Adamantine daggers do what?


Pathfinder First Edition General Discussion

451 to 482 of 482 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

The ineffectual weapons clause was, "we of the design team SERIOUSLY have better things to do than write 'tunnel-digging the rpg' so we're leaving it up to the DM with some very vague rules that are fairly clearly DM's prerogative."

As for a dagger cutting through a wall, well I like to pretend the adamantine dagger is like a plasma cutter. Sure it can sublimate or slice through solid stone and steel, but only to a very short depth. If you start carving at angles and essentially strip-mining or quarrying your way through you'll eventually get there, but it will take quite a while.

Say, one-quarter damage, ignores hardness, standard action to make a cut that will lead to cutting through the wall in question.


boring7 wrote:
Say, one-quarter damage, ignores hardness, standard action to make a cut that will lead to cutting through the wall in question.

How on earth does a shaving/chiseling type chop against a non-defender take longer than striking at somebody defending themselves in combat?

It's silly not giving someone attacking an object as many attacks as they receive in a Full Attack Action.


M1k31 wrote:
Purple Dragon Knight wrote:
bookrat wrote:

Just thought of something else:

When talking about realism, a history of people breaking out of prison via tunneling should be evidence enough that one can tunnel through walls with something as simple as a sharpened spoon or a knife.

I hope the PCs have months' worth of rations and a place to get rid of their exrements

Edit: I just found a rather nasty use for "bag of holding"

Interdimensional porta-potty?

Now I kind of want to see a quest where the DM has the party find one used for that purpose.....

One could use sovereign glue on their hiney and attach the bag of holding to it. That way, you don't even have to worry about the mess.


bags of holding do have a max capacity, you know... And you are now wearing one really large floppy diaper...

Sovereign Court

Pathfinder Pawns Subscriber

Lol


You can put an ooze in there first to eat the excrement.

Sovereign Court

Pathfinder Pawns Subscriber

Do oozes need oxygen?


Apparently they do.....

A mythic dire rat then.


Oozes do breathe, yes, but if you can find one that destroys organic matter, and has an INT of 3 or higher, then an iridescent spindle ioun stone will solve air and function on it.

Incidentally, this may also be a way to deal with tunnel rubble back on topic of the original point of the thread! Some oozes do burn stone. May not overlap with the INT 3+ ones though.

Or I suppose if it's intelligent, and its acid doesn't hurt glass, then it could learn how to use a bottle of air too.

Quote:
A mythic dire rat then.

That just creates it's own waste, doesn't it?


Good point


Pathfinder Maps, Pawns Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

I wold like to point out that you only need to do enough damage to a stone golem to de-animate it. That may well be very different from the amount of damage required to actually destroy the body itself.

Sovereign Court

bookrat wrote:

Just thought of something else:

When talking about realism, a history of people breaking out of prison via tunneling should be evidence enough that one can tunnel through walls with something as simple as a sharpened spoon or a knife.

I remember thinking it would take a man six hundred years to tunnel through the wall with it. Old Andy did it in less than twenty.


Crimeo wrote:

Oozes do breathe, yes, but if you can find one that destroys organic matter, and has an INT of 3 or higher, then an iridescent spindle ioun stone will solve air and function on it.

Incidentally, this may also be a way to deal with tunnel rubble back on topic of the original point of the thread! Some oozes do burn stone. May not overlap with the INT 3+ ones though.

Or I suppose if it's intelligent, and its acid doesn't hurt glass, then it could learn how to use a bottle of air too.

Quote:
A mythic dire rat then.
That just creates it's own waste, doesn't it?

Honestly, at the point you are wearing a magical diaper with an intelligent creature inside whose entire life revolves around eating your feces... Would it be so odd to just stick a siphon tube down your drawers to give the ooze a supply of fresh air? Do you really need to give it an expensive magical means to breathe?

That said,
1) what is keeping ooze from eating your... let's go with 'backside'... Between bowel movements/feelings?
2) if it is an acid based ooze that deals corrosive damage to anything it touches... How is it not destroying the bag of holding?

Sovereign Court

Pathfinder Pawns Subscriber

DM: Your fighter is now 48 YEARS OLD. Take -2 to STR and stuff...

Player: my fighter uses the adamantine dagger and seppukus the crap out of himself...


I'm still laughing at how people seem to think that bypassing a certain amount of hardness somehow makes digging through a wall so easy that it is measured in rounds...

Oh LOL.


