.png "way of the samurai 1 repair broken sword")
Personally I don't like to deal with enemies who sunder. A lot of folks take the familiar for the action economy. Some spells don't have material components. The Concentration check for bonded objects is rather easy for any Wizard/Sorc who actually takes a measure for that. Also you can always have a spare Spell Component pouch. Highly erroneous as sundering must be done in melee and many of them are unlikely to have it happen to them. A fighter can always use a mundane backup weapon, the caster is just a glorified commoner until he make up for the loses after the battle.
Actually, a caster that had his spell component pouch or his bonded item sundered is into deep s**t. You can judge every particular circumstance as a DM and see just how useless the players will be with sundered weapons, but creating a lingering fear is not a bad thing, as long it does not happen again and again. As a mentioned before, you should repay your players one way or another with what they lost, especially if this happens fairly often (which probably shouldn't) It is not that I entirelly disagree, but I will add some comments: The Fighter class can also be hit especially hard by sundering, since so many of their feats and class abilities are tied to a specific weapon/weapon group. Usually the only thing a wizard needs to worry about having sundered is a cheap component pouch, while the fighter could lose the sword that a quarter of his WBL is tied into. A fighter tends to have a lot more in the way of sunderable gear than a wizard, so certain players are going to be hit a lot harder by GMs who use sunder on a semi-regular basis. While 'useless' would be overstatement, any martial class is going to miss the to-hit and damage bonuses from losing their primary weapon.ģ: Hurts martials more than casters. With how expensive magic weapons are, even if your fighter keeps a backup weapon it's going to be a lot weaker than his primary. It would be sort of like if there were forms of ability damage that could just never, ever be healed in any way.Ģ: Fear of uselessness until they get a new weapon.
Nobody likes the idea that their character is going to be permanently weakened on account of a single good sunder roll. In my experience, there's three big reasons players don't like sundering.ġ: Loos of WBL. They should know that there is no insurance policy about their weapons and that they should be prepared (bachup weapons etc), but be kind and let them replace what they lose in the battle with something of at least equal value after the danger has passed. XMorsX wrote: I find it perfectly fine to sunder your players' weapons, just as long as you find a way to maintain their WPL. And what does the DM care? The next batch of villains will have brand new weapons.Īny thoughts or comments on this dynamic? I mean, sure, they COULD start sundering the weapons of the enemy, but that would mean destroying some of the loot they get from defeating them. The idea was that these spells were "balanced" because players typically didn't abuse them for fear that the DM would start using them on the players, and vice-versa.Įxcept in the case of sundering weapons, the PCs don't have the option to retaliate in kind. I even get a sort of vibe that having the monsters try to sunder weapons would be the equivalent of the DM "going nuclear", as described years ago by a WotC employee discussing overpowered spells like Time Stop and Gate. But I do get the feeling that players sort of operate on the assumption that the enemy will never try to sunder their weapons (or break their equipment).
Way of the samurai 1 repair broken sword Pc#
Is it just me, or is there a subtle pressure on the DM to never have the enemy try to sunder a PC weapon? There's obvious reasons why the players would rather have monsters try to hit THEM than hit their weapons, so I won't go into that now.
0 kommentar(er)
