Hardness of diamond

[Arakune]

How much is the hardness of diamond in DnD terms? Or better yet, aggregated diamond nanorods?

[sonofzeal]

Unspecified in D&D to my knowledge, but you might find this (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohs_Scale) helpful in estimating hardnesses.

[Rift_Wolf]

Seeing as Adamantine takes it's name from the latin for diamond, I'd say the same as Adamantine.

[sonofzeal]

Seeing as Adamantine takes it's name from the latin for diamond, I'd say the same as Adamantine.
From Wikipedia: "Adamantine is a mineral, often referred to as adamantine spar. It is a silky brown form of corundum. It has a Mohs rating of 9." And neither name was based on the other, they both go back to the greek word "adamas", meaning "invincible".

[Scrubbed]

[SilverClawShift]

[Scrubbed]

Ah, that wonderful roleplayer politeness.

[sonofzeal]

Ah, that wonderful roleplayer politeness.
Heh, that was a bit harsh, wasn't it? Indeed. ~ Sheriff of Moddingham. Remainder of non-apologetic "apology" [Scrubbed]

[Roderick_BR]

Seeing as iron is 10, and adamantine is 20, I'd say something like 15. Things made of diamond would have hardness 20/puncturing. Yes, I know that hardness doesn't have a "weak point", but diamond would be damaged by puncturing attacks.
I think it would have some resistance to most elements too, like cold and fire. Not sure if it would have any resistance against sonic, though.

[Dode]

Unspecified in D&D to my knowledge, but you might find this (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohs_Scale) helpful in estimating hardnesses. Not really, because D&D materials deal in "hardness" and "hit points", while the criteria of physical substances in the real world, like ductility, hardness, strength, plasticity, elasticity, flexibility, malleability etc. This is because D20 is an incredibly simplified, incompatible shorthand for material traits, while the smallest details of a metal's properties in the real world are a life-and-death matter for engineers. And never shall the two meet.

For the OP, who is perplexed at the lack of "aggregate diamond nanorods" in the DMG, I direct him to the classic WoTC thread "Uranium Sword" (http://forums.gleemax.com/wotc_archive/index.php/t-657376) as a parable of what happens when you try to put advanced physics in D&D. Just make something up.

[Burley]

And, not taking the time to belittle people is worthwhile, as well. Your posts are quite sharp, and undeservingly pointed at Rift_Wolf. Even your apology is insulting.

BACK ON SUBJECT:

@Roderick: Since Diamond ranks higher than Adamantine on the Mohs scale, it should have a higher Hardness. And, shatter wouldn't do anything to it, as it is neither brittle nor crystaline. A diamond's natural, uncut form is not crystaline, it just has multiple cleavage points.

As for the...nanorods... Humunawhatnow? Where is this aggrivated bananarod you're talking about? Sounds like a good BBEG? :smalltongue:

[sonofzeal]

Seeing as iron is 10, and adamantine is 20, I'd say something like 15. Things made of diamond would have hardness 20/puncturing. Yes, I know that hardness doesn't have a "weak point", but diamond would be damaged by puncturing attacks.
I think it would have some resistance to most elements too, like cold and fire. Not sure if it would have any resistance against sonic, though.
Actually, Diamonds are harder than (real-world) Adamantine Spar.

A "knife blade" has a Mohs Scale ranking of 5.5 (Hardness 10); "Hardened Steel", which is probably comprable to Mithril has a Mohs ranking of 7.5 (Hardness 15). Adamantine Spar has a ranking of 9 (Hardness 20). Diamonds have a ranking of 10, but the jump in "Absolute Hardness" over 9 is huge, so I'd put them closer to Hardness 25. Aggregated Diamond Nanorods are off the scale entirely, and your guess is as good as mine.

[Rowanomicon]

Unspecified in D&D to my knowledge, but you might find this (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohs_Scale) helpful in estimating hardnesses.

