What is the best Druid weapon?

[CyberThread]

So you get club, dagger, dart, quarterstaff, scimitar, sickle, shortspear, sling, and spear.


Of all these items, does it come down to , carry a spear for poking, a club for enchanted smacking, and well... sling sucks.. so we will just ignore the sling.

[eggynack]

Why would I ignore the sling? Slings are cool. You get to be somewhere that isn't close to the enemy, behind your friendly riding dog, and shoot bullet after bullet into your mighty entangles and impeding stones. It's also ridiculously cheap, offering any sort of ranged potential for only the cost of the bullets you shoot, if that. After that, the melee half divides into quarterstaffs or spears. The noble quarterstaff benefits both from being infinitely cheap, and from shillelagh based potency, while spears benefit from being marginally more damaging when not enchanted. I'm inclined to think that the spear makes for a superior option, because casting a spell for quarterstaff use just seems like a waste. Still, after you buy a spear, getting the other two weapons doesn't hurt your gold at all, so you should probably just get all three. If I had to choose one though, it'd probably be the sling.

[Erik Vale]

Yes, go for the infinite ammo ranged weapon.

Personally I go scimitar or spear, use the spells for something more useful than bashing harder.

[Asteron]

What about your bear hands?

Before that becomes an option, I prefer the scimitar or spear...

[Slipperychicken]

sling sucks.. so we will just ignore the sling.

It's dirt cheap, adds Strength to damage, and has a 50ft range increment, so that can be good at level 1 before you have multiple attacks, and long before you can afford a composite bow (which druids aren't even proficient with), or any sort of real ranged weapon like a javelin.

[Rebel7284]

Really depends on the level.

At high levels, a persisted Stormrage gives you a 100ft 10d6 attack all day. =)

At low levels, yeah, entangle + sling is great.

In between, if you actually need to attack, there is always claw/claw/bite, possibly with unarmed strike iteratives after.

[Darrin]

Feather Token: Tree.

Wildshape into something with wings, fly above your opponent, let him know it's "Arbor Day". 20d6 falling object damage.

[eggynack]

Adds strength to damage
I think that this one may be more of a disadvantage than an advantage, given the fact that strength is the dumpiest of the druid's dump stats. However, even low damage is damage, and damage is better than no damage, if that's the choice being made.

[Coidzor]

Slings are free. Clubs are free. Quarterstaves are free.

Slings are essentially long strips of leather. This is quite useful for more than just slinging rocks and bullets at your foes or things you want to break.

Granted, hardly anyone puts points into Use Rope and the RAW doesn't actually cover lashings (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lashing_%28ropework%29), IIRC, unless they included something in Races of the Wild or It's Wet Outside that I missed, but that basically allows you to make quite a variety of things, including some very useful structures (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pioneering_%28Scouting%29).

[Slipperychicken]

Granted, hardly anyone puts points into Use Rope and the RAW doesn't actually cover lashings, IIRC, unless they included something in Races of the Wild or It's Wet Outside that I missed, but that basically allows you to make quite a variety of things, including some very useful structures.

Lashing with a sling would probably be an improvised whip.

[Vaz]

Q'Staff.

Spikes, Entangling Staff, Spellstaff, Shillelagh.

Make one end a +1 Defending Spear. Max out your UMD. Turn it into a Runestaff. Add Greater Magic Weapon, Greater Mighty Wallop, Wraithstrike to your spells known. This allows you to GMW it, granting a free +5 to your AC. Greater Magic Armour and with Barkskin already on your self, it's sorted.

Stat up the other end. Add spells to your staff (not as Runestaff, but as charges).

Add wand chambers to either end.

For when you want to be a beatstick, literally. Obviously, it works best if you swap Wild Shape for something, such as the Swift and Deadly Hunter variant.

[eggynack]

For when you want to be a beatstick, literally. Obviously, it works best if you swap Wild Shape for something, such as the Swift and Deadly Hunter variant.
I rather disagree on this count. The stuff you get from deadly hunter is either worse than what you get from wild shape, like the fast movement and favored enemy, redundant on a druid, like track, or easily purchasable, like the monk AC bonus. You'd be better off using an ape-type animal, with their hand having abilities. You could even use something like a dragonborn anthropomorphic bat to pick up the fifth fangshields druid substitution level, and wield your quarterstaff as a handed bear of some variety. I don't think that deadly hunter is ever really the answer, unless the question is, "How can I nerf or otherwise simplify my druid."

