Item Hardness and Enhancement Bonus

[quest-master]

I wonder if it would be a bad thing to make the hardness and hit points of a magic weapon/shield/armor be increased by its effective bonus, not its enhancement bonus.

This doesn't come up that often since people get yelled by their allies for sundering magic items but there are occasionally other situations it could come up.

Goodbye dear, sweet +1 holy axiomatic flaming burst thundering weapon...Curse you, dread warrior, for your sundering ways and +2 weapon that does nothing!!!!!

[Mistwalker]

I house ruled that a long time ago.

Works well.

[tricky bob]

I kinda like the way it is. It makes enchanting that +1 weapon to a +2 worth at least a thought before the player goes for the +1d6 elemental damage, as they almost always do!

Also with the PF DR rules [assuming you're using them] getting to +3 for cold iron/silver, and then +4 for adamantine and +5 for alignment is even more tempting [assuming you haven't house ruled the non-numerical enchantment bonuses counting for this too].

[Majuba]

quest-master wrote:

This doesn't come up that often since people get yelled by their allies for sundering magic items but there are occasionally other situations it could come up.

This has also been fixed a bit, with the option to "break but not destroy" when sundering.

[Mistwalker]

tricky bob wrote:

Also with the PF DR rules [assuming you're using them] getting to +3 for cold iron/silver, and then +4 for adamantine and +5 for alignment is even more tempting [assuming you haven't house ruled the non-numerical enchantment bonuses counting for this too].

I am using PF rules.

And while I houseruled the hardness, I did not change the "substitution" rule. There are advantages to having a high rating on the weapons.

[selios]

I'm just bored with all these elemental damages... At least keep hardness and HP of magic items as they are.