Difference between revisions of "Talk:Better Sunder Rules (3.5e Variant Rule)"
Tarkisflux (talk | contribs) (→Non-scaling Limb Pools?) |
Ghostwheel (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
}} | }} | ||
| + | |||
| + | My philosophy is, if the players have access to it, so does the DM. Tell me again how you're going to play your level 3 wizard after he's got both arms chopped off :-P<br> | ||
| + | This is why I don't like long-lasting debuffs and strong effects in general. They screw over the target, and it can be frustrating on either side of the DM screen. Bad for the system, and the game in general, IMO. --[[User:Ghostwheel|Ghostwheel]] ([[User talk:Ghostwheel|talk]]) 17:30, 11 March 2014 (UTC) | ||
| + | |||
| + | |||
{{Rating |rater=Ghostwheel | {{Rating |rater=Ghostwheel | ||
|rating=oppose | |rating=oppose | ||
Revision as of 17:30, 11 March 2014
Ratings
|
Tarkisflux likes this article and rated it 3 of 4. |
|---|---|
| I don't know what Ghost is on about here. Allowing sundering to target body parts means your fighter has a built in debuff that is useful against pretty much everybody. Spellcaster? Sunder their arms and laugh as they can't use somatic components anymore. Turtle? Sunder their shell so others can hit them too. Scary clawed thing? Cut off their claws. And since the damage counts against their normal hit point pool, the only potential damage reduction you suffer is the one where you missed.
There's a couple of things that could be better though, like the limb hit point pools and target ACs. But I'll talk about those elsewhere. This is not the standard "sunder to screw yourself out of treasure" model, and in general I'm for it. |
My philosophy is, if the players have access to it, so does the DM. Tell me again how you're going to play your level 3 wizard after he's got both arms chopped off :-P
This is why I don't like long-lasting debuffs and strong effects in general. They screw over the target, and it can be frustrating on either side of the DM screen. Bad for the system, and the game in general, IMO. --Ghostwheel (talk) 17:30, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
|
Ghostwheel opposes this article and rated it 0 of 4. |
|---|---|
| Making sundering even easier is bad. I strongly dislike this, and on top of that, it could do with more professional use of the English language (grammar, punctuation, spelling, etc). |
Comments
Why are limb hit point pools fixed like that? 1 HD commoners don't survive losing a limb, but you've barely scratched the surface of a 20 barbarian's hit points when you hack his arm off. Why no pools relative to hit dice in addition to size? - Tarkisflux Talk 16:59, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
Additionally, the targeting of limbs is odd. Since you treat them as weapons, their AC is just 10 + attack bonus + size modifier, and doesn't include things like deflection bonuses or natural armor, things which would otherwise make hitting a part of their body more difficult. Is that intentonal, and if so, why? - Tarkisflux Talk 17:19, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