[TrueJordan]

Feather Token: Tree.

Wildshape into something with wings, fly above your opponent, let him know it's "Arbor Day". 20d6 falling object damage.

You sir, are too clever by half.

EDIT: Don't forget to take the token off first, put it on the ground, then pick it up. Otherwise, it becomes part of your body. Or something.

Also, where'd you get 20d6 from? Does it weigh 4000 pounds? I'd have thought more.

That said, I prefer quarterstaff until you can break the game by, you know, being a druid. It'll start somewhere 'round level 7. It'll be fun. Give in.

[Coidzor]

Lashing with a sling would probably be an improvised whip.

Not *that* kind of (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L_6mQi9773g)lashing (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lashing_%28ropework%29). :smalltongue:

[Spuddles]

Gore or bite tend to be best, if only because of DR and not needing pounce. Pounce forma underperform a little, imo, because of 3/4 BAB on a druid.

Sling + magic stones is great vs skeletons at levels 1-3.

Produce Flame (ranged) touch attacks, combined with extend spell, a rod of lesser empower spell and a ring of mystic fire are awesome.


Feather Token: Tree.

Wildshape into something with wings, fly above your opponent, let him know it's "Arbor Day". 20d6 falling object damage.

Odds your opponent will be under your feather when you drop it?

[Vaz]

I rather disagree on this count. The stuff you get from deadly hunter is either worse than what you get from wild shape, like the fast movement and favored enemy, redundant on a druid, like track, or easily purchasable, like the monk AC bonus. You'd be better off using an ape-type animal, with their hand having abilities. You could even use something like a dragonborn anthropomorphic bat to pick up the fifth fangshields druid substitution level, and wield your quarterstaff as a handed bear of some variety. I don't think that deadly hunter is ever really the answer, unless the question is, "How can I nerf or otherwise simplify my druid."

I meant as in if you were going for a weapon, rather than optimizing the Druid. Only way I can think of optimizing the Druid is by Planar Shepherd.

I meant it more in the sense that if you were truly going to optimize your Druid weapon, then it works best in being in a form in which you can use it. However, I did forget about Dire Ape/Legendary Ape form to use the weapons from it.

[eggynack]

I meant as in if you were going for a weapon, rather than optimizing the Druid. Only way I can think of optimizing the Druid is by Planar Shepherd.

I meant it more in the sense that if you were truly going to optimize your Druid weapon, then it works best in being in a form in which you can use it. However, I did forget about Dire Ape/Legendary Ape form to use the weapons from it.
My main point is just that it takes away really good stuff and also doesn't give anything that's worth having. I don't think that deadly hunter is good for optimizing weapon use, because I also don't think it's good for anything else. I get that all roads lead to planar shepherds and pun-puns, but stating that ridding yourself of wild shape is an obvious path to weapon superiority just seems inaccurate. Also, fangshields druid substitution levels are cool. The fifth level one in particular is an obvious must-take on any non-humanoid.

[Vaz]

Yup, no complaints from me on that one.

[Biffoniacus_Furiou]

You don't need to be making attacks before you get wild shape. If the opponent is at a distance, Produce Flame or (Extended) Creeping Cold or Splinterbolt or Icelance will do the trick. Or Kelpstrand if they're using wings to fly. If you can get close to the opponent, Enrage Animal on your animal companion and let it do the work while you concentrate. Even at 1st level I'd get a wooden tower shield and ignore the -12 to attack rolls because you can just Enrage Animal every fight.

If you want to be able to make attacks yourself, particularly ranged attacks, make the character a Wild Elf or a Snow Elf for the elf weapon proficiencies.

[Darrin]

Also, where'd you get 20d6 from? Does it weigh 4000 pounds? I'd have thought more.


Falling object damage caps at 20d6 as per the Rules Compendium. (In Core, damage by weight caps at 20d6, but damage by height is uncapped.)

I didn't work out the math, so I'm just guessing a 60' tree weighs 4000 lbs.



Odds your opponent will be under your feather when you drop it?

100%. In the Core rules, if you drop an object above a particular square, it drops straight down. There's no rule that allows the object or target to move laterally.

If you have Heroes of Battle, then you can use the Aerial Bombardment rules to give the target a Ref save DC 15 to avoid.

