Pointlessness of damaging armor and baiting the DM


Advice

1 to 50 of 85 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Liberty's Edge

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I was recently looking for a interesting weapon for a new character and came upon the Lucerne Hammer. I have never seen a character or NPC use one in Pathfinder, DnD 3.5 or even 3.0. Awesome, let me see what this see text thing is: +2 to CMB if you sunder medium or heavy armor.

Looking at the rules it is quite pointless to even try it despite this weapon being historically designed for this task.

Full-Plate hardness 10, HP 45
We'll use Str 16, Power Attack, and assume max damage for an example. So 9 damage.
Only After putting 3 holes in this armor does it begin to have the Broken Condition. For a character without power attack it really is pointless unless you want to bait the DM.

Then I thought about it not being about damaging the armor at all. It would be completely about how hilarious this situation would be.

Player: I attempt to Sunder Mr Aspis' armor.
DM: Do you have Improved Sunder?
Player: No, but I'm feeling confident that he doesn't have 10' reach.
DM: Okay, your weapon is within his reach while you are doing this so he will use his AoO to Disarm.
Player: Does he have Improved Disarm?
DM: No....
Player: Well I guess that means I'll use my AoO to Disarm him.
DM: Do you....
Player: No I don't. Does he have Combat Reflexes?
DM: No, make your disarm attempt.
Player: I got a 22 CM check.
DM: He is disarmed.
Player: Are you going to attempt to disarm me while unarmed?
DM: He can do that.
Player: Awesome! Does he have Improved Unarmed Strike? Because I do have Combat Reflexes.


7 people marked this as a favorite.

M: Okay, your weapon is within his reach while you are doing this so he will use his AoO to Disarm.

This doesn't work. you specifically need a high level fighter feat and a readied action to do that.

Liberty's Edge

I did see a Forum Post specifically on the topic of what you can do with an AoO.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Askdal Aleheart wrote:

I did see a Forum Post specifically on the topic of what you can do with an AoO.

The sunder is fine, but the attack of opportunity is made against the creature, not the weapon , and the creature is out of reach.

The Exchange

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Sunder builds don't really come online until medium-low levels.

Let's take a 4th level fighter with power attack, weapon specialization, and 18 strength for a +1 adamantine (important!) Lucerne hammer. That's 15 damage plus whatever he rolls. Still takes a tiny bit more than 2 hits on average to destroy full plate but almost anything else is within range of a 1-hit destruction.

Lucerne hammer is a fun weapon anyway. It's one of the very few d12 weapons, has reach, and gives you a choice of bashing or piercing.


If you build to sunder it can be impressive against people that have stuff to sunder.

I have never seen a person sunder armor. I have sundered weapons, holy symbols, and spell pouches before. Those can sometimes be easy to break. Heck under domination I sundered a +1 addy scimmitar.

If you get an addy weapon the 19 or less hardness is ignored. SO it is straight damage. A level 4 barbarian smashing someones armor can half that armor's hp it one hit

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.

My Magus (now retired) was a Sunder Specialist.

Using an Adamantine Weapon with Power Attack, Spellstrike and Haste he was able to chop his way through anything. His CMB was much higher than his regular to-hit.

I remember one fight in particular where getting rid of the BBEG's armor allowed the rest of the party to cut him down.

When I built him I was all too familiar with how Magi could solo encounters in one round. To avoid stealing the limelight from my party members I focused on Sundering as a method of debuffing.

It was a lot of fun ^_^

Sovereign Court

Armor is the last possible thing to sunder. Greater Sunder can even be a way to get at someone's HP if their AC far outpaces their CMD.

Instead, the following are great targets:
- Weapon; many NPCs don't carry a backup or are totally specialized in this one.
- Spell component pouch: can have the GM flipping lots of pages to figure out what he can still cast. Doesn't stop everything, notably not escape with Dimension Door. A caster without a pouch is most likely a sorcerer.
- Holy Symbol: stops some spellcasting, stops channel energy. Some priests have tattoos or birthmarks though.
- Arcane Bonded Items: many NPCs don't have familiars so if they're wizards tend to have this. Look for rings and amulets or fancy weapons in the hands of casters.

