Metal and Wood Weapons List

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Is there an official, or even a good non-official list of which of the
standard PHB weapons "have metal parts" (and so can be made with
adamantine, cold iron, etc.) and which are "mostly wood" (and so can
be made of darkwood or other exotic woods)?

I looked, but couldn't find anything. And I'd rather not trawl through
the PHB to assign edge cases. (Greatclub: Enough metal for a "special
metal" version, or not? I could see it argued either way, depending on
where the players' advantage lay.)




--
Erol K. Bayburt
ErolB1@aol.com

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Erol K. Bayburt wrote:
> Is there an official, or even a good non-official list of which of
the
> standard PHB weapons "have metal parts" (and so can be made with
> adamantine, cold iron, etc.) and which are "mostly wood" (and so can
> be made of darkwood or other exotic woods)?
>
> I looked, but couldn't find anything. And I'd rather not trawl
through
> the PHB to assign edge cases. (Greatclub: Enough metal for a "special
> metal" version, or not? I could see it argued either way, depending
on
> where the players' advantage lay.)

I suggest employing common sense. I can't think of a single weapon
that I'm confused about regarding either standard or nonstandard
materials and construction.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Anivair wrote:

>Erol K. Bayburt wrote:
>
>
>>Is there an official, or even a good non-official list of which of
>>
>>
>the
>
>
>>standard PHB weapons "have metal parts" (and so can be made with
>>adamantine, cold iron, etc.) and which are "mostly wood" (and so can
>>be made of darkwood or other exotic woods)?
>>
>>I looked, but couldn't find anything. And I'd rather not trawl
>>
>>
>through
>
>
>>the PHB to assign edge cases. (Greatclub: Enough metal for a "special
>>metal" version, or not? I could see it argued either way, depending
>>
>>
>on
>
>
>>where the players' advantage lay.)
>>
>>
>
>I suggest employing common sense. I can't think of a single weapon
>that I'm confused about regarding either standard or nonstandard
>materials and construction.
>
>
>
I'd have to agree. But than I've been researching weapons since I
was around 12...

--
Tetsubo
My page: http://home.comcast.net/~tetsubo/
--------------------------------------
If fifty million people say a foolish thing, it is still a foolish thing.
-- Anatole France

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Tetsubo wrote:
> >>I looked, but couldn't find anything. And I'd rather not trawl
> >through
> >>the PHB to assign edge cases. (Greatclub: Enough metal for a
"special
> >>metal" version, or not? I could see it argued either way, depending
> >on
> >>where the players' advantage lay.)
> >>
> >I suggest employing common sense. I can't think of a single weapon
> >that I'm confused about regarding either standard or nonstandard
> >materials and construction.
> >
> I'd have to agree. But than I've been researching weapons since I

> was around 12...

Well, if he's confused about any weapons he's more than welcome to ask
here. But I can't imagine a need to ask about most normal weapons.
Swords are mostly metal. Bows and staves are mostly wood. Though a
staff could be made of metal (almost any blunt weapon can be made of
metal or wood, IMO). And when you consider magical woods (ironwood)
almost anyhting can be made of wood.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

On Mon, 04 Apr 2005 17:34:33 -0400, Tetsubo <tetsubo@comcast.net>
wrote:

>Anivair wrote:
>
>>Erol K. Bayburt wrote:

[me asking about a list of which PHB weapons are metal or wood.]

>>
>>I suggest employing common sense. I can't think of a single weapon
>>that I'm confused about regarding either standard or nonstandard
>>materials and construction.
>>
>>
>>
> I'd have to agree. But than I've been researching weapons since I
>was around 12...

I've picked up a few things about weapons over the last [mumble]
years, since I've been playing RPGs, but I hope that I at least know
what I don't know.

"Common sense" tells me that spears are mostly wood, but the various
axes aren't - the ax-heads have half the weight or more. But what
about the "silly French polearms" (glaive, ranseur, etc.)? How heavy
is the head compared to the shaft?

And do all of the crossbows have metal prods, or do some of them have
prods of wood/horn/sinew? If the later, which ones?

Quarterstaves are officially all wood, according to the example given
under adamantine, even though IRL they often are metal-shod. (And in
the game, I'd expect Masterwork quarterstaves to be metal-shod, but
not normal ones.) So that bit of metal isn't enought to count. Fair
enough, but then how much metal *is* enough?

So common sense will do for 90% of the cases, but after that my
"common sense" comes down to me making wild-ass DM guesses - which may
not agree with what's 'obvious' to others. Especially if they've been
studying weapons since they were 12...


