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="Particle_Man" data-source="post: 1261827" data-attributes="member: 892">Taking these one at a time...1) I simply don't agree with the weight you attach to "also".2) There may be magical forces that can destroy magic weapons (the disintigrate spell comes to mind) so that hardness and hitpoints have uses, even on my interpretation, aside from measuring how to determine how much damage a magic weapon can take from magic weapons of equal or greater plusses.  Thus my interpretation does not require that hit points and hardness are of such limited use as you imply my interpretation requires.3) I don't find my interpretation to be that complicated.  From a bookkeeping point of view, it is easier, since you don't have to keep track of a weapon's hit points if your opponent has nothing that can sunder it.4) A Storm Giant with a +1 sword can't scratch the +2 quarterstaff because the quarterstaff is made of mightier stuff.  It's magic.  If one wants to bring in "Realism" one might want to explain why the same Storm Giant does not collapse under his own weight, or at least break his ankles with his first two steps.5) Why do dragons have improved sunder?  Perhaps they like to break non-magical things.  Perhaps they like to break wands, staffs, holy symbols, and other breakable goodies.  But my interpretation does explain why they have (unbroken) magic weapons and armours in their hordes: a) They can use them if they polymorph into humanoid form, and thus break PC weapons, and b) They might kill other humanoids without being able to break their toys, and so keep them, unbroken, in their horde.6) The DR argument is interesting.  But I could simply hold that the WOTC powers that be decided to make it harder for monsters to destroy the PC's favourite toys.  Since the PC's like their toys, that could make sense to me.  And any creature with /epic damage resistance would still be able to sunder non-epic weapons on my interpretation, since "epic" seems to mean "at least +6" when I read the MM 3.5 entry under Damage Resistance.  (I suppose one might argue on similar lines that /magic damage resistance would allow a sundering of +1 weapons (though not +2 ones) since no magic weapon in the core books is less than +1).  Well except the monks +0 magical bodies.  (And there, I have gone back on topic briefly)  <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=":)" />  7) I'm glad that your interpretation is easier for you and your game.  Can you accept that my interpretation is easier for me and my game?</blockquote>

Verification