."

Refresh my memory: When does a twentieth-level Fighter get a Dodge bonus to AC?

spotmarkedx
2007-04-13, 02:34 PM
Refresh my memory: When does a twentieth-level Fighter get a Dodge bonus to AC?
Ha, true enough. Fighters rarely get a dodge bonus to AC. However the fluff behind the mechanics of hitpoints usually are more like "as you get higher in level, you learn how to turn more of a weapon blow aside or avoid the worst of an attack", yes? Or do you envision a 200hp character taking what would amount to 20 deathblows to a normal human and still standing?

So using that line of logic, would not the fighter twist out of the way of the worst of a blow aimed at his belt, his cloak, his potion belt?

Note that in my earler post that I did say this was a house rule, not that it was RAW canon.

<edit> As an aside, that would be an amusing game should the DM run a short game that way. I can just see it: "So after the battle, the fighter is keeping his guts in with his left hand and has his neck halfway chopped through, the cleric is nursing a puncture wound to the temple, and the rogue was pierced through the heart twice. Cleric? Are you going to cast some healing?" Cleric: "Nah, that was an easy fight. Nobody is really that close to dying yet."

OzymandiasVolt
2007-04-13, 02:53 PM
You can't sunder armor. You could in 3.0 I think, but you can't in 3.5 It's pretty silly since it means your armor's hitpoints and hardness don't matter in the least unless someone attacks it after you take it off.

Presumably it had something to do with "if you're attacking their armor you're basically attacking them so it's a normal attack and not a sunder attempt." But that would mean every successful attack should simultaneously count as a sunder attempt on your armor.

Merlin the Tuna
2007-04-13, 03:02 PM
Presumably it had something to do with "if you're attacking their armor you're basically attacking them so it's a normal attack and not a sunder attempt." But that would mean every successful attack should simultaneously count as a sunder attempt on your armor.It's part that, part "Getting hit by weapons is exactly what armor is designed to do," and part "Sweet zombie Jesus, you don't actually want to keep track of your chain shirt's HP, do you?"

OzymandiasVolt
2007-04-13, 03:21 PM
Only as much as I want to keep track of my sword's hp. Or my spell component pouch's hp. Plus I like the idea of full body armor absorbing damage. If it covers every inch of my body, and some dink with a knife rolls a 20, I don't care how lucky he is, it's not getting though my hardness 30 +5 adamantine mountain plate.

Grr
2007-04-13, 03:53 PM
I don't see any reason why you can't target armor. After all, it is considered a worn object. Worn objects have an AC of 10 + Size Modifier + Dex Modifier of the person wearing it.

Tyrael
2007-04-13, 04:03 PM
Unless I'm reading the PHB incorrectly, Armor has AC of 10 + Size mod + Dex mod, hardness of the appropriate material, and HP of (AC bonus x5).

Thus, a Human Bandit with 14 Dex and Studded Leather Armor...his armor would have 12 AC, 2 Hardness, and 15 HP.

Merlin the Tuna
2007-04-13, 05:04 PM
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.Emphasis mine.

Starbuck_II
2007-04-13, 05:40 PM
Furthermore, how exactly does Shatter work? Say someone casts Shatter on a Greatsword. Does the thing just instantly explode? No damage rolls, no hardness to overcome, no saving throw, nothing? Considering it's a 1st or 2nd level spell, that seems INSANELY overpowered.

Shatter has 3 versions:
Area effect: all weak stuff like glass is broken in area (with a save). So all potions of yours might shatter (can be useful is guy is seen with lots).

Crystalline creatures save or damage.

Single nonmagical item weight 10 pounds/level or less. Yes, this means Full plate can be shatterd if not magiucal with a save.


Edit: My DM just found out that an "attended" item gets a Will save to negate it. My question is, what exactly constitutes attendance?

On their person. Like in their backpack if they are wearing one.

namo
2007-04-13, 10:02 PM
I like the idea of sundering (smashing things is a great stress reliever :), but unfortunately, as has been pointed out, the rules to sunder items are broken : basically at high level you almost always sunder your opponent's possessions if they are visible (exception : opponents with *really* high Dex).

Krimm_Blackleaf
2007-04-13, 10:21 PM
My groups tend to avoid sundering things because we're all magic item whores. Now and then the DM will destroy the PC's current weapon, and it always sends shockwaves through them, it's rather fun to watch, no matter how pitiful it is.

Grr
2007-04-13, 11:53 PM
Sunder first or be sundered. That's my warrior's motto.

Enzario
2007-04-14, 07:18 PM
I interpret "attended" as "close enough to do something to protect it." I think that someone standing next to a priceless artifact should get a chance to, say, make a reflex save to snatch it out of the way of a spell.

kpenguin
2007-04-14, 08:12 PM
I interpret "attended" as "close enough to do something to protect it." I think that someone standing next to a priceless artifact should get a chance to, say, make a reflex save to snatch it out of the way of a spell.

But you can't snatch something out of the way of a shatter. That would be a good idea for a ranged sunder or ray, however.

the_tick_rules
2007-04-14, 09:15 PM
yeah get a adamantine sword or arrowhead and cut that maximized rod all mage lovers get all hot and bothered over.

asqwasqw
2007-04-14, 09:54 PM
Disarm>Sundering. More loot!

Rigeld2
2007-04-14, 10:02 PM
yeah get a adamantine sword or arrowhead and cut that maximized rod all mage lovers get all hot and bothered over.Thatd be great. If you had to hold the rod to use it. You dont. It only has to be in your posession.

Lord Lorac Silvanos
2007-04-15, 09:11 AM
You have to wield it, having it in your backpack is not sufficient.

The description refers to "the wielder" several times.

Rigeld2
2007-04-15, 10:23 AM
I saw that, but I also saw
Possession of a metamagic rod does not confer the associated feat on the owner, only the ability to use the given feat a specified number of times per day.

So posessing it is enough.

Lord Lorac Silvanos
2007-04-15, 10:47 AM
Allow me to quote the whole entry.


Metamagic Rods: Metamagic rods hold the essence of a metamagic feat but do not change the spell slot of the altered spell. All the rods described here are use-activated (but casting spells in a threatened area still draws an attack of opportunity). A caster may only use one metamagic rod on any given spell, but it is permissible to combine a rod with metamagic feats possessed by the rod’s wielder. In this case, only the feats possessed by the wielder adjust the spell slot of the spell being cast.


Possession of a metamagic rod does not confer the associated feat on the owner, only the ability to use the given feat a specified number of times per day. A sorcerer still must take a full-round action when using a metamagic rod, just as if using a metamagic feat he possesses.


...

Metamagic, Empower: The wielder can cast up to three spells per day that are empowered as though using the Empower Spell feat.
...

Metamagic, Enlarge: The wielder...

...

Metamagic, Extend: The wielder...


[ETC.]



All the individual descriptions also refer to wielding it.

I do not think it is reasonable to assume that a general statement about ownership removes the stricter requirement of having to wield the item.

Possessor is used several times for magic items and it clearly refers to actively using the object, not gaining benefit from an item you keep locked up in your wizard tower while you go adventuring.

Lòkki Gallansbayne
2007-04-15, 11:04 AM
One of my characters sundered a bag once. With his fists.

In retrospect, I'm really not sure how I got away with that one.