Real quick question: creatures with hardness vs energy damage


Pathfinder Society

Sczarni 5/5 5/55/5 ***

In a game now, and we can't find the ruling John Compton made regarding energy damage against creatures with hardness.

Help?

The Exchange 3/5

Looking real quick here is a post by James Jacobs with regards to robot hardness. Not official but offers clarification

James Jacobs wrote:


Correct; robots aren't objects and thus take full damage from energy attacks. Their hardness reduces damage done by 10 (or whatever), regardless of if it's energy damage or force damage or slashing/piercing/bludgeoning damage or whatever. That's why it's not DR (which doesn't touch energy damage) or energy resistance (which doesn't touch slashing/bludgeoning/piercing damage).

I'll keep looking for the John Compton one though. . .

Sczarni 5/5 5/55/5 ***

Pretty sure it was John Compton, as it was PFS-specific.

The Exchange 3/5

Still not a John Compton post but here is one by Rob McCreary, one of the Devs. . . Rob's Thoughts

Rob McCreary wrote:
Devastation Bob wrote:

wrote:

So I have a question regarding the animated dolls in the first dungeon. Do they take energy damage as objects, (1/2 after hardness) or regularly because they're animated?

Here's my answer from another thread:

The animated objects are constructs, so they are now creatures, not objects. As creatures, energy damage is not halved against them (in effect, becoming a creature trumps the normal object rules). So they take full damage from energy attacks (150% if they are vulnerable to that energy type), then hardness is applied. However, page 174 of the Core Rulebook states (under "Vulnerability to Certain Attacks") that "Certain attacks are especially successful against some objects.In such cases, attacks deal double their normal damage and my ignore the object's hardness."

Even though the animated objects are no longer "objects," I would still apply this rule about overcoming hardness to them in this adventure (but the 150% creature vulnerability trumps the double damage to an object part of the rule), as hardness can be quite difficult to overcome for low-level PCs. So if the PCs use fire against the warrior dolls, for example, it would deal 150% the normal damage, and ignore the hardness. Other energy damage would deal full damage which would ten be reduced by hardness, the same as for any other attack against it.

Like I said, I am still looking, just posting relevant information as I find it.

5/5 5/55/55/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.

How does hardness work for creatures? Does energy damage such as cold deal half damage to creatures with hardness (Pathfinder RPG Core Rulebook 173-174) even before applying the flat numerical reduction?
When a creature with hardness sustains damage, subtract its hardness from the damage dealt. The rules for halving damage, doubling damage, dealing damage with ineffective tools, immunities, and the like only apply to damaging inanimate objects.
(This is apparently a question the Design Team has received a few times during the development of Iron Gods, so they were ready to go with an answer!)

Year of the Sky Key Q&A

Sovereign Court 4/5 5/5 ***

6 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Yeah, that's one post I keep on my PFS Clarifications List

The Exchange 3/5

Ah Thanks BNW, I was searching through his and other developers and the likes posts, didn't think to look in a blog post.

Sczarni 5/5 5/55/5 ***

Ack. Wow. That's not what any of us thought it was.

So, Alchemist Fire is completely ineffective against Hardness 10?

Grand Lodge 4/5 **** Venture-Captain, California—Sacramento

Pretty much. Unless it has a vulnerability to fire or it is thrown by a really, really, really smart alchemist.

5/5 5/55/55/5

Nefreet wrote:

Ack. Wow. That's not what any of us thought it was.

So, Alchemist Fire is completely ineffective against Hardness 10?

Unless you're fighting a wood golem, probably

Shadow Lodge 4/5

4 people marked this as FAQ candidate. 3 people marked this as a favorite.

Fires of karamoss has a sidebar on page 16 about fighting creatures with hardness, which reads:
Hardness works differently for creatures than for objects. Unlike an object, a creature with hardness takes full damage from energy and ranged attacks (as opposed to half damage), which is then reduced by the creature’s hardness. If the creature is vulnerable to a certain type of damage, that damage is increased before being reduced by the creature’s hardness. At the GM’s discretion, certain attacks may bypass a creature’s hardness entirely. In the case of robots such as [redacted] (who have vulnerability to electricity), it would be appropriate not only to apply 150% of the electricity damage dealt by an attack, but to also allow that damage to bypass the robot’s hardness.

Sczarni 5/5 5/55/5 ***

Thanks, everyone.

That's a rough ruling.

In our game the Fighter thought her +1 Flaming Arrows could add some extra damage to overcome the creature's Hardness.

But, the creature effectively had Hardness 20 (10 vs the arrow, and 10 vs the fire). Unless she crit, there was no way she could hurt the thing.

Luckily we had two Rogues that could Sneak Attack and power through the DR, but we nearly had a TPK.

Grand Lodge 5/5

The ruling from Karamoss, iirc, is something more akin to what I remember (misremember?) being stated previously. That FAQ is a bit on the tough side.

As for the archer, there is a RAI argument to be had for Clustered Shot working against hardness. (Hardness was originally intended for inanimate objects while DR/Adamantine would have been for creatures, also if you look at Pummeling Style which is an upgraded and newer version for unarmed strikes it does work for both) Unfortunately RAW this isn't true. Adamantine arrows may or may not even work depending on GM ruling about weapons intended ability to harm/not harm the object, but personally for my archer it was my best bet in cases like this.

5/5 5/55/55/5

Nefreet wrote:
But, the creature effectively had Hardness 20 (10 vs the arrow, and 10 vs the fire)

I could see doing it that way or considering the flaming arrow the same source.

