Say I'm playing an extremely strong (~30 Str) fighter who is not trained in unarmed strikes, and he happens to be fighting a guard in an attempt to break out of prison. He is unarmed, but the guard trying to stop him has a longsword.
If I were to attempt an unarmed Sunder combat maneuver to smash his sword, hoping that the unarmed guard will lose his nerve at the sight of it and flee, would I take a penalty? Objects are normally immune to nonlethal damage, which unarmed strikes typically deal unless you take a -4 penalty to your attack roll.
Does that penalty apply in this case if I want to deal any damage to his sword at all? Or do I just make a normal combat maneuver check for normal damage since it is a non-standard attack and not technically an unarmed strike?
And please don't say "why don't you just disarm him?" This is a question on how the rules work, not on what is the player's optimal action choice.
i think they do if you dont have ius. without it you dont threaten wgich is usually a function of being armed. though it occurs to me without ius you cant damage most weapons.
edit actually when ive thought about it nl damage cant really hurt objects. if ius didnt gdt the penalty there wouldnt be alot of point in the penty being mentioned.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
As far as I can tell - yes, you'd take the penalty, as a sunder is still an attempt to deal damage. Assuming you roll max damage on the attack, you could actually break the sword in one hit (one-handed weapons have hardness 10 and 5 hit points).
[derail] I prefer to do an empty-handed disarm so that I end up holding the weapon. Then bend it into a "U" shape with a strength check and hand it back. [/derail]
|
Objects are immune to nonlethal damage and to critical hits.
Dealing Lethal Damage: You can specify that your unarmed strike will deal lethal damage before you make your attack roll, but you take a –4 penalty on your attack roll. If you have the Improved Unarmed Strike feat, you can deal lethal damage with an unarmed strike without taking a penalty on the attack roll.
Since objects are immune to non-lethal damage, you must do lethal damage with your unarmed attack...and if you do not have Improved Unarmed Strike, you take -4 penalty to hit.
As Slim stated, the disarm would usually be more effective, but there is nothing stopping you from trying to sunder bare-handed.
Objects are immune to nonlethal damage and to critical hits.
Dealing Lethal Damage: You can specify that your unarmed strike will deal lethal damage before you make your attack roll, but you take a –4 penalty on your attack roll. If you have the Improved Unarmed Strike feat, you can deal lethal damage with an unarmed strike without taking a penalty on the attack roll.
Since objects are immune to non-lethal damage, you must do lethal damage with your unarmed attack...and if you do not have Improved Unarmed Strike, you take -4 penalty to hit.
As Slim stated, the disarm would usually be more effective, but there is nothing stopping you from trying to sunder bare-handed.
Making a disarm while unarmed incurs a -4 penalty to hit, so the checks are actually going to be the same.
Particularly in light of that (and because a sunder check is still an attack roll being done with an unarmed strike) you should take the -4 penalty for attempting to do lethal damage.
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Or do I just make a normal combat maneuver check for normal damage since it is a non-standard attack and not technically an unarmed strike?
Disarm, sunder and trip maneuvers are always delivered via weapons, and unarmed strike counts as a weapon for this purpose. Thus, you are using an unarmed strike for this particular sunder attempt.
I had thought you were already aware of the whole "some maneuvers use your weapon, some don't" thing, but maybe not. Anyway, there you go.
Also I believe you'd draw an AoO because you don't have Improved Unarmed Strike.
So if you don't have unarmed strike but do have improved sunder, does making this maneuver provoke?
Yes, because there are two separate conditions at play: You provoke if you make an unarmed strike without having IUS; you provoke if you make a sunder attempt without having Improved Sunder. Having Improved Sunder does not have any impact on the other potential trigger.
Now just to clarify, even if you lack both of them you would still only provoke once, because it's the attack that is the provoking action.
Except he isn't making an unarmed strike against an opponent, he's attempting to sunder unarmed.
As far as I can tell - yes, you'd take the penalty, as a sunder is still an attempt to deal damage. Assuming you roll max damage on the attack, you could actually break the sword in one hit (one-handed weapons have hardness 10 and 5 hit points).
I don't see how. Your max with 30 strength would be 13 damage for a medium creature. Don't you need 15 to break the sword?
EDIT: Unless you were referring to giving it the broken condition, of course.
Except he isn't making an unarmed strike against an opponent, he's attempting to sunder unarmed.
As far as I can tell - yes, you'd take the penalty, as a sunder is still an attempt to deal damage. Assuming you roll max damage on the attack, you could actually break the sword in one hit (one-handed weapons have hardness 10 and 5 hit points).I don't see how. Your max with 30 strength would be 13 damage for a medium creature. Don't you need 15 to break the sword?
EDIT: Unless you were referring to giving it the broken condition, of course.
Yep, I was speaking of the Broken condition, not destroying the weapon. That would be enough, IMO, to give you a hefty bonus on an Intimidate check; I'd probably rule that you bend the blade itself, not enough to be unusable but plenty enough to be noticeable (and scary).
Except he isn't making an unarmed strike against an opponent, he's attempting to sunder unarmed.
Attacking unarmed provokes an attack of opportunity from the character you attack, provided she is armed.
You can attempt to sunder an item held or worn by your opponent as part of an attack action in place of a melee attack. If you do not have the Improved Sunder feat, or a similar ability, attempting to sunder an item provokes an attack of opportunity from the target of your maneuver.
Sunder is just a specific form of an attack. And since it is still made against an opponent (though you're specifically targeting an item of the opponent), you are attacking that opponent for the purposes provoking by making an unarmed attack against an armed opponent.