Howdie,
I have reread the rules on breaking doors a couple times over now and I must say I do not get it. There seems to be a distincion between using a weapon and "attacking" the door (that seems to be when hardness comes into play) vs when you try to kick it in (for some reason hardness would not matter anymore and all you use is a strength roll).
What about natural weapons, like the ones on a summoners pet? This particular door has a hardness of 5, 20 HP and a Break DC of 23.
Who can detail this for me, a.k.a. a dummy?
The difference being between chopping a door down and kicking one in. The first breaks the door, the second breaks the frame.
EDIT: Ninja'd!
Yeah, here's a visual for you.
Jack Nicholson chopped through a door with a fire axe in The Shining. It took him a dozen chops to get enough of a hole to stick his head through, and he had the writers on his side.
Pick any episode of Nash Bridges or NCIS. They go up and kick a door. They kick it near the lock. The idea is you break either the lock, the frame that the lock is inserted into, or the frame holding the hinges.
Why would you chop through a door rather than kick it down? Because it's got a four-by-four bar on the other side, which means you can't break the frame or knock it off it's hinges. So you have to chop through it.
Thanks for the input, folks. Now for the technicalities:
As it appears our friendly neighbourhood Eidolons natural weapons are meant to use method A (called the Jack Nicholson Approach) it would have to roll a Sunder Maneuver against an AC of 10 + Size (where for a normal door I would assume Normal, thus +0) + Dex (being an inanimate object means -5 and -2 => -7) totaling: 3?
In other words, unless he rolls a 1 he hits? Sounds reasonably realistic, as its pretty hard to miss a door.
After that, he rolls damage from which we substract the doors Hardness (5 in this case)?
How about multiple attacks, do they work as per normal?
Thanks for the input, folks. Now for the technicalities:
As it appears our friendly neighbourhood Eidolons natural weapons are meant to use method A (called the Jack Nicholson Approach) it would have to roll a Sunder Maneuver against an AC of 10 + Size (where for a normal door I would assume Normal, thus +0) + Dex (being an inanimate object means -5 and -2 => -7) totaling: 3?
In other words, unless he rolls a 1 he hits? Sounds reasonably realistic, as its pretty hard to miss a door.
After that, he rolls damage from which we substract the doors Hardness (5 in this case)?How about multiple attacks, do they work as per normal?
A door, being immobile and an object is auto hit and cannot be criticaled. The eidolon, or anyone else, simply rolls damage dice for it's full attack and subtracts hardness from each one.
One of my players (a monk) went all E. Honda on a door the other day. Given that there was no hurry, I didn't bother requiring rolls.
Unfortunately (for them, though they don't know it yet) breaking in made a LOT of noise and the door is basically nothing more than a few chunks of wood hanging from the hinges, a pile of kindling on the floor, and a door handle still locked against the door frame.
Irony is it's so much better to destroy the whole door than try to break the lock. Locks have a hardness 15, doors are ususally hardness 5, 8 or 10. Since you attack on a per round basis, very rare any door will stop you for more than a minute.
per MurphysParadox, most locked doors are really just a poor man's burglar alarm.
Just keep in mind you need a hammer or pick to do any damage at all to a stone door.
Irony is it's so much better to destroy the whole door than try to break the lock. Locks have a hardness 15, doors are ususally hardness 5, 8 or 10. Since you attack on a per round basis, very rare any door will stop you for more than a minute.
per MurphysParadox, most locked doors are really just a poor man's burglar alarm.
And considering the door had Hardness 5 and 20 HP and the monk did 1d6+4 damage a hit... it was a very effective burglar alarm. I will ensure the denizens are waiting from them in the other rooms, heh. Teach them to be loud!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Just keep in mind you need a hammer or pick to do any damage at all to a stone door.
Source?
I was under the impression you could break open a stone door with your face (read: unarmed attack) if your strength bonus was high enough to overcome hardness.
|
Just keep in mind you need a hammer or pick to do any damage at all to a stone door.Source?
I was under the impression you could break open a stone door with your face (read: unarmed attack) if your strength bonus was high enough to overcome hardness.
Which requires either IUS and a +6 strength bonus (since only only have a 1d3 and can't critical, while it's immune to nonlethal that you would do without IUS) or be a monk and have a +3 strength bonus. Either way, it's going to take a looong time. Actually, with power attack you can reduce the required strength bonus to +4/+1 since you basically auto-hit objects and will get at least a +2 damage from power attack. You can't go lower than +1 without magical equipment because you would cease to qualify for power attack.