--
Erol K. Bayburt
ErolB1@aol.com

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Erol K. Bayburt wrote:

> "Common sense" tells me that spears are mostly wood, but the various
> axes aren't - the ax-heads have half the weight or more. But what
> about the "silly French polearms" (glaive, ranseur, etc.)? How heavy
> is the head compared to the shaft?
>
> And do all of the crossbows have metal prods, or do some of them have
> prods of wood/horn/sinew? If the later, which ones?
>
> Quarterstaves are officially all wood, according to the example given
> under adamantine, even though IRL they often are metal-shod. (And in
> the game, I'd expect Masterwork quarterstaves to be metal-shod, but
> not normal ones.) So that bit of metal isn't enought to count. Fair
> enough, but then how much metal *is* enough?
>
> So common sense will do for 90% of the cases, but after that my
> "common sense" comes down to me making wild-ass DM guesses - which
may
> not agree with what's 'obvious' to others. Especially if they've been
> studying weapons since they were 12...


Interestingly enough, this only matters for special, unique, or magical
items and the rules can feel free to break down there anyway. If you
want an adamantine quarterstaff, fine. ta-da, it's done and look how
it doesn't matter. Would I change thte stats any? I might increase
the weight. other than that, no changes. same goes for any weapon.
IMO, by the way, while logic tells you that spears are made of wood,
mostly, it tells me that spearheads are made of metal and if it's not
enchanted, then you've got a magic quarterstaff with a knife on the
end.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Anivair wrote:
> Interestingly enough, this only matters for special, unique, or
magical
> items and the rules can feel free to break down there anyway. If you
> want an adamantine quarterstaff, fine. ta-da, it's done and look how
> it doesn't matter. Would I change thte stats any? I might increase
> the weight. other than that, no changes. same goes for any weapon.

Whatever it was that made you smart earlier has apparently run out.
Please, Ani. *THINK*. Adamantine is implemented as a metal that is
heavier than steel. Steel is over ten times the density of oak. If
you formed a quarterstaff's worth of steel, the bloody thing would
weigh almost 50 pounds. Ironically, that's about what weightlifting
bars weigh ... AND NOBODY FIGHTS WITH THEM. Isn't adamantine double
again?
Not a very bright solution.
You could make it lighter by giving it 10x less cross section,
perhaps - but then it can't be handled worth a damnn.
Well, all right, perhaps what we do is make ourselves a pipe of
steel/adamantine that maintains the same weight and length and width as
a quarterstaff but is hollow ... what does a staff weigh, 4 pounds?
Let's give you 2 kg for good measure; 2 kg of of steel spread over two
meters means the cross sections have to be (2kg/2m)/(~8000 kg/m3)->
(1/8000) m2 -> (1/8000)(10000) cm2 -> 1.25 cm2 ... are you starting to
see the problem? Spread that cross section out into a 4 cm diameter
circumference; it's thin so XC=pi*D*T=1.2 cm2; T= 1.25cm2/(3.14*4 cm)..
you're looking at all of a millimeter of material!
Your staff will crumple on impact.

In fact, it's worth noting that just coating your staff in metal
doubles its weight..

-Michael

 

[drow]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Alien mind control rays made MisterMichael <mistermichael@earthlink.net> write:
> Anivair wrote:
>> want an adamantine quarterstaff, fine. ta-da, it's done and look how
>> it doesn't matter. Would I change thte stats any? I might increase
>> the weight. other than that, no changes. same goes for any weapon.
>
> Whatever it was that made you smart earlier has apparently run out.
> Please, Ani. *THINK*. Adamantine is implemented as a metal that is
> heavier than steel.

harder than steel. the 3.5 rules certainly don't make an adamantine
weapon any heavier than one made of steel, i don't recall any edition
which has.

one, its a fantasy game, adamantine quarterstaves are cool, i'd
probably allow it on that basis alone. otherwise, the players get all
whingy about dragons and beholders.

in a more realistic game, the point remains that a solid adamantine
quarterstaff would be ridiculously heavy, and not likely to be a viable
weapon unless you were ridiculously strong. in that case, i think i
might make it an exotic weapon, with an additional strength requirement.
(iirc, complete warrior has a slew of feats for using oversize weapons
in general, something could probably be built from that.)

--
\^\ // drow@bin.sh (CARRIER LOST) <http://www.bin.sh/>
\ // - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
// \ X-Windows: The defacto sub-standard.
// \_\ -- Dude from DPAK

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

On 4 Apr 2005 18:27:52 -0700, "Anivair" <anivair@gmail.com> wrote:

>And when you consider magical woods (ironwood)
>almost anyhting can be made of wood.