[eggynack]

You don't need to be making attacks before you get wild shape. If the opponent is at a distance, Produce Flame or (Extended) Creeping Cold or Splinterbolt or Icelance will do the trick. Or Kelpstrand if they're using wings to fly. If you can get close to the opponent, Enrage Animal on your animal companion and let it do the work while you concentrate. Even at 1st level I'd get a wooden tower shield and ignore the -12 to attack rolls because you can just Enrage Animal every fight.

If you want to be able to make attacks yourself, particularly ranged attacks, make the character a Wild Elf or a Snow Elf for the elf weapon proficiencies.
But all of those things take daily resources (or build resources, in the case of the elves) while simply shooting sling bullets at something takes no resources at all. When I'm in the first couple of levels, I'm not going to want to shoot spells at every problem in every single round, because that'd be crazy. Sometimes, you just want to deal some incidental damage at no cost.

[Spuddles]

Level 1 druid spell called aspect of the wolf. Really good for ignoring your physical stats early on. Cant cast in it, but has 50ft speed and a bite attack.

[Coidzor]

I got ~0.75 g/cm3 for the density of oak from google.

~0.75 (g / cm3) = ~46.8209704 pounds per (cubic foot)

Pi *r^2 = area of a circle. 5' diameter. 2.5' = r. 60' tall trunk.

2.5*2.5*Pi*60 = ~1178.0972451 cubic feet.

~1178.0972451 cubic feet * ~46.8209704 pounds per (cubic foot) = ~55159.6562411 pounds.

Gross simplification, as it assumes that the mass of the limbs and root system are only enough to offset the tapering of the trunk towards the top, but should give us the ballpark, I believe. So unless I did the math wrong or got a grossly inaccurate starting density, it seems like 4000 pounds is easily exceeded.

[Darrin]

~1178.0972451 cubic feet * ~46.8209704 pounds per (cubic foot) = ~55159.6562411 pounds.


Thank you! I owe you a pi(e).

Care to tackle the swan boat?

[CrazyYanmega]

I got ~0.75 g/cm3 for the density of oak from google.

~0.75 (g / cm3) = ~46.8209704 pounds per (cubic foot)

Pi *r^2 = area of a circle. 5' diameter. 2.5' = r. 60' tall trunk.

2.5*2.5*Pi*60 = ~1178.0972451 cubic feet.

~1178.0972451 cubic feet * ~46.8209704 pounds per (cubic foot) = ~55159.6562411 pounds.

Gross simplification, as it assumes that the mass of the limbs and root system are only enough to offset the tapering of the trunk towards the top, but should give us the ballpark, I believe. So unless I did the math wrong or got a grossly inaccurate starting density, it seems like 4000 pounds is easily exceeded.

Coidzor, I've been meaning to ask this for a while: Do you work for Mythbusters?

[TrueJordan]

Falling object damage caps at 20d6 as per the Rules Compendium. (In Core, damage by weight caps at 20d6, but damage by height is uncapped.)

I didn't work out the math, so I'm just guessing a 60' tree weighs 4000 lbs.



100%. In the Core rules, if you drop an object above a particular square, it drops straight down. There's no rule that allows the object or target to move laterally.

If you have Heroes of Battle, then you can use the Aerial Bombardment rules to give the target a Ref save DC 15 to avoid.

As far as I'm aware, you have that backwards, the weight doesn't ever cap while height does.
For each 200 pounds of an object's weight, the object deals 1d6 points of damage, provided it falls at least 10 feet. Distance also comes into play, adding an additional 1d6 points of damage for every 10-foot increment it falls beyond the first (to a maximum of 20d6 points of damage).


I got ~0.75 g/cm3 for the density of oak from google.

~0.75 (g / cm3) = ~46.8209704 pounds per (cubic foot)

Pi *r^2 = area of a circle. 5' diameter. 2.5' = r. 60' tall trunk.

2.5*2.5*Pi*60 = ~1178.0972451 cubic feet.

~1178.0972451 cubic feet * ~46.8209704 pounds per (cubic foot) = ~55159.6562411 pounds.

Gross simplification, as it assumes that the mass of the limbs and root system are only enough to offset the tapering of the trunk towards the top, but should give us the ballpark, I believe. So unless I did the math wrong or got a grossly inaccurate starting density, it seems like 4000 pounds is easily exceeded.

Wow. Nicely done, although this is just for the log portion of the tree, it'd probably be more for the whole thing since it has 40' worth of branches... but still. You're awesome.

Also might be completely useless to mention an anchor, nowadays weighs about 2500 pounds at the very least, and it's pretty impossible to tell how big the boat is, or of what material it's made of, but if it could hold eight 9' horses, it's probably pretty sizable. Doubt it's any heavier than a tree, though.

