One of these questions was raised earlier but doesn't seem to have been answered.
The animated broom has the following ability. The other types of Animated Objects do as well:
"Construct Armor Like normal objects, an animated broom has Hardness. This Hardness reduces any damage it takes by an amount equal to the Hardness. Once an animated broom is reduced to less than half its Hit Points, or immediately upon being damaged by a critical hit, its construct armor breaks and its Armor Class is reduced to 14."
A few questions:
1. Hardness reduces "any damage it takes." Does this operate like resistance to "all damage," so that it reduces each damage by X amount? So if a fighter hits the broom with a flaming sword that does 9 slashing and 3 fire damage, it takes 8 (7+1) damage?
2. Or do we add up all the damage and subtract the hardness? So in the example above it would take 10 damage?
3. In 1E, hardness only affected physical damage. Is that still true in 2E? Against the Animated Statue which has Hardness 9, does magic missile do zero damage?
Thanks in advance.
1. Hardness would apply to each type of damage.
2. It is not true that hardness only applied to physical damage in 1E. Energy damage is also reduced in 1E (and halved before hardness agains most objects).
3. In 2E, hardness applies to all damage types. Energy works as well as physical against objects in this edition, though.
1. Hardness would apply to each type of damage.
2. It is not true that hardness only applied to physical damage in 1E. Energy damage is also reduced in 1E (and halved before hardness agains most objects).
3. In 2E, hardness applies to all damage types. Energy works as well as physical against objects in this edition, though.
Ah, thanks.
Well! That animated statue is pretty tough for a Level 2 creature.
1. Hardness would apply to each type of damage.
2. It is not true that hardness only applied to physical damage in 1E. Energy damage is also reduced in 1E (and halved before hardness agains most objects).
3. In 2E, hardness applies to all damage types. Energy works as well as physical against objects in this edition, though.
Another question I had:
4. Does the hardness still apply after the armor breaks? Or is the only effect the lowered AC?
1. Hardness would apply to each type of damage.
2. It is not true that hardness only applied to physical damage in 1E. Energy damage is also reduced in 1E (and halved before hardness agains most objects).
3. In 2E, hardness applies to all damage types. Energy works as well as physical against objects in this edition, though.
Another question I had:
4. Does the hardness still apply after the armor breaks? Or is the only effect the lowered AC?
This is one thing I haven't been sure of myself. I initially assumed it didn't apply after breaking because a broken object provides no benefits, generally speaking, and I assumed the construct armor was a separate object from the construct itself. Golems don't have hardness, but instead damage resistance, as an example.
But it isn't as clear as I'd like.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I have figured that hardness DOES still apply, since there is nothing to suggest that a normal object would not still have hardness after it is broken, but before it is destroyed.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Looking at the stat block holistically, I believe that the hardness always remains. If it was meant to go away, it would say 2 (0 when broken), like the AC does.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
My first inclination was the hardness goes away, since that's the Construct Armor ability. You guys have changed my mind since armor gives AC, not hardness, plus what's under the armor is pretty much the same material as ever. It's not like there's a softer material underneath.
Except, why explain the Hardness under the Construct Armor portion? (Which is to say I could be swayed back.)
As for animated statues being tough: Yep. Kinda.
Until you finally break through, then they'll fall fast.
And an early crit hurts that much more since you get Hardness once, their AC drops, and they have fewer h.p. for their level than normal.
Makes for an interesting variant from normal enemies.
ETA: It's also very easy to trip these guys, to help set up that critical or an AoO.
And re: Magic Missile, the missiles aren't counted separately against the Hardness (unlike PF1). The spell tells you to combine the damage first.
Today I ran a Level 7 version of the Animated Statue, using the GMG guidelines. It had hardness 10.
One of my players cast acid arrow, which does 3d8 acid damage and 1d6 persistent acid damage.
He rolled 12 acid damage. So 2 damage with the initial hit.
If I had applied hardness to the persistent damage, the persistent damage would have been completely ineffective. I let this bypass the hardness, saying that the arrow had penetrated its armor and so the persistent effect was not affected.
I stand by this for flavor reasons. But does anyone know whether this was correct according to the RAW?
