Toolbag's page

Ok. Here's the bottom line even though it will be a very unpopular opinion.

When rolling characters straight up like this, everyone will have a difficult time optimizing and power gaming. Even with a lucky set of rolls.

This is very obvious if you look through the posts and consider the tone and attitude used. Most people are complaining because they think that any character with beginning stats lower than 14 are "Nerfed".

An array of 16, 15, 14, 13, 12, 11 is a fine character. Especially once you add normal race bonuses. But why can't the array be 14, 13, 12, 11, 10, 9 and modified by race bonuses?

I'll tell you why. Because hack and slash type of power gamers think this character is a turd that couldn't slaughter a level 1 kobold in one attack.

Personally, I like the idea of rolling characters straight up because it forces the player to figure out inventive ways to make the character work while actually ROLEPLAYING. Sure, I wouldn't want to make every character that way but it throws some of that old school play into the mix if you do it once in a while.

I apologize for the ranting and raving along with my long winded ways.

There are times when fudging the roll behind the screen is a good thing to do. Especially early on when the PCs are relatively weak and squishy. Also, sometimes you know that the crit you just rolled would put an end to the character that your player WANTS to keep playing to see how the build pans out.

The other thing I will point out, though, is that if somebody ever complains/questions, pull the screen and force them to take whatever rolls you make right before their eyes.

It's one or the other so they can't complain if they force you to take down the screen.

I recommend a system borrowed from the World of Warcraft RPG (3.5 base). For each stat, roll 4d6 and discard the lowest die rolled.

It would then be a hybrid where stats have to be rolled in order but there is a better chance of getting numbers that can be worked with.

Otherwise. Yeah. Players are going to grumble about the possibility of being forced into one type of character or another. But I personally think it would be a good experience and reminder of how things used to be thereby putting more emphasis on play.

Kermon wrote:

Yeah, the main problem in my case is I didn't detect evil, and was mostly going off of an assumption that killing it was a good thing to do.

if your DM is going to penalize you for killing an obviously evil creature, i think you & him would benefit from reading this;** spoiler omitted **...

This is good. I'm glad Nemesis posted this as it illustrates my point exactly.

Sure, the Paladin was obviously drunk, but the fact is that the Paladin justified what he was doing according to the code and his deity by taking time to spell it out in game. At the very worst, I as a GM would have penalized him for his actions yet made it possible for him to get back into the good graces of his deity through an atonement spell or some equivalent action. Which would also have provided the roleplay hook Steelfiredragon was talking about.

The OP might have fouled up but there is a chance of atonement which would keep him from falling.

Y'all missed my point there. Which is: Very little is absolute in Pathfinder. The Paladin studying the ettercap for three rounds would have determined the strength of the creature's evil aura. Was it a starving creature eating whatever it could put in it's mouth? Or did it truly kill it's prey for a meal? (I don't know since I haven't looked up the info on ettercaps)

Having been a GM myself, I would give the Paladin some leeway if they make that determination before they act. Conversely, I would make it known that the Paladin's deity is angry if they just kill everything they see because they assumed it was evil. Any compromise in between is workable provided that the player/character handles the situation is some manner appropriate to their code and their deity.

An argument could be made that you might have trouble sneak attacking with weapons that are attached by a chain. Spiked chain, Flail, Heavy Flail, etc.

Why?

Because it might jingle and make enough noise to affect your stealth roll.

Any character wearing a beer dispensing helmet.

I agree. Talk to the GM about it.

However, another thought. Did the ettercap register with your Detect Evil aura? Or did you just kill it without using an action to determine it was evil?

The above posts are correct. There are ways for you to justify your actions according to the Paladin code and your deity. The most important thing, in my opinion, is that your character make some effort to determine whether or not the code is being violated before they act. This could be the Detect Evil aura, a Knowledge roll to determine the creatures alignment, a Knowledge roll to determine if the creature is undead, declaring that an atonement spell might be necessary and other such actions.

I know this seems really basic but it may depend on whether your noob is an experienced roleplayer or just new to RPG in general.

Definitely make sure they know what we are talking about when we say d20 or d8 or d6. I don't know how many newbie's I've seen who are confused by what we are used to and take for granted. Explain to them what d% are and what they might be used for.

Also. I would explain things in much more basic terms at first.

