Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="ConcreteBuddha" data-source="post: 139829" data-attributes="member: 3139">"The reason weapons don't fall apart over normal use is because they don't generally hit things harder than themselves."Disagree entirely. During battle, swords clang, axes hit shields, warhammers break umber hulk bones... "A weapon will not take damage when hitting flesh any more than it will take damage when hitting paper mache." Translation: All combats involve fleshy blobs hitting each other without parrying, or natural armor or normal armor."What damage does result in day-to-day use can be considered fixable while traveling, such as with awhetstone, minor handle realignment, etc. "I'd really like to see the above happen in the "real world." "When you start going past the realm of 4 fights a day (average) against fleshy creatures and into 500 swings at a stone barrier, that's when I have to say (at least in my campaign) that reality does have a place in a game world."How many times in an adventure does an average character swing their sword? How many times does that sword A) hit a creature?B) miss because of armor?C) hit another creature's weapon?D) hit the ground or some other part of the environment?E) miss because of natural armor?F) get used in training?I'd say it's probably greater than the amount of times this particular Warhammer will be used against the rock.Besides, do YOU want to be the one to track how may times each weapon has been used and in each specific way?"If most things in a campaign do not follow standard "real world" cauailities, then ou end up with a campaign that lacks precisely what you are arguing for: consistency."I'm arguing for consistency in the DM, not the game world. In a game where magic, gods and dragons exist, "standard real world causalities" do not exist.For the DM to say, "Well, Barbarian Bob, you can't smash the wall because--Oops! Your hammer broke!", is not consistent, because in all other instances where that warhammer "should have taken damage", the DM didn't have that warhammer take damage."Your argument, summarized from your first, post is that the game isn't real life, so even if a hammer would break in real life, it won't in the game because there are no rules to address that situation."Um...it's more like this:1) The game isn't real life2) a hammer would break in real life3) in real life, a hammer should take damage in all instances where it would take damage4) this causes the hammer to break5) The game does not have a viable way of determining when a weapon takes damage6) Therefore: a. the DM should make a consistent system to handle ALL weapon breakages orb. use the DnD rules as presented (Where weapons don't break unless attacked)I never said the hammer wouldn't break. In fact, I think it would (in the real world). However, I'm not about to create an entire system of Weapon Hit Points that can be used to adjucate every instance of wear-and-tear on an item.  "Seems to me that logic would dictate one try to find a rule to mirror the reality,"Give me one instance in DnD where a rule "mirror's reality." <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />"rather than suggesting that the DM in question is a "frickin' moronic buffoon."I think kreynolds was using that as an endearing term for "DM who is a Judge, not a Referee." <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /></blockquote>

Verification