|
The thing you're willfully ignoring is that, unless you specifically state that it is a wall of paper that is also 10 feet thick with 300 hit points, the image that comes into mind when someone says "wall of paper" is a single sheet. Especially when you refer to a sword cutting through it.I'm "willfully ignoring" the fact that you made an assumption that I neither stated nor implied? In every one of my posts I've stated the exact same thing I stated in this one here.
You're willfully ignoring the fact that using the phrase "tear through it like paper" or the like does not generate in anyone's mind the image of someone burrowing through 150 feet of paper.
If katanas are such brilliant mining tools, then why haven't miners been using them instead of picks for a few thousand years?
The section on inapropriate weapons is there for a reason. It doesn't attempt to list EVERY single example that gamers could come across, because that would take an already over-bloated rulebook at make it undergo gravitational collapse, forming a miniature black hole that would eventually devour the Earth.
|
Ah, when people were stating that it did cut through stone as it did paper, they imagined a single sheet. Now I understand. No, it doesn't work that way. Adamantine ignores hardness, but it does not ignore thickness or hit points. No one is really saying that, at least on the defending side. You should not assume the unstated. That is probably where the heat is coming from. As a side note, around the time one can afford adamantine, spellcasters will have things like stone shape, so not really a balance issue.
Ok for the LONGEST time I've wanted an adamantine katana, for obvious reasons, cutting items and stuff is fun!
But then I ran into a bit of a wall.. literally.
What happens when I attack a wall with it? Walls have hardness and HP by thickness, but is that the WHOLE wall, does me slicing the wall for its hitpoints cause the whole wall to break?
I'm ignoring the 4 pages to say it's a 5X5 square in my game. Your milage may vary, but 5X5 stone sounds right for me and how I like to let my players play.
The thing you're willfully ignoring is that, unless you specifically state that it is a wall of paper that is also 10 feet thick with 300 hit points, the image that comes into mind when someone says "wall of paper" is a single sheet. Especially when you refer to a sword cutting through it.I'm "willfully ignoring" the fact that you made an assumption that I neither stated nor implied? In every one of my posts I've stated the exact same thing I stated in this one here.You're willfully ignoring the fact that using the phrase "tear through it like paper" or the like does not generate in anyone's mind the image of someone burrowing through 150 feet of paper.
If katanas are such brilliant mining tools, then why haven't miners been using them instead of picks for a few thousand years?
The section on inapropriate weapons is there for a reason. It doesn't attempt to list EVERY single example that gamers could come across, because that would take an already over-bloated rulebook at make it undergo gravitational collapse, forming a miniature black hole that would eventually devour the Earth.
Miners do use katanas for mining, don't you know? It's awesome, they just wheeZAMMboomSLASHH!!1!! and the wall falls to pieces. And if that fails, they just use the innate katana at-will abilities to throw meteor swarms and disintegrate instead.
|
|
The thing is, in the RAW, adamantine is not some magical material. It's just a metal that's harder than steel. The difference between it and steel is akin to the difference between iron and steel.
Wanna know what the true benefit of using an adamantine pickaxe rather than a steel pickaxe would be? You'd be able to use it for longer before it was ruined. Much like steel pickaxes would be more durable than ones made of iron.
If this is 75% a question of material, as you claim, then a sap loaded with adamantine shot would make a more effective weapon for breaking up a wall than would a steel pickaxe. And somehow I don't see even you attempting to make that argument.
I have no problem with adamantine being powerful.
I also believe that the inappropriate weapon/tool rule applies to one or two-handed blades, even if they are adamantine, when those weapons are being used to dig a tunnel. I am not saying that it would not work, but it would not be as fast as an adamantine pick. I would apply a 50% penalty to the damage output.
If the wall was only an inch or so thick, then no problem (and no penalty), the bladed weapon will quickly cut through the wall. Against thicker walls, the blades slice into it, needing several slices to cut pieces out, while the pick uses a deep hole, impact fractures and leverage to pop out wall pieces.
As any tunnelling would not happen in combat, taking 30 minutes vs 15 minutes to tunnel is not a game changer for me.
If miners in D&D had access to adamantine katanas, you can bet every single one of them would use one of those instead of a run-of-the-mill pick.
Actually, I think that they would rather have adamantine picks. :)
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
The thing is, in the RAW, adamantine is not some magical material. It's just a metal that's harder than steel. The difference between it and steel is akin to the difference between iron and steel.
Funny, my copy of the RPG doesn't mention steel ignoring hardness. Perhaps you have a faulty copy?
The difference between them is that an inch thick wall with 30 HP and hardness 15 is going to be harder for a steel, iron, even mithral pick to breech then it will be for an admantine pick.
The steel tool will go through a wall of implausium (hardness 0, HP 50) faster than a wall of stone (hardness 8, HP 50). The adamantine weapon will carve through them at the same speed.