Now, with actual weapons it's a little easier because you don't need IUS to do lethal and you have a large die size. Heck, the average joe could break down a stone door with most two-handers (give enough time, and it would take a lot of time). Unless that weapon is adamantine, of course, in which case you'll cut through that door in only a few attacks (so 3 rounds for the average joe, 2 with lucky rolls).
I'm not sure where RD is pulling the "can't damage at all" thing from, though.
EDIT: Disregard my last sentence. Evidently a weapon must be able to reasonable be effective against that type of object, and it gives the explicit example of having to use a hammer or pick against stone. This clause leaves a lot of room for DM interpretation, so be careful.
Just keep in mind you need a hammer or pick to do any damage at all to a stone door.Source?
I was under the impression you could break open a stone door with your face (read: unarmed attack) if your strength bonus was high enough to overcome hardness.
Which requires either IUS and a +6 strength bonus (since only only have a 1d3 and can't critical, while it's immune to nonlethal that you would do without IUS) or be a monk and have a +3 strength bonus. Either way, it's going to take a looong time. Actually, with power attack you can reduce the required strength bonus to +4/+1 since you basically auto-hit objects and will get at least a +2 damage from power attack. You can't go lower than +1 without magical equipment because you would cease to qualify for power attack.
Now, with actual weapons it's a little easier because you don't need IUS to do lethal and you have a large die size. Heck, the average joe could break down a stone door with most two-handers (give enough time, and it would take a lot of time). Unless that weapon is adamantine, of course, in which case you'll cut through that door in only a few attacks (so 3 rounds for the average joe, 2 with lucky rolls).
I'm not sure where RD is pulling the "can't damage at all" thing from, though.
EDIT: Disregard my last sentence. Evidently a weapon must be able to reasonable be effective against that type of object, and it gives the explicit example of having to use a hammer or pick against stone. This clause leaves a lot of room for DM interpretation, so be careful.
See: Rapier, Dagger, Short Sword. Yeah those aren't breaking down a door.
RD is refering to this section under Additional rules, Smashing an Object
Ineffective Weapons: Certain weapons just can't effectively deal damage to certain objects. For example, a bludgeoning weapon cannot be used to damage a rope. Likewise, most melee weapons have little effect on stone walls and doors, unless they are designed for breaking up stone, such as a pick or hammer.
This is left up to GM discretion.
See: Rapier, Dagger, Short Sword. Yeah those aren't breaking down a door.
I quite disagree. With proper training, one can punch through a door. Surely a dagger would make the task easier.
Further, I see very little difference between the head of a pick and a dagger other than the dagger doesn't benefit from a lever arm like the pick, a disadvantage that could be wholly negated by a high strength score.
|
See: Rapier, Dagger, Short Sword. Yeah those aren't breaking down a door.I quite disagree. With proper training, one can punch through a door. Surely a dagger would make the task easier.
Further, I see very little difference between the head of a pick and a dagger other than the dagger doesn't benefit from a lever arm like the pick, a disadvantage that could be wholly negated by a high strength score.
We are talking about a stone door that you say people can punch through, right?
Do you also allow someone to use an arrow (very similar to a dagger point after all) to break through a door?
A dagger is very different then a pick head. The dagger has to be thin enough to also act as a slashing weapon, and thus you could not put full force behind it like you would a pick head. This is why the dagger is 1d4 s/p (x2) while the light pick is 1d4 p (x4). You can put a whole lot more power behind the pick, thus the higher critical damage.
Note, I would not call the dagger an ineffective weapon for breaking down the door, but I am also not going to give it any bonuses for getting through hardness. While I may deem the stone door as vulnerable vs the pick (do double damage).
I quite disagree. With proper training, one can punch through a door. Surely a dagger would make the task easier.
Are you referring to real life? Or in the game?
In either case, I can see someone doing that to a normal door, but to a sufficiently thick stone door, it's pretty much impossible to do in real life or in game (and for good reason).
I quite disagree. With proper training, one can punch through a door. Surely a dagger would make the task easier.Are you referring to real life? Or in the game?
In either case, I can see someone doing that to a normal door, but to a sufficiently thick stone door, it's pretty much impossible to do in real life or in game (and for good reason).