Based on that and the D&D Hardness (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/exploration.htm#hardness) of Silver and Iron my math says that Diamond should be somewhere between 15 and 20, take your pic. That would make aggregated diamond nanorods basically the same as the other "hardest know thing," adamantine, 20.

That is of course ignoring materials that are the even more hardest thing known or the most even more hardest thing known. I like to call them EAA, Extra Adamanty Adamantine.

[RandomLunatic]

You are confusing RL hardness with DnD hardness-the values measure different things. While diamond is hard, it is also brittle-it is not terribly difficult to reduce a diamond to lots of little peices using nothing more than the common household hammer. DnD hardness measure how hard it is to break an object.

In DnD, I would give diamond hardness 8, same as rock, taking double damage from bludgeoning weapons.

[Arakune]

Um... difficult...

I wanted to ask because if you can pass some material hardness you can damage the material, right? But for materials with just hardness 20, around 16 level you could break diamond to dust without too much effort.


You are confusing RL hardness with DnD hardness-the values measure different things. While diamond is hard, it is also brittle-it is not terribly difficult to reduce a diamond to lots of little peices using nothing more than the common household hammer. DnD hardness measure how hard it is to break an object.

In DnD, I would give diamond hardness 8, same as rock, taking double damage from bludgeoning weapons.

Waiiiiit. I though only diamonds had any chance to damage diamonds...
Or a ridiculously powerful machine that in no way in hell could be called a 'household hammer'...

[Tsotha-lanti]

Around level 16 you can also shatter portculli with a single blow, and smash through stone walls in a few blows. And that's just the Fighters...

What's the DC for squeezing blood out of a rock, anyway? (Or sap out of a piece of wood, at least...)

[Admiral Squish]

Hardness 25, but low hit points. Hardness is, well, how hard something is. You can't cut a diamond, even with a sword, or a warhammer. But once you get through the hardness, it's brittle. Relatively speaking of course. So, I'd say hardness 25 and hitpoints as normal steel, 10/inch.

[RandomLunatic]

OK, once again, you do not need to scratch something to be able to damage it-inability to scratch it just means that, when you are done, none of the pieces will have a mark on them.

[SilverClawShift]

Waiiiiit. I though only diamonds had any chance to damage diamonds...
Or a ridiculously powerful machine that in no way in hell could be called a 'household hammer'...

Nope. Diamonds are incredibly 'hard' in the sense that they're essentially scratch-proof. The material doesn't wear down or give way to other materials very easily.

Diamond shatters though, just like everything else. Hit a diamond with something heavy, and you now have multiple smaller diamonds. As random lunatic said though, your smaller diamonds will still be scratch-free.

[Smiley_]

Give it a few hundred million years, and your diamond becomes graphite with no hardness to speak of.

Anyway, 25 sounds about right. noot sure about the HP per inch though.

[sonofzeal]

The measure of shatter-ability is "Toughness". A quick search informs me that diamonds have a toughness of "3.4 MN m^(-3/2)", which is apparently very good for a gem but not all that great in the grand scheme of things. I can't find any nice tables though, and this is a part of engineering I'm not too acquainted with. They're certainly more brittle than metal swords at any rate (metal bends and scratches, gems snap). I think the way to reflect that is with high hardness (you need large force to have any effect) but low hp (if you have any effect, it'll probably be major). Metal swords on the other hand would be easier to damage but more resilient.

On a related note, how would we handle obsidian? Auto-keen but d% chance of breaking?

[Chronos]

Quoth Burley Warlock:
And, shatter wouldn't do anything to it, as it is neither brittle nor crystaline.As others have already pointed out, diamond is in fact brittle (in fact, brittleness is often associated with hardness), and I'd like to see a definition of "crystalline" that does not include diamond.

One solution to statting it out in D&D terms would be to give diamond a very high hardness, but a relatively low break DC. This would cover it being immune (or nearly so) to cutting with a knife, while still allow for smashing it with a hammer.

