Did you houserule Hardness back?

[Yair]

So, it seems very few actually play with the rules for damaging objects as they appear on the DMG, despite the high rating of the option saying you stick to 4e rules. Alrighty.

If you go right to the rules about damaging objects you won't see it. But the books (and the rules to some extent) does support it. Just use your judgement.

It appears that the rules were intended to include resistance for objects, but that it got cut. Which is unfortunate.

The reason I didn't apply "common sense" so far is that I didn't want to do that in this campaign - testing out the new rules is the major idea behind the campaign, and the rules for harming objects in the DMG pretty clearly don't include resistance/hardness. I'm impressed with your book-knowledge-fu, but I'd still considere adding resistance to objects a house rule. At any rate, from now on I'll write off the rules for damaging objects in the DMG as written as a fail, and apply common sense to overrule them.

Thanks all for opining an'all.

 

[Dausuul]

Because weapons and fists will cut through walls with hardness too - it will just take longer.

And an indestructable, unchangeable except in specifically approved way, environment has annoyed me in numerous video games so I have little desire to repeat it in pen and paper games.

I just go with what seems sensible. Want to bash down a wooden door with a battle-axe? Go for it (but as soon as you make a substantial hole, you have to stick your face up to it and say "Heeeeere's Johnny!"). Want to bash it down with a greatsword? Not gonna work so well - you'll break the sword before you break the door. Want to bash down an iron door with your fists? Good freakin' luck.

I may reconsider once the PCs are approaching epic level, but for now, that's how it works.

 

[wedgeski]

Ok, I'll admit the above is slightly tongue in cheek, but one of the parts of 4e design is "anything's possible, and if the players can think up a creative way to do something, and it's *fun* you should allow it" (aka, "say yes"). I'm not sure that Rule Zero - in the context you mean it - is really compatible with 4e...

Rule zero exists in every edition of D&D as far as I'm concerned. I may not have called it Rule Zero, but it was always there. And hey, if they wanted to *enchant* the tooth-pick before using it, things might be different.

 

[Runestar]

The funny thing is that such a stunt (tunneling your way out of prison with a spoon) was actually possible (and fairly viable) in 3e. The stone dragon maneuvers let you ignore dr, power attack let you deal tons of damage (not that you could miss a wall) and adaptive style let you effectively refresh maneuvers every other round. This means that yes, even adamantine walls were being cut/bored through like wet tofu...

So yeah, hardness was more or less irrelevant to my party past 3rd lv...

 

[Starbuck_II]

Well, I don't really know if I'm going to create a houserule, but I am pretty dissatisfied with traps in general in 4e. My players quickly realised that it's not only safer, but also quicker, to "disarm" traps in 4e by attacking and destroying them from range than for a rogue to actually try to disable them using thievery.

And that just doesn't seem right to me...

I'm not a huge fan of houserules though - IME, they tend to introduce more problems than they solve, so unfortunately I think my "fix" is going to be to just not use any traps that can be attacked, which is a great shame given 4e's encounter design philosophy.

That was just like 3rd edition then wasn't it. Really, a Fighter/anyone with power attack can blow through almost any wall (helps if have adamantine sword).
Really, the AC of a Wall is really really small (AC 5?).

 

[Irda Ranger]

I just go with what seems sensible. Want to bash down a wooden door with a battle-axe? Go for it (but as soon as you make a substantial hole, you have to stick your face up to it and say "Heeeeere's Johnny!"). Want to bash it down with a greatsword? Not gonna work so well - you'll break the sword before you break the door. Want to bash down an iron door with your fists? Good freakin' luck.

I may reconsider once the PCs are approaching epic level, but for now, that's how it works.

This, though the Hardness rules were my guide for what was "sensible." An Adamantine sword could be used to bore through a wall (eventually), but it would take a lot longer than a good steel hammer. There's something to be said for using the right tool for the right job.

 

[TerraDave]

Well, at least now you can cut through stone with a pick.

 

[Scribble]

Uhh...

Some unusual materials might be particularly resistant to some or all kinds of damage. In addition, you might rule that some kinds of damage are particularly effective against certain objects and grant the object vulnerability to that damage type. For example, a gauzy curtain or a pile of dry papers might have vulnerability 5 to fire because any spark is likely to destroy it.

Seems like they're pretty much saying if something needs to be resistant it is.

 

[Yair]

Uhh...



Seems like they're pretty much saying if something needs to be resistant it is.

Not how I read it. Stone, or even vault doors, are not an "unusual material". I read it more like "a wall of liquid magma may be particularly resistant to fire damage", not "a wall of stone may be particularly resistant to most damage types".

The RAW seems clearly to stipulate that objects have no hardness (resistance) in 4e. Common-sense houseruling seems necessary to me, and it appears that it does to just about anyone else too, although not everyone is calling it a "houserule" as such.

 

[Scribble]

Not how I read it. Stone, or even vault doors, are not an "unusual material". I read it more like "a wall of liquid magma may be particularly resistant to fire damage", not "a wall of stone may be particularly resistant to most damage types".

The RAW seems clearly to stipulate that objects have no hardness (resistance) in 4e. Common-sense houseruling seems necessary to me, and it appears that it does to just about anyone else too, although not everyone is calling it a "houserule" as such.

But they then go on to say the reverse about vulnerabilities and then give examples of some rather mundane stuff.

Also keep in mind that the type of material effects the amount of HP it has.

So yeah in the end I agree kind of... I think hardness is still a feature fo the game, it's just not hard set numbers. The amounts and when it applies are based on common sense.