Axe Of Sundering

[Derrik Navarro]

Becauseit is an extremely effective strategy and with make whole and mending nothing is ever really destroyed. AUC.register('auc_MessageboardPostRowDisplay'); AjaxBusy.register('masked', 'busy', 'auc_MessageboardPostRowDisplay', null, null) blackbloodtroll Apr 7, 2014, 07:07 pm Kazumetsa Raijin wrote: I've always wondered why someone would want to Sunder a precious and probably fortune wielding Weapon or Armor.... Pathfinder sundering is not the "loot destroying" mess of 3.5, and easily dealt with out of combat. AUC.register('auc_MessageboardPostRowDisplay'); AjaxBusy.register('masked', 'busy', 'auc_MessageboardPostRowDisplay', null, null) Scott Wilhelm Apr 7, 2014, 07:47 pm There is the Shatterspike, but that is a badly designed magic item. The Shatterspike is a +1 longsword that does an extra +3 to attack and damage when used to Sunder by someone with Improved Sunder. It costs 4315gp.

It's actually less effective and more expensive than a nonmagical adamantine longsword, which will bypass the first 20 points of an object's hardness. Each + enhancement of a magic weapon adds 2 points of hardness, so a steel +5 longsword would have a hardness of just 20.

There is the Maul of the Titans, a +3 greatclub that does 3X damage against inanimate objects and can only be wielded by someone of 18 strength. It costs 25305 gp. Triple damage is pretty cool, and it should stack with Great Sunder.

The Maul of the Titans is also a badly designed magic item: who would so enchant a greatclub when you could put the same enchantment on an Earthbreaker hammer? And if you are going to put 25000 gp worth of magic into a weapon, why not put an extra 3000 in it to make it adamantine? The answer for the Maul of the Titans is that it was created before the Earthbreaker hammer existed and before we had our current understanding of adamantine weapons.

The rules for making magic items allow for the existence of a sundering weapon to exist that combines all these lovely things. I don't think there is any reason you could make a Maul of the Titans as an Earthbreaker instead of as a Greatclub. The rules for partial enchantments seem to allow you to put some of the magic on an item now and some later, so why not make a +1 Maul' that costs 9305 gp? Why not make an adamantine Earthbreaker instead and let it cost 12040?

Customizing magic item is expressly forbidden in PFS. A homespinning DM may not allow for you to just happen to find this item or a wizard to make it for you. So you might make it yourself, but if you were a wizard, why would you make that weapon for yourself? Your best bet is to take the feats Master Craftsman or Ancestral Relic (a 3.5e feat from the Book of Exalted Deeds). Either would give your fighter character the ability to make such a weapon yourself, assuming your DM would allow it...

From the APG & UE:

Bec de Corbin: The bec de corbin is a polearm very similar to the lucerne hammer, but the hammer head is blunt rather than spiked and the spike is stouter and more hooked. You primarily attack with the spike. You gain a +2 bonus to your CMB to sunder medium or heavy armor with a bec de corbin.

Lucerne Hammer: This polearm has both a pronged hammer head for crushing blows and a spiked head for piercing and peeling armor; most attacks are made with the hammer. The long haft allows the wielder to put amazing force behind the head of this weapon. You gain a +2 bonus to your CMB to sunder medium or heavy armor with a lucerne hammer.

To be fair - I think some of these were designed before the change (errata) to the rules that removed the 'must have a weapon of equivalent magical bonus to sunder'After that change any nonmagical adamantine weapon became better than anything non-adamantine for sundering.

This is an article that I was avoiding writing, but I have been asked to speak, and have chosen to acquiesce. For those who want some background on the Feri Tradition, I refer you to this excellent article.

It is said of late that the Feri Tradition has been broken in two, being named by folks on one side of the divide as a split between the \"Mystery tradition\" (taking on the old spelling of Faery) and \"public religion\" (Feri). While there have been splits and factions for almost as long as the tradition has been active, while the spelling of the name changed over time, and scapegoating, shouting, and long silences have abounded, I never before felt such an energetic sundering. As I write this, I can feel the mighty gates closing on what was. What will emerge, I do not know. Perhaps nothing will change, and perhaps everything will. Such are the times we live in, and various are the pronouncements of our egos trying to figure things out.