[StGlebidiah]

Quoth Burley Warlock:As others have already pointed out, diamond is in fact brittle (in fact, brittleness is often associated with hardness), and I'd like to see a definition of "crystalline" that does not include diamond.

Thank you Chronos! If you think that diamonds are not crystalline, you neither know what a crystal nor a diamond actually is.

[Ellisthion]

Diamond's a pretty standard crystal.

Or, to quote wikipedia, "A diamond is a transparent crystal of tetrahedrally bonded carbon atoms and crystallizes into the face centered cubic diamond lattice structure."

Now, for D&D hardness, we should look at the diamond's toughness:

"Toughness

Toughness relates to a material's ability to resist breakage from forceful impact. The toughness of natural diamond has been measured as 3.4 MN m-3/2,[10] which is good compared to other gemstones, but poor compared to most engineering materials."

Technically, that's wrong, that's fracture toughness, but as an example, the fracture toughness of steel is typically in the range of 50. It's more than cement, though, although that's not really saying much.

For a gem, you have to be able to smash it with a hammer, given enough force. No more than DR 5, thus.

If we look at creatures, no one needs an adamantine hammer to crush a rock, but stone golems have DR 10/adamantine. Lets look at this wierd thing (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/monsters/crysmal.htm), a crystaline monster. It's DR 5/bludgeoning, however I'm assuming it's made out of a weaker crystal than diamond (diamond's toughness compares well to other crystals).

If we combine the concepts, we get DR 5/bludgeoning and admantine. This works well mechanically, and means that the diamond probably won't smash if you drop it 10ft, which I wouldn't think it would, but you can still smash the gem easily if you hit it hard enough with just about anything.

*phew* that post took too long.

In other news, the main antagonist in my campaign is Lord Izod, whom I named after the Izod impact test, used for tested toughness. :-)

[Arakune]

*awesome*

Thanks.

I didn't know about the 'toughness' part of a gem. Shame. :smallannoyed:

[Worira]

Hardness 1 to 5, and fairly low HP. A housecat can't scratch it to bits, but a commoner with a hammer can smash it. Alternately, a high hardness and low break DC, as Chronos suggested. Diamond really is very easy to smash.

[Ellisthion]

Thanks.

I didn't know about the 'toughness' part of a gem. Shame. :smallannoyed:

No problem.

Yeah, there's a lot of stuff about breaking things that's more complicated than it has a right to be. Depending on the orientation of the gem, it's easier to break. Unfortunately, crystals have this annoying tendancy to break into little crystals... unlike, say, metals, which tend to just deform.

Hmm. Does anyone want to 'spend' a few hundred bucks and try smashing a diamond for us? It's for science!

[Arakune]

Hmm. Does anyone want to 'spend' a few hundred bucks and try smashing a diamond for us? It's for science!

Why? If we wait enough or have the right connections we can buy a industrial diamond the size of your fist for $25

[Admiral Squish]

I'm not sure how you're all getting 'easy to smash'. One of the big tests to determine between a real diamond and a glass one is if you hit a glass diamond hard on something, it breaks, but a real diamond does not. Has anyone here actually smashed a diamond? Or even seen a diamond large enough to smash thusly?

[WalkingTarget]

"Toughness" is defined as how much force it takes to break something if you hit it. Smashing things is how they rate them. Here's a chart that compares strength (how well a material holds up to repeated stresses, which diamond maxes out) with toughness (which it does not).

http://www-materials.eng.cam.ac.uk/mpsite/interactive_charts/strength-toughness/ceramics.jpg

This (http://www-materials.eng.cam.ac.uk/mpsite/interactive_charts/strength-toughness/NS6Chart.html) is the site I got that from, it's actually an interactive window and is kind of neat.

[Indon]

I'd give it a high hardness and low hp - perhaps 15 or 20 hardness, and 2 HP/inch of thickness (placing it, once damaged, between glass and ice for brittleness).