Quote:
Would it be so odd to just stick a siphon tube down your drawers to give the ooze a supply of fresh air? Do you really need to give it an expensive magical means to breathe?
Quote:
1) what is keeping ooze from eating your... let's go with 'backside'... Between bowel movements/feelings?

Asked and answered -- what's keeping it from doing so is not having a siphon tube creating a line of attack/escape all the time. When a BOH is closed, it is completely separated off. So I imagine you would create your waste (either rocks or excrement) separately, then open the bag toss stuff in and close it instantly in one swift movement. If you have a whole party helping in this, then you can finish all this in one surprise round, and the ooze doesn't even get a chance to move out.

Crafting the exact right ooze is probably more expensive than other methods of dealing with these problems, honestly, but is very entertaining.

Quote:
if it is an acid based ooze that deals corrosive damage to anything it touches...

I think the inside of a bag of holding is made out of the walls of a pocket dimensional space, not cloth. Or at least it is ambiguous about this in the rules. All we know for sure is sharp objects rupture it, whatever it is, and acid is not a sharp object. I could see a GM ruling that it is organic material or that it is just a wall of force.

Sovereign Court

Pathfinder Pawns Subscriber

It's a coated interior? ? By the gods it's the early alchemical version of Pepto Bismol!!!

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

Unless it's a pretty small ooze, it's going to exceed the weight limit.


Purple Dragon Knight wrote:
It's a coated interior? ? By the gods it's the early alchemical version of Pepto Bismol!!!

Maybe. I always imagined it as not actually the inside of the bag at all, but rather that the mouth of the bag is just a portal to a pocket dimension that otherwise has little or nothing to do with the inside of the bag. Only connecting to one another at the mouth portal. Flipping inside out being basically just like a command word sort of thing.

It doesn't really explain any of this one way or the other for sure. Probably because it's almost impossible to do so without committing to some sort of paradox or another.


alexd1976 wrote:

I'm still laughing at how people seem to think that bypassing a certain amount of hardness somehow makes digging through a wall so easy that it is measured in rounds...

Oh LOL.

I'm still wondering why it wouldn't be.

Silver Crusade

bookrat wrote:
alexd1976 wrote:

I'm still laughing at how people seem to think that bypassing a certain amount of hardness somehow makes digging through a wall so easy that it is measured in rounds...

Oh LOL.

I'm still wondering why it wouldn't be.

Oh, it'd be measured in rounds, just takes quite a few of them. Mostly just because it takes roughly a round for a super strong character to destroy an inch of stone with a dagger. So if you wanted to dig through a foot thick wall, it'd take you 12 rounds of dedicated effort. Honestly, it would probably take you longer, because the 15 HP/in of thickness makes no allowances for the size of the stone you're attacking.


Isonaroc wrote:
Oh, it'd be measured in rounds, just takes quite a few of them. Mostly just because it takes roughly a round for a super strong character to destroy an inch of stone with a dagger. So if you wanted to dig through a foot thick wall, it'd take you 12 rounds of dedicated effort. Honestly, it would probably take you longer, because the 15 HP/in of thickness makes no allowances for the size of the stone you're attacking.

It also doesn't take into account curvature, surface area, bulges, chamfered edges, etc.

Make a wall 60 in thick at its' thickest point, and leave the rest at 12 inches or so.

Personally, I'd like to think that I'm a reasonable person who doesn't want to waste time in a pissing contest with the players on the subject, and would assume that the "object" in question is 5'5'.
Or that the size is irrelevant and that the damage allocated to said object is what is necessary to cause it to be destroyed.

Destroyed could easily be structural failure, collapse, shattered, being rendered into small enough chunks that it's no longer an obstacle.

It's really very simple.

Also, why has no one discussed this rule?

SRD wrote:

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.

Before the screaming starts, I also point out that not a single item is called out (to my knowledge) that has this ability.

Silver Crusade

Sangerine wrote:

Also, why has no one discussed this rule?

SRD wrote:

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.

Before the screaming starts, I also point out that not a single item is called out (to my knowledge) that has this ability.

Probably BECAUSE nothing is called out that has that ability. Which leads to the more philosophical question: Is a rule that governs nothing still a rule?


Isonaroc wrote:
Sangerine wrote:

Also, why has no one discussed this rule?

SRD wrote:

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.

Before the screaming starts, I also point out that not a single item is called out (to my knowledge) that has this ability.
Probably BECAUSE nothing is called out that has that ability. Which leads to the more philosophical question: Is a rule that governs nothing still a rule?

