I'm re-editing my own stuff on this, and I really want to find a way to make this work right, so I'd like comments.
Attack and Damage penalty
There are big problems with the materials rule for weapons in D&D. Used as is, a stone mace (-2 attack, 1d8-2 damage crit20x2) would be completely inferior to a wood club (1d6 damage cri20x2), which would have clerics jerk out the stone heads out of their maces to be more effective. There are a number of other major flaws that I won't even point out. (note that all of these are integral part of the Pazio system)
Now, athas.org has had the good sense of lowering the inferior material rule to -1, and I did the same. This also has precedent in a Dorgotten Realms book, describing weapons made by a stone age culture in the chult jungle, if I'm not mistaken.
However, even then, there are still some issues. In the example above, a stone mace would still not fare that well against a club:
Mace, heavy, stone (cost 8cp, atk -1, dmg 1d8-1, crit 20 (2d8-2))
Club, wood (cost free, atk +0, dmg 1d6, crit 20 (2d6))
Not sure I'd go with the mace...
Of course, roleplayers won't care about numbers, but still the stone mace should be a more deadly than the wooden club, that's why people add the stone head to the wooden haft!
Now, athas.org had an interesting idea: Make some weapon, especially athasian weapons, weapon at no penalty with bone or stone or such. Interesting idea, like I said, because it also makes athasian weapons more desirable, which adds to the setting, but it also means that metal variant of these weapons are just as good, though they are harder. However, paying 100 times the price to get extra hardness seems a bit ridiculous. So, a bone wrist razor is just as sharp as a steel one. That doesn't really work out well, IMO.
I had once thought about taking away the favorable crits of non-metal weapons, since, for example, a bone longsword is less sharp than a metal one, and thus less able to deal deep and clean cuts. But that doesn't work quite well with all weapons, and it also takes away most of what makes weapons different.
Then I thought of making it go the other way around, and make all iron weapons ''keen'', but that seems a bit powerful, and also doesn't work that well with bludgeoning weapons, mechanically and logically...
So, I was thinking about giving substitude material weapons a standard -1 penalty to attack and damage, for ALL weapons. This means a bone club gets -1, a wooden quarterstaff gets -1, and singing sticks get -1 too. Only metal weapon are ''fully functional''.
I also want to make masterwork non-metal weapons much less expensive, representing the result of the low athasian wages and the work of slaves. It also allows non-metal weapons to drop the attack penalty fairly easily. The cost of a non-metal masterwork weapon would be 75cp + weapon's cost.
But then, there's one problem that popped up recently: Bronze. What to do with Bronze weapons? Do they get the -1?
I'm thinking of making bronze somewhat affordable, though. Based on Dune Trader, bronze would cost 10 times as less as iron.
So, Since other ''good'' materials, like adamantine, give an enhancement bonus to attack only, I'm thinking of making bronze weapons a -1 penalty to attack rolls ONLY. They would cost 10 times as less as the iron weapon, but weight 25% more. Hardness 9 and Hit point per inch 20.
And I want to make steel much more valuable in Dark Sun. It takes a feat (Secret of Steel) to be able to craft steel weapons. Since it byasses some damage reductions, I'd make it pretty much the equivalent of adamatine on Athas (since I don't see that material even existing on athas anyways). However, it would not have the great hardness and hit points (only 12/25 instead of 20/40 for adamantine and 10/30 for iron. Note that steel has less hit points per inch than iron, because steel, harder, doesn't bend easily, and attacks by passing its hardness would break it a bit more easily). Also, steel does not automatically ignore harness, as adamantine. It does, however, grant the masterwork +1 enhancement on attack rolls for weapons. Steel weapons would cost 600cp more than iron weapons.
Oh, and Agafari and Dasl should still be inferior materials, but have good hardness and hit points. They'd cost 5 times as much as the inferior material weapon.
