| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The implication I'm getting is that you automatically hit unattended objects (and thus cannot score criticals against them).
If I needed an AC for an immobile, unattended object; it would be by Quality (the only remaining variable for such objects):
Poor-Quality (AC 3)
Standard-Quality (AC 5)
Expert-Quality (AC 6)
Master-Quality (AC 7)
Legendary-Quality (AC 8)
Wood is Hardness 5, p. 354.
More wood just adds more dents.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Wood is Hardness 5, p. 354.
More wood just adds more dents.
The Hardness for doors, reinforced structures, and other durable constructions is usually twice the Hardness listed on the table.
A Wooden Door or Wall has 10 Hardness.
Wood is Hardness 5, p. 354.
More wood just adds more dents.The Hardness for doors, reinforced structures, and other durable constructions is usually twice the Hardness listed on the table.A Wooden Door or Wall has 10 Hardness.
I defer to your greater citing skills, though I'd likely only apply that to extraordinary doors like in dungeons, castles, etc.
And even then it seems odd it'd take a magic weapon to break down w/ a maul or greataxe! That needs some review. Like maybe add more Dents because its Hardness wouldn't be particularly different.
With nothing but a oaken staff and at least 14 Str, you can literally knock down a wooden door given the time to keep rolling. Any martial Two-Handed weapon will do so faster, sans a Str penalty.
With nothing but a oaken staff and at least 14 Str, you can literally knock down a wooden door given the time to keep rolling. Any martial Two-Handed weapon will do so faster, sans a Str penalty.
You have to do 20 damage to get a Dent, so if there aren't critical hits then you could never get that high.
We don't know that there are critical hits for doors yet, and it'd be odd if they made Hardness to assume critical hits.Maybe they're factoring in Power Attack?
|
Nope, you Need 20 Damage to cause a dent. As you ignore the first 10 Points of damage, the door only takes damage after that. That means in order to cause 10 damage to the door (and cause a dent), you Need to cause 20 damage initially.
This is actually unclear at the moment as the rule can be read 2 different ways. I made a thread about it here.
If a door doesn't have an AC it's odd that a number of stationary spell constructs (like Wall spells) do.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
With nothing but a oaken staff and at least 14 Str, you can literally knock down a wooden door given the time to keep rolling. Any martial Two-Handed weapon will do so faster, sans a Str penalty.You have to do 20 damage to get a Dent, so if there aren't critical hits then you could never get that high.
We don't know that there are critical hits for doors yet, and it'd be odd if they made Hardness to assume critical hits.
Maybe they're factoring in Power Attack?
Nay. The Playtest Rulebook's rules for Item Damage and Shield Block are completely broken. For an accurate example of how Objects are actually supposed to take damage, see the Playtest Bestiary (pg 12); under (of all things):
Damaging a mechanical trap or another physical hazard works like damaging objects. An attack that deals at least as much damage as the hazard’s Hardness dents it, and an attack that deals twice as much damage as the Hardness dents it twice (usually breaking it).
This means the same goes for Doors, Walls, Shields, and any other "object" dealt damage. Note use of the term 'dealt'as opposed to 'taken'.
For Shield Block, it is safe to assume the wording is supposed to match that of Construct Armor (playtest Bestiary pg. 30), which itself aligns with the described mechanics for damaging hazards (indicating it it the rulebook in error, not the bestiary).
In a pinch, I would say AC 5.
Base 10 + 0 (medium size) - 5 (0 Dex) = 5.
I know you gave it a value of zero, but I don't think size modifies AC any more.
I know you gave it a value of zero, but I don't think size modifies AC any more.
Good point. Still, if I needed to set a difficulty for hitting a larger or smaller target than a person-sized door, I think the old size modifiers would make a good rule of thumb.
What was the AC of a door in PF1? Seriously, I can't find it. Did they have one? If not, they probably don't need one now.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Nope, you Need 20 Damage to cause a dent. As you ignore the first 10 Points of damage, the door only takes damage after that. That means in order to cause 10 damage to the door (and cause a dent), you Need to cause 20 damage initially.
"If an item takes damage equal to or exceeding the item's Hardness, the item takes a Dent." p.175
Doors have 10 hardness, 10 damage in a single hit will dent them, 20 damages will break them in a single hit. Taking 10 damage twice in 2 separate attacks (just roll for damage, doors have no AC) will also break them.
Yeah, what the guy above said.
Nope, you Need 20 Damage to cause a dent. As you ignore the first 10 Points of damage, the door only takes damage after that. That means in order to cause 10 damage to the door (and cause a dent), you Need to cause 20 damage initially."If an item takes damage equal to or exceeding the item's Hardness, the item takes a Dent." p.175
Doors have 10 hardness, 10 damage in a single hit will dent them, 20 damages will break them in a single hit. Taking 10 damage twice in 2 separate attacks (just roll for damage, doors have no AC) will also break them.
The item doesn't "take" the damage equal to hardness. Let's look at your 10 hardness example.
Door hit for less than or equal to 10 damage? Door "takes" no damage, no dent.
Door hit for 11-19 damage? Door "takes" 1-9 damage, no dent.
