Would you allow readied action to sunder thrown weapon mid-flight?

[talonos]

If in pathfinder, a player using a gunslinger asked to ready an action to sunder a thrown weapon mid-flight, would you allow it?

Weapons, when not held, have a crap AC. (-5 dex penalty, -2 "Object" penalty, +8 size bonus = AC 11) A gunslinger could quite reliably hit a thrown weapon RAW once it leaves the hand of a person.

Thematically, this is awesome. I don't *think* it's game breaking; the gunslinger's readied action (a standard action) can cancel out *one* thrown weapon in a full attack.

Would you allow this? Are there any edge cases where such a house rule could become abusable?

[OldTrees1]

Yes I would allow it. The question is what would I set the AC of a flying thrown weapon at. A weapon mid flight might be better modeled as if it had Dex of 20 for 21 AC.

[LTwerewolf]

I'd give it a dex bonus of whatever the thrower's dex bonus was.

[Janthkin]

It is pretty awesome, and no more improbable than striking a projectile thrown at over 100 mph with a club.

I'd agree with swapping out the dex of a static unattended object with at least that of the thrower, though, and/or possibly with some sort of modifier for speed. If it's an automatic success, it's not nearly as cool.

[OldTrees1]

It is pretty awesome, and no more improbable than striking a projectile thrown at over 100 mph with a club.

I'd agree with swapping out the dex of a static unattended object with at least that of the thrower, though, and/or possibly with some sort of modifier for speed. If it's an automatic success, it's not nearly as cool.

I know I can't move nearly as fast as objects I throw move, so I agree that a modifier for speed above and beyond the thrower's Dex needs to be applied.

[Necroticplague]

Well, I don't see any rules against doing so. The rules for readying let you do anything you could do with a standard action. Considering the point about how this looses out on action economy, I can't fix any balance reason to disallow it either. So, lacking either a rules reason or a balance reason to disallow r, I would certainly let this happen.

[Deophaun]

There is no such thing mechanically as "mid-flight" in 3.P. It's either in the attacker's hand, or it has already hit and dealt damage or missed. As such, it would be resolved as a ranged sunder while still in the target's hand, and only then fluffed as being shot out of the air.

[XionUnborn01]

One weakness of the ability could be that if the attack is a crit you can't sunder it.

[charcoalninja]

Or, you know it's deflected before it lands ala Deflect arrows or Wind Wall. Or blocked by Stone Sheild, etc...

[bjoern]

You could make the thrown weapons AC be equal to the throwers attack roll. This would reflect the speed of the throw (strength bonus) and the spin or curve (Dex)

[TheIronGolem]

There is no such thing mechanically as "mid-flight" in 3.P. It's either in the attacker's hand, or it has already hit and dealt damage or missed. As such, it would be resolved as a ranged sunder while still in the target's hand, and only then fluffed as being shot out of the air.

Plus, the thrower deserves to have their CMD matter here, especially if they have particular bonuses against sundering.

[Zaq]

Readying an action costs a standard action, which is huge, and I believe it also screws with your initiative, does it not? (It did in 3.5; I haven't checked PF to see if PF changed that.) As long as those costs are in place, I see no reason that this would be overpowered. As you said, spending your whole turn to possibly (very likely, but not guaranteed) get rid of one incoming attack is a losing proposition in general, so it doesn't seem to be too bad.

If the player has a way of getting around the standard action cost of readying, that's a different story. But if they're actually paying the action costs, this seems totally reasonable.

I don't know if guns can usually be used to sunder (again, haven't really read the PF rules), so I guess that could be a consideration, but I have no problem with a heroic fantasy game letting someone who's an expert with a gun shoot a thrown weapon out of the air.

[Zancloufer]

There is no such thing mechanically as "mid-flight" in 3.P. It's either in the attacker's hand, or it has already hit and dealt damage or missed. As such, it would be resolved as a ranged sunder while still in the target's hand, and only then fluffed as being shot out of the air.

There is some precedence for this. The Deflect/Snatch/etc arrow line let's you essentially stop ranged attacks. Also there are martial adept manoeuvers that let you delfect/reflect melee attacks as well. So having a readied action which you then use to shoot a weapon out of the sky is far from unreasonable.

I would agree with the 10+Thrower's Dex mod+Size modifier(8 by default) as the AC to hit it though. Also remember that thrown/fired weapons have HP and hardness of 5+Enhancement mod.