[TrueJordan]

What about this underused spell? http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/treeShape.htm

Turn into a bird, fly above them, and 'assume the shape of a tree'. Better yet, turn into rhino, or any number of heavy animals of which I have no time to look up but are undoubtably heavy?

Wait, no, you can't turn directly from a bird to another shape, can you? Either way, you can still become a Large tree, which means at least 10 feet in diameter... wonder if it's even bigger and heavier than the tokened one?

You may have stumbled upon something big, yo.

'How to take out any one monster with a level 6 druid...' Nice.

[Darrin]

As far as I'm aware, you have that backwards, the weight doesn't ever cap while height does.


Whoops. Yep, going from memory, got it backwards.

So... 55,000 lbs dropped from 200' = 295d6 in Core.



Also might be completely useless to mention an anchor, nowadays weighs about 2500 pounds at the very least, and it's pretty impossible to tell how big the boat is, or of what material it's made of, but if it could hold eight 9' horses, it's probably pretty sizable. Doubt it's any heavier than a tree, though.

Using Coidzor's 46.82 lbs per cubic foot, 8 large creatures is either 20' x 40' or 10' x 80', a horizontal deck that's only one inch thick weighs... 800 x 0.083 x 46.82 = 3108 lbs. So just put any kind of hull around that, and you're over 4000 lbs easypeasy.

[Coidzor]

Thank you! I owe you a pi(e).

Care to tackle the swan boat?

De nada, it's a gross oversimplification, after all. Thankfully we're not really particularly interested in the specific number, or the difference that leaves and bark and the difference between roots, branches, and the main trunk. XD

Not really sure how one would. I think you could probably come up with the weight of a raft that would fit 8 horses or 32 humans arranged in a rectangular or diamond/ellipse sort of shape, but not knowing if it's flat bottomed or has a keel or what sort of shape it has or what it's made out of makes it a lot of guess-work. Assuming that it's all just wood and paint and lacks anything like a mast or sails just leaves what type of wood to be selected.

I'm thinking it'd probably count as a larger boat since it's not exactly a small rowboat or dinghy, so that would tend to make the wood used heavier from what I understand. I've only looked over a couple of sources so far, but it mostly suggests that either White Oak or Spruce would be used, though ideally you'd have a more rot resistant wood for the hull planking and another for the actual critical support pieces.

I think the best I could do would be to arbitrarily declare it to be about one plank thick on all sides and then approximate an open rectangular box of sufficient volume to accomodate 8 horses. I'm thinking 2 columns of 4 horses is the best fit. Since I'm being as dirty as possible, we'll just assume that the boat is thusly 20' by 40' by 5'.

With a bit more I could instead say that, say, the average horse is X long, of Y width and they need space equal to another two horses between each horse and 1 horse width from the sides and front of the boat, and 14.2 hands tall and half of that'll be beneath the waterline so I only need about 3/4 the height of the horse for the sides of the boat.

edit: 1 horse length (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horse_length) is ~8 feet and is a standard unit, at least. Let's add 2 feet in front and behind each horse for 4 feet between horses and 2 feet between horses' fronts/backs and the front and back of the boat. I'm not finding a way to determine a decent width for a horse. From what I recall of having been around them, they're a bit wider than a broad-shouldered human man, so I'd guess 4-5 feet. So plug in 4 there for a lower estimate and say they need just 2 feet between their sides and the sides of the boat and just one horse space between their sides and the side of another horse. So, hell, let's say that this is 8*4 +2*2 + 3*2 = 4 + 32 +6 = 42 feet long and 2*2+4*3 = 4 + 12 = 16 feet wide. So saved about 4 feet on width and gained 2 feet on length, and that's with a probably too close distance of 2 feet between the front of one horse and the business end of another horse(then again, the problem with horses is that both ends are dangerous and they're cunning inbetween. ...or something).

14.2 hands translates to roughly 4.73333333 feet (4 feet 8 & 51⁄64 inches). I'm going to go ahead and assume that only half of their height is covered by the boat though. Then again, I see that it comes out to be about 2.36666667 feet (2 feet 413⁄32 inches). So I say screw it and just assume the sides are around 3 feet or so.