Yeah,
My great-grandfather was a very powerful man (6' 6", looked like a minotaur with a human head). Very polite and nice man, never yelled at anyone (didn't have too honestly).There was a train station in town, back in the 30's. It had these big thick oak doors (about 3 inches thick) with heavy leather hinges (they used to use leather for hinges a lot back then, it was cheaper and easier than making metal hinges).
My grand uncle (grandfather's brother) was about 15, and was hanging out in the place when a deputy spotted a wanted criminal in the station, waiting for a train. The guy pulled a gun and shot at the deputy, and grabbed my great uncle as a hostage.
While the police were figuring out how to go in after him, my GGF stalked up to the door (locked by the hostage taker) and punched it off it's hinges (didn't bust the door, ripped the leather hinges in half).
The police caught the guy when he dove out of a window to get away from my GGF (apparently the GGF rolled a nat 20 on his intimidate check, and the guy failed his will save). May have had something to do with the fact the guy's gun was out of bullets. :)
Now, that was just a wooden door, and he was built like a mountain. And he didn't actually damage the door with his fist, he just damaged the hinges and knocked it down. So yes, you can knock a thick wooden door down if you're really targeting it's weak spots (hinges, frame). Same with a stone door if it has a weakness you can exploit, but that's honestly more of a disable device check than raw power. Although you might fluff if for RP purposes as the Rogue making the DD check, drawing an X on the door, and then pointing to the Barbarian and saying 'Hit it where the X is'.
Cool story.
Knocking a door off its hinges (targeting its weak points as you say) is worlds apart from "punching a hole directly through it."
The world's most powerful martial artists can't even do that.* The rules don't even seem to support fantasy martial artists doing that.
* Please note that karate chopping stacked slender blocks of stone is not the same thing as punching through a thick solid stone door or a solid stone wall. The former are set up so that they can break, the latter are not.
So yes, you can knock a thick wooden door down if you're really targeting it's weak spots (hinges, frame).
Awesome story, but brings it right back to the thing that gets me:
- in the game the hinges and the lock are actually the *strongest* parts of the door.
Locks actually have the hardness of mithril.
In fact someone able to do 9 points of damage to stone can reduce the door to splinters and the wall it's set in to rubble, but the lock will rest atop the pile, impervious and unscratched. Kinda silly.
MDT, that is not breaking the door through damage. That is exceeding the break DC on the STR check.
LOL, true Caineach
Getting the rogue to draw an X is a good use of Aid Other. Use of knowledge: engineering or disable device to add bonus to the strength check. Always nice to find ways to get aid other bonuses from different skills than the primary test.
So yes, you can knock a thick wooden door down if you're really targeting it's weak spots (hinges, frame).Awesome story, but brings it right back to the thing that gets me:
- in the game the hinges and the lock are actually the *strongest* parts of the door.
Locks actually have the hardness of mithril.
In fact someone able to do 9 points of damage to stone can reduce the door to splinters and the wall it's set in to rubble, but the lock will rest atop the pile, impervious and unscratched. Kinda silly.
Well,
It does if you look at modern doors. Modern doors use steel hinges and brass locks with steel inserts. It's actually fairly easy to smash a lock off a modern door, even a dead bolt. Easier than smashing the door apart. On the other hand, smashing the frame is even easier than smashing the lock.On the other hand, older locks were not nearly so easily broken. It's a case of modern production making the locks easier to smash.
My grandmother's house in Virginia was built back in the 20's. The door locks were the size of a CD case (3.5 x 3.5 inches) and built of iron and steel. The things were 1.5 inches thick (since they literally clamped over the door from each side). We replaced a door when I was 5 or 6 and the lock in the old one was so heavy I had trouble picking it up. It probably weighed 5 lbs. And the doors themselves were 2 inches thick (and this is an internal door) and made of solid oak. The only reason we replaced it was it got warped from water leaking on it for 50 years. The hinges were just as heavy duty, they had about four times the metal I see in my modern hinges. The door frame was pretty heavy duty too, except where the water leaked and ruined the wood.
So with that type of door, I can absolutely see the door being turned into splinters over the lock being smashed into bits.
EDIT : Doors were 1.5 to 2 inches thick, solid wood. All of them seemed to be slightly different in thickness. So it's hard to estimate right at times.