That means:
a bone longsword (-1 at/dmg, 6/5) costs 15cp
a masterwork bone longsword (-1 dmg, 6/5) costs 90cp
a bronze longsword (-1 at, 9/20) costs 150cp
a masterwork bronze longsword (+0, 9/20) costs 450 cp
an iron longsword (+0, 10/30) costs 1500 cp
a masterwork iron longsword (+1 attack, 10/30) costs 1800cp
and a steel longsword (+1 attack, bypass reduction, 12/25) cost 2100 cp
What do you think?
Hardness, Hit points and weight
Just a few things I'd point out:
Bone should not have a hardness of 10, since it snaps relatively easily. At most, it should have the same as wood, 5 hp per inch.
Stone does NOT weight twice as much as iron. In sheer mass that's evident, but of course, a metal blade would be thiner than the flint one, and the a metal mace head would have flangs and such instead of bulk, but even then, if the weapon were made too heavy, it wouldn't be very efficient. To keep the weapons efficient, you would probably make a bludgeoning stone weapon about as heavy as the metal one. At most, maybe wight 50% more, but I'd go for the same weight.
Obsidian and Flint weapons (slashing and peircing stone weapons) should have very few hit points per inch of thickness. Flint snaps and breaks off easily when impact is not so good.
Ŵeapon Breakage
I've given break DCs to all my weapons, or more accurately, all weapon parts. Since its the force of the blow, and not the damage on the weapon, that breaks it, a break DC seemed appropriate. Note that damaged weapons could still get a -2 to their break DC, as any other objects.
Now, the rule I use uses the principle that strong hits are likely to break the weapon. Now, maximum damage doesn't work, because some weapons would be much more likely to break than others, depending on damage dice, which usually refers to size, and not necessarily sturdiness. Instead, I use the following, which works great:
When you roll a natural 20 on your attack roll, you hit the target with great force. You then roll again to confirm crit. If you miss, you still hit the target, but not real good, so you don't crit, and you risk breaking the weapon! Roll a strength check against the break DC of the weapon, and hope to roll low. Of course, strong characters have a greater chance of accidentaly breaking their weapons on impact.
~
Comments, critics, ideas?
:88E:
But as far as I can tell you're looking for a way to best represent the other materials used on Athas in 3e correct?
My suggestion would be the rules used for stone and obsidian weapons in the Maztica article of Dragon issue 315 (the same one with the DS defiler/preserver as a matter of fact). You may want to add that an additional roll of a 1 (when a weapon has already been blunted) causes the weapon to break. That fits the Athas style a little better I think.
Anyway, that's the best rules I've seen for non-metal weapons in any campaign and it fits right in with the Dark Sun world (if you add the weapon breakage on an additional 1 that is). Hope this is at least something that you were looking for.
Originally posted by NytCrawlr
:headexplo
:88E:
Originally posted by Porkchops
While it makes sense logically that a strong person would have a greater chance of breaking a weapon, as a game mechanic I disagree with penalizing someone for having a good stat.
yeah, I agree, though I can't really think of any other way, unless you roll a straight d20...
Originally posted by NytCrawlr
Overall I just think it's too much work for too little gain.
I fail to see how putting every non metal weapon at -1, bronze at -1 attack, iron at 0 and steal a +1 attack is so much work. Think about bronze and steal as alternate materials, much like adamantium and mithril in D&D. Athas.org has -1 for some weapons, 0 for others, and metal affecting or not affecting weapons, depending on each individual weapons.
However, if you refer to the breakage rule, I agree to a point, but I think the flavor, part of the original setting, is not to be dissmissed because of ONE roll.
Originally posted by xlorepdarkhelm
Unless you're gonna suddenly infuse Dark Sun with a ton of metal, I really don't see why making the comparison to metal versions of Athasian weapons is an issue. the Athasian weapons were designed to circumvent the inherent problems with inferior materials, over the couple thousand years of the Age of the Sorcerer-Kings - they augment the various advantages those materials have to use the best features with each. Metal doesn't need such an adjustment, so sharp-edged pointy, flat metal blades work just fine, and are probably a helluva lot easier to forge than a Carrakal equivalent, which uses the strengths of wood and bone bound together to give a little extra advantage vs a normal bone or wooden weapon. It's not a materials issue, it's more of a technology issue. Using the materials at hand, the people of Dark Sun have been innovative in their methods of making weapons that are actually useful.