After that you can start sundering shoes, friendship bracelets, scarves and so forth, if Greater Sunder is your game.


7 people marked this as a favorite.
Lau Bannenberg wrote:


- Holy Symbol: stops some spellcasting, stops channel energy. Some priests have tattoos or birthmarks though.

.

in one game we were getting ripped apart by the channel cleric. So I sundered her symbol, and the Dm said she had another one. So my buddy sundered that. Then he shouts "where's your god now!"


Finlanderboy wrote:
Lau Bannenberg wrote:


- Holy Symbol: stops some spellcasting, stops channel energy. Some priests have tattoos or birthmarks though.

.

in one game we were getting ripped apart by the channel cleric. So I sundered her symbol, and the Dm said she had another one. So my buddy sundered that. Then he shouts "where's your god now!"

Someone reads the forums, because the last smart necromancer i saw had a holy symbol face tatoo


7 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
BigNorseWolf wrote:
Finlanderboy wrote:
Lau Bannenberg wrote:


- Holy Symbol: stops some spellcasting, stops channel energy. Some priests have tattoos or birthmarks though.

.

in one game we were getting ripped apart by the channel cleric. So I sundered her symbol, and the Dm said she had another one. So my buddy sundered that. Then he shouts "where's your god now!"

Someone reads the forums, because the last smart necromancer i saw had a holy symbol face tatoo

[b]I SUNDER FACE![b]

You're attacking for damage?

No, I'm attacking the tattoo on their face to sunder it..

*coughs*

Shadow Lodge

5 people marked this as a favorite.

I disagree. I've looked into making a sunder or disarm build before. Especially against a holy symbol or spell component pouch, it feels like a d*** move, and ruins the day for the GM.

Sczarni

7 people marked this as a favorite.

As a GM, I'm more likely to have the BBEG surrender when all they have left is a broken handle and a loincloth.

And I'm fine with that.

Dark Archive

3 people marked this as a favorite.

GROND SUNDER LOINCLOTH.

-GROND


Grond Doomhammer wrote:

GROND SUNDER LOINCLOTH.

-GROND

Bad Grond no wants to see his wobbly bits. Not give him your used snot rag.

Shadow Lodge

5 people marked this as a favorite.

Sundering a loincloth is just giving that enemy Quick Draw for free.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

...Wow. That escalated quickly...


1 person marked this as a favorite.
James Anderson wrote:
I disagree. I've looked into making a sunder or disarm build before. Especially against a holy symbol or spell component pouch, it feels like a d*** move, and ruins the day for the GM.

I am cool with this as a DM. I would rather have players surprise me with things that are different. Infact I can not think of a single tactic the PCs as a group could do that would upset me.

The only time I get annoyed is when a player or two is hogging the action from other players.


James Anderson wrote:
I disagree. I've looked into making a sunder or disarm build before. Especially against a holy symbol or spell component pouch, it feels like a d*** move, and ruins the day for the GM.

It is not a dick move, just like a coup de grace is not a dick move. It is something you don't like which is not the same as "it's universally bad". As long as the player's and GM are on the same page it is a non-issue.


plus, the GM job is to tell the story for hte players to win. If the player's are winning cause they sundered why would that ruin the GM's day? The only way it would ruing it is if the GM was against the PC's and wanted to kill them and was sad that he had no chance to do that. But that doesn't sound like the GM's the Society say to be.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Thomas Hutchins wrote:
plus, the GM job is to tell the story for hte players to win.

No, no it really isn't. Otherwise we wouldn't ever bother rolling any dice.


5 people marked this as a favorite.
andreww wrote:
Thomas Hutchins wrote:
plus, the GM job is to tell the story for the players to win.
No, no it really isn't. Otherwise we wouldn't ever bother rolling any dice.

Yes, yes it really is. The base for usefulness in scenarios is quite low. Fights are tilted for the players to win. The players are meant to win. They don't always win, but they are meant to win. The GM is the story teller, not an adversary to the players. And since the GM's goal shouldn't be to have a TPK having the players sunder some NPC's gear shouldn't upset the GM.

