If I may be a bit impertinent, it's likely that those suggesting tunneling with a dagger have never, for example, dug a hole or ditch (or grave), hewn stone with a pickaxe, or even trenched a sprinkler system, or any other digging/mining work, using hand tools. Even in soft clay and with tools designed for the job it's not easy or fast. Straightforward, yes, but definitely not fast.
I think it's more a question of differences in how people think of adamantine working. Imagine if substances effectively become soft as warm butter when under pressure from an adamantine blade. You might not be able to scrape a hole through a butter wall in a few seconds with a ten inch blade (and I admit I've never tried) - it might not be easy or fast - but the idea that you couldn't affect it at all would seem like obstructive GMing.
I'm gonna go ahead and rule [ineffective weapons] in my game, anyhow. Regardless of the base material of a dagger, it's still just a dagger. At best I'll allow a resourceful party the benefit of the doubt and use an adamantine dagger as a "sink anywhere" piton upon which they can safely tie a rope for climbing... they could also use it to extract the eye gems of a big statue, for example. Maybe they can also use it to engrave stone walls with markers or crude art.I agree, and will do the same.
If I may be a bit impertinent, it's likely that those suggesting tunneling with a dagger have never, for example, dug a hole or ditch (or grave), hewn stone with a pickaxe, or even trenched a sprinkler system, or any other digging/mining work, using hand tools. Even in soft clay and with tools designed for the job it's not easy or fast. Straightforward, yes, but definitely not fast.
A dagger hammered into stone is similar to the quarrying methods used to extract, split and shape limestone and granite for all of human history. Pound your spikes in a row, knock in a wedge, split out the stone. One invincible spike should be plenty, though time consuming.
http://www.cheops-pyramide.ch/khufu-pyramid/stone-cutting.html
Of course, that sounds more like a profession or craft check than a brute force method using combat rules, but pulverizing the stone with a pick or hammer is going to produce tons of debris compared to a splitting method. This should save the time and effort of moving debris that has much greater volume than the initial stone wall.
After all this back and forth, I would now employ this idea:
Sure, tunnel away, no problem. No, don't tell me your average damage, no, don't tell me how long you think it will take...
The clanging, scraping noise of you slowly chiseling away at the wall summons every monster within earshot.
Roll initiative, as you face every monster in the dungeon at once.
Lets be realistic here Alex... that depends entirely on the size of said dungeon.
In most cases you're only calling down 3-4 encounters on yourself at most which may or may not be the whole dungeon.
EDIT: also I HIGHLY doubt that excavating by hand is going to be any louder than combat.
Fair enough, but it isn't silent. Point is, the GM isn't obligated to allow it in the first place, it isn't a clever idea, why would someone obsess over being able to do it?
Might as well dynamite the whole dungeon and dig out the treasure later.
Way less risk.
Sounds good to me.Might as well dynamite the whole dungeon and dig out the treasure later.
Way less risk.
Also less fun.
At least, after the first time. The first time is hilarious, especially when the GM doesn't see it coming. :D
|
If I may be a bit impertinent, it's likely that those suggesting tunneling with a dagger have never, for example, dug a hole or ditch (or grave), hewn stone with a pickaxe, or even trenched a sprinkler system, or any other digging/mining work, using hand tools.
I participated in plenty of sandbag details, and have grounded my share of generators in hard ground. And foxholes don't dig themselves either.
It's amazing. All the mooks in the dungeon die and anything of any potency all scramble to the surface all at once to deal with whoever destroyed their home.Sounds good to me.Might as well dynamite the whole dungeon and dig out the treasure later.
Way less risk.
Also less fun.
At least, after the first time. The first time is hilarious, especially when the GM doesn't see it coming. :D
Have you SEEN the cave-in rules? Nothing survives that short of golems.
I know what abilities can help you escape it, but unlike some people, I don't just grant every ability listed to every monster in every dungeon. :D
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Maybe this is a good time to admit that the rules around tunneling in stone, like the Craft/profession rules, are at best an extremely rough approximation of reality, intended to cover corner-ish cases like hacking down a door (instead of picking the lock or forcing it with a Str check.) Adamantine weapons are meant to be used for sundering and occasionally as 'master keys', not as burrowing tools.