Door hit for 20-29 damage? Door "takes" 10-19 damage, 1 dent.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
"If an item takes damage equal to or exceeding the item's Hardness, the item takes a Dent." p.175
Doors have 10 hardness, 10 damage in a single hit will dent them, 20 damages will break them in a single hit. Taking 10 damage twice in 2 separate attacks (just roll for damage, doors have no AC) will also break them.
This is correct, as supported by the rules for destroying hazards I quoted above (which explicitly indicate that other objects are damaged the same way hazards are described to be).
You forgot the sentence above the one you quoted."Subtract hardness from damage first"
Nope. That sentence says "An item reduces any damage dealt to it by its Hardness." which only means that in general items use their hardness to soak damage. Then in the specific the sentence after it clearly states that if you damage EQUAL to hardness or more the item takes a dent so it's indeed 10+ for a door, not 20. The examples in the Bestiary clearly corroborate this at p.12 as Cantriped said.
You have to subtract the damage from hardness first. It can't take damage it never received. It doesn't make sense otherwise (even though I know lots I'd people will say you can't think of things realistically even though I would argue you can in a lot of cases). If a door has hardness 10, a SOLID WOOD DOOR not the kind of doors we have today but an actual solid wood door, you would have to do 20 damage to dent it. That means with a sledgehammer, arguably a 1d12, it would auto crit doing 2d12 damage, even assuming a door has an AC of 5 its very easy to crit. That means with enough tries you can break down a door with a sledge hammer with no strength bonus. That makes sense to me. It also means that a shortbow with 1d6 damage and a plus 1d10 for crit damage could still not do enough damage to dent a door, which again makes sense to me. It also means making a door out of steel would be basically indestructible to normal men with no magical means, which again makes sense.
The other way around you could dent a SOLID WOOD DOOR with a shortbow on a crit. That doesn't make any sense. You could punch a door with only a +2 str and dent it. Again that doesn't make sense. Considering that two dents breaks a door, which could you could argue means it breaks it in half or considerably so that it doesn't door anymore lol. You could punch a door twice and break it on a good roll. That doesn't make sense at all.
Thinking about it logically it doesn't make sense the other way so why would it work that way?
You have to subtract the damage from hardness first.
Again no. By RAW you are wrong. Check Bestiary p.12 and Rulebook p.175
"An attack that deals at least as much damage as the hazard’s Hardness dents it, and an attack that deals twice as much damage as the Hardness dents it twice (usually breaking it). In most cases, breaking or destroying the hazard also triggers it."
It NEVER says you have to subtract damage from Hardness first and no example supports it. Just because the introduction on Hardness says "An item reduces any damage dealt to it by its Hardness." it does not mean that you have to subtract your damage, it just means you have to beat the Harness, which is exactly what RAW says.
You have to subtract the damage from hardness first.Again no. By RAW you are wrong. Check Bestiary p.12 and Rulebook p.175
"An attack that deals at least as much damage as the hazard’s Hardness dents it, and an attack that deals twice as much damage as the Hardness dents it twice (usually breaking it). In most cases, breaking or destroying the hazard also triggers it."
It NEVER says you have to subtract damage from Hardness first and no example supports it. Just because the introduction on Hardness says "An item reduces any damage dealt to it by its Hardness." it does not mean that you have to subtract your damage, it just means you have to beat the Harness, which is exactly what RAW says.
It just says and I quote "An attack that DEALS at least as much damage as the hazard's Hardness dents it" it also says that an item when taking damage subtracts the damage by its hardness. There is no way that it would be DEALT 6 and then suddenly gain back 3 so it was still dealt 6. The damage total was at 6 then it subtracts 3 then it is DEALT the damage, which in this case would be 3.
The example in shields supports exactly what I'm saying. The wooden shield took 10 damage and it says it takes 2 dents. That means it HAS to have subtracted 3 damage and left with 7, that's still over twice the items hardness, which would be 6. Otherwise they would have said it takes 3 dents or they could have just said it took 7 damage.
Also as I just pointed out in another thread it has to work this way because items no longer have HP. So if the only way to know if an item is damaged or not is if it has a dent then what exactly would the hardness be reducing? Like in the example of a door with 10 hardness using your method.
The door is dealt 11 damage so it takes a dent. So then it reduces the damage by 10 so it takes 1 damage... To what? Where do we add that damage? It has no HP.
The way that I say it makes sense according to the rules presented. It's dealt 11 damage. It reduces that damage by 10 so it TAKES 1. Then you go okay was that equal to its hardness? No? Then no dent. The remaining HP actually matters cause it tells you if it got a dent or not.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
We could just bring back item hp. It was very clear, simple, and unambiguous.
I think Unattended Objects should have an AC score because part of ACs value is deflecting the attack; which even an immobile object can do. However unless an object is built as a Hazard or the AC (and TAC) is explictly noted, I'm not sure they do.
For example, a Petrified Creature has an explicit AC of 9 (and TAC of 5). But being Dead doesn't note the statistics of the 'object' you become at all.
One could build doors as 'harmless hazards' (ones with no attack actions) using their material's item hardness (half of their actual structural hardness) to determine their effective level. A wooden door would be 1st level and have an AC of 15 (and a TAC of 11) for example.