Grand Lodge

Thomas Hutchins wrote:
andreww wrote:
Thomas Hutchins wrote:
plus, the GM job is to tell the story for the players to win.
No, no it really isn't. Otherwise we wouldn't ever bother rolling any dice.
Yes, yes it really is. The base for usefulness in scenarios is quite low. Fights are tilted for the players to win. The players are meant to win. They don't always win, but they are meant to win. The GM is the story teller, not an adversary to the players. And since the GM's goal shouldn't be to have a TPK having the players sunder some NPC's gear shouldn't upset the GM.

You can pretty well calculate how often the PCs are supposed to lose, based on the wealth by level charts and the amount of prestige awarded vs the amount it costs to buy stuff with prestige.

It works out to an average, unoptomized PC should die on average once per ten games.

That sounds to me like the GM should be expecting the PC to win. I mean, he shouldn't bend the rules to make it happen, but he shouldn't be getting in the way either.

Silver Crusade

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Finlanderboy wrote:
James Anderson wrote:
I disagree. I've looked into making a sunder or disarm build before. Especially against a holy symbol or spell component pouch, it feels like a d*** move, and ruins the day for the GM.

I am cool with this as a DM. I would rather have players surprise me with things that are different. Infact I can not think of a single tactic the PCs as a group could do that would upset me.

The only time I get annoyed is when a player or two is hogging the action from other players.

I don't mind the tactic. I do mind that the bad guys are so absurdly vulnerable to some tactics.

Just about every character played by a competent, experienced player has backups of important things unless there is a roleplaying reason not to.

Backup spell component pouches, holy symbols, weapons, a dagger, etc.

Sundering a wizards spell component pouch should be a good tactic as it forces him to spend a round getting his backup, it shouldn't completely end the encounter.

Liberty's Edge

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Starfinder Superscriber

Honestly, I don't like anybody, player or GM, sundering a spell component pouch. It's just-- well, pathetic. It's finding the loophole in the game that breaks the game conventions about what a challenging combat is supposed to be. Yeah, I know, you have to invest some feats in being able to do it, but once you have, it just turns what should be challenging encounters into stupid things. It's like finding the cheat in a video game that makes you invincible. It is kind of cool for a short while as you feel completely empowered, but then quickly you either stop using it, or you stop playing the video game altogether because it's no longer any fun.

As a player, if another player started sundering holy symbols or spell component pouches, I'd be annoyed unless we were already in extremis and that was a last-ditch thing to save our lives.

Honestly, I feel the same way about slumber witches. If a slumber witch immediately presses the "end encounter" button every time, it just becomes boring. They can be used well -- to strategically take out some enemies in a multiple-enemy encounter, or as the last-ditch effort you use when things are starting to go really south. (I saw the spell "deep slumber" used in exactly this latter way in a game recently, and it was awesome.) But if you open with slumber in an encounter-ending way every combat, or if your go-to tactic is sundering holy symbols or spell component pouches, then that's likely to be annoying to other players at the table.

Really, I wish spell component pouches didn't even exist. Material components are an annoying hold-over from 1st edition that I used to houserule away. The spell component pouch is a nice workaround that lets you spend 5gp and not have to worry about enumerating all the stupid little things you're supposed to have to cast every spell. And, yeah, I get that material components can add flavor-- but mostly the add fiddly annoyingness. And, the fact that spell component pouches according to the rules can be sundered adds a very serious vulnerability that really isn't supposed to be in the scenario.

If I see a GM using tactics like that, that GM goes on a list of GMs never to play with.

If, as GM, I see players using those tactics, then I will seriously consider using similarly dirty tactics back. (I would never open with such tactics, unless the scenario explicitly told me to, and if there wasn't a VERY STRONG plot reason for it, I'd b@#@$ and moan about those written tactics in a review of the scenario.)


4 people marked this as a favorite.

Sundering a spell component pouch is a matter of table variation. The rules are silent on what happens when you sunder a multipart object: slicing open a bag of bat guano doesn't cause the bat guano to disappear from existence, it just makes it harder to handle.

