Does Spell Sunder make ANY sense at all?


Rules Questions

Dark Archive

Hey all.

I'm running a campaign in which our barbarian is working towards getting the rage power Spell Sunder. He has taken other feats and such things to accomodate the rage power but i'm having a hard time accepting how this ability works, at the flavor level anyway.

I simply cannot understand how a barbarian is able to dispell magic simply because he is angry and 'sunders' the spell.

What does that even mean? Is he punching/grabbingyelling at the 'spell' on the creature? How does he sunder a Bull's Strength? From a physical stand-point I don't know what he is targeting or how that happens in-game. I also don't understand why he is able to do this because "I R TEH ANGREH".

Does anyone have any thoughts on this?


srd5090 wrote:
I simply cannot understand how a barbarian is able to dispell magic simply because he is angry and 'sunders' the spell.

Spell Sunder (Su) is a Supernatural Ability. Supernatural abilities are magical but not spell-like.

So he's using magic to break other magic that he doesn't like.


imagine the Hulk smashing some force shield.
there is like a magic-dimension, where spells have an aura overlaying the physical world, and the barbarian found a way to channel his will into his weapon so that it's even a weapon in the magic-dimension where it can damage ongoing spells.

Yeah, it's really hard to picture, but mundane means to destroy magic should be encouraged.


I can't for the life of me find a good image of this, but if you've ever seen Evangelion - do you recall the scene where EVA-01 pries apart an A.T. field with its bare hands? That's how this works.

A raging barbarian isn't just Really Mad. It's less about rage and more about... power. They're tapping into an arbitrarily powerful well of strength within themselves, and that's disruptive - see the "no concentration" clause - but it's also not just an expression of physical power, which is why you get abilities like "swim real good" (Beastial Swimmer) and "grow wings" (Dragon Totem Wings) and "absorb spell effects" (Eater of Magic).

If this was my character and I was asked to justify this thematically (for, say, a bull's strength, I'd style it like this: I would [i]plunge my hand into their belly[i], and then withdraw it; but instead of holding their intestines, I would be holding a glowing orange mass, and I would crush it in my fist.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

The "flavor" is that the Barbarian chows down on the magical energy. It tastes like glowing chicken.

Shadow Lodge Contributor, RPG Superstar 2010 Top 8

Burrito Al Pastor wrote:
I can't for the life of me find a good image of this, but if you've ever seen Evangelion - do you recall the scene where EVA-01 pries apart an A.T. field with its bare hands? That's how this works.

This Scene?


Benchak the Nightstalker wrote:
Burrito Al Pastor wrote:
I can't for the life of me find a good image of this, but if you've ever seen Evangelion - do you recall the scene where EVA-01 pries apart an A.T. field with its bare hands? That's how this works.
This Scene?

Thank you! This is exactly how barbarians work.

The Exchange

Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

its just so powerful...
yes its once per rage, but no one reaches it without some rage cycling. and then its the ability to sunder a spell with one round of rage.

wall of force
summon monster IX
demiplane
it has no caster level restriciton on the spell being sundered. so it doesn't scale at all with encounters. Why not have any restriction like CL <= barbarian level?


Seraphimpunk wrote:

its just so powerful...

yes its once per rage, but no one reaches it without some rage cycling. and then its the ability to sunder a spell with one round of rage.

wall of force
summon monster IX
demiplane
it has no caster level restriciton on the spell being sundered. so it doesn't scale at all with encounters. Why not have any restriction like CL <= barbarian level?

... because we want martials to have nice things occasionally?

Why shouldn't a barbarian be able to disrupt those spells?

The Exchange

Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

because even a mage can't without the right spells. and then it uses up a daily slot. and they have to make a caster level check when they do which is capped at + character level except for a few exceptions.
while the barbarian gets effectively + caster level ( base attack bonus ) + stat ( str ) and other sundry bonuses to the roll. so not only can he do it more often than a caster can ( rounds of rage > # of spell slots ), he has an easier time of it and can overcome anything as long as he surmounts the caster level.

you build a CL 20 trap set by ancient wizards? great, a 9th level barbarian can come along with close to +20 and destroy powerful traps or wards set thousands of years ago...

there's no built in sensible limit to this power. its nice to give martials nice things. but the intent of "once per rage" is once per rage / encounter. But it turns into once per round when they get around that with rage cycling. and even then, it can spoil plot.

Shadow Lodge Contributor, RPG Superstar 2010 Top 8

Ignoring the bizarro thread necro...

Here's another example of what it might look like to beat the magic out of someone.

The Exchange

Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

yah, sorry for the necro. i had some questions about it. figured better to raise the dead than start over.


Seraphimpunk wrote:


you build a CL 20 trap set by ancient wizards? great, a 9th level barbarian can come along with close to +20 and destroy powerful traps or wards set thousands of years ago...

