Usually “missing” the AC of static objects like that means you physically hit it, but it’s sturdy enough that it didn’t sustain any damage. So something like “you give it your best shot, but you don’t make a dent/scratch/whatever in it.”
“You raise your sword up to strike the door, but you lose balance and roll your ankle. Not enough to hurt yourself, but enough to throw your swing off target. The only injury you suffer is to your ego. You feel confident that was a fluke and now need to redeem yourself in the eyes of your party members, who chortle as they watched this display of inadequacy.”
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
DM mostly, Player occasionally | Session 0 form| Doctor/Published Scholar/Science and Healthcare Advocate/Critter/Trekkie/Gandalf with a Glock | He/Him/They/Them
Usually “missing” the AC of static objects like that means you physically hit it, but it’s sturdy enough that it didn’t sustain any damage. So something like “you give it your best shot, but you don’t make a dent/scratch/whatever in it.”
This is what I'd go for; same when attacking any target that has a high AC due to armour etc., missing an AC value doesn't mean your character is an incompetent idiot who couldn't hit a large stationary object, or that it somehow dodged you, it just means that you didn't quite hit the weakness you were aiming for.
It's just an example of the over-simplification in parts of D&D where we no longer have separate armour (took the hit but not the damage) and reflex (avoided the hit), it's all rolled into one so you have to decide in the moment what it best represents. While a plucky Kobold Rogue might be nimbly dodging attacks, a door probably isn't (unless it's a mimic).
Objects or creatures without armor (in the generic sense) have AC 10 + dex with 0 dex this comes out as 5. If the attack was made against a tent wall I would describe a nat 1 or a total of less than 5 as missing the tent entirely, (roll there ankle, sword slips in their hand....). A roll of more than 5 hits the target but if it fails to meet the AC does not do damage.
Just to provide the info in case folks don't have the DMG.
"Armor Class. An object's Armor Class is a measure of how difficult it is to deal damage to the object when striking it (because the object has no chance of dodging out of the way). The Object Armor Class table provides suggested AC values for various substances.
OBJECT ARMOR CLASS Substance AC
Cloth, paper, rope 11
Crystal, glass, ice 13
Wood, bone 15
Stone 17
Iron , steel 19
Mithral 21
Adamantine 23"
So when a character swings at a wooden door ... if they don't hit the AC 15 then the door didn't take significant damage from the swing.
The difficulty in effectively hitting is offset because most objects don't have that many hit points.
If you want more details on giving objects damage resistance for certain types of damage or damage thresholds and hit points for fragile vs resilient objects - look at the DMG pg 246/247
Sorry you are right. The point I was making is it should be as easy to "hit" a door made of cloth as one made of adamantine, it is just that if you hit the door of cloth you are far more likely to damage it. I am actualy surprised at the AC of cloth and paper I don't think it should be easier to hit (and damage) a zombie than a piece of cloth.
Mechanically it doesn't make a difference if you describe an attack as hitting but not doing any damage or missing the target entirely so my descriptions are just flavour but I might need ot rethink it.
Sorry you are right. The point I was making is it should be as easy to "hit" a door made of cloth as one made of adamantine, it is just that if you hit the door of cloth you are far more likely to damage it. I am actualy surprised at the AC of cloth and paper I don't think it should be easier to hit (and damage) a zombie than a piece of cloth.
The guidelines for AC/HP of an object are pretty quick and dirty and assume AC for material and HP for size, but some times it will make sense to adjust the AC down for larger objects, in the same way that larger monsters are usually easier to hit, since AC isn't just about armour anymore.
A DM should also probably be granting you advantage to hit a target that is doing literally nothing to defend itself; while a zombie might be mindless and doing a poor job of avoiding harm, it's still moving around so there's a chance it will accidentally dodge your attacks, whereas a stationary door isn't at all likely to.
Also worth keeping in mind that a DM doesn't need to ask for an attack roll; if it doesn't make sense for you to miss or struggle to do any damage, they could either forgo the attack roll and just have you roll damage, or they could treat the situation as an ability check and factor your weapon, abilities etc. into the DC, or just use the roll to determine the degree of success (the higher the roll, the faster/cleaner/quieter you break through).