[Jormengand]

Readying an action costs a standard action, which is huge, and I believe it also screws with your initiative, does it not? (It did in 3.5; I haven't checked PF to see if PF changed that.)

It still does in PF.

[Deophaun]

Readying an action costs a standard action, which is huge, and I believe it also screws with your initiative, does it not? (It did in 3.5; I haven't checked PF to see if PF changed that.) As long as those costs are in place, I see no reason that this would be overpowered. As you said, spending your whole turn to possibly (very likely, but not guaranteed) get rid of one incoming attack is a losing proposition in general, so it doesn't seem to be too bad.
Consider that this can also be used to disrupt spells by simply readying an action to move, and yes, it is overpowered. In 3.5, you can also use this with abrupt jaunt to spoil attacks, or any kind of immediate move action. It's not just this case.

There is some precedence for this. The Deflect/Snatch/etc arrow line let's you essentially stop ranged attacks.
Great. Let him take the feat, then. That's what the precedent is: if you want to abide by different rules, you need a feat, class ability, or spell.

[Aldrakan]

Deflect/snatch arrows lets you do this without spending an action on it, that doesn't mean it can't be done at all without a feat.

Also why would you even argue that there's no such thing as "midflight" in 3.P mechanics? Not only are there several effects to disprove that, it sounds nonsensical. Don't inject lack of realism for the sake of it.

As for the other issue, if people are willing to spend standard actions to dodge a single attack they know is coming, let them? Frankly I thought teleporting away from someone at the last moment was what abrupt jaunt was for.

[Zaq]

Consider that this can also be used to disrupt spells by simply readying an action to move, and yes, it is overpowered. In 3.5, you can also use this with abrupt jaunt to spoil attacks, or any kind of immediate move action. It's not just this case.

Great. Let him take the feat, then. That's what the precedent is: if you want to abide by different rules, you need a feat, class ability, or spell.

You could already ready an action to shoot a caster who's planning to cast at you and force a really big Concentration check to make the spell not fizzle. Why is allowing a readied action to shoot down a nonmagical projectile a horrifying precedent, exactly? (Again, assuming that you're honestly paying the action costs involved, meaning that you spend a standard action to ready and then lose your place in the initiative order, which can potentially cost you a turn. All bets are off if you're mitigating those costs.)

[Immabozo]

Yes I would allow it. The question is what would I set the AC of a flying thrown weapon at. A weapon mid flight might be better modeled as if it had Dex of 20 for 21 AC.


I'd give it a dex bonus of whatever the thrower's dex bonus was.

Aaragorn did it in LotR. And it was not a rehersed stunt, the throwing orc messed up and the actor's combat training kicked in.

personally, I would not give it THAT high of a dex bonus, it isn't a curveball or a corkscrew, it is flying in a straight line, no lateral movement (wind factors only exists in D&D as a magical effect completely blowing it off course.)

Personally, an AC of half the throwers dex, plus any enhancement on the weapon

Sounds like a feat. An underwhelming feat that I would never even consider.

[OldTrees1]

Aaragorn did it in LotR. And it was not a rehersed stunt, the throwing orc messed up and the actor's combat training kicked in.
Good, you agree it is possible.


Sounds like a feat. An underwhelming feat that I would never even consider.
Why would it be a feat? It is way too underwhelming to be worthy of a feat slot and thus making it a feat would be bad game design. Like the "thrown weapon messing up a shield" ability in the other thread this is best left as a default option.

[Immabozo]

Good, you agree it is possible.

Why would it be a feat? It is way too underwhelming to be worthy of a feat slot and thus making it a feat would be bad game design. Like the "thrown weapon messing up a shield" ability in the other thread this is best left as a default option.

It just sounds like it would be a feat to me. Perhaps a skill trick? Spot + dex 13 or something? Or maybe as part of a feat, like one of those feats that allows a number of combat maneuvers?

[Sahleb]

I'd let him do it for the coolness factor alone.

That said, since you seem to be playing pathfinder, it should be the gunslinger's CMB vs the thrower's CMD.

[Vogie]

The PF progression to do that for a melee character was 3 feats: Improved Unarmed Strike, Deflect Arrows, and Snatch Arrows

However, Gunslingers already have a Utility Shot at level 3-

Scoot Unattended Object: The gunslinger makes an attack roll against a Tiny or smaller unattended object within the first range increment of her firearm. A Tiny unattended object has an AC of 5, a Diminutive unattended object has an AC of 7, and a Fine unattended object has an AC of 11. On a hit, the gunslinger does not damage the object with the shot, but can move it up to 15 feet farther away from the shot's origin. On a miss, she damages the object normally.