HP = how much you can get hurt before you die
Attack roll = how easy it is for you to hurt someone
Damage roll = how much you hurt someone

Not that I think people are stupid, but new players often need to have some equivalent that makes it easier to understand before sitting down at the table. Otherwise you tend to tell them when to roll dice and that's about the limit of their involvement.

At the same time, never be afraid to stop the game for what I call "A teaching moment". Experienced players will understand that these are necessary sometimes. For example: I had to stop and explain to a fairly new player about his character's alignment and how it was possible for him to do certain things that did not violate his lawful good status.

Don't stop for every single thing but it's ok to hold up the game for a few minutes for big major stuff.

Sorry. You're stuck. This is the way it has been in D&D in general forever. And while I admire your attempt to gain an advantage, it simply doesn't work in general.

I'm not trying to dissuade you from teamwork type of playing...However, I personally haven't seen much teamwork that meshed well (as opposed to mediocre meshing or not meshing at all). This is partially because I spent quite some time dealing with a slew of much lesser players who simply didn't get it.

RANT:
The big problem I have seen with teamwork in general has been the mix of characters in the party. Sure, everyone works towards the common good (or at least we hope they do), but everyone is on their own build path.

RAVE:
Not such a problem if you have a bunch of fighter types who can benefit from taking the extra feats. But this can become a massive problem with classes who don't get as many feats and therefore concentrate on feats that enhance the build.

CONCLUSION
(Edit)
In my opinion, we too often get caught up in optimizing what we see on our individual character sheet and lose track of what may or may not be helpful to the party as a whole.

I think I would look at what the non-"power gaming optimizer" is doing. Are they tripping? Grappling? Bull Rushing? Are they putting ranks in Bluff so they can Feint? Is there some way you could divert some of your characters abilities towards helping such things?

And by all means, follow Oli Ironbar's suggestion to play the character that you would find most enjoyable. Just consider what other things you might do to help the party as a whole that might be a challenge to your character at the same time.

I don't understand how magic works in your world either. However, I can't see how the magicians are deciding to stay neutral in all of this. I mean...if someone or some government told you and I that we aren't allowed to play Pathfinder...we aren't going to be very happy about it and we certainly aren't going to sit around watching the fight play out and accept the results. No way! We're going to get active and try to have a hand in our own destiny.

Ok. Now I see what you are getting at.

If I get +2 from Improved Sunder and +2 from Greater Sunder, that evens out 4 the BAB I use for power attack if I choose to do so. Beyond that it becomes a matter of what level I'm at and how much more BAB I want to sacrifice to power attack at higher levels.

I get the sense that you might be familiar with 3.x power attack, where the character could choose how much of a penalty to take when power attacking, limited to a maximum but not set to specific number by their BAB. If so, this changed. In PF, power attack is a set penalty to attack and a corresponding set bonus to damage according to BAB. You don’t get to opt for -1att/+2 dmg when you think you will have a hard time hitting your opponent. You also don’t get to opt for -5 att/+10dmg when you’ve got a bunch of bonuses to hit so you can afford to take a bigger penalty there.

Sunder, Improved Sunder and Greater Sunder will have absolutely no direct affect whatsoever on your damage roll, power attack or not. The bonuses they add will simply make it easier to land your attempt to sunder without any effect on the damage should you land your attempt.

_________________

You can make exceptionally deadly melee attacks by sacrificing accuracy for strength.

Prerequisites: Str 13, base attack bonus +1.

Benefit: You can choose to take a –1 penalty on all melee attack rolls and combat maneuver checks to gain a +2 bonus on all melee damage rolls. This bonus to damage is increased by half (+50%) if you are making an attack with a two-handed weapon, a one handed weapon using two hands, or a primary natural weapon that adds 1-1/2 times your Strength modifier on damage rolls. This bonus to damage is halved (–50%) if you are making an attack with an off-hand weapon or secondary natural weapon.

When your base attack bonus reaches +4, and every 4 points thereafter, the penalty increases by –1 and the bonus to damage increases by +2.

You must choose to use this feat before making an attack roll, and its effects last until your next turn. The bonus damage does not apply to touch attacks or effects that do not deal hit point damage.

____________
You are correct in that I am more familiar with the 3.5 version of power attack. However, now you've got me confused. The wording for Power Attack seems to work quite a bit like the 3.5 version. The only thing I see here is that I may only get to use Power Attack at one increment...the -1 attack/+2 damage you were referring to. Or as I progress in BAB it goes up to -2/+4, -3/+6, -4/+8 and so on. This is different from 3.5 because I can choose to use it or not...instead of at what increment.