Most of the time these numbers should only matter in combat or a time limited situation. Outdside of those circumstances, if it is possible to get through a door, or other obstacle, then the characters WILL succeed at the task, the only question is how long it takes and that is up to the DM to decide.
If the party comes across a door that is closed and they can't open and then they want to try to break it open using their weapons then I'd ask what weapons they are using. If it is a dagger then it would need to be used against a latch if any, a dagger won't significantly damage a stout door in a reasonable length of time. A sword is likely similar. However, a war hammer, two handed hammer or great club might be very effective at breaking down a wooden door (less so against a metal one) so it might take anywhere from 6 seconds to an hour (depending on material and circumstances). The result is that the situation is mostly narrative. The DM might ask for a roll just to get an idea of how long it takes the party.
The only time object AC and hit points really come into play is when the characters want to break something in an initiative situation where time matters and their actions are being used to attack an object rather than an opponent.
Most of the time these numbers should only matter in combat or a time limited situation. Outdside of those circumstances, if it is possible to get through a door, or other obstacle, then the characters WILL succeed at the task, the only question is how long it takes and that is up to the DM to decide.
If the party comes across a door that is closed and they can't open and then they want to try to break it open using their weapons then I'd ask what weapons they are using. If it is a dagger then it would need to be used against a latch if any, a dagger won't significantly damage a stout door in a reasonable length of time. A sword is likely similar. However, a war hammer, two handed hammer or great club might be very effective at breaking down a wooden door (less so against a metal one) so it might take anywhere from 6 seconds to an hour (depending on material and circumstances). The result is that the situation is mostly narrative. The DM might ask for a roll just to get an idea of how long it takes the party.
The only time object AC and hit points really come into play is when the characters want to break something in an initiative situation where time matters and their actions are being used to attack an object rather than an opponent.
It might also impact surprise.
If the party can blast the door off its hinges in a single hit and the bad guys are in the next room sipping tea I would say they are surprised as initiative is rolled. If they take a huge amount of time the bad guys might go around to where the party another way and surprise them.
As a (newb) DM
How would I go about describing a PC missing the AC of a door
I think a "swing & miss" for an object literally in front of their faces wouldn't make much sense
(aka be "realistic")
Usually “missing” the AC of static objects like that means you physically hit it, but it’s sturdy enough that it didn’t sustain any damage. So something like “you give it your best shot, but you don’t make a dent/scratch/whatever in it.”
“You raise your sword up to strike the door, but you lose balance and roll your ankle. Not enough to hurt yourself, but enough to throw your swing off target. The only injury you suffer is to your ego. You feel confident that was a fluke and now need to redeem yourself in the eyes of your party members, who chortle as they watched this display of inadequacy.”
DM mostly, Player occasionally | Session 0 form | Doctor/Published Scholar/Science and Healthcare Advocate/Critter/Trekkie/Gandalf with a Glock | He/Him/They/Them
You can try DDB for free using the Basic Rules, free adventures, MCV1:SC, and homebrew. Answers about physical books, purchases, and subbing.
What is it like to be on the forums.
This is what I'd go for; same when attacking any target that has a high AC due to armour etc., missing an AC value doesn't mean your character is an incompetent idiot who couldn't hit a large stationary object, or that it somehow dodged you, it just means that you didn't quite hit the weakness you were aiming for.
It's just an example of the over-simplification in parts of D&D where we no longer have separate armour (took the hit but not the damage) and reflex (avoided the hit), it's all rolled into one so you have to decide in the moment what it best represents. While a plucky Kobold Rogue might be nimbly dodging attacks, a door probably isn't (unless it's a mimic).
Characters: Bullette, Chortle, Dracarys Noir, Edward Merryspell, Habard Ashery, Legion, Peregrine
My Homebrew: Feats | Items | Monsters | Spells | Subclasses | Races
Guides: Creating Sub-Races Using Trait Options
WIP (feedback needed): Blood Mage, Chromatic Sorcerers, Summoner, Trickster Domain, Unlucky, Way of the Daoist (Drunken Master), Weapon Smith
Please don't reply to my posts unless you've read what they actually say.
