breaking weapons,shields and objects [Archive] - Wizards Community

breaking weapons,shields and objects [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Mr. Master
04-17-06, 11:58 AM I think that,at least in some situations,it would be better for a monster to break the powerful sword of the fighter AND then chop him to pieces.However,as the PH (I'm a DM in the 3.0) points out,you can't break,let's say,a +3 longsword if your warhammer is +2 or less.

Now,the problem is that monsters usually don't have magical weapons,especially if they use natural weapons such as bites,fangs and so on.

What do I have to do to avoid this situation,apart from giving them magical weapons?A dragon,for instance,doesn't use magical weapons and he hasn't got that powerful druid/ranger's spell which is magic fang.And I like very much the idea of a dragon that,with a powerful bite,breaks the fighterės sword or shield.

Can you help me?

Moreover,can I try to break the wizard's ring of protection/fighter's orc strength belt/cleric's elven boots with spells like flame arrow,Melf's acid arrow and all those spells that require a touch attack?And,if this thing is possible,can the player do a Saving Throw for his/her object so as to avoid it damages?
Illion the Red
04-17-06, 12:41 PM In 3.0:

Look at the monster's DR. If the dragon has DR X/+3, he can damage the +3 weapon. It's been an awfully long time since I've looked at anything in 3.0, but I recall dragons getting their DR improved as they advanced.
Dalthbar
04-17-06, 12:51 PM Two options come quickly to mind:

1) Disarm - we're all familiar with the rules
2) Stunning Fist - the creature stunned drops everything
draconic_swine
04-17-06, 02:50 PM Or you could adopt the 3.5 rules for sundering. Using them, it doesn't matter what enhancement a weapon has. You could successfully destroy a +5 longsword with a normal dagger. Each +1 enhancement a weapon has increases its hardness by 2 and hitponts by 10. It makes it much more difficult to sunder, but still possible by lesser weapons. I realize you're probably using 3.0 for a reason, and this might not be helpful in the slightest, but it's still something you might want to look at. You can check out the rules I'm talking about here (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/exploration.htm#tableCommonArmorWeaponAn dShieldHardnessAndHitPoints)
Mr. Master
04-17-06, 08:07 PM x Illion the Red:
The rule you are talking about is applied only against creatures with DR,not against weapons.

x dalthbar:
1)good idea,but there is a glove that negates this effect

x draconic_swine
This rule sounds very good,but it would be unfair for the PCs,IMHO.
Dr_Funkenstine
04-17-06, 08:34 PM If you're a DM, then you're allowed to break the rules. In fact the dungeon masters guide even has a chapter on this. As long as you dont run a game and have your players getting mad, then its probably cool.
draconic_swine
04-17-06, 11:48 PM This rule sounds very good,but it would be unfair for the PCs,IMHO.

Just out of curiosity, how would this be unfair to the PCs?
Mr. Master
04-18-06, 09:05 AM It would be unfair because PCs meet creatures with good Str much more times than these same creatures meet the PCs.This means that their chances of having their weapon broken would be higher.
draconic_swine
04-18-06, 11:37 AM That's true, but it's not like PCs in 3.5 have their weapons shattered every other encounter. It all depends on how much you as the DM decide to use sunder.

As others have said, you're well within your right to alter the rules. If you're still looking to make sundering easier for monstesr, you can use the rules I gave you as a starting point for making your own rules. Maybe you double the numbers (each +1 grants +4 hardness and +20 hitpoints), or something similar.
Dalthbar
04-18-06, 11:46 AM It would be unfair because PCs meet creatures with good Str much more times than these same creatures meet the PCs.This means that their chances of having their weapon broken would be higher.