I could definitely see a DM houseruling a "damaging miss" to sunder the object instead of just damaging it. Also, the RAW for Scoot shot above is for Tiny or smaller objects... creating a "Nudging Shot" (scaled up for medium & small objects within range) at a higher level may be needed. If that is too powerful as a free thing, require them to have Improved Sunder to do so.

[Eloel]

It just sounds like it would be a feat to me. Perhaps a skill trick? Spot + dex 13 or something? Or maybe as part of a feat, like one of those feats that allows a number of combat maneuvers?

Just tack it onto Precise Shot and call it a day, imo.

[LTwerewolf]

The reason I wouldn't have it as opposed on a CMD check is because the thrower didn't necessarily know the gunslinger was going to do it. The thrower would not have taken any specific action to avoid it, and instead simply thrown the weapon at their opponent. It's going in a straight line, and the added dex in my opinion is more to give it some chance of failure than anything else. It's no longer attended, so the it's not like the thrower can do anything about it at that point. That being said, there's a counter for this already in path of war (solar wind) called Intercepting Shade (level 2). On the SRD there's a bit of a formatting error where the second half of Solar Flare is added at the end of it instead of Solar Flare, but the rest is accurate.

[charcoalninja]

Consider that this can also be used to disrupt spells by simply readying an action to move, and yes, it is overpowered. In 3.5, you can also use this with abrupt jaunt to spoil attacks, or any kind of immediate move action. It's not just this case.

Great. Let him take the feat, then. That's what the precedent is: if you want to abide by different rules, you need a feat, class ability, or spell.

Or you could let your players apply existing mechanics creatively...

[OldTrees1]

It just sounds like it would be a feat to me. Perhaps a skill trick? Spot + dex 13 or something? Or maybe as part of a feat, like one of those feats that allows a number of combat maneuvers?

1) If something is not worthy of Cost X, then it shall not be made to have Cost X.
2) This is a highly niche situation where this benefit comes into play. At some point (before this) a benefit becomes too rare to be worth being involved in the limited character generation resources.

So I would default to this being part of the default combat maneuver. Things(feats) that buff that combat maneuver would in turn buff this usage. Instead of this as a feat, write a feat worthy ability that is related (Ex: you may expend an AoO to attempt to deflect an attack with your weapon).

[Âmesang]

So is anyone else now picturing a samurai cleaving a fired bullet in two? :smalltongue:

Heck, on a related note, if a spellcaster readies an action to cast time stop after someone throws a weapon/fires a projectile, could the caster then just grab them out of the air? All Matrix-like and what-not? "Za Warudo!"

[Occasional Sage]

One weakness of the ability could be that if the attack is a crit you can't sunder it.

Why would you penalize an already suboptimal choice? That's nonsensical.


There is no such thing mechanically as "mid-flight" in 3.P. It's either in the attacker's hand, or it has already hit and dealt damage or missed.

Sure, but that's only because the rules never had a reason to discuss things being in flight. As the rest of the thread has discussed (Snatch et al), there is precedent for interrupting ranged attacks.



As such, it would be resolved as a ranged sunder while still in the target's hand, and only then fluffed as being shot out of the air.


Again, why make a poor choice also more difficult? An easier chance to interrupt the attack seems like a good trade for the worsened action economy.

[Telonius]

The mental image I'm getting for this is pretty close to "Wall of Blades." (In fact, one of my players used it for that exact situation: he was carrying a Greatclub, and a Giant had thrown a boulder... "Home Run!")

[StreamOfTheSky]

Great. Let him take the feat, then. That's what the precedent is: if you want to abide by different rules, you need a feat, class ability, or spell.

The feat automatically stops the attack and is a non-action. Readying to sunder is no guarantee of success, costs your standard (and if the trigger never happens, your whole turn is wasted), and lowers your initiative in future combat rounds.

The two are not even remotely comparable.

[Castilonium]

There is an actual feat for this in Pathfinder. It's called Cut From The Air.

Cut from the Air (Weapon Mastery)

Your powerful and swift attacks can slice ranged attacks out of the air.

Prerequisite(s): Str 13, Power Attack, base attack bonus +5, weapon training class feature with a melee weapon.

