In the 3.5 handbook, for sunder it says that you are unable to sunder armor worn by another character. Now that's something that has changed in PF since they've made sunder much more friendly and viable (yay!)
Also in the 3.5 DMG it's stated that magic weapons & shields with an enhancement bonus can only be sundered by a weapon of at least the same enhancement. Ok so +1 sword cant sunder +3 sword but another +3 sword can right?
In PF they also have the statement that magic weapons can't be sundered except by other magic weapons of at least the same enhancement. The problem is they don't mention shields in this spot in the PF book. Worse yet since worn armor went from being unsunderable in 3.5 to fair game in PF, the book has failed to say one way or the other if you have to have a weapon of equal or greater enhancement to sunder magic armor.
So I'm calling for an official rule & errata on this.
In order to sunder a magically enhanced weapon/shield/armor worn/wielded by a foe, do you have to make the attempt with a magic weapon of at least the same enhancement?
The intent seems to be yes so that's how I'll play it for those three cases until it gets errata'd
The other half of that question if the "magic bonus" counts. Can a +1 Flaming Sword sunder a +2 Sword?
I would assume that any weapon, armor, or shield would "win" if the actual +X is higher. So +3 Sword > +1 Vorpal Sword > +1 Fullplate.
I think the "X can sunder Y" business has to go on straight plusses, not added frill, many of which do nothing to add to damage anyway.
But that's my judgment call based on what you just said. Looking at the rules on p. 175, it states pretty clearly "add +2 for each +1 enhancement bonus of magic items" and later "add 10 HP for each +1 enhancement bonus of magic items."
The rules are changed from 3.5.
Also, it mentions on the same page that the person breaking it has the option of destroying something utterly or leaving it with 1 hp but in the broken condition.
I'd imagine it'd go on the straight enhancement bonus too (the +1 attack/dmg), not the bonus from abilities so as thazar said.
For the +2/+10 thats the rules on hardness. And yep the option to break or destroy was added to pathfinder which is why I'm really happy with it being more friendly. That along with the repair rules. Either able to cast 'make whole' if you're a higher caster level or spending 1/4 retail price worth of materials and craft time to repair it.
Anyway, don't have the book in front of me so I'll post later the precise page #s I'm referring to in the 3.5DMG/PHB and PF
It is covered in the rules. Look at the item damage section of the core book. magic items get bonuses to hardness and hit points based on the enhancement bonus.
EDIT: Bottom left on page 174 of the core book.
You misunderstood me. It's not the rules about Hardness and Weapon Hp that are missing. Those fairly well detailed. [Tangent: Except for the part where the special material Adamantine is the ONLY one that gives an increase in arms/armor hp]
In 3.5 theres an explicit rule that you couldn't sunder a foe's worn armor
In 3.5 theres an explicit rule that you cannot sunder a +2 sword or +2 shield with anything less than a +2 weapon.
In pathfinder theres an explicit rule that you cannot sunder a +2 sword with anything less than a +2 weapon.
So PF is missing the text in their rule that also prevents a +2 Armor and +2 shield from being sundered by anything less than a +2 weapon.
Ok, back from work here's page numbers
3.5 DMG 222: An attacker cannot damage a magic
weapon that has an enhancement bonus unless his own weapon
has at least as high an enhancement bonus as the weapon or shield
struck.
3.5 PHB 158: [Under image on right] You can't sunder armor worn by another character.
-This changed in PF and is fair game.
PF 468: Damaging Magic Weapons: An attacker cannot damage weapon that has an enhancement bonus unless his weapon has at least as high an enhancement bonus as the weapon struck.
Looks like a deliberate omission to me.
To be honest I never even saw the bit about not being able to sunder a higher-enchanted weapon. And I won't be instituting it, either. The increased hardness/HP rules are plenty.
Looks like a deliberate omission to me.
To be honest I never even saw the bit about not being able to sunder a higher-enchanted weapon. And I won't be instituting it, either. The increased hardness/HP rules are plenty.
I'm of pretty much the same mind. Especially since the enchanted weapon can still be repaired for free later or even mid-battle with a well-placed Make Whole.
The 3.5 Official Errata changed the rules on sundering magic weapons and hp/hardness of such items:
"Hardness and Hit Points
Dungeon Master’s Guide, page 222
Problem: The first paragraph is not consistent with similar information for shields on page 217.
Solution: Delete the first sentence after the boldface header.
(note: this was the sentence 'An attacker cannot damage a magic weapon that has an enhancement bonus unless his own weapon has at least as high an enhancement bonus as the weapon or shield struck)
Change the next sentence to read as follows:
Each +1 of enhancement bonus adds 2 to a weapon’s or shield’s hardness and +10 to its hit points."
So, 3.5 changed this rule, but the SRD was not adjusted - and PRPG decided (or was mislead ?) to use the non-adjusted rules.
This is one of the only two rules I do not like at all (the other being 'Counterspell is not modified from 3.x')... how is supposed a Cloud Giant to Sunder a lousy +1 Dagger with his non-magical oversized Morningstar ? A Great Wyrm Red Dragon to Sunder a +2 Longsword (his DR is only 'magic', which basically stands for '+1 weapon')? A Monk to break a +3 Quarterstaff without an Amulet of Mighty Fists(unless we decide that when he reaches Ki strike Adamantine, his own fists are basically +4 weapons)?
Ah, great find Wraith! So that rule was errata'd away.
So that means either Paizo happened to miss that. Or their rule was a modified ruling on it in which case only weapons could be sundered by equal or greater weapons.
I'm thinking its actually alittle of column A alittle of column B. That is, since the sentance is almost exactly as written in 3.5 it seems they read and modified it however they had completely missed the errata.
So now, it needs to make it into PF errata =) Hardness and HP really ought to be enough.