Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="smuckenfart" data-source="post: 8944064" data-attributes="member: 7040256">Yes, we roll with critical hit and critical miss.  I understand it's an option, and still an example of where a dagger could receive damage.  It may also receive damage as means of good storytelling; "as you roll and tumble with your opponent the ground beneath you suddenly ceases to support you, the cliffside flashing in and out of your vision as you spiral downward, the enemy let go of you and screams as it flails its hands around trying to orient itself.  Below you and slightly to your right, you catch an outcropping tree that's grown out from the side of the cliffside.  As you fast approach it, you reach out with your hands and...roll to hit the branches.  Ok!  You reach out with your hands and grasp onto the first few branches, but they slip through your fingers as the gravity and speed are too much, the leaves rake across your face and you close your eyes in reaction, still grasping outward you've managed to slow your fall enough to clench a firm grasp of some solid branches and you yank yourself to a stop!  The shrill cry of your enemy continues to soar away from you as you watch him cast down to the rocks below.  A glint of sunlight flashing off a small metal object ricocheting off the boulders and you realize that you released your dagger while grasping for your life.  Looking around, the rocks on the cliff, you notice, are jagged enough to provide adequate footing, and you figure it's probably easier to get down than to get back up.  You make your way down to the bottom, blood splatter becoming apparent as you draw closer to the floor.  The body, you imagine a pulpous mess, lies behind a large rock to your right.  To your left about 10 feet ahead of you, you see your dagger, the tip broken off like a icicle.   You pick up the dagger and the broken shard, it looks like you could probably still use it as it is jagged."The dagger didn't actually take any damage, but it definitely has character and a story behind it.  The player can always go get it fixed, the dagger is functional so that if in the next fight it gets sundered, it can be proper naughty word.I do agree that the spell should be able to do something.  The fact is that a slender dagger cannot sustain much damage is due to its hardness, and HP's relative to its thickness.  That's the problem with the dagger, not the spell or the breaking objects rules.  A sword or larger weapon does not have that problem.  You're also forgetting about every other material that the spell can repair, weapons and armor being the least probable to be used by the spell.  Many items do not have hp's listed, what's small damage to a candle stick?  The disguise kit?  The amount of damage that can be repaired is relative to the size of the object, and most objects, from what I can tell, require a degree of sensibility to agree on what's considered a small tear or a small hole.  Objects that definitely have HP's, such as listed on page 166 of the PHB, those follow the rules for breaking objects, like a door, a rope, weapon, armor, etc.  Most campaigns that I have seen don't actually calculate the hp's of armor, even though they absorb a hit to prevent damage a player.  The way I play it, you roll to hit, and if that hit doesn't overcome the player's dexterity AC first, then the player dodges the attack.  If it is enough to overcome the dodge, but not the armor AC, then the armor blocks the damage.  That damage is supposed to be absorbed by the armor, and if the damage is enough to overcome the hardness, it is supposed to do hp damage to the armor.  I think it might be high time to include that in the campaign, the wear and tear of equipment.  Give that craft skill a use, not just some cosmetic RP thing.  The apparently uselessness of using the mending skill (for weapons and armor) is because weapon damage and armor damage are seldom enforced.  That's not a game mechanic problem.  You fall down a small cliff and take 36 points of damage, but your armor is fine.  eh?Consider this:A slender dagger that incurs a 75% crack along the width of its 1 inch blade and 1 hp of damage, that's a significant portion relative to the size of the blade, and half its hit points.  To you it might be small, but to that blade a 75% cut compromises its integrity significantly.  Now take that same measurement, 3/4 of an inch and place it on a bastard sword.  That 3/4 inch cleft on the sword's 4 inch wide blade is just 18% across, and it's hp's are reduced by just 20%.  That small amount of damage to the sword still leaves it considerably more durable than the slender dagger, the size of the damage done is the same.  Relativity matters.  The point being that just because it's a small dagger doesn't mean that any damage done to it is considered small.Consider for a moment that everything I am saying is true, and then let's see if there are any inconsistencies.First, let's assume that the authors did in fact know what "a tear" is and "a break" is and that "small" refers to not only size, but word choice describing that small damage type.1.  A break is a gap or opening.  A gap or opening, like a gash, is still connected to the whole and not separated into separate pieces.2.  A mending spell can repair broken metal objects, provided there is but one break.  It can ONLY repair a break as described in 1.3.  The break is only used to describe hard objects.  To make the break small, and still whole, use associated words that refer to small, ie. fracture, crack, cleft, chip, et, with the adjective "small".  a small fracture.  a small crack.4.  A clean break is a crack that has penetrated 100% across the width.  That's not a small crack, it is separated and breaks #1.  It can't be repaired because it breaks #2.  It breaks #3 because it is not a small crack, it's cracked all the way through.  A clean break is not a small break.So, assuming that, the mending spell can repair any small breaks as using 1-3 as guidelines, and it cannot mend objects that have been broken in two such as a clean break in #4.Pull up the breaking objects rules.  You can sunder an object by reducing it to zero hp.  The weapon or shield is destroyed, stated as such on page 158 under Step 3: Consequences:"See Table 8–8: Common Armor, Weapon, and Shield Hardness and Hit Points to determine how much damage you must deal to destroy the weapon or shield."Again on page 165 under Hit Points:"When an object’s hit points reach 0, it’s ruined."And again under Damaged Objects:"A damaged object remains fully functional until the item’s hit points are reduced to 0, at which point it is destroyed."This of course you already know, and they're pretty adamant about it to repeat it in different locations, and across the board online.  A weapon breaks when its hp's are reduced to zero.  If it breaks in half, separated into pieces, it's also not just a gap or space.  Line it all up and see what checks out:A weapon has been sundered, it's hp's brought to zero and breaks in two as the player parries yet another mighty blow.A weapon that has been reduced to zero hit points is ruined/destroyed.  Ruined/destroyed are not terms for small damage type.  Check.A weapon that is broken in two does not fit with the "gap or space" definition of "a break".  Check.The blade that has a clean break does not conform to the small category of damage (unlike that 33% crack, this is 100%).  CheckNot allowing such a weapon to be mended does not contradict any of the requirements or limitations of the breaking objects ruling, nor the 1-4 ruling above.A weapon that has sustained a small fissure along the blade.  "fissure" is still one piece, check.  Fits the "small" requirement, check.  Fits the "gap or space" definition of "a break", check.  Has HP.  Check.  Nothing about this breaks or bends any rules.  If you assume what I'm saying is accurate, then it all checks out.  This item could be mended.Where it doesn't check out, is when you start saying that "a break" doesn't in fact mean that it's just "a gap or space", and separation into two independent pieces is possible.  Because then, you conflict with the zero hp rule, since a weapon won't break on you unless it's sundered to zero.  The definition of the author's word choice is ignored.  The books describing the items as ruined/destroyed are trivialized.  The relative size of the damage type to the weapon in question is ignored in favor of a general idea that an inch is just an inch.</blockquote>

Verification