Also, how often do your NPCs have Imp. Sunder? If they don't, those are AoO's that the PCs get on the creature - so that's something to consider. AoOs can be a huge equalizer.
Mr. Master
04-18-06, 12:45 PM x Dalthbar:
AoO's?

x draconic_swine and Dr_Funkenstine:
Uhm,I think you're right.I think I'll have to test both the rules (creatures with DR can damage magical weapons provided their DR equals the weapon EB / every +1 EB adds 2 hardness and 10 hit points).
You know,I've always tried to follow the rules,so that my players could easily know what to expect (and,most of all,couldn't argue about my decisions),but I think it's time to change some of them,at least because we find that some rules are a bit unrealistic in some situations. Just think about the ridiculous amount of damage you take if you fall from,let's say,60m=200ft: only 20d6,which means that a 15th level fighter has good chances to survive (I think there's a topic about damage taken from falls here...).
Dalthbar
04-18-06, 01:42 PM AoO = Attacks of Opportunity
Mr. Master
04-19-06, 09:17 AM Uhm,not many of my NPCs or monsters have that feat.However,since my PCs don't have many AoO,it would be a small equalizer.
capella
04-19-06, 11:10 AM Am i missing something here.

Couldn't you give the monster levels in monk (ki strike?) which allows his natural attacks to classed as magical weapons?

Give the monster levels in the class to gain magic fang.
RaspK FOG
04-19-06, 06:21 PM Am i missing something here.

Couldn't you give the monster levels in monk (ki strike?) which allows his natural attacks to classed as magical weapons?

Give the monster levels in the class to gain magic fang.
I really fail to understand what you mean... Could you elaborate, please?
Mr. Master
04-20-06, 09:50 AM I think he's talking about giving some levels as monk/druid to monsters.This would mean:
monk=ki strike
druid=can cast magic fang
Well,it sounds nice,but not every single type of monster can follow the monk's path.Moreover,in my campaign I've never used monks (nor will I do it in future ones),because,IMHO,they don't have that "western world fantasy falvour" which I love in the other classes.
As for the druid class,well,that's probably a better choice,but I really find it difficult to imagine a fire giant as a druid or a black dragon as a druid (in the latter case,moreover,the dragon just can't gain class levels...thank God).