[Kekken]

Woah!
Nintendium (Ntd) >9000



What!? It's over 9000!!!?



..... sorry.... :smallredface:


.... I'll be good...

[Indon]

What!? It's over 9000!!!?

I believe that would be an instance of Wiki-vandalism.

[John Campbell]

The difference between hardness and toughness is the reason that various methods of differential construction were used for fighting swords. You want the blade to be hard, so that it'll take and hold a good edge, but you also want it to be tough, so that it'll stand up to the shock of combat. And there tends to be a trade-off, there... hard steel is brittle, tough steel is soft.

The Japanese solved this by masking part of the katana blade with clay when they tempered it, so the cutting edge of the blade was hard, to take and hold a razor edge, but brittle. The back edge, however, was softer but tougher steel, to provide an elastic spine to keep the blade from snapping in combat.

The Dark Ages West used the simple solution of actually making the thing out of different kinds of steel, hammer-welded together. Pattern-welded blades were typically built with a core of softer steel rods braided together, and a billet of harder steel folded around the outside, to form the edges and point. This, again, gives a blade with hard edges, to take and hold a sharp cutting edge, and a softer, tougher core, so that it flexes under stress instead of snapping.


And, yes, diamonds will break if you hit them good and hard. This is how jewelers cut them. You didn't think they came out of the ground looking like that, did you?

[Roderick_BR]

Actually, Diamonds are harder than (real-world) Adamantine Spar.

A "knife blade" has a Mohs Scale ranking of 5.5 (Hardness 10); "Hardened Steel", which is probably comprable to Mithril has a Mohs ranking of 7.5 (Hardness 15). Adamantine Spar has a ranking of 9 (Hardness 20). Diamonds have a ranking of 10, but the jump in "Absolute Hardness" over 9 is huge, so I'd put them closer to Hardness 25. Aggregated Diamond Nanorods are off the scale entirely, and your guess is as good as mine.
Ah, my bad. I didn't knew that adamantine was a real metal, but that it was something made up/taken from mythology, like mithral, or adamantium from Marvel Comics.

[Serpentine]

On a related note, how would we handle obsidian? Auto-keen but d% chance of breaking?I've seen this written... Damn, what was it? It may have been that it has trouble holding an edge - no auto-keen, anyway - and it had different hardness and hit points to steel. Same hardness but less hit points or something like that.

What we need in here is a jeweller who can tell us just how easy it is to smash a diamond... (my guess is, not very).

[sikyon]

What we need in here is a jeweller who can tell us just how easy it is to smash a diamond... (my guess is, not very).

A few papers out there where the toughness of diamond is stated. I looked on wikipedia but the units for their quotation don't make sense to me. It should be Joules/meter^3 but instead it's listed as Meganewtons/sqrt(m^3) for some reason. Doesn't make sense at all...

Anyhow, basically you need to exceed that energy to fracture a diamond. It's compicated, a sharp point will also induce fracture much more eaisily than a sledgehammer, for example.

[Ellisthion]

Ah, my bad. I didn't knew that adamantine was a real metal, but that it was something made up/taken from mythology, like mithral, or adamantium from Marvel Comics.

Actually, no, it's fictional. Adamantine spar basically the same as a ruby or sapphire, but brown instead of red or green.

Anyway, on obsidian: offensively, it'd be pretty similar. Whilst you *can* get a sharper edge with obsidian, in a weaponised form you'll lose that edge pretty quickly, even if you get it sharper to begin with. Defensively, trying to sunder it might be a bit easier, so maybe less hardness or HP. As a glass, it will have an annoying tendancy to shatter if you hit it too hard.

[QUOTE=ryuan]Why? If we wait enough or have the right connections we can buy a industrial diamond the size of your fist for $25[/url]

Heh, they're not THAT cheap. Besides, no one makes industrial diamonds the size of your fist, they're useless. The best you're going to do is artificial gemstone-quality diamonds... they're not going to be fist size, or cost $25, but they're a lot cheaper than natural ones, to be sure.