They are rules of convenience, like how Burrow speeds almost never leave a usable tunnel.
The more your game focuses on these out-of-focus rules, the weirder things get. It doesn't matter if that's because you have an Alchemist PC who can churn out potions daily, but still takes weeks to make basic alchemical items.
Or why 8 hardness and oodles of hit points means explosive weapons are basically useless at blasting stone walls.
Or if you have players who made the logical leap between hacking down a door and hacking through a wall.
Or you have a glibness bard who can test the limits of 'impossible' Bluffs.
Or you just think too hard about why a 35-foot tall Rune Giant is restricted to the same 5-foot step as a 6-foot human being.
Because "rocks falling on your heads killing everyone because you did something I don't like" is the exact, word-for-word definition of the absolute worst type of GM.Why because then your characters would realize that actions have consequences?Or do it. You'll kill off all your players and they wouldn't need to play with a GM that would do this anymore.Just have the dungeon collapse on their heads after they cut through a structural load baring wall. Maybe give them a knowledge:engineering check to be sporting about it. Nip it in the bud. Just because a thing can be done doesn't mean it should be done....Don't do this.
Actually, since this situation is entirely in the "GM Fiat" area of the rules, the worst person at the table is the player who keeps arguing with the GM over a ruling.
Ceiling collapse is entirely justified. +1
|
I think it's more a question of differences in how people think of adamantine working. Imagine if substances effectively become soft as warm butter when under pressure from an adamantine blade.
Some people do seem to think that touching any adamantium item to a wall creates the instantaneous effect of a passwall spell.
:P
Steel is harder than dirt, but digging a hole is a lot more work that simply touching a shovel to the earth and watching fissures appear.
|
|
If I may be a bit impertinent, it's likely that those suggesting tunneling with a dagger have never, for example, dug a hole or ditch (or grave), hewn stone with a pickaxe, or even trenched a sprinkler system, or any other digging/mining work, using hand tools.I participated in plenty of sandbag details, and have grounded my share of generators in hard ground. And foxholes don't dig themselves either.
Little known fact: every trench in WWI was instantly dug by one Army man as he touched his adamantium shovel to the ground. The earth was cleaved mightily! We're just lucky that the westernmost bits of Europe didn't completely split off from the rest of the continent and float off into the ocean.
I assumed the "5 foot step" was just minor adjustments while taking other actions. You aren't stepping there so much as adjusting your position while taking some other action.
I figure if you're living underground, you're likely to have some ability to escape caveins [or you're still a mook and only your family will mourn your death... oh wait they died too.]
At least is solves the goblin baby dilemma.
Little known fact: every trench in WWI was instantly dug by one Army man as he touched his adamantium shovel to the ground. The earth was cleaved mightily! We're just lucky that the westernmost bits of Europe didn't completely split off from the rest of the continent and float off into the ocean.If I may be a bit impertinent, it's likely that those suggesting tunneling with a dagger have never, for example, dug a hole or ditch (or grave), hewn stone with a pickaxe, or even trenched a sprinkler system, or any other digging/mining work, using hand tools.I participated in plenty of sandbag details, and have grounded my share of generators in hard ground. And foxholes don't dig themselves either.
That is one hell of a STR bonus, no wonder we won.
I assumed the "5 foot step" was just minor adjustments while taking other actions. You aren't stepping there so much as adjusting your position while taking some other action.
Agreed, to me it makes MORE sense for bigger creatures, less sense for smaller ones...
I mean, an eagle on the ground has a speed of 10.
A five foot step is half a move for him normally.
What about the other skymetals?
Abysium: glows, source of energy, and sickening to be around for lengthy periods of time
Djezet: liquid metal (at all temperatures), heightens magic
Horacalcum: warps time
Inubrix: phases through iron and steel, slightly less malleable than lead
Noqual: tough as iron, weighs half, resistant to magic
Siccatite: either constantly hot or constantly cold
In comparison to those, is a super-hard material with the ability to negate hardness in lesser materials really so wild?
