Sunder is a pretty good way to tell that someone is just there to ruin the game for the other players and has no long term interest in the campaign. A Troll (as in the internet term for someone there to make other people miserable) will take the feat to win 1 fight then leave at the end of the session, while the serious player won't touch the feat since once they kill the bandit boss thats THEIR treasure they just broke in half.

That's not strictly true. Sundering can be a very useful tactic... It's just not something you want to dedicate too many resources to, and make sure you do so when it is prudent. Like when Luffy sundered the Cat Claws in the last campaign arc.

Disarm on the other hand....

And then disarm the other hand...

And then disarm the mouth?

I thought that was disbleive the mouth.

No. you're supposed to put your hand in the statues mouth. The sign says so, after all.

Disarming can backfire as well. I once made a ghost boss that had a morningstar that was meant to be part of the loot, which was why I had him wielding it. They disarmed him pretty quickly, which led them to see how bad his corrupting touch (at least 8d6 damage) was.

The advantage to sunder over disarm, of course, is that it works on worn items, not just held ones. It's a risk of damaging/destroying treasure that is worth keeping, but at the same time, wrecking an opponent's armor can make or break a fight.

Still, focusing around either maneuver and getting the most of it requires a touch of metagaming. If you know the campaign will have plenty of humanoids and other item using foes, they'll come in handy in a big way. If you fight mostly things like T-Rex and Aboleths using poor or unequipped thralls, those investments will be naught but wasted resources.

Comes down to knowing your DM well. And hoping they don't play against their normal meta.

Doesn't Sunder use up an attack? So basically, if he DIDN'T use Sunder, he wouldn't have needed the extra attack in the first place?

If Cleave was in play he makes 1 attack sunders 2 weapons and then he'll get 2 extra attacks just like a Whirlwind attack/cleave build can get hundreds of attacks per round if they have a lackey drop a bag of rats next to the fighter

Also, Corey just told Emily that his AC is dependent on how many swords he's holding. Every attack Mihawk makes after a successful sunder targets a more vulnerable Zoro than before the sunder attempt.

one, a bag of rats would probably count as a swarm of rats, not a hundred individual rats, and that's dumb in any case and would probably be banned by any gm worth their salt. two, whirlwind attack states that it doesn't work with cleave.

The "cleave build" remark reminded me of something that my husband came up with years ago that, while never implemented (because it's EVIL), was hilarious in concept, which went something like...

Step 1: Secure kobolds or goblins or something low-level in a long, neat line, evenly spaced apart.

Step 2: Permanently cast Regenerate or whatever will allow them to heal back up.

Step 3: Fighter with Great Cleave.

Result: High-speed rail-line.

The point was that by sundering both swords Cory's AC was reduced, and Sundering Cleave meant the attacks weren't wasted. So he sundered the swords with his first two attacks, then hit Cory three times. It's a neat trick.

If he sunder his opponent weapon, he get a extra attack on a now unarmed opponent. If he just use normal attack, well he just attack...

Hey DragonTrainer, I like the page of today. It's not vissible that you had any trouble with it. And you know what they say: the less words in a commic, the better the page!

I knew Zoro letting slip that his AC was dependent on his swords was a bad idea.