Perhaps you missed my stone mace vs wood club example Xlorep. I can give you other nonmetal example if you'd like.
However, without even wanting to make metal items common, it doesn't make much sense that a bone elven thinblade would be just as good as the metal elven thinblade. Surely, metal will produce a much more sharper and aerodynamic blade. Its not a matter of putting each weapon against other metal weapons, but pitting them against their own metal variant. I don't see why a dagger gets a better edge in metal, but wrist razors or puchik, for example, don't. Why would thor-kreen even bother to make metal kyorchka?
And when you do get to compare weapons, it just gets weird. A wood and bone macahuitl is better than a bone longsword, and just as good as a steel longsword!
The thing is, if you allow those kinds of things, metal weapons won't be rare, they'll be non-existant. No one will manufacture steel weapons if they produce no difference on the battlefield (especially if you take out weapon breakage) for about a hundred times the price. Metal weapons won't be precious for their combat abilities, just for their metal, and players will sell them first chance they get.
Originally posted by vader42xx
My suggestion would be the rules used for stone and obsidian weapons in the Maztica article of Dragon issue 315 (the same one with the DS defiler/preserver as a matter of fact). You may want to add that an additional roll of a 1 (when a weapon has already been blunted) causes the weapon to break. That fits the Athas style a little better I think.
Anyway, that's the best rules I've seen for non-metal weapons in any campaign and it fits right in with the Dark Sun world (if you add the weapon breakage on an additional 1 that is). Hope this is at least something that you were looking for.
Hmm... interesting...
Athasians do forge metal however, so I'd like to keep a difference between metal and non-metal weapons that's a bit more obvious.
Thanks for the reference!
Would it be possible to make an obsidian/flint scimatar?
The weapon seems fairly common in Dark Sun material, but I'd think they would have to be made out of curved bones...
Yes? No?
Originally posted by Shei-Nad
However, if you refer to the breakage rule, I agree to a point, but I think the flavor, part of the original setting, is not to be dissmissed because of ONE roll.
Eh agree to disagree.
The penalty thing I don't have issue with, but I'm having issue with the whole weapon breakage thing, mainly cause I think it's too much for too little flavor gain, but that's all breakage rules, just not your's.
One of the reasons I probably just won't implement one in my campaign, too many rolls going on already.
Originally posted by NytCrawlr
Eh agree to disagree.
The penalty thing I don't have issue with, but I'm having issue with the whole weapon breakage thing, mainly cause I think it's too much for too little flavor gain, but that's all breakage rules, just not your's.
One of the reasons I probably just won't implement one in my campaign, too many rolls going on already.
That's ok, I just like my players' faces when their bone longsword snaps!
Originally posted by Shei-Nad
Ŵeapon Breakage
I've given break DCs to all my weapons, or more accurately, all weapon parts. Since its the force of the blow, and not the damage on the weapon, that breaks it, a break DC seemed appropriate. Note that damaged weapons could still get a -2 to their break DC, as any other objects.
Now, the rule I use uses the principle that strong hits are likely to break the weapon. Now, maximum damage doesn't work, because some weapons would be much more likely to break than others, depending on damage dice, which usually refers to size, and not necessarily sturdiness. Instead, I use the following, which works great:
When you roll a natural 20 on your attack roll, you hit the target with great force. You then roll again to confirm crit. If you miss, you still hit the target, but not real good, so you don't crit, and you risk breaking the weapon! Roll a strength check against the break DC of the weapon, and hope to roll low. Of course, strong characters have a greater chance of accidentaly breaking their weapons on impact.
~
Comments, critics, ideas?
