|
I am vexed by a discussion on generic rules and specific weapons (indirectly drawn from a discussion on the Feint feats).
In your view, what damage ranges do the following weapons have (assuming Medium size weapons)?
1. An alchemical silver light mace (1d6 or 1d6-1?)
2. A Masterwork Silver Dagger, which is a specific entry under Magic Weapons (1d4 or 1d4-1?)
3. A +1 spellstoring sickle, the Silverhex, which appears in a recent evergreen quest (1d6 or 1d6+1?)
The entry for the Masterwork Silver Dagger appears under Specific Magic Weapons section of Ultimate Equipment as well as in an entry the Core Rulebook, while the rules on alchemical silver appear in the Special Materials section of the Core Rulebook and elsewhere.
In my opinion:
1. In my opinion, the silvered light mace does 1d6 because it is not a slashing or piercing weapon ("On a successful attack with a silvered slashing or piercing weapon, the wielder takes a –1 penalty on the damage roll").
2. In my opinion, the Masterwork Silver Dagger is a named entry (though not a "named item") with the admonishment "[a]s a masterwork weapon, this alchemical silver dagger has a +1 enhancement bonus on attack rolls (but not to damage rolls)." Since the specific named entry reiterates the enhancement rules but not the damage rules, and since the table includes other deviations (e.g., a Mithral Shirt weighs 10 lb instead of 12.5 lb, and Elvin Chain does not require Medium Armor Proficiency), I would let a player at my table do 1d4 damage rather than 1d4-1 damage. Note that this weapon or its equivalent occurs all over, including in Zarta Dralneen's chambers in First Steps: In Service to Lore. Again, in my opinion, changing the damage to -1 isn't RAW (but I know people that argue that it is).
3. In my opinion, the Silverhex does take the -1 damage penalty for being alchemical silver, which interpretation also matches Ulisha's stat block on page 26 of the Silverhex Chronicles.
1) Alchemical silver light mace = 1d6
2) Masterwork silver dagger = 1d4-1. The specific weapon entry doesn't state it forgoes the -1 penalty to damage with piercing/slashing attacks. Any monster/NPC stat entry that forgets the -1 penalty is due to writer or editor error missing that mistake.
3) +1 spellstoring sickle (The Silverhex) = 1d6
The mace doesn't take the -1 because the rules for alchemical silver specific only piercing and slashing weapons take the penalty.
So
Mace: 1d6
Dagger: 1d4-1
Sickle: 1d6-1(silver) +1(magic) = 1d6
The entry doesn't mention anything about silver and does mention about the masterwork weapon quality. While I can understand where you might interpret that to be meaningful, it is most likely an editing issue and they decided to remove the statement about the effects of silver on the weapon because it existed elsewhere and they needed room to fit everyhting they wanted onto the page.
Because any silver non-bludgeoning weapon is going to take the penalty. A specific entry doesn't break that rule, and if it did it would actually need to mention that it does. Sometimes the rules are good at reminding you about things, but that doesn't mean they remind you about all posibilities all the time.
The entry for the adamantine dagger doesn't mention is bypasses hardness less than 20 as admantine does, does that mean it shouldn't get it? No. But that is essentially your argument, because they fail to mention something it shouldn't apply.
|
|
Understood.
It's more that (when GMing) I allow generic benefits but assume that specific items may not get the generic drawbacks / overall rule unless called out (mithral shirt doesn't weigh 2.5 lb more even though a chain shirt of mithral should be half of 25 lb, Elven chain doesn't require medium armor proficiency since it is "treated, in all ways, like light armor, including when determining proficiency").
Otherwise, I am assuming that my players will have to memorize rules from multiple places and that they must make the assumption that every rule or item has a hidden agenda / drawback / issue requiring exhaustive study. In my opinion, though I am a rules-monkey, I ought not expect that of my players. (Note that my own characters use blunt silvered weapons to avoid the whole issue.)
Now... if we DO want the general rule to apply then we might want to note the reduced damage in introductory materials where newer GMs or players may not have fully internalized "All The Books" (e.g., when Zarta Dralneen hands off her letter opener in First Steps: In Service to Lore.
Note it and it becomes a teaching point in introductory material (and I hope that we shall see more Silverhex and Wounded Wisp-style material!). Hide it -- as we currently do -- and it becomes a trap to trip the unwary who are not rules-lawyers like ourselves here.
I agree that if a specific weapon says something that would contradict the general rules that the specific text is correct, thought the discontinuity often bothers me. It's usually unimportant though. However, the silver dagger doesn't say anything about being silver not affecting damage, it just doesn't mention anything about it at all in the text.
Elven chain shirt really is a unique item, where as for some reason they decided to include items like a silver dagger and adamantine dager as specific entries....despite the fact that aren't really necessary. They're not "unique" magical items.
Further, the entries don't mention anything about how they affect the hardness or hp of the item, but you would expect them to follow the normal rules.
Yes, this requires player to become familiar with the rules. I don't really see that as a problem or being a "rules lawyer".
Ultimately it would have been best if they simply didn't list any of the non-magical non-unique items in the book and simply referred you to the general rules for special materials.
For what it's worth, mithral has the same effect as alchemical silver for overcoming DR, but doesn't have the damage penalty.
Mithral: Mithral is a very rare silvery, glistening metal that is lighter than steel but just as hard. When worked like steel, it becomes a wonderful material from which to create armor, and is occasionally used for other items as well. Most mithral armors are one category lighter than normal for purposes of movement and other limitations. Heavy armors are treated as medium, and medium armors are treated as light, but light armors are still treated as light. This decrease does not apply to proficiency in wearing the armor. A character wearing mithral full plate must be proficient in wearing heavy armor to avoid adding the armor's check penalty to all his attack rolls and skill checks that involve moving. Spell failure chances for armors and shields made from mithral are decreased by 10%, maximum Dexterity bonuses are increased by 2, and armor check penalties are decreased by 3 (to a minimum of 0).
An item made from mithral weighs half as much as the same item made from other metals. In the case of weapons, this lighter weight does not change a weapon's size category or the ease with which it can be wielded (whether it is light, one-handed, or two-handed). Items not primarily of metal are not meaningfully affected by being partially made of mithral. (A longsword can be a mithral weapon, while a quarterstaff cannot.) Mithral weapons count as silver for the purpose of overcoming damage reduction.
Weapons or armors fashioned from mithral are always masterwork items as well; the masterwork cost is included in the prices given below.
Mithral has 30 hit points per inch of thickness and hardness 15.