Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Deset Gled" data-source="post: 3536877" data-attributes="member: 7808">This is a subject that has been debated before, and is truly left up to the DM to decide.Personally, I look at the rules for acid damage as a precedent.&nbsp; In the core rules, all chemical damage is simply called &quot;acid&quot; damage, whether the damage is caused by a strong acid, a strong base, or just a volatile compound.&nbsp; For the sake of the simplicity, the game says any chemical that causes damage is an &quot;acid&quot;, even if the chemical is actually the exact opposite of an acid.&nbsp; This is done to make the game more playable, even if it will make a few chemists upset.In the same what that all chemicals are &quot;acids&quot;, I would say that all metals &quot;rust&quot;.&nbsp; It follows the spirit of the rules, keeps things simple, and doesn't require a full analysis of what elements and alloys are used to make mithral or adamantine, nor an explanation for what type of chemical reaction magical rust causes.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Deset Gled, post: 3536877, member: 7808"] This is a subject that has been debated before, and is truly left up to the DM to decide. Personally, I look at the rules for acid damage as a precedent. In the core rules, all chemical damage is simply called "acid" damage, whether the damage is caused by a strong acid, a strong base, or just a volatile compound. For the sake of the simplicity, the game says any chemical that causes damage is an "acid", even if the chemical is actually the exact opposite of an acid. This is done to make the game more playable, even if it will make a few chemists upset. In the same what that all chemicals are "acids", I would say that all metals "rust". It follows the spirit of the rules, keeps things simple, and doesn't require a full analysis of what elements and alloys are used to make mithral or adamantine, nor an explanation for what type of chemical reaction magical rust causes. [/QUOTE]

Verification