MDT, that is not breaking the door through damage. That is exceeding the break DC on the STR check.
That's the funny thing about the system. You can model real life in multiple ways.
Sufficient damage on a single attack to destroy the hinges.
Sufficient Disable Device check with an Aid-Other fluffed as the ally punching the door. (or vice versa)
Sufficient success on a STR check to hit the break DC of the door.
mdt, I agree and disagree. Dissagree on locks just on the basis that no other iron object gets more hardness than iron. It's a weird outlier on that. Having said that, if you look at these medieval style padlocks you can get at the ren fairs and such, yea, those are some solid looking things.
But having said *that*, the game really cheats doors. The modern door like the Jack Nicolson Shining example fits the stats of a pathfinder door, but if you ever look at a castle door, those things are made to withstand a battering ram. Modern panel doors are cardboard compaired to them. To get a door in pathfinder up to snuff you'd have to make it out of steel and enchant it. Never liked that.
Nevermind the whole issue of how easy it is to just mine with your hammer through the adjoining wall....
|
|
mdt, I agree and disagree. Dissagree on locks just on the basis that no other iron object gets more hardness than iron. It's a weird outlier on that. Having said that, if you look at these medieval style padlocks you can get at the ren fairs and such, yea, those are some solid looking things.
But having said *that*, the game really cheats doors. The modern door like the Jack Nicolson Shining example fits the stats of a pathfinder door, but if you ever look at a castle door, those things are made to withstand a battering ram. Modern panel doors are cardboard compaired to them. To get a door in pathfinder up to snuff you'd have to make it out of steel and enchant it. Never liked that.
Nevermind the whole issue of how easy it is to just mine with your hammer through the adjoining wall....
Modern science tells us that just by rearranging the internal structure of a material you can dramatically increase its durability (i.e. hardness). And I don't mean by making it a different molecule, I mean simple structural change. This can be a macroscopic change or a microscopic change, depending on the type of object you expect it to endure.
It wouldn't be unreasonable to assume that by shaping the iron in an intricate fashion that it would become more durable. Think the difference between an iron ingot and a shape like the Eiffel tower.
StabbittyDoom, of course, the dissconnect is cheap dagger, hardness 10, shield, hardness 10, multifolded steel katana, hardness 10 - iron padlock, hardness 15. Same as a +5 magic weapon or mithril. The door it's meant to keep closed, hardness 8. It's weirdness.
|
|
StabbittyDoom, of course, the dissconnect is cheap dagger, hardness 10, shield, hardness 10, multifolded steel katana, hardness 10 - iron padlock, hardness 15. Same as a +5 magic weapon or mithril. The door it's meant to keep closed, hardness 8. It's weirdness.
You say cheap dagger, I say solid piece of iron. You say shield, I say solid piece of iron. You say multifolded steel katan, I say solid chunk of iron (with some carbon). I was referring more to the macro scale pieces that the lock possesses. But if we were being realistic, that cheap dagger would have a hardness more like 9 (cheapness introduces some weakness from the hilt, likely enough), the shield would have a hardness of 10, and that katana would have a hardness of 11-12 (microscopic stuff boosting the integrity).
Of course, this is all moot since I doubt the designers were thinking about this sort of thing when they wrote those rules. Heck, they don't even acknowledge a difference between iron and steel, and everyone knows about that!
All I was trying to do with my example was show why an object *could* have higher hardness than the material it was made of, not necessarily try to completely explain away the inconsistencies. In other words, I wasn't dispelling the conclusion, merely one of the assumptions upon which that particular argument for the conclusion was built.
All I was trying to do with my example was show why an object *could* have higher hardness than the material it was made of, not necessarily try to completely explain away the inconsistencies. In other words, I wasn't dispelling the conclusion, merely one of the assumptions upon which that particular argument for the conclusion was built.
5 foot steel bar
vs
5 foot steel I-Beam
Same amount of steel in each. Which bends first? Bar every time.
|
|
All I was trying to do with my example was show why an object *could* have higher hardness than the material it was made of, not necessarily try to completely explain away the inconsistencies. In other words, I wasn't dispelling the conclusion, merely one of the assumptions upon which that particular argument for the conclusion was built.5 foot steel bar
vs
5 foot steel I-Beam
Same amount of steel in each. Which bends first? Bar every time.
This is a very good example of what I was talking about. Same amount of material (therefor same HP), yet more durable (which can only be hardness since HP is the same).
