Mundane damage VS Magic Weapons

[star]

This is my first post and likely to be a long one. Thank you in advance for your patience and help.

This is the situation. We just started the City of the Spider Queen module. My PC was in a crypt fending off 3 vampires while the party sorceror was outside lobbing fireballs inside or at the crypt. Eventually the crypt collapses nearly killing me and breaking my great sword. I argued several points against the breaking of the sword.

1. My sword has a +1 enhancement bonus and should not take damage from anything without at least a +1 bonus.

He ruled that the force of the fireball increased the damage, essentially ruling that the crypt exploded and the stones were propelled in every direction, not simply falling on me, and the force was strong enough to similate an enhancement bonus.

I countered with the fact that the fireball spell specifically states that it creates almost no force.

2. Even disregarding the enhancement bonus, the stones should not have been able to defeat the hardness of my sword as they were falling only 20 feet. The one's less than 200 pounds should have done a d6 damage and been innefectual. The one's greater than 200 pounds should have done 2d6 and only done any damage if they rolled max damage. As there can only be a limited amount of stones in excess of 200 pounds directly over my head, and the odds of rolling maximum damage on all of them, my sword should be at worst scratched.

He said that from the force of the fireball stones were propelled in all directions and eventually wore down the hardness and HP of the sword, breaking it.

3. I felt that I should have gotten a save. We rolled (In fact he let me roll) on all of my items to see which were affected. My issue is that he felt that affected meant automatically destroyed.

He ruled that saves for magic items are for spell affects and that since this was impact damage like ice storm there is no save.

I would like to know what you think, I've been lurking for a month or two and have learned a lot. I'd also like to point out that I'm not normally a rules lawyer, but loosing my primary weapon in the first encounter of this module is going to really hurt. I'm going to go with his ruling of course, but he's open to discussion and any help you can give me would be appreciated.

Star

 

[Dr. Zoom]

Seems rediculous to me, but maybe he does not want you to have that sword.

 

[kreynolds]

1. My sword has a +1 enhancement bonus and should not take damage from anything without at least a +1 bonus.

Except for really extreme circumstances, like two moons crashing together with a magical dagger between them, I completely agree. Actually, so do the rules (in regards to the weapon striking the magical weapon anyway).

He ruled that the force of the fireball...

Eh? What force!?

...and the force was strong enough to similate an enhancement bonus.

Two moons smashing together, sure, but a building falling down? Nah. I can't agree with that.

I countered with the fact that the fireball spell specifically states that it creates almost no force.

Exactly. I'm surprised he didn't just give in right there.

2. Even disregarding the enhancement bonus, the stones should not have been able to defeat the hardness of my sword as they were falling only 20 feet. The one's less than 200 pounds should have done a d6 damage and been innefectual. The one's greater than 200 pounds should have done 2d6 and only done any damage if they rolled max damage. As there can only be a limited amount of stones in excess of 200 pounds directly over my head, and the odds of rolling maximum damage on all of them, my sword should be at worst scratched.

Yup. I still wouldn't have damaged the sword at all, even if every single stone got max damage.

He said that from the force of the fireball...

No force!

...stones were propelled in all directions...

Not without force, so this is mute.

3. I felt that I should have gotten a save.

You probably should have.

We rolled (In fact he let me roll) on all of my items to see which were affected.

You shouldn't have had to roll a single save for any of your items at all unless you rolled a 1 on your initial saving throw.

My issue is that he felt that affected meant automatically destroyed.

I would have had issue too.

He ruled that saves for magic items are for spell affects and that since this was impact damage like ice storm there is no save.

Actually, because ice storm _doesn't_ allow a save, according to the rules, you don't have to worry about items you are carrying. You can't roll a 1 if there isn't a roll to begin with.

I would like to know what you think...

I think this is really simple. I think your DM wanted to take some of your stuff away, regardless of what the rules say. Fireball simply has no concussive force according to the rules (almost no pressure, meaning it isn't anything worth noting at all). His argument was absolutely dead in the water right there.

My advice? Get a wand of fireball. When you pop his bad guys with it, insist that they get knocked through the air all over the battlefield, and take additional falling damage when they hit the ground. Why? Well, apparently fireballs have enough concussive force to throw around chunks of stone, so what the hey.

 

[Maitre Du Donjon]

Seems rediculous to me, but maybe he does not want you to have that sword.

I'll second that. It isnt rule-related anymore, but did the DM have a particular reason for wanting to take that sword away?

Maitre D

 

[Kae'Yoss]

Unapproachable East has a metamagic feats, Explosive Spell, that lets area damage spells create a blast that throws people around. But unless he hasn't got that feat (I really doubt he has), the fireball won't imbue any items with enhancement bonuses (which would be a transmutation effect).

Your DM obviously wanted to take that sword from you - and with you entering the underdark soon, running around without weapon will kill you (and a non-magical weapon won't help you much, since there will be creatures with DR).

I know the phenomenon: bad DM's wanting something and completely disregarding any logic or rules (while it's their right to do so, it will destroy the credibility of the game world - and the fun). In a campaign I play, I personally (well, my character) witnessed the "miracle of the ford": a couple of horses (complete with a whole wagon) from our caravan got torn away by water that didn't even reach their knees (it didn't reach our knees). The same DM refuses to use monsters like the digester because he thinks they're unrealistic and unbelievable...