What about the other skymetals?
Abysium: glows, source of energy, and sickening to be around for lengthy periods of time
Djezet: liquid metal (at all temperatures), heightens magic
Horacalcum: warps time
Inubrix: phases through iron and steel, slightly less malleable than lead
Noqual: tough as iron, weighs half, resistant to magic
Siccatite: either constantly hot or constantly cold
In comparison to those, is a super-hard material with the ability to negate hardness in lesser materials really so wild?
No one is debating the negation of hardness, it is simply a discussion of tunneling speed while using a tool not made for tunneling.
Well, what about a pickaxe makes it good for breaking up rocks? Because daggers do piercing damage too. I would have said it's the crit but you can't crit objects. So... yeah, a dagger should be just as useful for tunneling as a pickaxe (if a little less powerful).
And I already did the math. 5 foot cube of rock takes about 12 and a half minutes to tunnel through. That's assuming average damage, 1 attack a round, and 20 Str.
For boredom's sake, let's run it with a pickaxe. 1d8+7 average 11.5, 3.5 after hardness, 258 rounds, 25.8 minutes. So... yeah, about twice as fast using adamantine.
More attacks, a better weapon than a dagger, higher strength, lots of things could change this, but with the same conditions the dagger is really only twice as fast.
Based on the assumption that only damage type matters, sure.
Ask your GM, it's not your call.
Leverage counts, at least according to Archimedes, but what did he know?
In any case, daggers aren't made with mining in mind, so it's up to the GM to allow it, not the players.
No, not based on the assumption that only damage type matters. But by the game rules, the only thing the pickaxe is is a two-handed piercing weapon. It doesn't have any other special properties. It doesn't get a bonus to break stuff. That puts it in the same category as a spear or the halberd. So either the pickaxe should have some kind of bonus vs objects or any other big piercing weapon can be used like a pickaxe.
Sure, leverage matters. Presumably that's taken into account in weapon damage. Maybe in the two-handing rules. But there are no rules for "more leverage". There isn't even a suggestion that you should change anything because of "more leverage". Again, a pickaxe and a spear are exactly the same by the rules, except the spear can be thrown, braced, and has a lower crit range. And none of those matter for digging through a wall.
If only there existed some text addressing whether or not a given item was intended for tunneling through stone...
Hrm...
You mean the text that most definitely does not say that a pickaxe is a good weapon for tunneling through stone?No, not based on the assumption that only damage type matters. But by the game rules, the only thing the pickaxe is is a two-handed piercing weapon. It doesn't have any other special properties. It doesn't get a bonus to break stuff. That puts it in the same category as a spear or the halberd. So either the pickaxe should have some kind of bonus vs objects or any other big piercing weapon can be used like a pickaxe.
Sure, leverage matters. Presumably that's taken into account in weapon damage. Maybe in the two-handing rules. But there are no rules for "more leverage". There isn't even a suggestion that you should change anything because of "more leverage". Again, a pickaxe and a spear are exactly the same by the rules, except the spear can be thrown, braced, and has a lower crit range. And none of those matter for digging through a wall.
If only there existed some text addressing whether or not a given item was intended for tunneling through stone...
Hrm...
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.You'll notice it's a pick, not a pickaxe. Clearly separate and different, by pedantry @#$%^&*. If you insist on pedantry I can do it as well, but it's pretty boring.
If you mean the text of the pickaxe itself:
A two-handed version of the heavy pick, the brutal pickaxe is equally effective at breaking up earth and stone as it is at sundering flesh and bone. Often a weapon of convenience for commoners, the pickaxe is also a favorite among brutes and thugs who value the intimidation factor afforded by the immense weapon.It's as good...
I'm not seeing the part where it says daggers are made for tunneling through stone, please clarify.
Clearly we need a Pathfinder rules reference show similar to Myth Busters in order to solve these challenges in real life simulations.
Some people do seem to think that touching any adamantium item to a wall creates the instantaneous effect of a passwall spell.