Benefit(s): When a ranged attack is made against you or a target adjacent to you, you can cut the weapon (or ammunition) out of the air, deflecting the attack so the target takes no damage. As an attack of opportunity, make a melee attack roll at your highest bonus. If the result is greater than the attack roll total of the ranged attack, the attack is deflected. You must be aware of the attack and not flat-footed. Unusually massive ranged weapons (such as boulders or ballista bolts) and ranged attacks generated by spell effects cannot be deflected.

This feat is in Pathfinder Player Companion: Weapon Master’s Handbook © 2015, Paizo Inc

[Immabozo]

There is an actual feat for this in Pathfinder. It's called Cut From The Air.

This feat is in Pathfinder Player Companion: Weapon Master’s Handbook © 2015, Paizo Inc

/thread the mic has been dropped

[Psyren]

The feat lets you do it as an AoO, which is superior for action economy. I'd probably let you ready an action to attempt this without the feat as that is more costly.

[LTwerewolf]

Mic dropped not when an ability is mentioned the first time that allows this, but the second time when it suits your agenda better. Got it.

[NightbringerGGZ]

So is anyone else now picturing a samurai cleaving a fired bullet in two? :smalltongue:

Heck, on a related note, if a spellcaster readies an action to cast time stop after someone throws a weapon/fires a projectile, could the caster then just grab them out of the air? All Matrix-like and what-not? "Za Warudo!"

There's a feat for that somewhere, basically lets you chop down ammo. The feat chain eventually lets you chop aside ranged touch spells if I recall correctly. Give me some time this afternoon and I'll look it up =).

[StreamOfTheSky]

There is an actual feat for this in Pathfinder. It's called Cut From The Air.

This feat is in Pathfinder Player Companion: Weapon Master’s Handbook © 2015, Paizo Inc

Well, Paizo loves to take totally reasonable creative uses of the existing physical combat rules and turn them into martial feats...often with high level or multiple requirements, like with that "Strike Back" one right in core. Doesn't mean I need to go restricting the warriors in my game just because PF likes to stealth nerf them.
And as Psyren said, at least in this case the feat still gives some advantages over readying.

[Psyren]

Well, Paizo loves to take totally reasonable creative uses of the existing physical combat rules and turn them into martial feats...often with high level or multiple requirements, like with that "Strike Back" one right in core. Doesn't mean I need to go restricting the warriors in my game just because PF likes to stealth nerf them.
And as Psyren said, at least in this case the feat still gives some advantages over readying.

"Stealth nerf" is disingenuous - if the RAW doesn't allow you to do something at all, then you would obviously need a houserule to do that thing. If nothing is stopping you from houseruling that ability in before the feat exists, nothing is stopping you from houseruling it in afterward either.

Packaging it in a feat is actually beneficial - it gives me a basis, in my houserule, I can point to and say that "martials can do this thing, and here is a suggested prerequisite level/feats/ability scores they'd need to be able to do that thing." That gives me a baseline I can then tweak, such as making a less powerful version available baseline without a feat, as I did above with the Ready vs. AoO example.

[Deophaun]

Or you could let your players apply existing mechanics creatively...
Gee, I did that: Treat as ranged sunder, fluff as exploding in mid-air. All existing mechanics.

Readying an action for something that does not happen? Not an existing mechanic.

Sure, but that's only because the rules never had a reason to discuss things being in flight. As the rest of the thread has discussed (Snatch et al), there is precedent for interrupting ranged attacks.
The rules have ALWAYS had a reason to discuss things being in flight. Bows exist in the PHB. Movement exists in the PHB. Cover exists in the PHB. Readied actions exist in the PHB.

"I ready an action to move behind a tree when an arrow flies within 10' of me." Everything there is PHB. Yet, the PHB says no, because there is no flying arrow. The arrow is either in the bow, or it's in your neck, never in between. And there are good reasons for it.

Again, why make a poor choice also more difficult? An easier chance to interrupt the attack seems like a good trade for the worsened action economy.
Because it can be used for even better choices. It's like arguing that level 1 characters should get at-will polymorph so that one character can make his eyes turn different shades of blue as a standard action.

The feat automatically stops the attack and is a non-action. Readying to sunder is no guarantee of success, costs your standard (and if the trigger never happens, your whole turn is wasted), and lowers your initiative in future combat rounds.

The two are not even remotely comparable.
First, the question is not readying to sunder. Considering that I already stated I would treat it as a sunder, that is a ridiculous argument to bring against my position.