Well, strong characters would actually have less of a chance of breaking the weapon. Since strong characters have more of a chance to hit on the second roll, they'd be less likely to have to make a strength check. Also, while I agree that breakage should not be determined by damage die, I think we should still use the weapons hp. So, on the off chance a character hits with too strong a force, it damages the weapon (tracked by the dm of course). This would give characters a stronger incentive to sunder weapons, a vital part of gladitorial combat.
I had always had a problem with a bone wrist razor being comparable to a steel wrist razor. Thanks for solving this one!
From the lazy dm standpoint, I like Shei-Nad's simpler minuses. Less bookkeeping.
I don't see a problem with a bone scimitar or even greatsword. There is still enough elasticity to bone to make it work. Obsidian greatsword? mmmmm dunno.
maybe if it is constructed like a larger version of the wood sword with obsidian chips set into the edge? The weight and shape would be the same as a "normal" greatsword.
Originally posted by Shei-Nad
That's ok, I just like my players' faces when their bone longsword snaps!
God your evil, can't wait to play in one of your games, hehe.
Originally posted by mekillot
I like the rules Shei-Nad proposed. There is no "extra rolling" because the breakage only occurs when the crit is not confirmed.
Guess I need to read that again cause I missed that, hence my previous exploding head & confused post.
Originally posted by Wasgo
Well, strong characters would actually have less of a chance of breaking the weapon. Since strong characters have more of a chance to hit on the second roll, they'd be less likely to have to make a strength check.
Yeah, it kind of even's up. Anyways, thinking about making it a straight d20 roll, since like Porkchops mentionned, its sort of penalising characters for having a high ablity score. If I could just find a precendent for this, I'd have a clearer conscience...
Also, while I agree that breakage should not be determined by damage die, I think we should still use the weapons hp.
Well, the break DC for the weapon depends on the type of the weapon (blade, blunt, haft) and the material. As such, weapons with lots of hps and hardness have higher DCs (though it depends on size too). Though damaging the weapon could also work, I would think its more the sudden impact that can snap the blade rather than the weapon ''wearing out''. On the object break DC table from the PHB, you have a DC to break a spear. The spear isn't damaged, it just snaps because of impact. However, should you damage the spear, the break DC is reduced by 2, like all other break DCs for objects.
So, on the off chance a character hits with too strong a force, it damages the weapon (tracked by the dm of course). This would give characters a stronger incentive to sunder weapons, a vital part of gladitorial combat.
Like I said, its one way to go, but I'm not sure its really appropriate, but its that's more bookkeeping too.
Originally posted by NytCrawlr
God your evil, can't wait to play in one of your games, hehe.
Yeah... Players reaching epic levels is just a Myth in my campaigns... ;)
Seriously!
Originally posted by Shei-Nad
Well, the break DC for the weapon depends on the type of the weapon (blade, blunt, haft) and the material. As such, weapons with lots of hps and hardness have higher DCs (though it depends on size too). Though damaging the weapon could also work, I would think its more the sudden impact that can snap the blade rather than the weapon ''wearing out''. On the object break DC table from the PHB, you have a DC to break a spear. The spear isn't damaged, it just snaps because of impact. However, should you damage the spear, the break DC is reduced by 2, like all other break DCs for objects.
With hitpoints it's still the same thing. It just tracks partial damage, just like for creatures it doesn't track injury. They just die, and it just breaks. I think using hitpoints would be benificial though, that way new DCs don't need to be created for new weapons, as they already have those mechanics.
I'll be posting those later after the re-edition of my stuff is completed. You can get an idea of the mechanics in my earlier edition of Dark Sun rules on my website.
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ie=UTF-8&q=obsidian+scalpel
Rule I used was obsidian weapons are:
-1 hit/+1 damage, if edged.
The South Americna cultures inset them into wood to make swords that woule slice you to bits, since no one had metal armour, breakage was less of a worry.
IMPORTANT POINT!!!
The reason obsidian and glass break so easily is NOT because they are "weak" materials, but because they have a load of flaws as they are formed by chilling hot materials. Note there is a big difference between having inherently low tensile strength, and being filled with fractures. Hence modern day advanced ceramics are extremely resilient, because the flaws are reduced or neutered.