Grand Lodge

Finlanderboy wrote:
Lau Bannenberg wrote:


- Holy Symbol: stops some spellcasting, stops channel energy. Some priests have tattoos or birthmarks though.

.

in one game we were getting ripped apart by the channel cleric. So I sundered her symbol, and the Dm said she had another one. So my buddy sundered that. Then he shouts "where's your god now!"

I tried that in a certain season 0 level 3 negative channeler vs low tier and the GM basically just said "no" because that wasn't fun for him. I didn't want to kill the NPC and knew that would be the equivalent of incapacitating them. I was playing a barb and knew I could just hit them so I ended up doing that. So I ended up taking away both our fun because he disallowed my action and I killed his NPC. Luckily no one died or it would have mattered.

Grand Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
rknop wrote:
Honestly, I don't like anybody, player or GM, sundering a spell component pouch. It's just-- well, pathetic. It's finding the loophole in the game that breaks the game conventions about what a challenging combat is supposed to be. Yeah, I know, you have to invest some feats in being able to do it, but once you have, it just turns what should be challenging encounters into stupid things. It's like finding the cheat in a video game that makes you invincible. It is kind of cool for a short while as you feel completely empowered, but then quickly you either stop using it, or you stop playing the video game altogether because it's no longer any fun.

It's not a cheat. It is *built in* to the system itself for the express purpose of placing a balancing factor on casters. It is literally something you are supposed to be able to do to slow them down, given how overpowered casting is.

Shadow Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I've done it as a player and experienced it as GM and both times it felt really loopholey. I'd be fine if there'd be some kinda opportunity cost or maybe were it harder to do but whacking some nerd's or theology student's felt bag or wooden rod with your magic greatsword is piss easy. Prepared caster cmd's max out at around 21-22 cmd and that's on tier 10-11 and there's no need for sunder feats when AAO's aren't an issue.

I'd be fine with it in some kinda gauntlet play or a made-to-order meatgrinder like Slumbering Tsar, but in regular PFS play I scoff. Scoff!


If you don't like sundering spell component pouches or divine focuses, how do you react when someone uses a Steal maneuver to lift those items in combat (without the caster noticing when using Greater Steal, probably causing the caster to waste his next action when the spell fails due to missing component)? Arguably, those things are what the Steal maneuver was designed to do.

On another note, spell pouch destruction is one of those situations which affects the player disproportionately (coup de grace, disease, curses, and the Blindness spell are others). It's a bigger jerk move for a DM than a player to destroy a spell pouch, since it can potentially stop a player's contributions for the rest of the game. I understand that it's part of the game, but grinding the session to a halt because the Rogue and Wizard are blinded and the Cleric's holy symbol has been destroyed isn't fun for anyone.

Muser wrote:

I've done it as a player and experienced it as GM and both times it felt really loopholey. I'd be fine if there'd be some kinda opportunity cost or maybe were it harder to do but whacking some nerd's or theology student's felt bag or wooden rod with your magic greatsword is piss easy. Prepared caster cmd's max out at around 21-22 cmd and that's on tier 10-11 and there's no need for sunder feats when AAO's aren't an issue.

I'd be fine with it in some kinda gauntlet play or a made-to-order meatgrinder like Slumbering Tsar, but in regular PFS play I scoff. Scoff!

Grappling seems to disproportionately affect casters as well.

Readied actions, too.

Sovereign Court

claudekennilol wrote:
Finlanderboy wrote:
Lau Bannenberg wrote:


- Holy Symbol: stops some spellcasting, stops channel energy. Some priests have tattoos or birthmarks though.

.

in one game we were getting ripped apart by the channel cleric. So I sundered her symbol, and the Dm said she had another one. So my buddy sundered that. Then he shouts "where's your god now!"

I tried that in a certain season 0 level 3 negative channeler vs low tier and the GM basically just said "no" because that wasn't fun for him. I didn't want to kill the NPC and knew that would be the equivalent of incapacitating them. I was playing a barb and knew I could just hit them so I ended up doing that. So I ended up taking away both our fun because he disallowed my action and I killed his NPC. Luckily no one died or it would have mattered.