 

[Spatzimaus]

Okay, let's run through the mistakes one by one:

> Attended items are only damaged by area-effect spells if the wearer rolls a 1 on his save. The exception is if the spell specifically allows for item damage (if I'm wearing a suit of gasoline-soaked paper and I'm hit by a spell that ignites combustibles, for example)
Even then, though, there's a specific order you go through to determine which item (note the singular) gets damaged, and it still doesn't negate the item's Hardness.
> Even if they could be attacked separately, items make their own saving throws; magic items get a save based on their caster level, attended items use their wielder's saves, and attended magic items use whichever is larger. Doesn't really apply in this case, since Fireball doesn't have that clause.
> Fireball has no concussive effect. It is energy damage, and only energy damage. The only way for it to cause rocks to fall from the ceiling would be if the Fireball destroyed a load-bearing support beam holding the roof up. Considering Fireball peaks at 35 damage on average AND fire damage is cut in half before applying to hardness AND given the hardness of most materials, this just isn't going to happen; any wooden support beam will have 5 hardness (reducing the damage to 12.5 on average) and 10 HP per inch of thickness, so there's no way it'd destroy the beam.
Besides, you're in the Sunless Citadel, I seriously doubt the bad guy is throwing 10d6 fireballs at you. A 5d6 fireball has basically no chance of getting past the sword's 11 hardness (10 for steel, +1 for Enhancement). A rock falling from the ceiling will be far more likely to kill the player than shatter the sword (cuz people don't have hardness!)
> Hardness is not "worn down".
> The part about "the force was large enough to simulate an Enhancement bonus" is just ridiculous. Even ignoring the oft-repeated fact that there is NO FORCE in a Fireball, the whole concept of equating mundane forces to magical ones defies all logic.
It's really simple: read the spells, and apply the effects they say. Fireball doesn't say it destroys all the items you're wearing (unlike, say, Disintegrate), so it doesn't do it unless there's an explicit rule (like the DMG part about a 1 on a save) that overrides that.

At first I thought the DM was just out to destroy your item, but that makes no sense: it's the Sunless Citadel and we're talking about a +1 weapon.

Point him to this thread. If he still insists he handled it right, I'd say it's time to find a new group. It's all right for the DM to make rule mistakes, especially when he's just starting out, but this one's way the heck out there in Sadistland.

 

[Kae'Yoss]

Okay, let's run through the mistakes one by one:
it's the Sunless Citadel and we're talking about a +1 weapon.

'twas City of the Spider Queen. I suspect the party being level 10, and it was the party sorcerer who hurled those fireball spells.

The rest is totally true, though. No way you can destroy a weapon that way - except you have made it your very holy quest as DM to royally piss off your players.

 

[star]

Before this goes much further with people suggesting that I find another group and whatnot I want to take a moment and stick up for my DM. I like and respect the guy, if I didn't I wouldn't be playing in his game. I don't always agree with him, this particular moment is a pretty good example of that, but I enjoy playing in his game.

He is fairly new to the 3rd edition rules, as am I. He made a call off the top of his head without stopping to look it up in the interest of speeding up gameplay. He does a lot of common sense rulings, and honestly if you're not terribly familiar with the rules, ruling that a building falling on someone may break their stuff seems fairly logical. I can appreciate that and told him that I was going to look up the specifics and email him.

I looked up the hardness rules, the save rules and the rule concerning normal damage not overcoming the enhancement bonus. I emailed him and he responded with the fireball force stuff. I emailed him back reminding him that fireball doesn't do force damage but agreeing to go by whatever he rules. Then for your thoughts, opinions and help I came here. As of this time I haven't gotten his response to the force argument.

In light of the rules that I've looked up and everyone agreeing with me (I half expected several replies telling me that I forgot something obvious) I do think that I got hosed. But I don't think that it was an intentional thing where he set out to do it. It's not as though I'd been using the sword for awhile and doing too much damage with it. This was the first encounter of the module. The previous group that was making it's way up to 10th level to start this module got killed, so he let us make new PC's to start the module. So I don't think it was a premeditated "This PC is too powerful, time to take away some of this guy's offense" thing. It was a mistake on his part and mine for not knowing the rules better. I am a bit concerned that the members of the group that are much more familiar with the rules didn't help me out more.

For those wondering it was a +1 flaming burst greatsword - a bit more powerful than just a +1. I only mentioned the +1 part as only the enhancement bonus dealt with the hardness and hit points and it had not occured to me that he had intended to take it away because of it's power.

Thank you to everyone that has chimed in with their thoughts and opinions.

Star

 

[kreynolds]

I am a bit concerned that the members of the group that are much more familiar with the rules didn't help me out more.

So am I, for you, anyway. I swear, I must be blessed with the best group in the world. I don't have even 5% of the problems I hear about on these boards. Weird.

 

[LokiDR]

I have played in a game that used rules like this. In the very first session, the fighter had all of his equipment incinerated (save his sword). This proceeded to happen again every few weeks. The game was over the top a lot. But that is what made it fun. The fighter never lost his sword, so he could always attack. He often got new armor.

We told the DM about the rules, but he stuck to destroying stuff. It was fun, so long as he kept it balanced. More recently, the fighter hasn't gotten replacement equipment and it has gotten to him. The other characters have died a lot, and have generally gotten sick of the game.

What I am saying is that changing the rules to destroy stuff can be fun. But each DM should realize that it can cause lots of problems.