Obsidian has an extremely high hardness high above that of steel.
Typical steel knife/sword has Rockwell around 50 to 65 (very fine expensive weapons)
Obsidian doesn't get Rockwell tested as it's too fragile, but it can scratch glass and has a standard hardness of 7 (10 being diamond and it's on a relative, not precise scale), and steel being 5.5.
http://www.amfed.org/t_mohs.htm
Obsidian also takes extremely fine edges by it's natural cleavage, and micro saw/scalloped edges.
So in Dark Sun or other *FANTASY WORLDS*, where they have access to magic and psionics, if you could remove the flaws in obsidian, you would have one heck of a nice material for edged weapons. Thus I suggest, using appropriate abilities, you could have obsidian weapons that are +1 hit/+1 damage
(masterwork and the extremely sharp natural properties of obsidian).
In Dark Sun, such materials and their creators would be VERY valuable and useful, also much more readily available than iron.
Then they attacked us hand to hand, some with lances and some shooting arrows, and others with their two-handed cutting swords. . . .
They were carrying their usual weapons: bows, arrows, lances of various sizes, some of which were as large as ours; shields, swords single and double handed, and slings and stones. . . .
They carried two-handed swords, shields, lances, and feather plumes. Their swords, which were as long as broadswords, were made of flint which cut worse than a knife, and the blades were so set than one could neither break them nor pull them out.
Montezuma had two houses stocked with every sort of weapon; many of them were richly adorned with gold and precious stones. There were shields large and small, and a sort of broadsword, and two-handed swords set with flint blades that cut much better than our swords.
[Bernal Diaz, The Conquest of New Spain, trans. J. M. Cohen (New York: Penguin Books, 1963), pp. 22,23,29,142-143,228.]
This was a problem I had in 2e DS as well. Applying to-hit and damage penalties to bone, stone, and obsidian weapons - *but* only when that weapon is normally made from steel - simply makes clubs and staves the supreme weapons. Reducing the standard DMG penalty of -2 to -1 lessens the problem but does not remove it.
My solution was to knock down the damage die of such weapons by one step. As an example, this turns a wooden mace (normally d8 20/x2) into a club (d8 becomes d6, crit remains the same), which is as it should be. Non-steel longswords become d6 19-20/x2, dwarven waraxes do d8 20/x3, etc. This also has the added advantage of reducing the number of modifiers that one has to worry about in combat.
I originally wanted obsidian to function differently, for reasons brought up by Silverblade. Slashing and piercing weapons made with obsidian would do damage as steel weapons, but would only be good for a handful of fights before needing to be repaired or discarded. But I eventually scrapped that as being too much work, and lumped obsidian in with wood, stone, and bone weapons, stat-wise.
I also declared rapiers, scimitars, khopeshs, and kukris as weapons that had to be made from metal, and made them all exotic (the kukri already is exotic, of course).
Yeah I'm pretty sure flint and obsidian are have razor sharp edges, but there is still a major difference in penetration, I should think. Maybe not for piercing weapons, but for slashing weapons, you won't be able to make your obsidian blade thin enough the deal the clean slashes a metal blade could, I would think. Of course, since D&D wounds are only skin deep, it is really represented well, but I would think an obsidian blade would have a hard time slicing all the way through an arm or neck. So there would still be a difference. However, you do make a good point, and aside from weapon breakage, I'm not sure obsidian edges would really deal less damage than metal ones. hmm...
In any case, however, I should think the hit penalty is appropriate, since I doubt you could make a stone weapon as wieldy as a metal weapon, since you can shape the latter much better.
Bone and wooden weapons would still be far less effective though, for slashing weapons at least.
As for the obsidian encrusted wooden swords of the aztek, those are the macahuitls, as presented by athas.org. These weapons could deal pretty ugly wounds, but the wooden base would prevent deep cuts.
Hmm... Will have to give this more thought...
I've seen "knapped" shortswords and axe heads, tomahawks, with blades 8 to 16 inches in length, made from obsidian and flint. Cross section is comparatively thin, still well within needs to stab or cut deeply.