Just a note. Season 0 clerics don't get channel energy, since they use 3.5 rules.

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I kind of agree with "sunder is exploit" in general. While it's something that you could easily protect against as a wizard or cleric by carrying a spare symbol/bag, they rarely do, probably for simplicity or page count reasons. While most players (after seeing it happen once) probably patch over this horrible glaring weakness for a few GP. It's really a case of the enemies having a huge weakness that could be patched for just 10GP - that includes a dagger so they have a backup if their first weapon is sundered.

It just looks like taking advantage of the NPS's statblock being small for page count reasons.

Disclosure: I too have done this. When an enemy starts using quickened true strike/disintegrate, the gloves come off. Then it's time to start sundering everything until you also destroy the bonded item.

Now, bonded items, those do look like a genuine honest sunder target; those were clearly written with weakness in mind. As shown by the serious rules for it. No 5gp backup. And if they're magical, they might have enough HP that you actually need to have some skill at sundering to do it, rather than just "he's a wizard with a dagger, his AoO isn't going to stop me".

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Society Subscriber
claudekennilol wrote:
Finlanderboy wrote:
Lau Bannenberg wrote:
- Holy Symbol: stops some spellcasting, stops channel energy. Some priests have tattoos or birthmarks though.
in one game we were getting ripped apart by the channel cleric. So I sundered her symbol, and the Dm said she had another one. So my buddy sundered that. Then he shouts "where's your god now!"
I tried that in a certain season 0 level 3 negative channeler vs low tier and the GM basically just said "no" because that wasn't fun for him. I didn't want to kill the NPC and knew that would be the equivalent of incapacitating them. I was playing a barb and knew I could just hit them so I ended up doing that. So I ended up taking away both our fun because he disallowed my action and I killed his NPC. Luckily no one died or it would have mattered.

Hmm, there is even a feat specifically for getting a nice bonus when sundering holy symbols: Iconoclast.

It's a two feat investment, but it sorta proves to me that sundering holy symbols is quite legit.


Evil overlord list for pfs antagonists

The Exchange

Does anyone else have their PC Caster pull their Material Components out of their S.C.P. and just carry them in their pockets/belt/folded cuffs?


Da Wander wrote:

Does anyone else have their PC Caster pull their Material Components out of their S.C.P. and just carry them in their pockets/belt/folded cuffs?

Considering that would be a move action, probably not. Move actions are normally not AS vital to casters as martials but you still need them.

Grand Lodge

Lau Bannenberg wrote:


Just a note. Season 0 clerics don't get channel energy, since they use 3.5 rules.

Season 1, small typo.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

When this is a legitimate tactic permitted by the rules, why would anyone feel it was an exploit or cheating?

Sovereign Court

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Nostrus wrote:
When this is a legitimate tactic permitted by the rules, why would anyone feel it was an exploit or cheating?

It's not cheating, because it's allowed by the rules. It's a bit of an exploit however because most NPCs are so absurdly vulnerable to it. Not because it's hard to protect against, but because NPC statblocks are kept small for page count reasons.

Any somewhat experienced (say, L3+) NPC with pretensions of being an adventurer or mercenary should have invested 5GP in a backup spell component pouch and an 1GP wooden holy symbol to spare. And any warrior should have a backup dagger or two in case he loses his sword. Just like all the PCs do. But they don't, not for realism reasons but for meta reasons (page count, trying to keep statblocks simple, poor writing).


Now I want to combine a Sunder build with Catch Off-guard. "I sneak attack him because he's unarmed" GM: "He's not unarmed, he still has, um, his gauntlets" "Great, then I sunder those with my maul so i can deal him more overflow damage".


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I'm assuming Askdal's quote of a max damage output of 9 from the hammer is a typo (I didn't read the entire thread here). Max damage on a d12 is..well, 12. 1.5x a 16 str would be +4 damage, and level 1 power attack would be 3 damage. So, I'm getting 19 damage on a max level 1 sunder attempt. And, of course, weapon training feature and weapon specialization at level 4 make it even more.
I'd say sundering armor with a lucerne is a pretty formidable option.