Objects or creatures without armor (in the generic sense) have AC 10 + dex with 0 dex this comes out as 5. If the attack was made against a tent wall I would describe a nat 1 or a total of less than 5 as missing the tent entirely, (roll there ankle, sword slips in their hand....). A roll of more than 5 hits the target but if it fails to meet the AC does not do damage.
That's not true at all.
Just to provide the info in case folks don't have the DMG.
"Armor Class. An object's Armor Class is a measure of how difficult it is to deal damage to the object when striking it (because the object has no chance of dodging out of the way). The Object Armor Class table provides suggested AC values for various substances.
OBJECT ARMOR CLASS
Substance AC
So when a character swings at a wooden door ... if they don't hit the AC 15 then the door didn't take significant damage from the swing.
The difficulty in effectively hitting is offset because most objects don't have that many hit points.
If you want more details on giving objects damage resistance for certain types of damage or damage thresholds and hit points for fragile vs resilient objects - look at the DMG pg 246/247
Sorry you are right. The point I was making is it should be as easy to "hit" a door made of cloth as one made of adamantine, it is just that if you hit the door of cloth you are far more likely to damage it. I am actualy surprised at the AC of cloth and paper I don't think it should be easier to hit (and damage) a zombie than a piece of cloth.
Mechanically it doesn't make a difference if you describe an attack as hitting but not doing any damage or missing the target entirely so my descriptions are just flavour but I might need ot rethink it.
The guidelines for AC/HP of an object are pretty quick and dirty and assume AC for material and HP for size, but some times it will make sense to adjust the AC down for larger objects, in the same way that larger monsters are usually easier to hit, since AC isn't just about armour anymore.
A DM should also probably be granting you advantage to hit a target that is doing literally nothing to defend itself; while a zombie might be mindless and doing a poor job of avoiding harm, it's still moving around so there's a chance it will accidentally dodge your attacks, whereas a stationary door isn't at all likely to.
Also worth keeping in mind that a DM doesn't need to ask for an attack roll; if it doesn't make sense for you to miss or struggle to do any damage, they could either forgo the attack roll and just have you roll damage, or they could treat the situation as an ability check and factor your weapon, abilities etc. into the DC, or just use the roll to determine the degree of success (the higher the roll, the faster/cleaner/quieter you break through).
Characters: Bullette, Chortle, Dracarys Noir, Edward Merryspell, Habard Ashery, Legion, Peregrine
My Homebrew: Feats | Items | Monsters | Spells | Subclasses | Races
Guides: Creating Sub-Races Using Trait Options
WIP (feedback needed): Blood Mage, Chromatic Sorcerers, Summoner, Trickster Domain, Unlucky, Way of the Daoist (Drunken Master), Weapon Smith
Please don't reply to my posts unless you've read what they actually say.
I really like the idea of only considering the Damage Roll
As this would make the most sense in my opinion 🤔
Most of the time these numbers should only matter in combat or a time limited situation. Outdside of those circumstances, if it is possible to get through a door, or other obstacle, then the characters WILL succeed at the task, the only question is how long it takes and that is up to the DM to decide.
If the party comes across a door that is closed and they can't open and then they want to try to break it open using their weapons then I'd ask what weapons they are using. If it is a dagger then it would need to be used against a latch if any, a dagger won't significantly damage a stout door in a reasonable length of time. A sword is likely similar. However, a war hammer, two handed hammer or great club might be very effective at breaking down a wooden door (less so against a metal one) so it might take anywhere from 6 seconds to an hour (depending on material and circumstances). The result is that the situation is mostly narrative. The DM might ask for a roll just to get an idea of how long it takes the party.
The only time object AC and hit points really come into play is when the characters want to break something in an initiative situation where time matters and their actions are being used to attack an object rather than an opponent.
You, sir David, are a genius 🧠
This makes a ton of sense… thanks 🙏🏾
Depends on the door. In modules and books generally AC 10 15 HP with some going up to AC 16 and I forgot the HP.
No Gaming is Better than Bad Gaming.
It might also impact surprise.
If the party can blast the door off its hinges in a single hit and the bad guys are in the next room sipping tea I would say they are surprised as initiative is rolled. If they take a huge amount of time the bad guys might go around to where the party another way and surprise them.
For my groups, I describe the swing as striking the door but doing no damage.