I'd estimate it's somewhere between half an inch and 2 inches for the planks, so I'm going to go ahead and choose 1 inch since I've already put far too much time into this and don't want to have to do the doublechecking necessary, especially since I got kicked off the computer and am coming back to this after reading for half an hour... So that's 2 sides with dimensions 1 inch by 3 feet by 42 feet for the sides, 2 sides with dimensions 1 inch by 3 feet by 16 feet for the front and back, and a bottom with dimensions of 1 inch by 42 feet by 16 feet.

(1/12 * 3 * 42) + (1/12 * 3 * 16) + (1/12 * 42 * 16) = ~70.5 cubic feet of whatever wood.

70.5 * whatever wood density (http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/wood-density-d_40.html) = poundage

I'm going to plug in 40 for Spruce and 50 for Oak. 2820 for the one and 3525 for the other. So if the box was thicker, it'd probably exceed the 4000 pound mark, and if I added in something for the acoutrements rather than assuming they help make up for making it into a box shape that'd probably help too.

Aside from the distance between the front and back of the horses and the thickness of the sides and bottom, I'm reasonably confident that I'm somewhere in the right ballpark as far as simplifying it down to a box, though it may or may not have half or a quarter of a "lid" too.


Coidzor, I've been meaning to ask this for a while: Do you work for Mythbusters?

:smallconfused: I just have access to google and seeing how big the numbers actually are for things related to D&D sometimes.

[Spuddles]

Is that dry or wet density for oak? Because if it's the dry density, a living tree would be considerably heavier.

[Piggy Knowles]

Q'Staff.

Spikes, Entangling Staff, Spellstaff, Shillelagh.

Make one end a +1 Defending Spear. Max out your UMD. Turn it into a Runestaff. Add Greater Magic Weapon, Greater Mighty Wallop, Wraithstrike to your spells known. This allows you to GMW it, granting a free +5 to your AC. Greater Magic Armour and with Barkskin already on your self, it's sorted.

Stat up the other end. Add spells to your staff (not as Runestaff, but as charges).

Add wand chambers to either end.

For when you want to be a beatstick, literally. Obviously, it works best if you swap Wild Shape for something, such as the Swift and Deadly Hunter variant.

This, except that it's even better when you keep wild shape and carry around your beatstick as a legendary ape.

[Coidzor]

Is that dry or wet density for oak? Because if it's the dry density, a living tree would be considerably heavier.

Point. From the figures I'm seeing, it seems to be the dry density.

[TrueJordan]

Point. From the figures I'm seeing, it seems to be the dry density.

Well, according to Tipler, Paul A. Physics for Scientists and Engineers. 3rd Edition., the density for dry oak wood is 600-900 kg/m^3, which averages to what you said. But live oak would way far more, presumably. Still, for our purposes, I think 55k/ 295d6 or 275d6 from just 10 feet up is quite enough.

Any guesses on 'Tree Shape', Coid?

[georgie_leech]

Well, according to Tipler, Paul A. Physics for Scientists and Engineers. 3rd Edition., the density for dry oak wood is 600-900 kg/m^3, which averages to what you said. But live oak would way far more, presumably. Still, for our purposes, I think 55k/ 295d6 or 275d6 from just 10 feet up is quite enough.

Any guesses on 'Tree Shape', Coid?

I don't know about "far more;" the majority of the rest of the weight would be water, which is 1000 kg/cubic metre. It's mostly academic though, as we're already at the point where our damage is "Enough"d6 either way.

[TrueJordan]

I don't know about "far more;" the majority of the rest of the weight would be water, which is 1000 kg/cubic metre. It's mostly academic though, as we're already at the point where our damage is "Enough"d6 either way.

Actually, you made me realize that wet wood, while heavier than dry, my very well be less dense. Looking it up... Whoa. It says on this site, http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/weigt-wood-d_821.html that the density for fresh oak is between 61 and 64... lb/ft^3. Converting that to tree weight using coid's formula (averaging 62.5) of 62.5*1178.0972451 it comes to... 73631.08 pounds, and that's not including branches, or 368d6 (averaging 1287 damage. Whoa.).

But wait, can that be? A tree that weighs about 37 tons? True, it's fairly tall and fairly wide, but... I wonder what the average tree weight is.

EDIT: I wondered into Google, and he gave me this nice Arborist post: http://arbtalk.co.uk/forum/general-chat/8418-how-much-does-tree-weigh.html#post151609)

[Coidzor]

Well, according to Tipler, Paul A. Physics for Scientists and Engineers. 3rd Edition., the density for dry oak wood is 600-900 kg/m^3, which averages to what you said. But live oak would way far more, presumably. Still, for our purposes, I think 55k/ 295d6 or 275d6 from just 10 feet up is quite enough.

