Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Celebrim" data-source="post: 6634787" data-attributes="member: 4937">Taking an edge and hardness aren't completely related.  Titanium for example doesn't take an edge easily nor retain an edge well despite being fairly hard.  Presumably, yes.  During the iron age, the finest swords were still made of bronze.  Iron replaced bronze in weapons mostly because of issues of cost and quality control, and steel didn't completely replace it until sometime in the dark ages.  I wouldn't be entirely too sure that bronze allies to modern standards were unknown, as 'evolved' technology can achieve pretty remarkable results with only limited understanding of the whys and hows.  Individual examples of swords with ideal ratios of copper, tin, and phosophor and relatively free of impurities are known, particularly among Egyptian bronze.I think that's pretty much exactly my point and why it is a fair comparison.In D&D, damage => time.  The more damage the object does to the material, the faster that it whittles it away.   Your own analysis establishes that we know axes do more damage to wood than swords, and swords more than spears.Effectively, this his how it works out.  If I attack a hardness 8 object with a hardness 12 object, I can do up to 4 damage to the object I'm whittling on while doing none to the implement I'm wielding.   Conversely, if I try to attack a hardness 12 object with a hardness 8 object, I'll soon damage eventually break the softer object.</blockquote>

Verification