Here is the ruling: Info found here
Ground Breaker (Ex): Once per rage, the barbarian can attack the floor around her as a standard action. This attack automatically hits and deals damage normally. If the barbarian manages to deal more damage than the floor's hardness, the space she occupies and all of the squares adjacent to her become difficult terrain. Creatures in these squares, except the barbarian, must make a DC 15 Reflex save or be knocked prone. A barbarian must be at least 6th level to select this rage power.
So say stone floor have 8 hardness and the barbarian while raging does at least (1 damage + 12) so 13, I propose two scenarios, which one is correct:
- While dealing 13 damage to the floor, and 13 being greater then the hardness of 8, then the Ground Breaker power succeeds.
- While dealing 13 damage to the floor, because the floor has hardness of 8, the damage is reduced to 5, 5 is not greater than 8 so it does not succeed.
Which one is correct?
Is the damage calculated to succeed subject to the hardness of the floor before determining success?
Thank you ahead of time!
#1 is correct.
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
To damage an object in this case the ground you have to beat its hardness. If the ground has a hardness of 8 and you deal 9 damage, 1 point gets through and allows the effect of power to work.
However, when damaging objects there is the inapropriate toolo rule. I suggest using a hammer or a pick of some sort as your weapon. I think Picks beside the pinty end have an axe head on the back? which pretty much covers you for every substance i can think of.
Anyhow with the inappropriate tool (or is it weapon?) rule youd need to do about 20 damage to damage the floor with say a great sword.
Does that make sense since with a level 1 barbarian, this is pretty much an auto succeed? It seems like the is no risk or difficulty involved.
Why would they choose to include a challenge with the hardness check, if while raging, you use the rage power and auto succeed? It doesn't seem like it is "hard" enough (pun intended).
Can it be interpreted that Floors have hardness, that dealing damage has to over come hardness, and that the wording "If the barbarian manages to deal more damage than the floor's hardness [...]", it means that after overcoming hardness, if the damage "dealt" to the floor is equal to or higher then the hardness, the Rage Power succeeds?
From a meta gaming point of view, if a floor is stone (8 hardness) and you deal 7 damage to it, you weren't strong enough to even leave a mark in the floor since it was undamaged.
If the floor is stone and it's hardness is 8 and you deal 9 damage to it, which is 1 over hardness, you essentially leave a small crack in it, or you pick out a rock sized hole. You don't cause a 15 ft by 15 ft area to be turned to rubble and the ground to shake and knock people down.
On the other hand if you obliterate the floor such as to deal at least 16 dmg to a stone floor of hardness 8, then you have dealt enough damage to over come the floors hardness AND the dmg "dealt" to the floor after hardness is equal to the hardness. Doesn't this make more sense from a meta gaming point of view?
|
It's not that powerful really, and it hurts you almost as much as your enemies as you are also in difficult terrain now. Level one is irrelevant as you must be level 6 to take the power. You are sacrificing one rage round of attacking to make some difficult terrain and knock down adjacent foes. Option one is how the power is supposed to work. Option two is just DM editorializing the power into uselessness.
Option two is just DM editorializing the power into uselessness.
We are all here to ask questions, clarifications, and where needed get advice and ideas on how to improve the game.
My intention isn't to nerf a ruling, it's to understand it. And not just take something someone said for granted. You must be able to appreciate that?
All I'm saying is it doesn't mention bypassing hardness, which is from the following source here. It is implied that hardness is factored in.
What does "deal more damage than the floor's hardness" mean to you? What does "Damage Dealt" mean to you?
|
|
Option two is just DM editorializing the power into uselessness.We are all here to ask questions, clarifications, and where needed get advice and ideas on how to improve the game.
My intention isn't to nerf a ruling, it's to understand it. And not just take something someone said for granted. You must be able to appreciate that?
All I'm saying is it doesn't mention bypassing hardness, which is from the following source here. It is implied that hardness is factored in.
What does "deal more damage than the floor's hardness" mean to you? What does "Damage Dealt" mean to you?
I apologize for the editorializing remark, it came off as more snide than I had intended. Text doesn't convey tone well.
The power states that it it automatically hits and damages normally. If the attack deals more damage than the Hardness of the floor, then squares become difficult terrain. It makes no mention of actually dealing HP damage to the floor. The attack simply has to deal more damage than the floor's hardness, and then the squares become difficult terrain.
"Deal more damage than the floor's hardness" means 'the total of the dice is greater than the hardness of the floor'.
Your reading is 'dealing more than twice as much damage as the floor's hardness'.
Thank you everybody for chiming in.
I was clearly stuck on the notion of Deal Damage/Damage Dealt. In my head damage dealt is after damage reduction. :)
Also I agree, a fixed DC15 Reflex save ... lol The rule doesn't need any more nerfing.
Thanks again.
Thank you everybody for chiming in.
I was clearly stuck on the notion of Deal Damage/Damage Dealt. In my head damage dealt is after damage reduction. :)
It might help to distinguish between "damage dealt" and "damage taken".
In your example, the barbarian "deals" 13 points worth of damage. The floor only "takes" 5.