No one who argues the sword will cut through the wall is saying that it will cut through a 50 HP wall in one shot* anymore than Qui-gon's lightsaber did the blast doors in Episode I.
*
Anyone in this thread read Warbreaker?
There's a scene in there where a character uses his 'Treats nonliving material as if it were a lightsaber' weapon to help dig a trench; I say helps, because it provides no utility for actually moving the material out of the way. He uses an oversized hammer to actually break stuff up and get it out of the way.
That said, having a tool which could carve up earth while ignoring its inherent 'stone and dirt' qualities was a huge help.
I dont know how much it matters, but it is relevant in that its a fiction based example of someone using something similar to a adamantine sword for carving up something inantimate for the purpose of moving lots of rock and stone out of the way.
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
Good catch Stubs, I'd forgotten that. (Still doesn't change that Adamantine is more than 'harder than steel')
Again though, it's a GM call, there's no list of those 'certain attacks'. The Pick might be able to ignore the hardness and do double damage, but a GM can also rule that the adamantine butter knife* can do the same, ruling the adamantine has the same property. I believe one poster above did just that.
Plus, isn't it still awesome when you have all these normal swords taking a hunk out of the rock, and the Sword of Omens slices clean through?**
*
**
Edit: (omg fighters can't have nice things!)
Well...!
They're always standing around, all shirtless and buff, oiling themselves up before battle...
...Deflection bonus, sure.
I removed a post and the reply to it. Please don't talk down to people.
My point still stands. Cutting through a wall of stone or steel or mithril is just as easy with an adamantine weapon as cutting through paper or cloth or flesh or ice or clay. If you incorrectly assume you know what that means, well... that's your own problem. It doesn't invalidate the point.
Wow, way to go at being horrible when your point fell over.
You made a comment, we all knew what you meant, and then you got really offended when you had it pointed out to you taht what you were saying was completely inaccurate.
It's not as easy.
150" is how far you would get through a wall of paper, happily cutting it to confetti given 300 points worth of damage.
Yet you would only make it through 20" of stone, or only 10" of steel.
You are, therefore, not cutting one like the other.
You don't have a point.
I still think the argument for "super sword if made from adamantine" is simply a conflation between adamantine and adamantium
Vulnerability to Certain Attacks
Certain attacks are especially successful against some objects. In such cases,attacks deal double their normal damage and may ignore the object's hardness.
Yet your back in the same catagory as ineffective GM call. Nothing says a pick is extra effective and even if it is nothing says that same pick ignores hardness on walls. Except the GM who can as easily rule that the pick does double damage keeps hardness while an adamantine spoon deals normal damage at no hardness.
Or any number of variations thats what we have been trying to say that its not anywhere codified and left for the GM to decide.
Not everything is going to be codified, and somewhere between commonsense and rule 0 will lay the answer to the 3000gp Katana.
Mind you, I still find Monks punching their way through walls with bare fists the ultimate cheezeburger... really? they can tunnel through rock with bare fists? Martial Artist just overcomes the walls hardness no worries too... just like the Adam. Katana.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
So hate me if you want :) I'm just a product of 3 years solid of horrid gming.Three years? Wow. :-) Me, it's closer to 23.23 years of horrid DMing? I offer my condolences. ;)
Heh. Yeah, makes you think...
Adamantine bananas?
Careful. Adamantine bananas ignore the hardness of your teeth.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
... How do you know adamantine isn't a near-frictionless material? How do you know your mu isn't 0.000000001?
It could be, but then it would be useless as a weapon because you couldn't hold onto it securly enough to wield like a sword. It would probaly be possible to 'monkey-shine' a fairly secure method to hold something like a punching dagger though.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Adamantine Adamantium!
Respectfully sir, you are mistaken. The scene you reference happened in Way of Kings, not Warbreaker*. Entirely different world settings, though written by the same author.Kudos, however, on your excellent taste in reading for having experienced both books.
** spoiler omitted **
Right you are. I'm between Sanderson books ATM though so I must have been temporarily deranged.
Point stands, Way of Kings has an interesting example of a sword being used in this fashion :)
lol @ pick not being effective against stone walls because it isn't spelled out in the core rulebook specifically... with that i think i am done with this thread, as this has become a silly place.
Not even close to what I said. I said its up to the gm if it ignores hardness or deals double damage or if it's just effective not super effective.
lol @ pick not being effective against stone walls because it isn't spelled out in the core rulebook specifically... with that i think i am done with this thread, as this has become a silly place.Not even close to what I said. I said its up to the gm if it ignores hardness or deals double damage or if it's just effective not super effective.
Right that is fair enough. it is a GM call. It is simply a GM call because the rules are not meant to handle the situation being discussed. Like I said before, there is a conundrum, of how one could even forge adamantine in the first place, since it is the material of ultra hardness. Or why Adamantine meteors don't bore through the planet on impact.
Both those above situations are exagerated silliness. Much like wrecking walls with tunnels made by a sword of any material. Rules aren't meant to handle it. It is a gm call.