If this is correct, then Improved and Greater Sunder will in fact boost my Sunder CMB roll thereby allowing me to choose to Power Attack my BAB bonus over to Damage. Albeit at the one increment instead of me choosing how much to transfer.

Am I wrong somehow?

Since Godzilla was originally a guy in a rubber suit, couldn't you base one off of a skin/robe/cloak concept that transforms the character into the beast?

More importantly, the known sundering weapons like lucern hammer and sword breaker dagger are not listed as favored weapons by any deities. At least as far as I know. Nor is the earth breaker listed as a favored weapon.

I also agree that it would depend upon the GM.

You are also correct in that I'm trying to get more bonuses by inventing more bonuses. That's why I think it was important to respond by including the intention for this to be an epic endeavor for this guy. It's simply not something that will happen anytime soon.

Otherwise. Perhaps a GM might accept that his attempts to create a new weapon comes with a certain failure possibility. Maybe the GM makes a secret-behind-the-screen d% roll to determine if the new weapon breaks.

I also think this introduces possibilities for extra roleplaying since the character would need to convince the group that he needs to make a side adventure to obtain some material. Or maybe he needs a special forge to work the material because of its' properties and that requires a visit to some remote/forsaken place.

1. You have a valid point concerning the core game mechanic. And although I didn't go into it before, my intention was that it would be this character's legacy. My intent was for him to adventure until at least level 15 while searching for the non-existant information. Thus spending many years of life tinkering with different ideas and designs before even coming close to a solution. Doesn't mean I am right or wrong but it was my thinking.

2. I agree that it could, and should, have been fleshed out more. As in, one of my thoughts was that some family member was also encouraging this by passing on an heirloom set of masterwork artisan tools to help the process along. Not enough to really make a backstory but we are on the same page here at least.

3. Torag was chosen based solely upon the fact that the favored weapon is the warhammer.

I don't understand why I've had some people on the forum question my intentions with a character but I'm willing to chalk it up to everyone having their own opinion and playing style. However, I've decided to lay it out here in the General category just for fun and see where the conversation goes.
_________________________

Torag blesses my human Paladin through the holy symbol engraved in each side of the head of his warhammer, thus making the hammer eligible for channeling/smiting evil through the hammer. This is not the only reason for the warhammer, though, as shattering the forces of evil is often accomplished through sundering actions.

This is in direct contrast to Torag's wish that followers create.

Therefore, my Paladin has ventured into the world to pursue a legend found deep within the works of his homeland, the Five Kings Mountains.

Legend states that the ancient Orcs employed a special material known as Thorium along with weapons which had been weighted to deal extra damage when striking foes. He is actively seeking Orc settlements in order to gain this special knowledge. (These are World of Warcraft concepts which I am bringing over to Pathfinder with the intent that this Paladin is on a wild goose chase because they do not exist in Golarion)

Eventually having failed in his quest, he turns his creative energy to devising his own special weapon which would have the new quality of "Sundering" (based upon the qualities of Disarm, Trip, etc.).

________________________

These ideas would be subject to GM approval but I think that it works well as a backstory and has good potential for story hooks.

Yes. That's exactly what I meant although I apparently didn't word it very well.

The bottom line is that Improved and Greater Sunder add +4 to the CMB roll which could then be Power Attacked to the damage roll as per the norm.

Instead of Improved and Greater Sunder adding +4 to both the CMB roll and the damage roll.

I know this has been beat to death (Yes it's a pun for sundering) but I haven't been able to find anything even remotely like this question.
_______________________________
Sunder

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 in place of a melee attack* (see Editors Note: Multiple Sunder Attempts). 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.

If your attack is successful, you deal damage to the item normally. Damage that exceeds the object’s Hardness is subtracted from its hit points. If an object has equal to or less than half its total hit points remaining, it gains the broken condition. If the damage you deal would reduce the object to less than 0 hit points, you can choose to destroy it. If you do not choose to destroy it, the object is left with only 1 hit point and the broken condition.
_________________________________
Improved Sunder

You are skilled at damaging your foes’ weapons and armor.

Prerequisite: Str 13, Power Attack, base attack bonus +1.

Benefit: You do not provoke an attack of opportunity when performing a sunder combat maneuver. In addition, you receive a +2 bonus on checks made to sunder an item. You also receive a +2 bonus to your Combat Maneuver Defense whenever an opponent tries to sunder your gear.

