|
[Stupid Question]Okay, after reading the entry in the PHB about damaging an object, I am ever so slightly confused. Does acid and sonic damage ignore hardness? Because it says to apply it normally and it doesn't make any clarification as to whether it does or doesn't, while every other entry for energy types tell you that it does (for example) [it does half damage. Divide by 2 before applying hardness]. Is ignoring hardness for acid and sonic implied by the omission?[/Stupid Question]
[Stupid Question]Okay, after reading the entry in the PHB about damaging an object, I am ever so slightly confused. Does acid and sonic damage ignore hardness? Because it says to apply it normally and it doesn't make any clarification as to whether it does or doesn't, while every other entry for energy types tell you that it does (for example) [it does half damage. Divide by 2 before applying hardness]. Is ignoring hardness for acid and sonic implied by the omission?[/Stupid Question]
I read it as ignore hardness. If you want to rationalise it, acid melts and therefor hardness means bugger all; sonic sets up harmfull harmonics so once again hardness has little to do with resisting damage.
I don't think there have ever been particularly good rules for any of these. The easiest rule I have is just to apply real world physics: A crystal potion flask is not going to melt no matter how much the black dragon pukes on it. However, it will shatter easily if the bard uses sonic burst to hit a high C. Contrawise, a tapestry is not going to be affected no matter how much you crank the subwoofers, but the black dragon spitting on it is going to dissolve it like Kleenex.
I have always run it as "sonic ignores hardness, but can only hurt hard things effectively". Massive amounts of sonic damage (50+) will damage things like tapestries, because at that point its less of a loud noise and more of a shockwave.
I rule that acid has to deal with hardness, but certain acids ignore the hardness of certain materials. Hence lockbreaker acid, stone-eater acid, and such.
For what it is worth we have always run with them ignoring hardness. The fact that they say to apply normally and the other energy types say do X before applying is less an implication and more a statement. If they went through and stated for all the others and then didn't go and errata it later, the intent is pretty clear as far as we see it. To that point there are spells out there that do damage as specific type of damage and state they are exceptions to the rule (maybe this acid spell doesn't ignore hardness, or this sonic spell says to divide hardness by 1/2 before applying damage) and call themselves out in that way.
As for the suggestion to apply real world physics, I'd say not to do that, there ends up being way too much micro managing on that path. This is a game and certain things are going to be glossed over or be contrary for the sake of the game and game balance. Also as a fantasy game involving magic it sort of tosses physics as we know it out the window anyways. This approach has led to alot of banging of heads in our group and some irritation when things in real life don't translate well into the game. That isn't to say there won't be differences in interpretation of rules, but I don't think this particular rule set leaves too much out. It has been brought up enough and never changed or errat'ed so I think it is safe to use as written and intended.
If you enter into game play with the understanding that some things just don't make sense in game and that there are reasons for those things to be that way you'll generally enjoy the game that much more. If you try to force things you end up with more or less a mess as some people will want to see it one way and some people want to see it another. Saying this acid does and this acid doesn't ends up seeming arbitrary when new material is published and now you have to justify the decision one way or another. This of course leads to anyone motivated enough can argue or make a decidedly compelling motion to have something one way when the rules say something else, "it makes sense why not change it?" And the 3 games later you run into something being way more powerful or effective because of that decision and you are sitting there going "Oh... thats why."
Case in point, any sonic attack that is capable of seriously damaging/killing a character would have many more far reaching effects (permanent deafness for sure among possible others) in reality but those effects are ignored in game for a reason.
You have to apply real world physics sometimes, if just because there aren't rules for everything, and when there aren't rules, it defaults to a DM call. And it's easy enough to follow the laws of the real world in most cases.
There are acids that will dissolve gold--aqua regia does that neatly--and even ones that will eat glass. However, if the dragon is puking up enough hydrofluoric acid to melt the potion flasks, the fumes will be etching everyone's eyeballs and eating out their lungs.
Real-world physics also allows me to put in game-world flavor. The black dragon's hoard consists mostly of gems and potions and gold and not a lot of anything else, since those would have been dissolved.
I'll have to re-read it when I get home but I always assumed (maybe incorrectly) that sonic and acid did full damage and the other energy types did half damage, but hardness was alway taken into consideration. I thought hardness was only bypassed by certain materials like admantine or specific spells or feats.
Does acid and sonic damage ignore hardness? Because it says to apply it normally...
From the 3.5 FAQ:
Hardness applies to all types of damage unless specifically stated otherwise by the effect. (Page 165 in the Player’s Handbook is sometimes misinterpreted to suggest that hardness doesn’t apply to acid and sonic damage; in fact, the phrase “apply [damage] normally after a successful hit” simply means that the damage isn’t halved or quartered, as other energy damage is.)