Umm, when did ironwood become magical? I've got some sitting on the
kitchen table, haven't noticed a single unusal thing about it.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Ken Andrews <gobble@degook.com> wrote:
>On 4 Apr 2005 18:27:52 -0700, "Anivair" <anivair@gmail.com> wrote:
>>And when you consider magical woods (ironwood)
>>almost anyhting can be made of wood.
>
>Umm, when did ironwood become magical? I've got some sitting on the
>kitchen table, haven't noticed a single unusal thing about it.

You know what he meant. The material created by the Ironwood spell
(Druid 6), not wood from an ironwood tree...

Donald

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

"drow" <drow@bin.sh> wrote in message
news:4254689c$0$601$8046368a@newsreader.iphouse.net...
> > Whatever it was that made you smart earlier has apparently run out.
> > Please, Ani. *THINK*. Adamantine is implemented as a metal that is
> > heavier than steel.
>
> harder than steel. the 3.5 rules certainly don't make an adamantine
> weapon any heavier than one made of steel, i don't recall any edition
> which has.

Adamantine armors don't pick up weight?

> in a more realistic game, the point remains that a solid adamantine
> quarterstaff would be ridiculously heavy, and not likely to be a viable
> weapon unless you were ridiculously strong. in that case, i think i
> might make it an exotic weapon, with an additional strength requirement.
> (iirc, complete warrior has a slew of feats for using oversize weapons
> in general, something could probably be built from that.)

AS STRONG AS A GIANT.

-Michael

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Michael Scott Brown <mistermichael@earthlink.net> wrote:
>> harder than steel. the 3.5 rules certainly don't make an adamantine
>> weapon any heavier than one made of steel, i don't recall any edition
>> which has.
>
> Adamantine armors don't pick up weight?

Not over steel armors. RTFM.

Donald

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

MisterMichael wrote:

> Whatever it was that made you smart earlier has apparently run
out.
> Please, Ani. *THINK*. Adamantine is implemented as a metal that is
> heavier than steel. Steel is over ten times the density of oak. If
> you formed a quarterstaff's worth of steel, the bloody thing would
> weigh almost 50 pounds. Ironically, that's about what weightlifting
> bars weigh ... AND NOBODY FIGHTS WITH THEM. Isn't adamantine double
> again?
> Not a very bright solution.
> You could make it lighter by giving it 10x less cross section,
> perhaps - but then it can't be handled worth a damnn.
> Well, all right, perhaps what we do is make ourselves a pipe of
> steel/adamantine that maintains the same weight and length and width
as
> a quarterstaff but is hollow ... what does a staff weigh, 4 pounds?
> Let's give you 2 kg for good measure; 2 kg of of steel spread over
two
> meters means the cross sections have to be (2kg/2m)/(~8000 kg/m3)->
> (1/8000) m2 -> (1/8000)(10000) cm2 -> 1.25 cm2 ... are you starting
to
> see the problem? Spread that cross section out into a 4 cm diameter
> circumference; it's thin so XC=pi*D*T=1.2 cm2; T= 1.25cm2/(3.14*4
cm)..
> you're looking at all of a millimeter of material!
> Your staff will crumple on impact.

Possibly. then again, adamantime is more durable than real world
metals, so the math doesn't nessisarily apply. And given some of hte
improbably weapons that people weild in D&D, i can't say it that far
off base.

The adamantine entry, as far as i see, doesn't say anyhting about
weight (at least not in the SRD online) but you may be right. I
suppose mithril would be a better magical metal. Either way I don't
think a metal staff is impossible, since I've seen and used one.
Granted, real life metals can be harder and sturdier than game metals
while being lighter thanks to the wonders of modern science, but isn't
that what magic is for?

Anyway, the point was that I don't personally care what he makes a
weapon out of so long as some consideration is given to it. A steel
quarterstaff is certainly heavy, but if you really want to use one I'd
say a +1 weapon enchantment would be perfectly reasonable to makie it
useful to someone. Given some magic just about any material can be
used for a weapon, IMO.

 

[drow]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Alien mind control rays made Michael Scott Brown <mistermichael@earthlink.net> write:
> "drow" <drow@bin.sh> wrote...
>>> Whatever it was that made you smart earlier has apparently run out.
>>> Please, Ani. *THINK*. Adamantine is implemented as a metal that is
>>> heavier than steel.
>>
>> harder than steel. the 3.5 rules certainly don't make an adamantine
>> weapon any heavier than one made of steel, i don't recall any edition
>> which has.
>
> Adamantine armors don't pick up weight?

unless i'm blind as a yrthak, weight isn't mentioned at all in the
adamantine special material description. nor do the adamantine
breastplate or dwarven plate specific armors note a weight difference.