Also everyone forgets a low level spell : STONE SHAPE..works on obsidian and flint you know ;)
If oyu coudl remove the flaws, caused by quenching, in glass like materials (obsidian, flint etc), AND the material had decent tensile strength, the only problem left would be it's density, and how that would affect it as a weapon. "Rock" tends to be less dense than metals. Obsidian is 1/3rd the density of Iron.
Iron approx 7 grams/cubic centimetre
Obsidian approx 2.3 grams/cubic centimetre.
Haivng a light, strong, sharp sword would be very nice, but obsidian still may not have the inherent tensile strength of steel.
Note modern dsay use of cermaics as tools (scissors for example) is increasing. Also, obsidian is EXTREMELY durable in regards to corrosion/natural processes, which is one reason it's considered in regards to storing radioactive waste.
In D&D terms, you could set "empowered" obsidian to have less hps than iron, and perhaps less hardness too (sicne hardness in D&D is also based on tensile strength). But it is immune to acid and rust monster attacks! ;)
And in Dark Sun, a So-ut won't bite your leg off to get it, as it's not metal, hehe.
As for the wooden-bladed/obsidian tipped swords, and how deep they'd cut, note the Spanish writer I quoted saying how grievously they cut. If you get a thin piece of wood, say half an inch to an inch, thinning to the edge, and hit flesh with that, it WILL penetrate tissue deeply, but since it doesn't have a sharp edge, what you get is a deep crushing wound. Imagine being hit by a 3 foot long aircraft propeller, edge on. It would shatter your arm or ribs and leave the most nasty deep bruises. Now, if you tipped that with obsidian or flint, it would bite and cut very deeply.
What we are talking about is impacts. Formula for kinetic energy of impacts:
1/2 mass multiplied by velocity squared. Longer the weapon, faster it's end travels due to leverage. faster it hits, more energy to target. Greater the mass, more energy.
That's why a hit from a sword, mace or the like deals substantial damage to the target beyond just cutting/piercing. When you put an edge on that, it refines the contact surface to a thinner section, and causes deep cuts. Deep cuts can severe blood vessels.
Impacts from bullets and blunt weapons rarely sever blood vessels, but they can damage organs and thus cause blood loss, but it's not as common as an edged weapon slicing an artery. Blunt weapons though deliver tremendous kinetic energy due to mass and large surface area, and this can incapacitate due to the shock. Basically the body is a network of blood vessels, so a long, broad, but thin cross-section edged tool, has a high likelyhood of cutting them on impact. Sharper edges have more chance of cutting them, as arteries and veins act like rubber tubes, deliberately made to be NOT easy to tear, but limited in this regard by the material's strengths.
For these reasons, a blunt weapon or firearm is highly likely to render the victim hors de combat, stunned, weakened or the like, but blows with them require the user to commit heavily to the attack, and be likely to be hit by a counter attack, as the mass is hard for the wielder to counter, and allow easy manouvering.
Edged weapons require less effort to use, thus more able to avoid counter attack and not be left tired. A small wound may result in lethal bleeding. Edged weapons may also be mounted on long reach weapons or projectiles, easily, granting advantage. The spear was preffered weapon of war over swords for many centuries with good reason.
Thus stab wounds from edged weapons are extremely efficient methods to dispatch enemies, which is why the Roman gladius was the functional equivalent of a modern day assault rifle, compared to a bolt action rifle or shotgun in the hands of the enemy.
Finally, neve runderestimate people's ability to create, REGARDLESS of their "supposed" primitive status.
Consider the Pyramids of Egypt, Romans building the FLavian ampitheatre with CONCRETE far better than anything available until the Germans rediscovered the trick in the late 1930s...etc etc.
Given people's ingenuity AND magic and psionics, they could be capable of a lot of stuff.
Sorry I'm a geek who loves history, geology, and biology ;)
Originally posted by Shei-Nad
yeah, I agree, though I can't really think of any other way, unless you roll a straight d20...