Shadow Lodge 4/5

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens Subscriber

I would rule that all damage from an attack, even if it's of different types, is from the same pool of damage. Obviously, if an effect only blocks some of the damage (such as Fire Resistance 10), it would stop that one type, but I feel that the Hardness 10 would be subtracted only once from the 1d8+1d6+1 of the flaming arrows.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

My Brother of the Seal monk must be terrifying to robots.

-j

Sovereign Court 2/5

James McTeague wrote:
Yeah, that's one post I keep on my PFS Clarifications List

That's a really cool list, thanks, James!

The Exchange 5/5

Acedio wrote:
James McTeague wrote:
Yeah, that's one post I keep on my PFS Clarifications List
That's a really cool list, thanks, James!

I noticed the "selling Spellbook" entry is the older one and this one might modify if...

Liberty's Edge 5/5

Starfinder Superscriber

Yeah, I really wish the "Fires of Karamoss" rule exception were listed somewhere other than just in "Fires of Karamoss".

I was in a game the other day (a different scenario) where a player was using that, but it took him forever to find the actual ruling to show the GM that it was legit. Everything in the rulebooks and forum threads we found-- which was already hard enough to find!-- indicated that hardness was applied to all energy damage, with no indication that vulnerability affected that. Were I the the GM, I would not have allowed it, but this GM was more forgiving. Even once he found the ruling, I was a bit dubious-- it was a ruling from another PFS scenario, one I hadn't played or GMed yet, and I really don't like the idea that I have to read PFS Scenario X to know the game rules for PFS Scenario Y. That's just backassward and wrong.

We really need an FAQ on this. Hell, the fact that creature hardness doesn't work like object hardness already is kind of obscure, and we need an FAQ on that.

Sovereign Court 2/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.

After a long bout of reading CRB on this matter, the simplest explanation I was able to derive was the following (hope it helps or makes sense):

1. Harness and Energy Attacks (specifically halving energy damage) are properties of objects.

2. Harness and 'Energy Attacks' rules are separate, and are not tied together in one package.

3. A Robot is not an object, it is a construct, so it does not have the 'Energy Attack' rules. It is given the Harness rules explicitly.

Spoiler has the CRB sources.

Rules Quotes and stuff:
Damaging Objects, Additional Rules, CRB, PRD wrote:

Smashing an Object

Smashing a weapon or shield with a slashing or bludgeoning weapon is accomplished with the sunder combat maneuver (see Combat). Smashing an object is like sundering a weapon or shield, except that your combat maneuver check is opposed by the object's AC. Generally, you can smash an object only with a bludgeoning or slashing weapon.

...

Hardness: Each object has hardness—a number that represents how well it resists damage. When an object is damaged, subtract its hardness from the damage. Only damage in excess of its hardness is deducted from the object's hit points (see Table: Common Armor, Weapon, and Shield Hardness and Hit Points, Table: Substance Hardness and Hit Points, and Table: Object Hardness and Hit Points).

....

Energy Attacks: Energy attacks deal half damage to most objects. Divide the damage by 2 before applying the object's hardness. Some energy types might be particularly effective against certain objects, subject to GM discretion. For example, fire might do full damage against parchment, cloth, and other objects that burn easily. Sonic might do full damage against glass and crystal objects.

At least this is how a lot of us concluded prior to the FAQ that robots didn't halve energy damage.

Edit: Corrected "object" wording.

Edit 2: The thing I have yet to see addressed that I'm still not sure how to rule on is the precedence of hardness and vulnerability to electricity. Do I subtract harness, then multiply damage by 1.5? Or do I multiply damage by 1.5, then subtract hardness? Or do I ignore hardness altogether?

Liberty's Edge 5/5

Starfinder Superscriber

The "Fires of Karamoss" sidebar indicates you ignore hardness altogether. But, as far as I know, that's the only place that rule has shown up. Which makes it very troublesome, because players who know it want to use it, but we don't have an actual reference anywhere other than a single scenario.

Sovereign Court 2/5

1 person marked this as FAQ candidate.
rknop wrote:
The "Fires of Karamoss" sidebar indicates you ignore hardness altogether. But, as far as I know, that's the only place that rule has shown up. Which makes it very troublesome, because players who know it want to use it, but we don't have an actual reference anywhere other than a single scenario.

Oh ok, it looks like we're talking about different things/I misread your post/I don't know how to read. Sorry! Do you happen to have the wording?

EDIT: Found it (sorry, I'm struggling real hard today)

Quote:

Fires of karamoss has a sidebar on page 16 about fighting creatures with hardness, which reads:

Hardness works differently for creatures than for objects. Unlike an object, a creature with hardness takes full damage from energy and ranged attacks (as opposed to half damage), which is then reduced by the creature’s hardness. If the creature is vulnerable to a certain type of damage, that damage is increased before being reduced by the creature’s hardness. At the GM’s discretion, certain attacks may bypass a creature’s hardness entirely. In the case of robots such as [redacted] (who have vulnerability to electricity), it would be appropriate not only to apply 150% of the electricity damage dealt by an attack, but to also allow that damage to bypass the robot’s hardness.

Cool! Vulnerability precedence! But yeah this should be FAQ'd please.

Silver Crusade 2/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Acedio wrote:
rknop wrote:
The "Fires of Karamoss" sidebar indicates you ignore hardness altogether. But, as far as I know, that's the only place that rule has shown up. Which makes it very troublesome, because players who know it want to use it, but we don't have an actual reference anywhere other than a single scenario.
Oh ok, it looks like we're talking about different things/I misread your post/I don't know how to read. Sorry! Do you happen to have the wording?

From this thread.

Community / Forums / Organized Play / Pathfinder Society / Real quick question: creatures with hardness vs energy damage All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in Pathfinder Society