Any guesses on 'Tree Shape', Coid?

Well, I'm not exactly any kind of expert with these sorts of things, as I said. But since you're asking... :smalltongue:

Since it's Large, that gives it a fairly likely limitation of 8-16 feet for its height. The living version has a span of its limbs of roughly the same size, IIRC. The dead version has few limbs so it's probably even closer to just assuming a cylinder for it. Or maybe a cylinder and a cone. XD

As I mentioned earlier though, I'm not sure how you'd be able to account for the limbs and leaves and roots in the abstract.

So the main difficulty would be in determining the diameter of the trunk.

You could probably extrapolate from the Tree Token though, I suppose. (5-foot diameter trunk, 60-foot height, 40-foot top diameter... which I guess would suggest that the limbs are ~2/3 the diameter of the height of the tree, so 16/3' to 32/3' span, depending upon whether the tree is on the small end or large end. Or 24/3' or 8' for the "average" tree height of 12 feet.)

So... 5/60 = x/12

60x/12 = 5*60 = 300

60x*12 = 300*12

...I get the feeling I'm crossing some wires here...
720x = 3600
72x = 360
x = 360/72
x = 5

So that's another diameter of 5 feet?

...Yeah, definitely crossing some wires here...

Let's... try that again. 5 feet is to 60 feet as X feet is to 12 feet.

60/5 = 12/x
60 = 60/x
60x = 60
x = 60/60
x = 1

For the minimum, 5 feet is to 60 feet as X feet is to 8 feet.

60/5 = 8/x
60 = 40/x
60x = 40
x = 40/60
x = 2/3'

For the maximum, 5 feet is to 60 feet as X feet is to 16 feet.
60/5 = 16/x
60 = 80/x
x = 80/60
x = 1-1/3' or 4/3'


So 1' diameter. that's .5*.5*12 = 12/4 = the volume of the tree. So... 3 cubic feet.

Minimum: 1/3 * 1/3 * 8 = 8/9 = ~0.88888888888 cubic feet.
Maximum: 2/3 * 2/3 * 16 = 64/9 = ~7.11111111111 cubic feet.

Then all you need to do is plug in your density. Heaviest wood I see is the 83 pounds/ft^3 for Ebony/Lignum Vitae. So on the high end that's ~7.11111 * 83 = ~590.222222222 pounds. The lightest I see is Balsa wood at 7 pounds/ft^3, so on the low end that's ~0.8888888888 * 7 = ~6.2222222216 pounds.

Midrange as a dead oak would be about 3 cubic feet * ~46(IIRC my earlier post) = ~138 pounds.


Actually, you made me realize that wet wood, while heavier than dry, my very well be less dense. Looking it up... Whoa. It says on this site, http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/weigt-wood-d_821.html that the density for fresh oak is between 61 and 64... lb/ft^3. Converting that to tree weight using coid's formula (averaging 62.5) of 62.5*1178.0972451 it comes to... 73631.08 pounds, and that's not including branches, or 368d6 (averaging 1287 damage. Whoa.).

But wait, can that be? A tree that weighs about 37 tons? True, it's fairly tall and fairly wide, but... I wonder what the average tree weight is.

Well, I could have done the math wrong or we could be using grossly wrong densities. So that's two potential points of error I can see just from here. Considering I managed to get a 5 when the answer was 1 with my last bout of armchair calculations, the chances of my making a math error are fairly good. :/

A tree trunk's not going to be a perfect cylinder, either, since there's always going to be some tapering going on towards the top if nothing else. I'm only assuming a cylinder for ease of calculation. Also because I hope that way I'll also partially account for the limbs.

Edit: That one ton per cubic meter would've simplified things. XD

edit 2: Wow. *facepalm*

Forgot the Pi part of Pi*r^2

So that's 3*pi, .88888888888 * pi, and 7.11111111111 * pi.

~2.79252680316 cubic feet for the 8' tall tree. * 7 = ~19.5476876221 pounds
~9.42477796077 cubic feet for the 12' tall tree. * 46 = ~433.539786195 pounds
~22.3402144255 cubic feet for the 16' tall tree. * 83 = ~1854.23779732 pounds

*facepalm*

[TrueJordan]

Well, I'm not exactly any kind of expert with these sorts of things, as I said. But since you're asking... :smalltongue:

Since it's Large, that gives it a fairly likely limitation of 8-16 feet for its height. The living version has a span of its limbs of roughly the same size, IIRC. The dead version has few limbs so it's probably even closer to just assuming a cylinder for it. Or maybe a cylinder and a cone. XD

As I mentioned earlier though, I'm not sure how you'd be able to account for the limbs and leaves and roots in the abstract.

