Why does hardness apply to all damage but DR only to physical damage?


Pathfinder First Edition General Discussion


This never made sense to me. There's even some constructs that have hardness instead of DR, which frankly seems like cheating


Hardness isn't really intended to apply to "all" damage.

Quote:
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.

But for some reason, there aren't very many things with hardness that also have a listed vulnerability.

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.

If they weren't different, why would we have two game terms for the same thing?


Does adamantine ignore hardness on constructs like with objects?


Yqatuba wrote:
Does adamantine ignore hardness on constructs like with objects?

Pretty sure the rules on adamantine states it ignores harness "when attempting to sunder weapons or objects," or something like that, so maybe by RAW no.

I've always thought hardness was an old dinosaur of a rule that ought to be well contained within damage reduction.


Quixote wrote:
Yqatuba wrote:
Does adamantine ignore hardness on constructs like with objects?

Pretty sure the rules on adamantine states it ignores harness "when attempting to sunder weapons or objects," or something like that, so maybe by RAW no.

I've always thought hardness was an old dinosaur of a rule that ought to be well contained within damage reduction.

Constructs are either crafted creatures or animated objects.

They mostly either have hardness or a DR vs adamantine anyways. The question is pretty moot.


Pathfinder Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Hardness is meant for objects, to stop PC's from destroying all the furniture when they cast fireball; IMO it shouldn't be used on creatures.
every table I've ever played at has run adamantine weapons as bypassing hardness on constructs too.

Silver Crusade

Robots do have hardness. For example, Myrmidon Robot (scroll down to bottom of page).

The Iron Gods AP has plenty of robots.


I never liked that elemental damage was halved against objects. Makes them nearly immune to spells.


Cavall wrote:
Constructs are either crafted creatures or animated objects...

Is the creature "animated object" also an "object", as defined by games terms? I mean, obviously it's supposed to be.

My point was, with constructd that are not animated objects, there could be a case for the RAW disallowing it. But that's dumb.
Cavall wrote:
They mostly either have hardness or a DR vs adamantine anyways. The question is pretty moot.

Exactly why hardness is dumb. You don't see one very small group of creatures that have "DV" and not AC, where "DV" functions like AC but is slightly different in 5% of situations.

Nathan Monson wrote:
Hardness is meant for objects, to stop PC's from destroying all the furniture when they cast fireball...

And if objects had a form of DR that protected them from fire, it'd be exactly the same thing.


Joey Cote wrote:
I never liked that elemental damage was halved against objects. Makes them nearly immune to spells.

Well some objects are vulnerable to some energy damage types. The rules say it's up to the DM but lists fire vs cloth or sonic vs glass or crystal as examples.


Quixote wrote:
Cavall wrote:
Constructs are either crafted creatures or animated objects...

Is the creature "animated object" also an "object", as defined by games terms? I mean, obviously it's supposed to be.

My point was, with constructd that are not animated objects, there could be a case for the RAW disallowing it. But that's dumb.
Cavall wrote:
They mostly either have hardness or a DR vs adamantine anyways. The question is pretty moot.

Exactly why hardness is dumb. You don't see one very small group of creatures that have "DV" and not AC, where "DV" functions like AC but is slightly different in 5% of situations.

Nathan Monson wrote:
Hardness is meant for objects, to stop PC's from destroying all the furniture when they cast fireball...
And if objects had a form of DR that protected them from fire, it'd be exactly the same thing.

They are objects with hardness. Wood or equivalent unless points are made to amkenor stone or metal. Have hardness.


Hardness simplifies the system. I'd much rather have a couple of basic stats for things that rarely even get attacked than a half-dozen for everything.


QUOTE="Cavall"]They are objects with hardness. Wood or equivalent unless points are made to amkenor stone or metal. Have hardness.

Not sure what your point is, here.

EldonGuyre wrote:
Hardness simplifies the system. I'd much rather have a couple of basic stats for things that rarely even get attacked than a half-dozen for everything.

Hardness is just a simpler version of damage reduction.

I honestly cannot see a single reason for why it's a separate quality, versus DR X/adamantine or whatever.


Quixote wrote:
Cavall wrote:
They are objects with hardness. Wood or equivalent unless points are made to amkenor stone or metal. Have hardness.

Not sure what your point is, here.

EldonGuyre wrote:
Hardness simplifies the system. I'd much rather have a couple of basic stats for things that rarely even get attacked than a half-dozen for everything.

Hardness is just a simpler version of damage reduction.

I honestly cannot see a single reason for why it's a separate quality, versus DR X/adamantine or whatever.

That animated objects are objects and according to the construction system for it treat as if made of wood unless you want it stone or metal. Or wood equivilant. Hardness and hitpoints.

You asked if they are. They are. I was just giving the answer.


Quixote wrote:

Hardness is just a simpler version of damage reduction.

I honestly cannot see a single reason for why it's a separate quality, versus DR X/adamantine or whatever.

The reason is that it's a simpler version of damage reduction.

If we gave a sword DR 10/Adamantine instead of hardness 10, then by the definition of DR it wouldn't work against a fireball or similar. So the sword would also need fire resistance 10 as a separate stat, and lightning resistance, and sonic resistance... This would be more realistic, because they could give, say, a book less resistance to fire and more resistance to electricity, but it would be far too complicated to specify for every object.

Or if we gave zombies hardness instead of DR 5/slashing, they'd automatically be fire resistant.

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / General Discussion / Why does hardness apply to all damage but DR only to physical damage? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.