At what point in an ecstatic, syncretic, Bardic tradition, does one's own work cease to be of that tradition? My first book, Evolutionary Witchcraft, about my studies and teaching in the Feri Tradition, was already heavily influenced by Gurdjieff, Sufism, and mysticism. As a matter of fact, these other systems gave me the lens on Victor and Cora Anderson's work that caused me to see ever more deeply into it. So why did I stop teaching Feri?

The answer is multivalent, of course, and we likely will understand the whole thing better ten or twenty years from now. There were, however, two main reasons. One was that working within a small container of initiates and within the container of a set tradition was causing me some discomfort; my work is ever evolving in its expression, though I feel the core of my work will always remain the same, centering on evolutionary practices of alignment and self-possession, true to my deep self and true even to the teachings of Victor and Cora. Yet it is also infused with the theory and practices set forth by G. I. Gurdjieff, and the whirling dance and poetry of Jalalludin Rumi, not to mention the mystic seeking of my childhood Catholic soul, and the strident calling of Thelema. My work needed to be free from some measure of \"is this Feri or not?\" in order to open the old into the new.

The second reason is that, as a public teacher of Feri, I felt I had stretched the tradition as far as was possible at the time. This was causing some of my brothers and sisters pain. Yet to not do my work, to curtail my vision and guidance because of their discomfort, would have been to deny the work of my God Soul, which is the spreading of light and liberation. So I decided it was cleaner to simply say: \"I no longer teach Feri.\" This caused bewilderment to some, though I had tried to prepare my students, and helped many others to breathe a sigh of relief.

I wrote a whole article on initiation that I will not reprise here. I encourage you to go read it, but in summation, in my mind, there are as many varieties of initiation as there are human beings. The Mystery cannot be taught, and can never be bought or sold or spoken. The Mystery can only reveal itself in time.

And then . . . there is still the merging of those four types of initiation, the power of which requires a very strong container indeed, which is why most of my initiates trained for many years before me, many years with me, and many years after me.

There are still others who say the split is about the charging of money for teaching, to which we can also say that Victor himself had no problem with the concept of charging the public for Craft services, or for teaching, as long as these people were not training toward the intimate act of initiation, and that regardless of what Victor or Cora said, did, or taught, each priest has her own autonomy and must choose how to walk this path. Yes, abuse can happen, but that is always the case.

Still others worry about forming a Feri priesthood separate from a Feri laity, or about commercialization, or . . . I cannot answer all of these concerns with the depth and respect that they warrant. That would require another book, and one likely written with the help of an anthropologist. The truth is that there is crossover between the sides of \"mystery\" and \"openness\" on almost every point.

All I can say is this: there has been regrettable behavior on both sides of the split, as well as heartfelt expression, poetry, pain, and hope. There are also many people who are not on any side at all, but who are, to paraphrase Rumi, \"meeting in the field beyond right and wrong.\" This split feels painful, and yet also, in a strange way, right. It is another sign of the times.

It is said of late that the Feri Tradition has been broken in two, being named by folks on one side of the divide as a split between the "Mystery tradition" (taking on the old spelling of Faery) and "public religion" (Feri). While there have been splits and factions for almost as long as the tradition has been active, while the spelling of the name changed over time, and scapegoating, shouting, and long silences have abounded, I never before felt such an energetic sundering. As I write this, I can feel the mighty gates closing on what was. What will emerge, I do not know. Perhaps nothing will change, and perhaps everything will. Such are the times we live in, and various are the pronouncements of our egos trying to figure things out.

The answer is multivalent, of course, and we likely will understand the whole thing better ten or twenty years from now. There were, however, two main reasons. One was that working within a small container of initiates and within the container of a set tradition was causing me some discomfort; my work is ever evolving in its expression, though I feel the core of my work will always remain the same, centering on evolutionary practices of alignment and self-possession, true to my deep self and true even to the teachings of Victor and Cora. Yet it is also infused with the theory and practices set forth by G. I. Gurdjieff, and the whirling dance and poetry of Jalalludin Rumi, not to mention the mystic seeking of my childhood Catholic soul, and the strident calling of Thelema. My work needed to be free from some measure of "is this Feri or not?" in order to open the old into the new.

3a8082e126