So the main difficulty would be in determining the diameter of the trunk.

You could probably extrapolate from the Tree Token though, I suppose. (5-foot diameter trunk, 60-foot height, 40-foot top diameter... which I guess would suggest that the limbs are ~2/3 the diameter of the height of the tree, so 16/3' to 32/3' span, depending upon whether the tree is on the small end or large end. Or 24/3' or 8' for the "average" tree height of 12 feet.)

So... 5/60 = x/12

60x/12 = 5*60 = 300

60x*12 = 300*12

...I get the feeling I'm crossing some wires here...
720x = 3600
72x = 360
x = 360/72
x = 5

So that's another diameter of 5 feet?

...Yeah, definitely crossing some wires here...

Let's... try that again. 5 feet is to 60 feet as X feet is to 12 feet.

60/5 = 12/x
60 = 60/x
60x = 60
x = 60/60
x = 1

For the minimum, 5 feet is to 60 feet as X feet is to 8 feet.

60/5 = 8/x
60 = 40/x
60x = 40
x = 40/60
x = 2/3'

For the maximum, 5 feet is to 60 feet as X feet is to 16 feet.
60/5 = 16/x
60 = 80/x
x = 80/60
x = 1-1/3' or 4/3'


So 1' diameter. that's .5*.5*12 = 12/4 = the volume of the tree. So... 3 cubic feet.

Minimum: 1/3 * 1/3 * 8 = 8/9 = ~0.88888888888 cubic feet.
Maximum: 2/3 * 2/3 * 16 = 64/9 = ~7.11111111111 cubic feet.

Then all you need to do is plug in your density. Heaviest wood I see is the 83 pounds/ft^3 for Ebony/Lignum Vitae. So on the high end that's ~7.11111 * 83 = ~590.222222222 pounds. The lightest I see is Balsa wood at 7 pounds/ft^3, so on the low end that's ~0.8888888888 * 7 = ~6.2222222216 pounds.

Midrange as a dead oak would be about 3 cubic feet * ~46(IIRC my earlier post) = ~138 pounds.



Well, I could have done the math wrong or we could be using grossly wrong densities. So that's two potential points of error I can see just from here. Considering I managed to get a 5 when the answer was 1 with my last bout of armchair calculations, the chances of my making a math error are fairly good. :/

A tree trunk's not going to be a perfect cylinder, either, since there's always going to be some tapering going on towards the top if nothing else. I'm only assuming a cylinder for ease of calculation.



Well, if we don't assume that it has anything to do with the token except that it's oak and that's what we're working with, let's look at the SRD table chart thing for size categories: http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/movementPositionAndDistance.htm#bigandLittleCreatu resInCombat
So disregarding weight, since it doesn't really tell us much, the height is 10 ft and the width is 10 ft (I assume the diameter so the very edges of this somehow perfectly circular tree are touching the corners of the square) and we have one mighty weird looking tree. But that aside, working with the formula above, we get 5 for R and 10 for height, and the same 62.5 pounds for density, that's 5*5*10*pi*62.5,
I got 49087 pounds. Again, that seems like a lot. But this time the trunk was twice as wide as the other one even though it was a sixth of the height.

I doubt you made a math error, you basically did area of circle*density, which made sense when I started typing this sentence, but now I'm thinking we should try for a cylinder, and I feel like it shouldn't make a difference, but how to find the area has escaped me... Formula: pi*h*r^2
which is what we goddam did before. If we did something wrong, aside from assuming that a tree is a cylinder, I don't know what it is.

Sound good?

[Spuddles]

I don't know about "far more;" the majority of the rest of the weight would be water, which is 1000 kg/cubic metre. It's mostly academic though, as we're already at the point where our damage is "Enough"d6 either way.

Well, going by the 0.75g/cm3 previously posted, water being 1g/cm3, then you're looking at upwards of a 20% increase in weight.

[CyberThread]

So your saying, the best weapon a Druid has , are the Tree's?

[georgie_leech]

Edit: That one ton per cubic meter would've simplified things. XD

Heh, yeah, isn't the Metric system great? A Kg is defined as the mass of a litre of water, which 10cmX10cmX10cm, so a cubic metre of water works out to a ton. Isn't it nice when units come together so nicely?