Ched Greyfell wrote:

I'm assuming Askdal's quote of a max damage output of 9 from the hammer is a typo (I didn't read the entire thread here). Max damage on a d12 is..well, 12. 1.5x a 16 str would be +4 damage, and level 1 power attack would be 3 damage. So, I'm getting 19 damage on a max level 1 sunder attempt. And, of course, weapon training feature and weapon specialization at level 4 make it even more.

I'd say sundering armor with a lucerne is a pretty formidable option.

19 max base

10 hardness
19-10 = 9 max damage to the object.

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Anyone else think of the fight in Full Metal Alchemist when Alphonse shreds his boss's glove? (which has an alchemist circle on it) His boss then just starts using his other hand.

A couple of characters have alchemist circle tattoos too for just that reason. Including one who (rather notably) needs to show off her cleavage to use it. (No - I don't mean the feat!)


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Chess Pwn wrote:
Ched Greyfell wrote:

I'm assuming Askdal's quote of a max damage output of 9 from the hammer is a typo (I didn't read the entire thread here). Max damage on a d12 is..well, 12. 1.5x a 16 str would be +4 damage, and level 1 power attack would be 3 damage. So, I'm getting 19 damage on a max level 1 sunder attempt. And, of course, weapon training feature and weapon specialization at level 4 make it even more.

I'd say sundering armor with a lucerne is a pretty formidable option.

19 max base

10 hardness
19-10 = 9 max damage to the object.

Ah, gotcha. Thanks, CP. I guess I missed his meaning.


The vast majority of animals, aberrations, constructs, magical beasts, fey, dragons, elementals, etc, will never wield an axe or don a suit of plate. There are typically plenty of humanoids in APs, but if someone took power attack and two sunder feats, I certainly wouldn't fault them for making use of it. If your group is sundering spell component pouches and holy symbols too much, well... wizard's convert into arcane sorcerers so easily. And have you noticed how many clerics and oracles have birthmarks these days?


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Wei Ji the Learner wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:
Finlanderboy wrote:
Lau Bannenberg wrote:


- Holy Symbol: stops some spellcasting, stops channel energy. Some priests have tattoos or birthmarks though.

.

in one game we were getting ripped apart by the channel cleric. So I sundered her symbol, and the Dm said she had another one. So my buddy sundered that. Then he shouts "where's your god now!"

Someone reads the forums, because the last smart necromancer i saw had a holy symbol face tatoo

[b]I SUNDER FACE![b]

You're attacking for damage?

No, I'm attacking the tattoo on their face to sunder it..

*coughs*

Well, tattoos ARE listed as items in some book's equipment sections... :P

Sovereign Court

DocShock wrote:
The vast majority of animals, aberrations, constructs, magical beasts, fey, dragons, elementals, etc, will never wield an axe or don a suit of plate. There are typically plenty of humanoids in APs, but if someone took power attack and two sunder feats, I certainly wouldn't fault them for making use of it. If your group is sundering spell component pouches and holy symbols too much, well... wizard's convert into arcane sorcerers so easily. And have you noticed how many clerics and oracles have birthmarks these days?

You realized you're posting in the PFS forum right?


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Rule number one of killer hobo party: You do not talk about killer hobo party! .... Wait, how does this help? Shit

Rule number one of killer hobo party: Don't f$&+ing SUNDER LOOT!


Chess Pwn wrote:
andreww wrote:
Thomas Hutchins wrote:
plus, the GM job is to tell the story for the players to win.
No, no it really isn't. Otherwise we wouldn't ever bother rolling any dice.
Yes, yes it really is.

Yeah, honestly, if the players weren't supposed to "win", they'd never "win"

...
I'm so late to the party.

Shadow Lodge

It's hard to say the players ever 'win' since the GM has to allow them to do so.

1 to 50 of 85 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Advice / Pointlessness of damaging armor and baiting the DM All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.