I've seen some people say the 'substances such as rock and metal and diamond have a hardness of zero against adamantine' rule takes precedence over the 'some weapons are the wrong shape to damage a wall' rule, and some people who say the latter rule takes precedence. I haven't seen anyone saying anything like what you're saying they're saying.
Earlier I claimed that you can destroy a metal breastplate with an ordinary rapier without damaging the rapier - maybe you could ridicule that?
Clearly we need a Pathfinder rules reference show similar to Myth Busters in order to solve these challenges in real life simulations.
If only real life situations mattered in a game where rules are approximations of said situation.
But it is a game, with rules to follow, regardless of real life.
I'd put Adamantine hardness-penetration in the Extraordinary category, like Troll regeneration.
Some people do seem to think that touching any adamantium item to a wall creates the instantaneous effect of a passwall spell.I've seen some people say the 'substances such as rock and metal and diamond have a hardness of zero against adamantine' rule takes precedence over the 'some weapons are the wrong shape to damage a wall' rule, and some people who say the latter rule takes precedence. I haven't seen anyone saying anything like what you're saying they're saying.
I believe the word you're looking for is 'hyperbole'.
It was funny.
(But yes, I've been at a table with players that essentially expect a substantially similar effect.)
When you use hyperbole to characterise the arguments of those who disagree with you, it's called 'creating a straw man'.
|
|
1) Adamantine is not adamantium. Adamantine is NOT indestructible.
2) For those of you referencing the fact that Wolverine seems to be able to slice through virtually anything like a white-hot razor through half-melted butter...adamantine is not adamantium. Also, about 99% of the time a comic/cartoon shows that, Wolverine wouldn't be anywhere near strong enough to actually do it, despite the indestructibility and sharpness of his claws.
Adamantine I think takes a lot of flak because it legitimately is way less realistic than most of these other mundane examples, but at the same time, it does still seem itself mundane. Because it's flavored as if it's just a matter of its hardness and sharpness doing it.
So even though other things are just as unrealistic like other starmetals, if they are flavored as magic, people are just like "oh well.. magic. Okay." Adamantine I think is one of it not the more unrealistic thing that isn't described in a magical way. it's just one one side of that critical threshold.
I get this point. I'm just on the opposite side. I don't think of adamantine as "steel plus"; I think of it as "horacalcum less".
I have no problem attributing any number of physical properties to the substance, even physical properties that violate the laws of physics, in order to explain away what it can do.
For example, power steering makes my heavy car easier to steer. Without it, my mere human physically-unfit strength would have a more difficult time. Power steering hydraulically augments what I do.
Who's to say adamantine (and for that matter, adamantium) doesn't do something similar? No, Wolverine has never been depicted as having the strength to carve out a tunnel and simple hardness on the part of his adamantium claws wouldn't overcome the incompressibility of bedrock, so that must mean that some other property is in play. Maybe adamantium (and adamantine) actively create a radioactive (or pseudo-supernatural) field that transmutes the materials it's being used against into, effectively, butter, at least for the purposes of overcoming those other materials' hardness.
In comparison with a skymetal that perpetually generates its own heat or one that warps time, a skymetal that creates an "anti-hardness" field seems entirely appropriate.
By the rules, you never need to sharpen ANY sword, or repair ANY armor.
But you CAN sharpen your sword if you WANT to. Ultimate Equipment says you can use a whetstone to add +1 damage to your next attack if you spend a while sharpening you non-magical blade.
To my knowledge, this would even work on a non-magical adamantine blade.
1) Adamantine is not adamantium. Adamantine is NOT indestructible.
2) For those of you referencing the fact that Wolverine seems to be able to slice through virtually anything like a white-hot razor through half-melted butter...adamantine is not adamantium. Also, about 99% of the time a comic/cartoon shows that, Wolverine wouldn't be anywhere near strong enough to actually do it, despite the indestructibility and sharpness of his claws.
Neither Adamantium is indestructible, just insanely hard, like PF/D&D Adamantine.
(Also a metal called Adamantine does exist in the Marvel Universe. It's hard as Adamantium but also grants resistance to magic and mental attacks)