Normal: You provoke an attack of opportunity when performing a sunder combat maneuver.
__________________________

Greater Sunder

Your devastating strikes cleave through weapons and armor and into their wielders, damaging both item and wielder alike in a single terrific strike.

Prerequisites: Improved Sunder, Power Attack, base attack bonus +6, Str 13.

Benefit: You receive a +2 bonus on checks made to sunder an item. This bonus stacks with the bonus granted by Improved Sunder. Whenever you sunder to destroy a weapon, shield, or suit of armor, any excess damage is applied to the item’s wielder. No damage is transferred if you decide to leave the item with 1 hit point.

_________________________
So by these rules, you get to add +4 to your CMB to Sunder. Great. But does it only get applied to the CMB check? Or does it also get applied to the damage dealt normally?

My interpretation is that it only applies to the CMB check and would have to be applied to the damage roll through Power Attack. No other option available.

Yeah. I accept the probability that they won't be happy. But it plays into the backstory I have come up with for a Human Paladin using a warhammer as a holy symbol of Torag.

I'm still relatively new to Pathfinder and I am putting together a character built with Greater Sundering in mind. Does Pathfinder have rules for the magical backlash of destroying a magic item? Not all systems do.

PRD materials only please.

Thanks.

The difference between CAN and SHOULD is a good way to look at it too. Especially since we were all noob's at one point in time and figured out how the game works as we went along.

I have seen a fair amount of "Why are you not doing this?" and "You didn't do that." and "You should be doing..." type of things. I've even had to stop and tell the entire group that if they would simply give me a minute to take my turn they would understand what I had going on.

These instances equate to what Phillippe Lam said about different expectations at the same table.

Fortunately these have never been truly serious problems and I've only had to forcibly boot a player from the table once (the only other time the player knew he did wrong and accepted his fate without even voting on it).

At the very worst, maybe he's got a thing for sculpting snakes.

I really like what Gummy Bear said above. It sums things up in a better way than my half thought out rambling. I especially like the part about getting away from the need to "win". It's all about having fun and even I got away from that in my earlier post.

I've had to use the phrase "shut up and let me play my character". It's never pleasant. But it works and it works well because I have never had to use it twice with the same player. Even if I did have to use it twice with the same player, that player would have earned themselves a group vote to be booted from the table.

New players are one thing because they may need a little help in deciding what action might be best.

Established players are entirely different. There might be a theme to the character; a backstory may be involved; or the possibility that advice and rules lawyering has delayed the game so badly that an action is being taken just to move the game along.

Also. It's not always about max damage. Sometimes a control move is a good option too. Or a blindness spell that wreaks havoc on the enemy.

So where am I going with this? Let players make their own choices and don't be afraid to tell them point blank.

"SHUT IT, NERD!" Lol!

Yeah. I think we're in agreement. I will look into the Shatterspike enchantment but I think it will all come down to personal preference. My original intent was the warhammer because it is the favored weapon of Torag. But at the same time, there really aren't that many undead in the Reign of Winter adventure path so the hammer as a channeling/smiting holy symbol might not be that effective.

I would set up encounters that exploit the fact that sometimes they make dumb decisions. This is always the most fun because you can test the players to see just how dumb/naïve they may be. Also. One time I had a GM set up encounters for each of the party members that tested their willingness to follow their alignment. Possibly turning traitor against their own people/race? A paladin choosing a fair fight with unarmed strike because the opponent has no weapons? Something along those lines. I do also like the choice of different guides with different levels of expertise. So many chances for chaos to ensue.

Actually, the Earth Breaker wouldn't be bad but for one thing. The warhammer is the favored weapon of Torag and is therefore eligible for the possibility of using it as a holy symbol which would allow channeling/smiting through the warhammer. Blah, blah, blah...you get the idea even if I'm not stating it very well.

Cleaving Finish says "target"...

Prerequisites: Str 13, Cleave, Power Attack.

Benefit: If you make a melee attack, and your target drops to 0 or fewer hit points as a result of your attack, you can make another melee attack using your highest base attack bonus against another opponent within reach. You can make only one extra attack per round with this feat.

And honestly, it's a concept that I found somewhere in these forums, it is not an original of mine.

It just is awesome if it works, however it leaves zero useable loot when you are done with the person.

