Damaging Objects (Pathfinder 1st edition)

[RiTz21]

Energy Attacks
Energy attacks deal half damage to most objects. Divide the damage by 2 before applying the object’s hardness. Some energy types might be particularly effective against certain objects, subject to GM discretion. For example, fire might do full damage against parchment, cloth, and other objects that burn easily. Sonic might do full damage against glass and crystal objects

Greetings,

If a spell caster sends a Fireball in a room, where a BOOK is laid out on a wooden table, the table & book would take the fireball damage (probably 100% of it and not even half).

In any case, what happens to the Book and table if the Fireball is converted into a "cold" ball (ie. dealing cold damage). Does Cold even have an effect on objects like books and wood?

Was there any clarifications on this Energy Attack vs Objects rule?

THANKS for your help!

[Psyren]

There is a rule for this, but it is closer to a guideline and will require some judgment calls from you. CRB 173:


Smashing An Object
...
Energy Attacks

Energy attacks deal half damage to most objects. Divide the damage by 2 before applying the object’s hardness. Some energy types might be particularly effective against certain objects, subject to GM discretion. For example, fire might do full damage against parchment, cloth, and other objects that burn easily. Sonic might do full damage against glass and crystal objects.
...
Vulnerability to Certain Attacks

Certain attacks are especially successful against some objects. In such cases, attacks deal double their normal damage and may ignore the object’s hardness.

Basically, if it makes sense for an energy type to do full damage to an object, like fire vs wood or paper, you do that. If it doesn't, like cold and paper, you don't. If it makes sense that an object would take even more damage than full, like paper soaked in oil, you do that.

There's also the "Ineffective Weapons" rule - while it talks about weapons it could apply to other forms of attack. For example, if you're trying to use cold damage to freeze your way through a wall of ice, your GM can rule that it's a waste of time.

[RiTz21]

There is a rule for this, but it is closer to a guideline and will require some judgment calls from you. CRB 173:


Yes I am aware of the {vague} rule - I did quote it in my initial post.

I was hoping for a better clarification then just a 'Judgment call' on this topic.. :(

R

[Saint-Just]

Not sure how hrlpful you would consider 3.5 content, but in many cases there specific examples of dubiously effective energy attacks doing quarter damage against the objects instead of half. Examples include acid vs ice in Dungeonscape and cold (!) against wood in Stormwrack.

[Psyren]

Yes I am aware of the {vague} rule - I did quote it in my initial post.

I was hoping for a better clarification then just a 'Judgment call' on this topic.. :(

R

You did, but I wanted to quote the whole thing as well as emphasize the important parts because it supported my answer.

I believe that providing more detail than this guideline is counterproductive. There are hundreds if not thousands of materials that objects can be made out of even in our world, never mind a fantasy world that has all kinds of fictional ones. Some are easy to define, like the effect fire has on wood or paper - but some however might require a bit more thought, like the effect of acid on stone, fire on gold, or cold on leather. Litigating all those permutations and determining whether half damage, full damage or double damage is appropriate for each one could fill an entire book and still be incomplete - which means a guideline is the correct answer from a design perspective.

[RiTz21]

You did, but I wanted to quote the whole thing as well as emphasize the important parts because it supported my answer.

I believe that providing more detail than this guideline is counterproductive. There are hundreds if not thousands of materials that objects can be made out of even in our world, never mind a fantasy world that has all kinds of fictional ones. Some are easy to define, like the effect fire has on wood or paper - but some however might require a bit more thought, like the effect of acid on stone, fire on gold, or cold on leather. Litigating all those permutations and determining whether half damage, full damage or double damage is appropriate for each one could fill an entire book and still be incomplete - which means a guideline is the correct answer from a design perspective.

While you are correct, an author could just as easily used a simplification via the use of groups of materials, which would effectively solve this in an elegant manner. EXAMPLE: Metals, Woods, Ceramics, Cloths, Flesh (i.e the players!) (I don't want to say Plastics! lol)



Not sure how helpful you would consider 3.5 content, but in many cases there specific examples of dubiously effective energy attacks doing quarter damage against the objects instead of half. Examples include acid vs ice in Dungeonscape and cold (!) against wood in Stormwrack. Are there links to these sources?

Thanks!!
R

[Psyren]

While you are correct, an author could just as easily used a simplification via the use of groups of materials, which would effectively solve this in an elegant manner. EXAMPLE: Metals, Woods, Ceramics, Cloths, Flesh (i.e the players!) (I don't want to say Plastics! lol)

I don't know that it would actually. For example, Gold, Silver, Cold Iron, Asbestos and Adamantine are all metals, but I don't know that they would (or should) all behave the same way if subjected to the same amount of fire damage. I also don't think Wood, Ironwood, and Soarwood should all behave the same way. And would Leather be a Cloth or a Flesh? And that's before getting into magically enhanced materials... like I said, I understand your desire here but I don't think it's practical, especially not for an already chunky core book.

[TheFamilarRaven]

While you are correct, an author could just as easily used a simplification via the use of groups of materials, which would effectively solve this in an elegant manner. EXAMPLE: Metals, Woods, Ceramics, Cloths, Flesh (i.e the players!) (I don't want to say Plastics! lol)


The benefit of this doesn't outweigh its cons IMO. For one, this is NOT a simplification. You are asking DMs to 1) know what material group an object belongs (which means now there is a table classifying every material in the game into groups), 2) look up a table every time an energy type collides with an object to double check whether it's effective, average or useless against that material group. This is NOT more simple than just halving the damage and applying hardness or deciding that the energy type is super effective or just straight up ignoring the collateral damage. Because most of the time, the energy damage won't be super weak or effective. And if an energy type would be super effective against a material type, it's extremely obvious. Like fire versus ice, or sonic versus glass.

So while you might like a table to clarify which energy types are good/useless against each material, it is not necessary for the game to run smoothly. Nor does it add anything to the game's narrative. Which is why there is a general catch-all rule rather than a large table to handle every case. And if you embark upon making such a table, I think you'll discover that most energy types only have a few things they are effective/weak against (if any), and is so intuitive you wouldn't need the table at all to figure it out.