I wish I could find more information on diamond toughness... after a bit more reading, I'd probably reduce the Hardness (and, for creature, DR) to 3. A good hit with a small hammer will break it. A small gem would have 1 hp. However, for a creature... D&D stuff seems to imply that causing a fracture in a crystalline creature is effective, but not instant-kill effective. Also, I've changed my mind on the bludgeoning thing: you're not trying to dent it, you're trying to cause a fracture.

Revised: Gem HP: 1. Hardness: 3. DR as creature: 3/-.
NB: You'll probably dull whatever slashing or piercing weapon you use to hit it with.

[Dervag]

Ah, my bad. I didn't knew that adamantine was a real metal, but that it was something made up/taken from mythology, like mithral, or adamantium from Marvel Comics.Nonono.

Adamant was originally a Greek word for 'really hard'. In the Middle Ages it was used as a word for diamond. 'Adamantine' meant "really really hard, like a diamond."

So any hard substance can accurately be described as "adamant" or "adamantine," because the word means "hard stuff" and does not refer to any particular material.

The real substances that have "adamant" in their names are:
"adamantine spar," a kind of corundum (the same crystal that makes rubies and sapphires, but a different color). Corundum is not quite as hard as diamond.
and
"adamantane," a hydrocarbon with a chemical structure sort of vaguely like diamond but which isn't hard at all.

There is no metal with "adamant" in its name; that is purely a construct of fiction starting with Marvel comics.


Anyway, on obsidian: offensively, it'd be pretty similar. Whilst you *can* get a sharper edge with obsidian, in a weaponised form you'll lose that edge pretty quickly, even if you get it sharper to begin with. Defensively, trying to sunder it might be a bit easier, so maybe less hardness or HP. As a glass, it will have an annoying tendancy to shatter if you hit it too hard.Well, I certainly wouldn't want to use a glass sword in a fight.

A club studded with bits of broken glass or spear tipped with it could be quite effective (people have probably done that in real life), and of course that's the way the Aztecs used obsidian (small blades set into clubs or onto spear hafts).

The key is that there will be some pretty hard and fast restrictions on what kind of weapons you can make of obsidian. For knives it will work quite well; for swords or axe blades it's going to be almost useless.

[sonofzeal]

Well, I certainly wouldn't want to use a glass sword in a fight.

A club studded with bits of broken glass or spear tipped with it could be quite effective (people have probably done that in real life), and of course that's the way the Aztecs used obsidian (small blades set into clubs or onto spear hafts).

The key is that there will be some pretty hard and fast restrictions on what kind of weapons you can make of obsidian. For knives it will work quite well; for swords or axe blades it's going to be almost useless.
The Macuahuitl (http://www.macuahuitl.com/pb/wp_98514d3c/images/img2166445baeb2de9b02.JPG) looks more like a sword than a club to me, personally, except for the piercing damage thing. Maybe it needs its own status as a martial/exotic weapon?

The danger to weaponized obsidian is that it both is one of the sharpest cutting surfaces we can easily produce even now (to my knowledge at least; I know it's used for scalpels), and would rip flesh like a serrated knife. While the obsidian would likely chip and shatter against metal, historical accounts describe obsidian weapons like the Macuahuitl decapitating horses in a single swing, so these were certainly significant threats on the battlefield.

The question is how to stat them out in a game that doesn't account for weapon degradation through use. :smallconfused:

Oh, and awesome chart WalkingTarget!

[Cuddly]

Diamonds burn like coal. At least, that's what a chem teacher told me.
My mom tells me diamonds chip easily. You can even bust them up while washing dishes. They may be scratch resistant, but they're surely not shatter proof. I imagine you could pulverize one relatively easy with a hammer and a hard surface.