I agree it would work great provided that I accept the fact that I'm destroying all of the loot. It would even work great if I was sundering a holy symbol, spell component pouch or spellbook. I'm just not sold on using cleave in conjunction with sunder. Even in your posting above, it still says MELEE ATTACK. But sundering works under the CMB/CMD rules. While CMB vs. CMD can be substituted for a melee attack, is it a melee attack by it's own right? I admit I'm still new to pathfinder but I'm not sure sundering qualifies for cleave in general.

The following is copied from PRD:

Sunder

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.

If your attack is successful, you deal damage to the item normally. Damage that exceeds the object's Hardness is subtracted from its hit points. If an object has equal to or less than half its total hit points remaining, it gains the broken condition (see Conditions). If the damage you deal would reduce the object to less than 0 hit points, you can choose to destroy it. If you do not choose to destroy it, the object is left with only 1 hit point and the broken condition.

Hmmm. Interesting concept at least. However, I copied and pasted this directly from the PRD covering the Core Rulebook.

Cleave (Combat)

You can strike two adjacent foes with a single swing.

Prerequisites: Str 13, Power Attack, base attack bonus +1.

Benefit: As a standard action, you can make a single attack at your full base attack bonus against a foe within reach. If you hit, you deal damage normally and can make an additional attack (using your full base attack bonus) against a foe that is adjacent to the first and also within reach. You can only make one additional attack per round with this feat. When you use this feat, you take a –2 penalty to your Armor Class until your next turn.

But this says to make an attack against a FOE. How do you justify the weapon/shield/armor as being a foe? Most people I know would tell you it only applies to their body.

You're right. This is all really good stuff. I will only stress that you pay attention to what choices the players are making on their character sheets. Which feats are they choosing? Which skills are they putting ranks in? Where did they put their ability point? These kinds of things are indicators of what the players are expecting in the game and where the players think or intend for the game to go and you can use this to tweak/add to the adventure path to make sure they have opportunities to put their choices into action.

Oh. Oops. Forgot to put in the Adamantine part. And yes, PRD only means no third party stuff. If we don't have a physical copy of the book, the GM likes to be able to pull up the PRD on his cell phone. Saves a lot of argument due to interpretation that way.

I realize that a character built around sundering is not popular due to the destruction of loot but I wanted to get some general advice on this concept.

Reign of Winter adventure path

Human Paladin multi-classed into Fighter for feats and weapon training

Blood of Giants trait (+1 to CMB for Sunder)

Power Attack
Improved Sunder
Greater Sunder
Weapon Focus--Warhammer
Weapon Specialization--Warhammer
Weapon Training--Hammers

Possible use of the Warhammer as a holy symbol of Torag

PRD materials only.

Any great suggestions for improving this concept beyond Greater Weapon Focus and Greater Weapon Specialization?

Thank you, one and all.

If it is a character that is purposefully going out to adventure, it probably has the best armor it can afford... regardless of the material.

Why nerf the character with inferior armor just because the other minotaurs wear leather or hide?

Hmmm. Not sure if I am offended by this or not. All I can think to say is that not every person on the planet is a power gamer.

Otherwise, as a monster class, a Minotaur Barbarian may choose a natural armor material and spend the gold cost of Mithral for some better weapon.

Just my opinion.

Personally, I would assume that the Minotaur would prefer an armor made out of some natural material (hence the suggestion for hide or leather). Others might be able to tell you about Darkwood(?) armor. And this is presuming the Minotaur is intelligent enough to choose manufactured armor as opposed to some form of natural armor bonus.

I'm relatively new to Pathfinder and little out of date on D&D in general but I've never known of anyone to try this. I agree that it is an interesting idea, however, Cavall's post from earlier is pretty accurate as far as I know. There just hasn't historically been a way to change a weapons damage type from piercing/slashing/bludgeoning to things like fire/cold/acid/force/sonic. Sorry.

I'm guessing they don't want to have to go back to town themselves to deliver this gold. Seems they are looking for some form of teleportation.

Toolbag wrote:

Ok. I have a serious reply now.

Is the ankylosaurus eligible for the feats Endurance and Die Hard? (I personally don't like animal companions and usually shun them)

Endurance would give the cold-blooded dinosaur some helpful save vs. heat/cold while Die Hard would keep it alive after it reaches 0 HP so that you could heal it in some way.

Both and if you raise their int to 3 they can learn any.

Also dinos aren't cold blooded recent science believes they are a special mix of cold and warm blooded that allowed them to more properly regulate their body temperatures.