It is not a rule at all.

A rule that governs nothing and suggests things is a guideline. It's GM advice.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Isonaroc wrote:
Sangerine wrote:

Also, why has no one discussed this rule?

SRD wrote:

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.

Before the screaming starts, I also point out that not a single item is called out (to my knowledge) that has this ability.
Probably BECAUSE nothing is called out that has that ability. Which leads to the more philosophical question: Is a rule that governs nothing still a rule?

I'm not falling for your shenanigans.

sensemotive: 1d20 - 1 ⇒ (14) - 1 = 13

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

This sounds like a math problem. Making some assumptions...

Quote:
A fighter wants to use his adamantine dagger to cut a 4 foot diameter circular opening in a 5 inch thick stone wall. How long will it take? He can cause 5 HP in damage to the stone per round.

Stone has 15 HP per inch (inch^3? Sure, why not), and the fighter wants to basically cut a stone cylinder about 150 inches in circumference and 5 inches thick.

The fighter has to cut through about 11,250 HP of stone (ignoring hardness).

At 5 HP of damage per round, it will take about 2,250 rounds, or about 3.75 hours to cut through the stone.

That's my take on the question, anyway...

Dark Archive

That is certainly one way to look at it. Makes walls a lot more impressive. Also makes other weapons a lot less impressive against them at the same time, so there's that. I find no particular objections to this logical ruling, and shall henceforth use a similar approach in my own games.

Silver Crusade

DocWatson wrote:

At 5 HP of damage per round, it will take about 2,250 rounds, or about 3.75 hours to cut through the stone.

That's my take on the question, anyway...

5 HP of damage? The dagger averages 2.5 HP per strike alone, factor in the fighter's strength bonus (generally at least +5, more likely higher if they've managed to get a belt or have leveled up enough to throw in ability points), weapon enhancements, and power attack...you're looking at likely 10 or more HP per swing. Factor in iterative attacks (depending on level) and it's reduced even more.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I did specify the fighter in question could do 5 points per round. Maybe its a level 1 fighter? I wanted to keep it simple for the example..

Even at 10 hp of damage per round, you are looking at about 1.9 hours to cut a hole in a stone wall. That is still a significant amount of time to be hacking away at a wall.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Quote:
Stone has 15 HP per inch (inch^3? Sure, why not),

Why not is because it wouldn't make sense with other listed HPs. For example a "good wooden door" has 15 HP, and 1" of wood is 10.

If you interpret it as one cubic inch, are you suggesting that a typical "good wooden door" has 1.5 cubic inches of wood in it? 8 foot tall, 3 foot wide = 0.0004" thick door? (That's about 1/8th of a sheet of paper) If you interpret "1 inch of wood" as "a 5x5 area, 1 inch deep" then the door comes out to be 1.56" thick then. Pretty much spot on.

A 2" thick iron door is listed as 60HP. If it's cubic inches, then a typical iron door is 1" tall and 1" wide (iron mouse hole door?). If it means 5'x5'x1" = 30hp though, then it's normal door sized.


Crimeo wrote:
Quote:
Stone has 15 HP per inch (inch^3? Sure, why not),

Why not is because it wouldn't make sense with other listed HPs. For example a "good wooden door" has 15 HP, and 1" of wood is 10.

If you interpret it as one cubic inch, are you suggesting that a typical "good wooden door" has 1.5 cubic inches of wood in it? 8 foot tall, 3 foot wide = 0.0004" thick door? (That's about 1/8th of a sheet of paper) If you interpret "1 inch of wood" as "a 5x5 area, 1 inch deep" then the door comes out to be 1.56" thick then. Pretty much spot on.

A 2" thick iron door is listed as 60HP. If it's cubic inches, then a typical iron door is 1" tall and 1" wide (iron mouse hole door?). If it means 5'x5'x1" = 30hp though, then it's normal door sized.

Actually, most manufactured doors have ~3 standard door heights ranging from 7'8" to 8'6" or so.

But, not only is that a modern practice, realism != mechanics.
So I like the fact that my assumption of 5 ft turned out to be mathematically accurate.


Quote:
manufactured

Yeah, I would say that this is late medieval to early renaissance, thus things aren't manufactured really.

However, there is the nagging doubt about the fact that all spell books and scrolls are printed on exactly 8.5" x 11" A4 paper... lol

451 to 482 of 482 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / General Discussion / Adamantine daggers do what? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.