That doesn't mean that the PF system isn't inconsistent about application of this sort of knowledge, but it does dispel the argument that two things of the same material *must* have the same hardness.
I'm sure that this "same hardness" axiom is used for weapons/armor to keep them simple, but need not be applied to other objects.
I would think that the hardness and hit points would be the same, but the break DC would be higher.
I would think that the hardness and hit points would be the same, but the break DC would be higher.
That's actually a decent point. The metal itself isn't any harder, and doesn't have any extra HP, but it is much harder to bend or break an I-beam than a bar.
I would say that the I-Beam would have probably 3-4 times the break DC of a bar, as well as have additional resistance to attacks. In that, certain attacks would be considered 'inferior' when attacking it. For example, bludgeoning attacks against a bar are affective, but not against an i-beam, given it's greater tensile strength. So force effects and bludgeoning would 'bounce off'. A dagger would scrape off, but a pike could probably punch a hole in the I-beam if you hit it in a thin area. The problem then is, that because of the way an i-beam is constructed, damage to one of the flat pieces really doesn't affect it's tensile strength. You pretty much have to blow it apart to get rid of the tensile strength (which is why we use it in buildings).
Gah...why does this feel like we are entering Rolemaster territory?
Anyways, I did mean the stone door when I was talking about daggers and short swords. However, my original thought was around piercing weapons vs slashing vs bludgeoning when the door material is factored in. Bludgeoning seems like it would be the weapon type of choice for any door, regardless of material, followed by slashing and then piercing. I can see piercing weapons doing damage to the door, but not meaningful damage like a maul busting a door lock or an axe chopping through the panel.
Not for nothing, but consider a miner's pickaxe. Mining stone is done with piercing.
You could get a rogue to Find Traps and dispose of the lock. Quietly. Efficiently. You'll ejoy a fruity mixed drink while he does it.
Acid splash, and you thought cantrips were useless.
Against a lock? Yeah. Not doin' shite.
|
|
Just keep in mind you need a hammer or pick to do any damage at all to a stone door.Source?
I was under the impression you could break open a stone door with your face (read: unarmed attack) if your strength bonus was high enough to overcome hardness.
Ineffective Weapons: Certain weapons just can't effectively deal damage to certain objects. For example, a bludgeoning weapon cannot be used to damage a rope. Likewise, most melee weapons have little effect on stone walls and doors, unless they are designed for breaking up stone, such as a pick or hammer.
About the eidolon question:
Bite attacks would little or no damage to a door (unless he is beaver shaped, maybe), claws are a bit better, but still inefficient.Smashing down the door instead of smashing it (those are the terms used in the rules) will work better.
As a houserule I would make appropriate attacks (like an axe against a wooden door) would bypass the item hardness [I was sure to have read that somewhere, but currently I am not finding the rule].
|
|
I quite disagree. With proper training, one can punch through a door. Surely a dagger would make the task easier.Are you referring to real life? Or in the game?
In either case, I can see someone doing that to a normal door, but to a sufficiently thick stone door, it's pretty much impossible to do in real life or in game (and for good reason).
Yeah,
My great-grandfather was a very powerful man (6' 6", looked like a minotaur with a human head). Very polite and nice man, never yelled at anyone (didn't have too honestly).There was a train station in town, back in the 30's. It had these big thick oak doors (about 3 inches thick) with heavy leather hinges (they used to use leather for hinges a lot back then, it was cheaper and easier than making metal hinges).
My grand uncle (grandfather's brother) was about 15, and was hanging out in the place when a deputy spotted a wanted criminal in the station, waiting for a train. The guy pulled a gun and shot at the deputy, and grabbed my great uncle as a hostage.
While the police were figuring out how to go in after him, my GGF stalked up to the door (locked by the hostage taker) and punched it off it's hinges (didn't bust the door, ripped the leather hinges in half).
The police caught the guy when he dove out of a window to get away from my GGF (apparently the GGF rolled a nat 20 on his intimidate check, and the guy failed his will save). May have had something to do with the fact the guy's gun was out of bullets. :)
Now, that was just a wooden door, and he was built like a mountain. And he didn't actually damage the door with his fist, he just damaged the hinges and knocked it down. So yes, you can knock a thick wooden door down if you're really targeting it's weak spots (hinges, frame). Same with a stone door if it has a weakness you can exploit, but that's honestly more of a disable device check than raw power. Although you might fluff if for RP...