Die hard also doesn't do anything to keep you alive, it keeps you conscious.

Hhhmmmm. New science that I wasn't aware of. And my point to Die Hard was that it would be a way to call the dinosaur out of combat for much needed healing.

Ok. I have a serious reply now.

Is the ankylosaurus eligible for the feats Endurance and Die Hard? (I personally don't like animal companions and usually shun them)

Endurance would give the cold-blooded dinosaur some helpful save vs. heat/cold while Die Hard would keep it alive after it reaches 0 HP so that you could heal it in some way.

Dumb question...What would keep the Ankylosaurus from attacking and trying to eat the second animal companion? I mean...is Anky there a vegetarian? I don't remember my dinosaurs that well.

Gotcha!

According to those links, you might end up with multiple Attacks of Opportunity...Your disarm fails so you've shared Improved Disarm Partner with your allies who now get to make disarm attempts as an AoO...the disarm portion provoking an AoO from the enemy.

This would be broken if your allies also have Improved Disarm which specifically says that the characters disarm attempts do not provoke.

That scenario would be...Your disarm fails so you've shared Improved Disarm Partner with your allies who now get to make disarm attempts as an AoO...however your allies also have Improved Disarm which keeps their disarm attempts from provoking. Bad guy gets nothing but bad news.

I think you are correct here. Your lower STR is really causing you a problem. And what's worse, I think Power Attack will only make this worse in your current state. I would definitely look into some boost to STR.

As for AoO's in the scenario you described:
I think it will all depend on what Improved Disarm Partner says. If it is like Improved Disarm, then your allies making a disarm attempt would not provoke attacks of opportunity.

I presume Improved Disarm Partner is a teamwork feat that may have Improved Disarm as a prerequisite?

Ah. Ok. Now I'm with you.

Power Attack says: You can choose to take a -1 penalty on all melee attack rolls and combat maneuver checks to gain a +2 bonus on all melee damage rolls. This bonus to damage is increased by half (+50%) if you are making an attack with a two-handed weapon, a one handed weapon using two hands, or a primary natural weapon that adds 1-1/2 times your Strength modifier on damage rolls. This bonus to damage is halved (-50%) if you are making an attack with an off-hand weapon or secondary natural weapon....

My interpretation of this is:
The off-hand weapon would be subject to (-50%) penalty. So. If the normal bonus is +2, the off-hand weapon would only gain +1.

This makes Power Attack for an off-hand weapon an even trade: -1 to all attack rolls and CMB rolls for +1 to all damage rolls.

By my numbers the +1 Swordbreaker would normally get:
1+1d4+half STR mod, or 1+1d4+1 in this case, for a max damage of 6

So if Power Attack for this scenario is an even trade then the +1 Swordbreaker would need to Power Attack for at least 5 to break DR10

New numbers:
-5 to attack or CMB is 1+1d4+1+5 which equals a max damage of 11

Double Slice would bring this up to this number:
1+1d4+2 which equals max damage of 7

Therefore with Double Slice you would need to Power Attack for at least 4 to break DR10
-4 to attack or CMB is 1+1d4+2+4 which equals a max damage of 11

Wait a minute. Maybe I missed something here.

Sure the Swordbreaker is still a Dagger but it's offhand damage is 1d4+1/2STR mod. Not a prime damage dealer even with the bleed.

Let's face it...the Swordbreaker Dagger is designed for disarming and less than mediocre at sundering. Now you've made a good choice in the Adamantine Swordbreaker but it's still only mediocre at sundering because of the 1d4+1/2STR mod of damage.

Borrowing from my own Swordbreaker/Rapier TWF build, my suggestion is the feat Break Guard...thus allowing you to perform a disarm with the Swordbreaker followed by a Power Attack from your primary weapon.

If you are concerned about Power Attack being used with Improved Sunder through the Swordbreaker Dagger, the only chance you have is the feat Double Slice...add full STR mod to off hand damage instead of 1/2STR mod.

My first thought was Rust Monster but then I realized that Rust Lord would be better yet.

Claxon is correct. What I meant by using a hold spell or a blindness spell is this: your build is super anti-melee, but from what you originally posted, he appears to have little to no preparation against spells at all. No spell resistance and I assume average saves for this level. All of that equates to being vulnerable to magic.

I agree. There are a lot of adventuring possibilities built into this guy that should make the game interesting.