Are you insuating that most players use a gay d20?
:DFirst off, I dislike the original Dark Sun rule of "max damage risks breaking a weapon". I don't like the idea of punishing a character for rolling well. Instead, I plan to bring back the "critical fumble".
If the player rolls a 1 on an attack, he risks a fumble. He rolls a second time, and if he misses again, he fumbled. Otherwise it was just a normal miss, no harm done.
When a fumble is rolled, the amount the threat roll was missed by is checked against the monster's AC. If it's equal to or less than the dexterity bonus/deflection bonus of the monster, then the player just totally missed and may be thrown off-balance. A DC 15 Reflex save is needed or the character is flat-footed until the beginning of his next turn.
If the threat amount was greater, the character hit at a bad angle, did no damage, and potentially broke his weapon. A break DC is rolled, which is modified by material types and quality. If the check succeeds, the weapon is fine, but unless it has a magical bonus, its hit points drops by 1 point.
Also, if the monster has damage reduction and the player's weapon does NOT bypass it, then every time he strikes and hits, a break DC is called for. (Magical bonuses don't negate the hit point loss here.) Also, sunder attempts with a weapon made of a material that has less durability than the target weapon automatically fail.
One other idea I had was composite weapons. Most weapons don't consist of all one material in Athas. A good club may have a bone haft and a stone head, for example. In these instances, the break DC that is used is always the lowest one of the materials. The to hit bonus/penalty is determined by the material used for the haft or grip, and the damage bonus/penalty is determined by the material of the head or blade. Bone and wood hafts don't incur any penalty on to-hits. (There's some stickiness here with some weapon combinations, but I'll keep my eye out for bizarre and absurd ones.)
Break DC's are: material hardness + masterwork bonus + magical bonus (if any). Masterwork adds a +1 bonus to the break DC. Material hardnesses are:
Wood: 5
Bone: 6
Stone: 8
Bronze: 9
Iron/Steel: 10
My main goal here is to produce a system that makes players value a good weapon, makes it so they have to replace them every once in awhile, and that a magic weapon doesn't automatically end the "weapon breakage" game. And doesn't produce a lot of extra work for me. :D
Any comments or criticisms?
Adamantyr
I value an almost frenetic pace to my combats. It keeps the tension higher. The more rules I include, the clunkier the combat gets. I'll sacrifice a degree of detail for speed any day.
Originally posted by mekillot
Although your rules seem fair, it seems like the added complexity is not worth the payoff. My opinion is that the more you can reduce the mechanics of the game the more you can emphasize the story elements.
I value an almost frenetic pace to my combats. It keeps the tension higher. The more rules I include, the clunkier the combat gets. I'll sacrifice a degree of detail for speed any day.
I certainly don't dispute that. However, if you want the added complexity of weapon breakage, you're pretty much going to have to deal with some added time. Fortunately rolling 1's happens as often as 20's.
You could, I agree, make completely subjective and arbitrary decisions. If you're using FUDGE, it's the only way to go. But with D&D I personally like having some structure to rely on over making a subjective call every time.
Normal D&D doesn't have weapon breakage, except for deliberate attempts with sundering attacks, and that's cool. But with Dark Sun, I'm going for something different from the norm. Plus I don't intend the campaign to be a hackfest with nothing else going on.
Adamantyr
When you roll a natural 20 on your attack roll, you hit the target with great force. You then roll again to confirm crit. If you miss, you still hit the target, but not real good, so you don't crit, and you risk breaking the weapon! Roll a strength check against the break DC of the weapon, and hope to roll low. Of course, strong characters have a greater chance of accidentaly breaking their weapons on impact.
How about this...
Instead of making it a natural 20, I think a natural 1 would be preferable, simply because 20's are supposed to be good luck and desireable, while 1's are not, and changing that tends to get some players irked.
Rather than a strength check, you could use the regular weapon breakage rules (hardness and hp) and just roll damage against their own weapon. Metal, Dasl, and Agafari are immune to this rule.