I think that fall under the breaking or bursting and not under the smashing definition.
Breaking Items
When a character tries to break or burst something with sudden force rather than by dealing damage, use a Strength check (rather than an attack roll and damage roll, as with the sunder special attack) to determine whether he succeeds. Since hardness doesn't affect an object's Break DC, this value depends more on the construction of the item than on the material the item is made of. Consult Table: DCs to Break or Burst Items for a list of common Break DCs.
Break down strong door DC 23
Smashing you cut an hole in the item with repeated attacks and can be done even if you are not so strong.
Breaking you make a single all out assault to burst it, it stay mostly intact and it break at the weakest point (hinges or lock for a door).
Someone mentioned adamantine weapons.
One of Keith Bakers characters in one of his Eberron series got a lot of mileage out of a non-magical adamantine dagger.
Your interpretation of the rules may differ, but I got the idea from reading it that you could do thing like cut the lock mechanism out of the door fairly quickly.
Or literally cut a door in a brick wall if you so desired.
All without even harming the edge on the adamantine weapon.
Yes for the former, no for the latter.
A dagger can be treated as a appropriate item to cut through a few inches of wood, not through a wall that is ticker than the blade is longer (what I have seen in some American houses isn't a wall, it is a bit of plaster on a frame).
Your main problem with the "cut door through a wall with a dagger" scenario is that you will have cut the outline of a door for a depth equal to the dagger blade, but you would not have removed any of the stone wall.
Essentially you would have produced a tiny crack into the wall, not a door.
I wonder how much an adamantine portable ram would be?
New York expensive and Midwesterner heavy.
I wonder how much an adamantine portable ram would be?New York expensive and Midwesterner heavy.
LOL yea. Adamantine dagger is all you need.
Acid splash, and you thought cantrips were useless.
True, works in all the heist movies, with the safe cracker putting acid in the lock with an eyedropper.
Basically, any 'safe storage' dungeon must have all doors AND walls enchanted and trapped, or they're not going to be effective to thwart entry or channel movement against any party not willing to play along.
Locks and doors aren't to stop determined thieves. Not in the real world, not in the game. Even the heaviest defensed doors, like bank vaults, aren't going to stop someone from getting past them given sufficient time and determination. Even Fort Knox can't stop someone.
All they're intended to do is slow down the thief/adventurer/whatever while the security forces respond to the threat.
There's a reason most dungeons have lesser things on the outside, and nastier guards on the inside. It's called layered defenses. You don't want to waste your resources on keeping out riff-raff, and you don't want your heavy hitters responding to riff-raff and letting the dangerous ones through. So you have your own riff-raff keep out the riff-raff, and your heavy hitters keep out the dangerous ones.
The doors and traps and everything else are really designed to slow down intruders while your defense forces get set up to kill them.
Yea, mdt, that's true. Like, safes and locks are rated by the time it takes an experienced safecracker to defeat them.
In the iconogrphy of the game and fantasy stories, however, a lot of times you want a door like the door to Moria, where the fellowship had to find the right password to get though. To get that element, you can't have Gimli with the option of breaking out his mining tools and digging a hold around the side, or Gandalf buring an entrance with repeated acid splashes. So, if you want your adventure to have those elements, the rules are working against you on that - which is a bit paradoxical since so much of the game has the implicit assumption that door and walls *are* supposed to be barriers that channel movement, and present puzzel challenges like the door to Moria.
I handled that in my own game by having the dwarves work magic into the stones surrounding their city, so that spells and picks don't work (basically they linked a stone bubble around their cities to the plane of earth, so if you try to mine through it, you just end up mining all the way through to the other side of the city without ever reaching it). The only way to make a new 'hole' in the bubble is with specially crafted wands of earth shaping. Basically, you have to have the right magic key to get through the lock on the bubble.
I handled that in my own game by having the dwarves work magic into the stones surrounding their city, so that spells and picks don't work (basically they linked a stone bubble around their cities to the plane of earth, so if you try to mine through it, you just end up mining all the way through to the other side of the city without ever reaching it). The only way to make a new 'hole' in the bubble is with specially crafted wands of earth shaping. Basically, you have to have the right magic key to get through the lock on the bubble.
Ah, macguffins...what can't they do? :-)