[GammaPaladin]

The Macuahuitl (http://www.macuahuitl.com/pb/wp_98514d3c/images/img2166445baeb2de9b02.JPG) looks more like a sword than a club to me, personally, except for the piercing damage thing.

That's... not even made right. Usually the obsidian projected very little from the wooden body. By making each little "blade" shorter, it keeps them from breaking as easily.

I saw a documentary where they had a couple of guys with some degree of martial skill take a steel sword and a macuahuitl to a side of beef to compare, and that primitive weapon was able to cut just as deeply as the sword, if not moreso.

The problem is, one single parry and you're weapon is utterly destroyed, more or less. Same if you hit someone in armor. Obsidian is barely any harder to shatter than average window glass.

[sonofzeal]

That's... not even made right. Usually the obsidian projected very little from the wooden body. By making each little "blade" shorter, it keeps them from breaking as easily.

I saw a documentary where they had a couple of guys with some degree of martial skill take a steel sword and a macuahuitl to a side of beef to compare, and that primitive weapon was able to cut just as deeply as the sword, if not moreso.

The problem is, one single parry and you're weapon is utterly destroyed, more or less. Same if you hit someone in armor. Obsidian is barely any harder to shatter than average window glass.
I'd think that's more a problem with the shaft being wood. Hmmm.... 1d8/18-20, but on every miss there's a 10% chance of breaking? That number should be higher against people in fullplate who are parrying, and lower against (say) Druids, but in the interest of gameplay it's probably best to have a static %.

[Krrth]

I'm not sure just how hard diamonds are to damage, but I know my wife (who works in a jewelry store) does. I'll ask her tonight, and may have an answer for y'all tomorrow.

[Krrth]

If anyone is still following this, I found out about breaking diamonds. They can be broken with a hammer, or even just by banging them against the wall. It is not common however. It all depends on where the fracture lines are.

[daggaz]

I'm not sure how you're all getting 'easy to smash'. One of the big tests to determine between a real diamond and a glass one is if you hit a glass diamond hard on something, it breaks, but a real diamond does not. Has anyone here actually smashed a diamond? Or even seen a diamond large enough to smash thusly?

LMAO.... whoa..ok, ok... this one is too good to pass up.

Having grown up in an antique shop run by my adopted parents, who had business partners with both gem cutters and gold/gem exchanges, as well as various other antique and jewelry shops, I can hearby declare that you dont have the slightest, faintest, foggiest idea of what you are talking about.

You HONESTLY think jewelers go around smacking diamonds with hammers or on the counter or whatever, to see if they break or not? LMAO!!!! Dude, its called a LOOP (the magnifying glass that watchmakers wear around their forehead). You simply LOOK at the diamond under magnification, and that is more than enough to tell a discerning professional whether the stone is paste (glass), or the real deal. You can even tell the difference between cubic zirconia and diamonds in this manner.

And everybody else who said that diamonds are brittle are absolutely correct. Drop one on a stone floor, and chances are you will chip off a straight flake or section of the gem. Why do you think they carry them in cloth packed cases? Obviously, they arent worried about them scratching. They are worried about them chipping on eachother during transport.

[ColdBrew]

Dude, its called a LOOP (the magnifying glass that watchmakers wear around their forehead).
Loupe, actually.

[Indon]

Loupe, actually.

Why would a jeweler want to wear a wolf around his neck?

: P

[ColdBrew]

Why would a jeweler want to wear a wolf around his neck?

: P
So nobody steals his jewels, duh!

[SurlySeraph]

For the OP, who is perplexed at the lack of "aggregate diamond nanorods" in the DMG, I direct him to the classic WoTC thread "Uranium Sword" (http://forums.gleemax.com/wotc_archive/index.php/t-657376) as a parable of what happens when you try to put advanced physics in D&D. Just make something up.

That thread was awesome. Now I need to make a character dual-wielding mercurial uranium chainsaw halberd-chucks.