The question is triggering an action off of something that does not exist. Just because he would be using it sub-optimally in this case does not mean it is balanced.

[Aldrakan]

"I ready an action to move behind a tree when an arrow flies within 10' of me." Everything there is PHB. Yet, the PHB says no, because there is no flying arrow. The arrow is either in the bow, or it's in your neck, never in between. And there are good reasons for it.



You've claimed a couple times now that according to the PHB there's no flying arrow. Can you point to that, just to clear things up? Because there's a vast difference between the PHB not mentioning something, and it specifically not existing. Especially when it's something that obviously exists in reality, and there are mechanics clearly interact with something in this state (deflect arrows, wind wall, any kind of invisible barrier etc.). I don't think it mentions how long it takes to digest food either, that wouldn't mean food ceases to exist the moment it's swallowed.

As for your example, again, spending a standard action for an arrow to definitely miss you instead of maybe miss you is hardly gamebreaking.
Although in that case a DM might also say that's not a reasonable readied action, because it takes time to move, and they didn't give themselves enough time.
Because just as the arrow doesn't appear in you as soon as it's fired, you don't instantly appear behind a tree. Because many people like to play as though they're simulating being in a fantasy world (it's kind of the foundational concept), the turn-based system being a way to simulate it, rather than that being the actual laws of physics.

[Deophaun]

You've claimed a couple times now that according to the PHB there's no flying arrow. Can you actually point to that? Because there's a vast difference between the PHB not mentioning something, and it specifically not existing.
It's how the attack rules work. When you attack, you roll a d20. If you have not rolled the d20, you have not attacked.If the attack roll hits, you deal damage. If the d20 rolls a hit, it does not matter what has happened in the intervening time: you deal damage. There is no way, without a specific exemption granted by a feat, class ability, or spell, for anyone to take any action that spoils the attack. This is why 3.5's abrupt jaunt can be used to ruin a full-attack routine, but not an individual swing of a sword.

Consider readied actions: they occur before the event that triggered them. There are only two things for the readied action to key off of: the attack roll, or the damage roll. If you go before the attack roll, the attack never happens and its action is not used; the character may choose to do something different. If you go before the damage roll, who cares? Game doesn't; you still take damage because there is no check at that point to determine if you're still a valid target. You can fluff this however you like, but that's the mechanics.


As for your example, again, spending a standard action for an arrow to definitely miss you instead of maybe miss you is hardly gamebreaking.
So, you're telling me that you completely missed the part about rules not being balanced simply because a particular player in a paticular instance chooses to use it sub-optimally? That just went entirely over your head? Like at ISS altitude? Got it. I won't bother in the future.

[Larsen]

Consider readied actions: they occur before the event that triggered them. There are only two things for the readied action to key off of: the attack roll, or the damage roll. If you go before the attack roll, the attack never happens and its action is not used; the character may choose to do something different. If you go before the damage roll, who cares? Game doesn't; you still take damage because there is no check at that point to determine if you're still a valid target. You can fluff this however you like, but that's the mechanics.


The same logic can be applied to casting spells, but they can still be counterspelled with readied actions. Or interrupted with a readied attack.
Even if the readied action happens first from an initiative point of view, the triggering action is still spent.

[Eloel]

The same logic can be applied to casting spells, but they can still be counterspelled with readied actions. Or interrupted with a readied attack.
Even if the readied action happens first from an initiative point of view, the triggering action is still spent.

The same logic does not apply there, as you cannot interrupt a spell after it finishes being cast but before the affect is . There's an explicit "casting time" for spells, during which you interrupt them.

[Larsen]

Why wouldn't it be possible with an attack? There is nothing that say they dont take time. The attack roll only happens once the projectile is about to hit the target, not when it leaves the attackers hand.

Compare the following:

1- PJ: "I ready an action to attack the wizard if if cast a spell"
2- MJ: "The wizard start casting a spell"
3- PJ attacks and hit the wizard
4- MJ rolls concentration and fails -> spell lost and action of the wizard lost: "The spell fizzles".

1- PJ: "I ready an action to cast a wall of stone in front of the fighter (or sunder at a distance if that action is allowed) if he throws his axe."
2- MJ: The fighter throws his axe towards A
3- PJ cast wall of stone, granting total cover to the target.
4- MJ: "The axe hit the wall. The figther throws his second axe to B who is still visible". Doesn't roll for the first attack, rolls for the second.

I don't see any breach of the rules here.