Alternatively one could set the AC using the DC Guidelines, making it a task of whatever difficulty and level is comperable to the DC to Break it Open. For example, the chest in A12 of The Lost Star might have an AC of 17 (A High-Difficulty 3rd Level Task). I chose 17 because a critical hit (a roll of 27+) with an appropriate weapon will likely Break the chest, and the Break Open DC for said chest is 27. This value is also five less than the DC to pick the lock, or ten less than the Break Open DC; which makes it an easy 'rule of thumb' to apply to existing modules.
RPG Superstar 2014 Top 16
|
Wood is Hardness 5, p. 354.
More wood just adds more dents.The Hardness for doors, reinforced structures, and other durable constructions is usually twice the Hardness listed on the table.A Wooden Door or Wall has 10 Hardness.
This came up for our group as well. One of the players was a bit frustrated that the double-hardness rule was buried in the text, when the much more obvious table gave no indication that the "wood" value is not what you'd use for "wooden door."
"Then why don't they just put that in the table?" he asked incredulously.
Fortunately the party included a Barbarian who was able to deal 12 damage in a single blow, so that door didn't stand a chance! But against someone like the Monk rolling 1d6+STR, it seems a bit odd that such a character would never be able to bash down a door with Hardness 10. :-(
This came up for our group as well. One of the players was a bit frustrated that the double-hardness rule was buried in the text, when the much more obvious table gave no indication that the "wood" value is not what you'd use for "wooden door."
"Then why don't they just put that in the table?" he asked incredulously.
Fortunately the party included a Barbarian who was able to deal 12 damage in a single blow, so that door didn't stand a chance! But against someone like the Monk rolling 1d6+STR, it seems a bit odd that such a character would never be able to bash down a door with Hardness 10. :-(
I agree that the mundane materials table could have been laid out better, each mundane material deserves an entry like the special materials that organizes a material's hardness values (for thin items, items, and structures by material+quality).
Does all doors have a hardness of 10? Is there no difference between a castle gate, an outhouse door, a door leading to a study or a door to a shack in the poorer side of town? Seems odd.. I as a GM would give woulden doors a hardness between 3-20 depending on the purpos of the door and the quality.
Nay, there are specific example doors in the Playtest Bestiary (on pg. 7). Including rules for climbing and breaking them open. For example an Iron Door has 18 Hardness and can sustain 4 dents. The Playtest Bestiary is more up-to-date and accurate than the Playtest Rulebook; and it looks like they shoved some stuff into the Bestiary that didn't fit or were ommited from the rulebook.
The list isn't exclusive... An inferior quality door would obviously have a lower Hardness (likely Hardness 6), in addition to Breaking after zero dents (instead of 1 or more Dents). Just like a superior quality door has a higher hardness: A Legendary-quality Wooden Door has 22 Hardness for example.
Also as I just pointed out in another thread it has to work this way because items no longer have HP. So if the only way to know if an item is damaged or not is if it has a dent then what exactly would the hardness be reducing? Like in the example of a door with 10 hardness using your method.
The door is dealt 11 damage so it takes a dent. So then it reduces the damage by 10 so it takes 1 damage... To what? Where do we add that damage? It has no HP.
The way that I say it makes sense according to the rules presented. It's dealt 11 damage. It reduces that damage by 10 so it TAKES 1. Then you go okay was that equal to its hardness? No? Then no dent. The remaining HP actually matters cause it tells you if it got a dent or not.
The RAW are pretty clear on Bestiary p.12
"Damaging a mechanical trap or another
physical hazard works like damaging objects. An attack
that deals at least as much damage as the hazard’s Hardness
dents it, and an attack that deals twice as much damage as
the Hardness dents it twice (usually breaking it)."
It does not say you must subtract Hardness from the damage or whatever.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Mark Seifter just answered this on the official Paizo Twitch. You just need to beat the Hardness to make a Dent. Twice the Hardness, two Dents in a single blow. Damage is NOT supposed to be subtracted with Hardness first. So there you go, it's official now.
The Intent is clear (to me), but the RAW I'll admit is all messed up. The Rulebook also has the quoted text regarding destroying a hazard BTW. It's just this one erroneous sentence in the rules for Item Damage presented in the equipment chapter confusing the issue:
An item reduces any damage dealt to it by its Hardness.
This one sentence makes the rules for "Items" contradict how Hardness applies to (and how Dents are calculated for) every other Creature or Object in the playtest rules. IIRC It also contradicts what the developers stated the intended mechanics were. The problem is excerbated by the useless example that follows the above clause; supporting both likely interpretations while itself contradicting the literal interpretation of the Shield Block mechanics... Per RAW, this clause makes Items have the same effective Hardness as structures, and twice the effective Hardness of a similar animated object. I am certain this clause was a PF1 hold-over that wasn't intended to remain in the final product. For all we know, different people edited those chapters, and the left hand really didn't know what the right hand was typing.
Hopefully on Monday they'll clarify the messy rules for Item Damage, Shield Blocking, and include the omited Smash action (aka rules for legally attacking non-creatures like Hazards and other objects).