[TrueJordan]

So your saying, the best weapon a Druid has , are the Tree's?

Anyone with flying, really. So that's Druid 5, Wizard 5, or Cleric if he has the travel domain 5. Or any non-core races or classes I don't know about.
Though it should be noted that on the chart, apparently colossal and colossal+ (whatever the hell that is) guys can weigh over 125 tons, which is like, several trees. But you can probably easily take care of them with a couple of 400 shekel trees that you can buy in any shop.

[Coidzor]

Well, if we don't assume that it has anything to do with the token except that it's oak and that's what we're working with, let's look at the SRD table chart thing for size categories: http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/movementPositionAndDistance.htm#bigandLittleCreatu resInCombat
So disregarding weight, since it doesn't really tell us much, the height is 10 ft and the width is 10 ft (I assume the diameter so the very edges of this somehow perfectly circular tree are touching the corners of the square) and we have one mighty weird looking tree. But that aside, working with the formula above, we get 5 for R and 10 for height, and the same 62.5 pounds for density, that's 5*5*10*pi*62.5,
I got 49087 pounds. Again, that seems like a lot. But this time the trunk was twice as wide as the other one even though it was a sixth of the height.

Well, that's one thick tree, so of course it's going to weigh a lot. XD


I doubt you made a math error, you basically did area of circle*density, which made sense when I started typing this sentence, but now I'm thinking we should try for a cylinder, and I feel like it shouldn't make a difference, but how to find the area has escaped me... Formula: pi*h*r^2
which is what we goddam did before. If we did something wrong, aside from assuming that a tree is a cylinder, I don't know what it is.

Sound good?

Well, in the bad math here spoiler I definitely did make some errors, where I had the fractions upside down. I was *intending* to solve for a cylinder, but I just realized I forgot to multiple those values by pi. So I just did radius^2*height. Whee! XD

So all of the errors! Though at least the latter ones seem to have just been from leaving out a step which we can throw in at the end.



So 1' diameter. that's .5*.5*12 = 12/4 = the volume of the tree. So... 3 cubic feet.

Minimum: 1/3 * 1/3 * 8 = 8/9 = ~0.88888888888 cubic feet.
Maximum: 2/3 * 2/3 * 16 = 64/9 = ~7.11111111111 cubic feet.

So that's 3*pi, .88888888888 * pi, and 7.11111111111 * pi.

~2.79252680316 cubic feet for the 8' tall tree. * 7 = ~19.5476876221 pounds
~9.42477796077 cubic feet for the 12' tall tree. * 46 = ~433.539786195 pounds
~22.3402144255 cubic feet for the 16' tall tree. * 83 = ~1854.23779732 pounds

*facepalm*


So your saying, the best weapon a Druid has , are the Tree's?

Makes sense. XD

[TrueJordan]

But again, bro, you're basing this off the tree from the token, even though it says large, and a large thing is tenish by tenish, so the diameter probably is more than two.

All that said, it's been a pleasure and an honor to have you help figure out the easiest way to take out a great gold wyrm dragon with a level 5 spellcaster, costing only 400 gold. *salute*

[Coidzor]

But again, bro, you're basing this off the tree from the token, even though it says large, and a large thing is tenish by tenish, so the diameter probably is more than two.

All that said, it's been a pleasure and an honor to have you help figure out the easiest way to take out a great gold wyrm dragon with a level 5 spellcaster, costing only 400 gold. *salute*

The space it occupies is 10*10, but, well, humans aren't 5*5 circles and halfings definitely aren't 5*5 circles or 2.5*2.5 circles, so we shouldn't assume that the tree's trunk takes up all of that space perfectly, either.

In the chart for sizes (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/movementPositionAndDistance.htm#bigandLittleCreatu resInCombat), they give 8-16 feet as the height (or length) of a Large creature and the size of a Large object is the same as a Large creature, basically (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/equipment/weapons.htm#weaponSize)(though I'm sure it's spelled out more explicitly somewhere else).

So there's basically a few ways of finding the diameter of the trunk, extrapolating from another source within the rules using what we can find about how tall a Large tree would be indicated to be, finding a real world source for how wide a tree of that height would be, or determining how wide the tree would have to be to take up enough of its 4 squares to count as large.

We may have stumbled upon a realization that the size category of a tree is independent of actual height but instead based upon the thickness of its trunk by RAW or something else. :smallconfused: I dunno.