[Florian]

The problematic issue rather is the "unattended object" part, which a fired shot/thrown weapon isn´t.

I think the most simply solution is spending a point of Grit to do a "Ranged Disarm", regular CMA check and be done with it.

[gooddragon1]

I'd allow it as follows:

AC of the object to hit is Size modifier+Attack roll result of the attack. It's moving so it doesn't lack a dex score and dexterity doesn't really come into play here. It's the force and speed of the attack. Attack roll represents this mechanically for this purpose. Balance wise it makes it at least decently challenging all the way up to completely impossible (though things with insane attack bonus tend not to throw weapons so much as claw you to death).

[Psyren]

There are various spells and other abilities that let you interrupt attacks/projectiles, e.g. Stone Shield (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic/all-spells/s/stone-shield). I'm personally of the opinion that, action-wise, anything an immediate lets you do is fair game for a ready.

[Jormengand]

I don't know about in Pathfinder, but in 3.5 the arrow really does exist between the two points, at least on the prime material:


Material Plane

The Material Plane tends to be the most Earthlike of all planes and operates under the same set of natural laws that our own real world does. This is the default plane for most adventures.

Given the way physics works and the fact that in reality arrows do not travel instantaneously (and would cause severe problems including but not limited to nuclear fusion reactions if they did), the arrow is indeed between the two points.

[Florian]

I don't know about in Pathfinder, but in 3.5 the arrow really does exist between the two points, at least on the prime material:

Given the way physics works and the fact that in reality arrows do not travel instantaneously (and would cause severe problems including but not limited to nuclear fusion reactions if they did), the arrow is indeed between the two points.

Uninteresting, actually. The combat system is an abstraction in which an arrow takes the same time traveling 10ft. or 10.000ft.
Only question is whether it is an unattended object at any point in-between or not.

[AnonymousPepper]

I think most everything has been hashed out thus far, but I would like to make a minor point wrt the person who suggested that you couldn't counter a crit with it. Why not? Swashbucklers can parry nat20s so long as they can beat the roll (does not call out an exception for nat20s, and as a class ability is more specific than the rule stating that nat20s always hit), and that's just about the most similar mechanic I can think of.

Edit: Actually, why not just work it out as a parry, except instead of getting it as an AoO, you have to ready (expending your standard) and you only get one?

[Tjallen]

Isn't there a thing in the bloodstorm blade prc from ToB about being able to prepare an action to close doors to prevent weapons with the returning ability from returning? I know it's 3.5, but that would be an example of things being in the air, no? Away from books so can't check.

[OldTrees1]

Isn't there a thing in the bloodstorm blade prc from ToB about being able to prepare an action to close doors to prevent weapons with the returning ability from returning? I know it's 3.5, but that would be an example of things being in the air, no? Away from books so can't check.

Yes, yes there is


Notes on stopping a Returning Weapon
It might seem logical to ready an action to grab a weapon that flies about the battlefield or somehow strike it from the air, but a thrown weapon is no more vulnerable to such tactics than an arrow. Although a feat such as Deflect Arrows remains useful protection, a thrown weapon with the returning special ability must be treated like any other thrown weapon. Once thrown, it is in rapid constant motion and never hovers or hangs in the air. However, some of the tactics that work against arrows can be effective against a bloodstorm blade’s thrown weapon attacks. For example, a creature could ready an action to close a door between itself and a bloodstorm blade when the blade throws a weapon. If the readied action was contingent on the weapon being thrown, the closed door would provide total cover against the attack. If the readied action was contingent on the weapon passing through the open door, the weapon would attack the bloodstorm blade’s intended target, but would be prevented from returning and fall to the floor after making its attack (whether successful or not), since line of effect no longer exists between the weapon and its wielder.

[AnonymousPepper]

Yes, yes there is

Since it mentions breaking line of effect as preventing things from returning, would this stop weapons with the Teleporting property (http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/SRD:Teleporting) from teleporting back to the thrower's hand? Just as a one-off curiosity.

[OldTrees1]

Since it mentions breaking line of effect as preventing things from returning, would this stop weapons with the Teleporting property (http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/SRD:Teleporting) from teleporting back to the thrower's hand? Just as a one-off curiosity.

IFF the path of the weapon is obstructed then yes. Teleporting property uses the Astral plane, so an obstruction isolating either endpoint from the Astral would prevent the teleporting. Normally closing a door does not so obstruct, but such an obstruction could exist without the door being closed.