--
\^\ // drow@bin.sh (CARRIER LOST) <http://www.bin.sh/>
\ // - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
// \ X-Windows: It could be worse... but it'll take time.
// \_\ -- Dude from DPAK

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Michael Scott Brown wrote:

> > in a more realistic game, the point remains that a solid adamantine
> > quarterstaff would be ridiculously heavy, and not likely to be a
viable
> > weapon unless you were ridiculously strong. in that case, i think
i
> > might make it an exotic weapon, with an additional strength
requirement.
> > (iirc, complete warrior has a slew of feats for using oversize
weapons
> > in general, something could probably be built from that.)
>
> AS STRONG AS A GIANT.

Plenty of fighters are as strong as giants, for the record. Though I
do think that in order to use a solid metal quarterstaff one would have
to do somehting ense with it (an enchantment springs to mind).

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Ken Andrews wrote:

>On 4 Apr 2005 18:27:52 -0700, "Anivair" <anivair@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>>And when you consider magical woods (ironwood)
>>almost anyhting can be made of wood.
>>
>>
>
>Umm, when did ironwood become magical? I've got some sitting on the
>kitchen table, haven't noticed a single unusal thing about it.
>
>
I had considered commenting on that myself...

--
Tetsubo
My page: http://home.comcast.net/~tetsubo/
--------------------------------------
If fifty million people say a foolish thing, it is still a foolish thing.
-- Anatole France

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

On Wed, 06 Apr 2005 13:21:16 -0400, Clawhound <none@nowhere.com>
wrote:

>A smart person first checks to see if somebody else has already done the
>work. That puts this person in the category of "smart person."

Yes. Thank you.
Also, I already have a large number of house rules; I don't want to
add more if there's a perfectly good official ruling available.

>
>I've never seen a good breakdown on this topic, but I don't have every
>WotC book, so that observation is not definitive. Given the sheer
>variety of equipment and material in combination, I say you to go with
>your best judgement.

As it turns out, I sent the question to WotC, and they answered that
there isn't an official list. It's officially left up to the judgment
of the DM. So I get to use common sense for the obvious cases and to
make stuff up for the non-obvious cases.



--
Erol K. Bayburt
ErolB1@aol.com

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Erol K. Bayburt wrote:

> On Wed, 06 Apr 2005 13:21:16 -0400, Clawhound <none@nowhere.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>>A smart person first checks to see if somebody else has already done the
>>work. That puts this person in the category of "smart person."
>
>
> Yes. Thank you.
> Also, I already have a large number of house rules; I don't want to
> add more if there's a perfectly good official ruling available.
>
>
>>I've never seen a good breakdown on this topic, but I don't have every
>>WotC book, so that observation is not definitive. Given the sheer
>>variety of equipment and material in combination, I say you to go with
>>your best judgement.
>
>
> As it turns out, I sent the question to WotC, and they answered that
> there isn't an official list. It's officially left up to the judgment
> of the DM. So I get to use common sense for the obvious cases and to
> make stuff up for the non-obvious cases.
>
>
>

You may want to make a list list of wood-substitutes. Example: mithril
for wood. Mithril is light and good for the shaft, while adamantine is
heavy and gives you punch. Or add some rare woods like ironwood: one for
flexibility, one for DR, and one for whatever else.

If you can give your players some simple to follow rules, you also give
yourself some simple rules to work out those sticky problems.

CH

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

On Thu, 07 Apr 2005 12:29:19 -0400, Clawhound <none@nowhere.com>
wrote:

>Erol K. Bayburt wrote:
>


>> As it turns out, I sent the question to WotC, and they answered that
>> there isn't an official list. It's officially left up to the judgment
>> of the DM. So I get to use common sense for the obvious cases and to
>> make stuff up for the non-obvious cases.
>>

>
>You may want to make a list list of wood-substitutes. Example: mithril
>for wood. Mithril is light and good for the shaft, while adamantine is
>heavy and gives you punch. Or add some rare woods like ironwood: one for
>flexibility, one for DR, and one for whatever else.

I'm adding at least one new "special material" wood (to complement
adamantine), and will probably add more. I'm also thinking of dumping
the "mostly wood" bit in the darkwood rules in favor of requiring the
"special lightweight" versions of wood-and-metal weapons to be made
from a combination of darkwood and mithril.

>
>If you can give your players some simple to follow rules, you also give
>yourself some simple rules to work out those sticky problems.
>

Great minds think alike

--
Erol K. Bayburt
ErolB1@aol.com