Post/Author/DateTime	Post
PaluX 04-11-05, 05:22 PM	what are the rules for shattering someones knee or elbow with with a regular attack? not an attempted sunder, but massive damage to a specific body part. all i have been able to find is that it affects skill checks, and maybe speed. if you deal 50 points of damage to a knee though, on a called shot, wouldn't you think the knee is prety much wasted. thoughts... thanks in advance
epifreak 04-11-05, 06:43 PM	It would make sense, but then again, having a 1200 lb object fall 10 feet onto you should do more than, say 1d6 damage, no? Anyway, that's something you'll have to take up with your DM. Although, as far as specific body regions go, massive damage to the head has the same penalty to hit (-4) as does massive damage to the knee.....
masterofmayhem 04-11-05, 07:53 PM	Another called shot question? I do hope they manage to get search back up . . . That said, this thread (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=411502) was on a similar topic. Read mine and Tarkin's posts on the subject for some more info. Specifically regarding hamstringing, you would not be able to do it in combat with just a regular attack, period. You might have a feat that allows you to subtract sneak attack damage to halve their speed (there is a feat something like this out there), but that would have to be a sneak attack, or a death attack, or something special like that that focuses on vital areas. Keep in mind that, in real life, if you get hamstrung, you are crippled. For a five-round combat, that's the equivalent of killing someone, since they can no longer harm you. Letting someone go around hamstringing enemies would be extremely inbalanced, and you would find that anyone with such an ability would mop up even the most difficult of encounters with ease. And there is no massive damage to a specific body part. If you succeed on massive damage, and the oppoennt fails the save, he dies. Whether or not your DM decides to allow you to choose where you hit your opponent for flavor is entirely up to them, but should have no bearing on any game mechanics. It would make sense, but then again, having a 1200 lb object fall 10 feet onto you should do more than, say 1d6 damage, no? It does. There are rules for dealing falling damage according to weight. FALLING OBJECTS Just as characters take damage when they fall more than 10 feet, so too do they take damage when they are hit by falling objects. Objects that fall upon characters deal damage based on their weight and the distance they have fallen. For each 200 pounds of an object’s weight, the object deals 1d6 points of damage, provided it falls at least 10 feet. Distance also comes into play, adding an additional 1d6 points of damage for every 10-foot increment it falls beyond the first (to a maximum of 20d6 points of damage). Objects smaller than 200 pounds also deal damage when dropped, but they must fall farther to deal the same damage. Use Table: Damage from Falling Objects to see how far an object of a given weight must drop to deal 1d6 points of damage. Table: DAMAGE FROM FALLING OBJECTS Object Weight Falling Distance 200–101 lb. 20 ft. 100–51 lb. 30 ft. 50–31 lb. 40 ft. 30–11 lb. 50 ft. 10–6 lb. 60 ft. 5–1 lb. 70 ft. For each additional increment an object falls, it deals an additional 1d6 points of damage. Objects weighing less than 1 pound do not deal damage to those they land upon, no matter how far they have fallen.
PaluX 04-11-05, 11:25 PM	yes hamstringing would be very powerful, but given the right minuses whouldn't i be able to say "i want to shoot at the left knee". and if i hit given the minuses, shouldn't there be some sort of illeffects to my target given the critical need for two functioning knees. my point is this, if someone had the attack modifiers to get around the insane minuses there would have to be given size of target, movement of target, etc. shouldn't there be some kind of ruling on the effects this would have on a target.
tarkin 04-12-05, 08:42 AM	1) Given the "right minuses" will NOT help. Right minuses have nothing to do with it, they are a laughable restriction. There are lots of ways to get HUGE bonuses to hit. True Strike is the prime example of it. That means you could take a -20 to hit rule, and people would still hit just as often as usual. 2) Actually there is an official feat called Hamstring Complete Warrior, page 100. It is a Rogue feat, where you give up some sneak attack damage and as a result if you succeed on a sneak attack hit you reduce there movement to 1/2 normal. It can not be used to do more than reduce the movement rate to 1/2.
PaluX 04-12-05, 03:01 PM	the hamstring feat still does no justice to the ability to destroy a vital joint. thats my point. yes its powerful, yes its brutal, yes, yes, yes, but it is still a viable atack and there are no rules to govern it. 1/2 speed, come on, with one leg. why not make the hamstring feat a general that you could take without sneak attack? if you can blow out someones knee at 300 feet, they can't get close to you. great advantage for you. not all creatures reley on legs to travel, and some of the ones that do, a giant for example, is going to be annoyed but not crippled by an arrow to the knee. my wish oh great d&d gods is that there would be some kind of rules to explain what the pros and cons of such an attack would be. maybe give it a will save or something like in the movies. i don't know the fix, but i wish it would be covered.
masterofmayhem 04-12-05, 07:14 PM	yes hamstringing would be very powerful, but given the right minuses whouldn't i be able to say "i want to shoot at the left knee". The "right minuses"? :rolleyes: So what you propose to do is give everyone a free vorpal weapon, right? Oh, not what you were thinking of? Let me put it this way, if I take a -20 to my attack so i can aim for the neck, I still have at least a 5% chance to hit, barring miss chances, and that hit severs the neck. So, yes, you are giving everyone a free vorpal weapon. The reason you can't just "blow out someone's knee" with a normal attack is because of how hit points work in D&D. They represent an energy, or life force, that is consumed in keeping the person alive. For example, a 1st level character has barely any experience in turning aside blows, so a hit with a flachion for 7 damage is a severe hit. That same attack against a level 20 character, however, depletes only 7 of his 200 hit points, because he is adept at turning the blow, and manages to change that life-threatening gash into nothing more than a shallow cut by twisting out of the way. Besides, called shots don't even make sense. Don't you think the fighters are all ready aiming for the most vulnerable spot they can target? You don't think they think, "Well, without weapon specialization, the most damage I can do is 12. Better just try to make a shallow cut on the guy's arm; anything more than that would be impossible," do you?