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Mr. Master 04-17-06, 11:58 AM	I think that,at least in some situations,it would be better for a monster to break the powerful sword of the fighter AND then chop him to pieces.However,as the PH (I'm a DM in the 3.0) points out,you can't break,let's say,a +3 longsword if your warhammer is +2 or less. Now,the problem is that monsters usually don't have magical weapons,especially if they use natural weapons such as bites,fangs and so on. What do I have to do to avoid this situation,apart from giving them magical weapons?A dragon,for instance,doesn't use magical weapons and he hasn't got that powerful druid/ranger's spell which is magic fang.And I like very much the idea of a dragon that,with a powerful bite,breaks the fighterės sword or shield. Can you help me? Moreover,can I try to break the wizard's ring of protection/fighter's orc strength belt/cleric's elven boots with spells like flame arrow,Melf's acid arrow and all those spells that require a touch attack?And,if this thing is possible,can the player do a Saving Throw for his/her object so as to avoid it damages?
Illion the Red 04-17-06, 12:41 PM	In 3.0: Look at the monster's DR. If the dragon has DR X/+3, he can damage the +3 weapon. It's been an awfully long time since I've looked at anything in 3.0, but I recall dragons getting their DR improved as they advanced.
Dalthbar 04-17-06, 12:51 PM	Two options come quickly to mind: 1) Disarm - we're all familiar with the rules 2) Stunning Fist - the creature stunned drops everything
draconic_swine 04-17-06, 02:50 PM	Or you could adopt the 3.5 rules for sundering. Using them, it doesn't matter what enhancement a weapon has. You could successfully destroy a +5 longsword with a normal dagger. Each +1 enhancement a weapon has increases its hardness by 2 and hitponts by 10. It makes it much more difficult to sunder, but still possible by lesser weapons. I realize you're probably using 3.0 for a reason, and this might not be helpful in the slightest, but it's still something you might want to look at. You can check out the rules I'm talking about here (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/exploration.htm#tableCommonArmorWeaponAn dShieldHardnessAndHitPoints)
Mr. Master 04-17-06, 08:07 PM	x Illion the Red: The rule you are talking about is applied only against creatures with DR,not against weapons. x dalthbar: 1)good idea,but there is a glove that negates this effect x draconic_swine This rule sounds very good,but it would be unfair for the PCs,IMHO.
Dr_Funkenstine 04-17-06, 08:34 PM	If you're a DM, then you're allowed to break the rules. In fact the dungeon masters guide even has a chapter on this. As long as you dont run a game and have your players getting mad, then its probably cool.
draconic_swine 04-17-06, 11:48 PM	This rule sounds very good,but it would be unfair for the PCs,IMHO. Just out of curiosity, how would this be unfair to the PCs?
Mr. Master 04-18-06, 09:05 AM	It would be unfair because PCs meet creatures with good Str much more times than these same creatures meet the PCs.This means that their chances of having their weapon broken would be higher.
draconic_swine 04-18-06, 11:37 AM	That's true, but it's not like PCs in 3.5 have their weapons shattered every other encounter. It all depends on how much you as the DM decide to use sunder. As others have said, you're well within your right to alter the rules. If you're still looking to make sundering easier for monstesr, you can use the rules I gave you as a starting point for making your own rules. Maybe you double the numbers (each +1 grants +4 hardness and +20 hitpoints), or something similar.
Dalthbar 04-18-06, 11:46 AM	It would be unfair because PCs meet creatures with good Str much more times than these same creatures meet the PCs.This means that their chances of having their weapon broken would be higher. Also, how often do your NPCs have Imp. Sunder? If they don't, those are AoO's that the PCs get on the creature - so that's something to consider. AoOs can be a huge equalizer.
Mr. Master 04-18-06, 12:45 PM	x Dalthbar: AoO's? x draconic_swine and Dr_Funkenstine: Uhm,I think you're right.I think I'll have to test both the rules (creatures with DR can damage magical weapons provided their DR equals the weapon EB / every +1 EB adds 2 hardness and 10 hit points). You know,I've always tried to follow the rules,so that my players could easily know what to expect (and,most of all,couldn't argue about my decisions),but I think it's time to change some of them,at least because we find that some rules are a bit unrealistic in some situations. Just think about the ridiculous amount of damage you take if you fall from,let's say,60m=200ft: only 20d6,which means that a 15th level fighter has good chances to survive (I think there's a topic about damage taken from falls here...).
Dalthbar 04-18-06, 01:42 PM	AoO = Attacks of Opportunity
Mr. Master 04-19-06, 09:17 AM	Uhm,not many of my NPCs or monsters have that feat.However,since my PCs don't have many AoO,it would be a small equalizer.
capella 04-19-06, 11:10 AM	Am i missing something here. Couldn't you give the monster levels in monk (ki strike?) which allows his natural attacks to classed as magical weapons? Give the monster levels in the class to gain magic fang.
RaspK FOG 04-19-06, 06:21 PM	Am i missing something here. Couldn't you give the monster levels in monk (ki strike?) which allows his natural attacks to classed as magical weapons? Give the monster levels in the class to gain magic fang. I really fail to understand what you mean... Could you elaborate, please?
Mr. Master 04-20-06, 09:50 AM	I think he's talking about giving some levels as monk/druid to monsters.This would mean: monk=ki strike druid=can cast magic fang Well,it sounds nice,but not every single type of monster can follow the monk's path.Moreover,in my campaign I've never used monks (nor will I do it in future ones),because,IMHO,they don't have that "western world fantasy falvour" which I love in the other classes. As for the druid class,well,that's probably a better choice,but I really find it difficult to imagine a fire giant as a druid or a black dragon as a druid (in the latter case,moreover,the dragon just can't gain class levels...thank God).