You need to beat the DC by 10 or more to actually dispel it instead of suppressing it for a round or two, so in your hypothetical example the Barbarian would need to beat DC 45 (15 base + CL + 10 to dispel). If that's a trivial check for your Barbarian at 9th then he has some super serious Sunder optimization going, i.e. a lot of permanent character choices spent to buff his one trick. If that's the case he deserves to be good at it.


What bothers me most about the power is that it's totally unclear how the barbarian is even supposed to know what spell effects are where. A great many of them are invisible.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

It works because... Magic.

Casters can warp time and space, why do people question when non-casters can do interesting stuff that might actually have some impact on the story, rather than just impact on someones face?

I wish Fighters had something similar, but i won't try to derail this thread.

Spell Sunder makes PERFECT sense in a world where casters exist. Having the ability to attempt to end a spell effect is the logical evolution of a fighting style.

If you become powerful enough to unlock the ability, you ABSOLUTELY have faced casters, multiple times.

I wonder why this ability isn't available to MORE classes.


Seraphimpunk wrote:

its just so powerful...

yes its once per rage, but no one reaches it without some rage cycling. and then its the ability to sunder a spell with one round of rage.

wall of force
summon monster IX
demiplane
it has no caster level restriciton on the spell being sundered. so it doesn't scale at all with encounters. Why not have any restriction like CL <= barbarian level?

Demiplane and SMIX get spell sundered no nproblem, but I'm not so sure on Wall of Force. Isn't it immune to Dispel/AMF? Would Spell Sunder work in such a case?

Personally, I would perfer if it would, since Spells that create Walls should be the easiest spells to Sunder, but, I don't know.


Kaouse wrote:
Seraphimpunk wrote:

its just so powerful...

yes its once per rage, but no one reaches it without some rage cycling. and then its the ability to sunder a spell with one round of rage.

wall of force
summon monster IX
demiplane
it has no caster level restriciton on the spell being sundered. so it doesn't scale at all with encounters. Why not have any restriction like CL <= barbarian level?

Demiplane and SMIX get spell sundered no nproblem, but I'm not so sure on Wall of Force. Isn't it immune to Dispel/AMF? Would Spell Sunder work in such a case?

Personally, I would perfer if it would, since Spells that create Walls should be the easiest spells to Sunder, but, I don't know.

It's immune to Dispel Magic. Nowhere does it say that all atempts to dispel something count as Dispel Magic.

It's a bit wierd, but that's what it is.

As for Spell sunder...yep, it pretty much makes no sense from a realism standpoint. Which as far as I am concerned is a good thing. The barbarian at 6th level is a bigger badass than anyone who has ever lived. They should be able to punch magic out.


Forseti wrote:
What bothers me most about the power is that it's totally unclear how the barbarian is even supposed to know what spell effects are where. A great many of them are invisible.

Personally, I had my barbarian pickup knowledge arcana and spellcraft for just that reason. Not explicitly required, but it made sense.


I'm not certain that Spell Sunder works in all of the ways that you guys are saying. Otherwise what would be the purpose behind taking Sunder Enchantment? Are we counting "magic item" as just weapons, armor, shields, wonderous items, staves, wands, rods, rings, etc? Or are magic traps counted as well? What about items that are enchanted with magic made permanent via permanency?

If it is only the former I'm not certain that Rage Power is worth it. If it is any of the latter then it likely is.


Also, like Claxon, I have a character that uses this. She is a "human" "rogue" (half-orc Breaker/Liberator Barbarian with a single level in Trapper Ranger). So I have a vested interest in this discussion.


The way I had always interpreted Sunder Enchantment was that it was only needed for weapons, armor, shields, wondrous items, etc.

Unfortunately it's not made clear anywhere what does and doesn't count.


Does (or is your character going to get) have Sunder Enchantment? If so, or if you will humor me for the moment: for what reason would you get that Rage Power?

...can't you already Sunder all of those things without that Rage Power?


Lune wrote:

Does (or is your character going to get) have Sunder Enchantment? If so, or if you will humor me for the moment: for what reason would you get that Rage Power?

...can't you already Sunder all of those things without that Rage Power?

No my character didn't take it because yes you could sunder all those item to make them unable to be used. However, the difference is destroyed loot, versus temporarily disabled loot.


Mine is for PFS. You cannot permanently destroy items that are on the chronicle sheet there. So, yeah... kinda cheating in PFS. Similar to an Arcanist's Consume Magic Exploit. ;)

I can see it for non-PFS play for just temporarily disabling the enemy's loot, though.


I wasn't aware that such was the case for PFS. But it would make it unavailable for the adventure, so you would have to purchase it at the end. But that is better than not having access to it at all.

So yeah, for PFS it's probably a waste.

For a home game where the GM isn't going to compensate you for the loot you destroyed, you should consider taking Sunder Enchantment.

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Does Spell Sunder make ANY sense at all? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.