Today I ran a Level 7 version of the Animated Statue, using the GMG guidelines. It had hardness 10.
One of my players cast acid arrow, which does 3d8 acid damage and 1d6 persistent acid damage.
He rolled 12 acid damage. So 2 damage with the initial hit.
If I had applied hardness to the persistent damage, the persistent damage would have been completely ineffective. I let this bypass the hardness, saying that the arrow had penetrated its armor and so the persistent effect was not affected.
I stand by this for flavor reasons. But does anyone know whether this was correct according to the RAW?
RAW everytime the object takes damage, hardness applies. So even the persistent damage would be affected.
http://2e.aonprd.com/Rules.aspx?ID=195But I don't think it's a bad ruling to let the persistent damage go through as long as the initial attack dealt some damage in that case.
Today I ran a Level 7 version of the Animated Statue, using the GMG guidelines. It had hardness 10.
One of my players cast acid arrow, which does 3d8 acid damage and 1d6 persistent acid damage.
He rolled 12 acid damage. So 2 damage with the initial hit.
If I had applied hardness to the persistent damage, the persistent damage would have been completely ineffective. I let this bypass the hardness, saying that the arrow had penetrated its armor and so the persistent effect was not affected.
I stand by this for flavor reasons. But does anyone know whether this was correct according to the RAW?
RAW everytime the object takes damage, hardness applies. So even the persistent damage would be affected.
http://2e.aonprd.com/Rules.aspx?ID=195But I don't think it's a bad ruling to let the persistent damage go through as long as the initial attack dealt some damage in that case.
Thanks. Well, this just makes me think that this hasn't been fully thought through, and that it could use some clarifying/revising.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't think it needs clarifying. The rules on hardness are pretty clear with "each an item takes damage".
The difference between hardness and resistance seems to be that hardness applies only to the whole damage chunk while resistance applies to each damage type and can apply multiple times.
The difference between hardness and resistance seems to be that hardness applies only to the whole damage chunk while resistance applies to each damage type and can apply multiple times.
What are you basing this off of? Because I've wondered about it in the past.
What are you basing this off of? Because I've wondered about it in the past.
The difference between hardness and resistance seems to be that hardness applies only to the whole damage chunk while resistance applies to each damage type and can apply multiple times.
I base it off the rules text for resistance and hardness. Resistance says "each time you take damage of that type of damage, you reduce..." and hardness just says "each time the item takes damage, reduce...". Hardness' text doesn't seperate by damage types.
Also, if hardness was supposed to work like resistance, it would be resistance and hardness could be dropped as a mechanic, I think. All items would have "resistance all XXX" instead of hardness.
Edit: I could definitely be wrong. XD I just think if it is called differently, it probably works differently. And though mechanically different, Shield Block uses hardness and also only blocks that damage total, so it's consistent.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I have figured that hardness DOES still apply, since there is nothing to suggest that a normal object would not still have hardness after it is broken, but before it is destroyed.
"Construct Armor Like normal objects, an animated broom has Hardness. This Hardness reduces any damage it takes by an amount equal to the Hardness. Once an animated broom is reduced to less than half its Hit Points, or immediately upon being damaged by a critical hit, its construct armor breaks and its Armor Class is reduced to 14."
If the hardness does not go away after the Construct Armor is broken, why are the two sentences I struck out included in the write-up at all?
Those sentence read to me like reminder text. So that people will realize hardness is a defined game mechanic.I have figured that hardness DOES still apply, since there is nothing to suggest that a normal object would not still have hardness after it is broken, but before it is destroyed."Construct Armor
Like normal objects, an animated broom has Hardness. This Hardness reduces any damage it takes by an amount equal to the Hardness.Once an animated broom is reduced to less than half its Hit Points, or immediately upon being damaged by a critical hit, its construct armor breaks and its Armor Class is reduced to 14."If the hardness does not go away after the Construct Armor is broken, why are the two sentences I struck out included in the write-up at all?
It is weirdly placed in that case. Putting in the construct amor lone implies it is linked to construct armor somehow. I dunno. I could still go either way on this.
I've never felt more ambiguous after reading a rules discussion thread.