PaluX 04-12-05, 10:56 PM	The "right minuses"? :rolleyes: So what you propose to do is give everyone a free vorpal weapon, right? Oh, not what you were thinking of? Let me put it this way, if I take a -20 to my attack so i can aim for the neck, I still have at least a 5% chance to hit, barring miss chances, and that hit severs the neck. So, yes, you are giving everyone a free vorpal weapon. your getting hung up on the called shot. i guess a better way to state it would be a debilitating shot. not trying to kill someone, but take away a limb. to stop a fleeing enemy, or bring down a charging dire rhino, or make a tough enemy stationary. whatever you say, it is a viable attack strategy. and i wish there were rules to govern it.
Beamup 04-13-05, 11:52 AM	and i wish there were rules to govern it. There are. It's exactly what you're doing every single time you're in combat.
Santrilla 04-13-05, 12:14 PM	There are rules. The hamstring feat does what you want. The fact that you give up sneak attack damage suggests that you need special rogue training (which encompasses knowing where to hit to do extra damage) to do it. If you want to hamstring that much, take a level in rogue. And as beamup says, it's exactly what you're doing in combat. Consider that when someone has more than 0 hitpoints, they're still at full combat effectiveness. When you get them down to 0 or less, THAT'S when they become disabled and/or dying. Effects like limb removal, gutting or whatever are nothing more than flavor text for an abstract health system.
masterofmayhem 04-13-05, 06:37 PM	your getting hung up on the called shot. i guess a better way to state it would be a debilitating shot. not trying to kill someone, but take away a limb. to stop a fleeing enemy, or bring down a charging dire rhino, or make a tough enemy stationary. whatever you say, it is a viable attack strategy. and i wish there were rules to govern it. You're right, my mistake. Let's call it a "debilitating shot." Now, instead of "extremely overpowered," let's call it "utterly broken." Sound better? :rolleyes: As a famous dead person might say, "A rose by any other name . . . ." Now, let's consider some of your examples. Stop a fleeing enemy: Obviously the enemy getting away is not something you want. The enemy could be going to get help to kick your butt. So it could easily be considered a threat. By stopping that enemy, you neutralize a threat. He is still a threat, however, in that he can still attempt to fight you and break away again (assuming he was merely tripped, or something). However, if he is hamstrung, then he is totally neutralized. He might as well be dead, since there is nothing he can do to you now. Stop a charging dire rhino: Once again, successfully neutralizes the threat, unless said rhino is capable of making ranged touch attacks with nauseating excrement. Hamstringing that rhino would totally incapacitate it, allowing your archers and casters to pick it off with ease. What's this? You've defeated an equivalent CR in a single hit? That's OK, it's not like you could do the same thing to the tarrasque . . . . . Make a tough enemy stationary: Yes, now let's focus on the utter brokenness of taking out a BBEG in a single hit. It's ok that it's a 20th level minotaur werebear fighter, he can't do anything, because he cannot move. Are you seeing yet how uber the ability to cripple an opponent is? It allows you to finish him at your leisure by avoiding him, and essentially removes him from the fight. Now, you say that the ability does not exist? Consider it an existing feat that everyone all ready has. DEBILITATING STRIKE [GENERAL] Through intensive training, you can target obvious vital areas for a killing blow. Benefit: You may make a debilitating strike. Doing so is an attack action usable an unlimited number of times per round, assuming you have an attack to use. You must declare that you are using this feat before rolling to see if you hit an opponent. To succeed on a debilitating strike, make an attack roll against their AC. If you successfully hit, make a damage check. If you do enough damage to kill them, you have delivered a debilitating strike, be it hamstringing, decapitation, gouging out of the eyes, or various bodily trauma. Failure to do enough damage does damage as normal, but does not deliver the debilitating strike, as the opponent was able to successfully evade part of the attack. Special: All characters have this feat. They need not select it. Now, that said, I do support being able to do cool, flavorful moves in combat, but I am against attaching overpowered results onto them. If you want to do something that you consider cool, then you should be prepared for it to not be the most game-breakingly useful thing in existence. In the end, however, the usage of any "hamstringing feat" is up to your DM.
PaluX 04-18-05, 09:13 PM	Dear mr masterofmayehm... your wisdom is inspiring. your arrogance is sickening.
masterofmayhem 04-18-05, 09:59 PM	Why, thank you! It's always nice to get a kind word from someone. ;) :D "Mr." isn't necessary, though. We're on a first-name basis, buddy. ;) You do at least see how simply lame it is to just call a called shot something else and expect it to be accepted, though, right?