Odraude wrote:Because ghosts and spirits and incorporeality are inherently magic creatures.
So magic can only be engaged by more magic? This is good for a game in which a PC can choose to be nonmagical but will inevitably face magical foes?Quote:Creatures of the Ethereal realm that can only be damaged greatly by magic (and even then, by half) and channeling positive energy.
Why do we have to keep the idea that they can only be damaged by magic? Why is that part of the definition of being incorporeal?Quote:It feels like something that to me, shouldn't be overcome with skill alone.
Then why do we still have classes that rely on skill alone if skill alone isn't enough to overcome what they face?Quote:I stand corrected, those are good points. Though for SR, I honestly just assumed that the creature was just immune.
A creature immune to magic is still affected by non-SR spells. "Immune to magic", in Pathfinder, means "immune to spells that allow SR".Quote:As for that 2,000, a fighter isn't buying a magic weapon just to deal with incorporeals. He's buying a magic weapon to fight things better. A fighter will always be buying that +1 magic weapon. The fact that it helps with incorporeal creatures is a bonus to it. And there are other methods to dealing with ghosts and undead beyond magic weapons. Such as holy water.He's still depending on magic to do more than 2d4 points of damage even at 20th level. Also, see my last post.
1. I'll admit it's a preference thing, but yes, I feel that magic should defeat magic most of the time. It's something you see in fantasy media and it's really not that far-fetched. A player can still fight magic with magic weapons or items or blessing to defeat magical creatures.
2. That's usually the standard in fantasy literature. Ghosts, shades, and such can't be hit without some form of spiritual item.
3. Because those magical creatures can still be overcome with preparation. Bringing silver or cold iron or holy water. In fantasy, it's not often you see a supernatural hunter come in without the right materials and research. Salt, holy water, a crucifix... it's all staples of fantasy literature.
4. Yes, like I said, I made a mistake about spell immunity. So sue me.
5. Again, I don't have an issue with relying on magic to fight magic. I saw your last post and it feels less like an actual example of gameplay and more just an example of a GM wanted to screw over a player. And before you say it, yes, I understand that removing the fighter's magic items is much easier to do than sticking a wizard in an anti-magic zone.
That said, I feel we can compromise about this issue. I'll be honest, an ability to overcome incorporeal would certain help the fighter, even if it doesn't quite match my personal preference. Maybe the fluff is calling for a blessing from the gods, or, like the monk, channelling chakra/ki/prana/some other mystical, but inner spirit energy. I could dig that, and it'd give the fighter the boost for using a "magic weapon" without "magic". That seems like a good fit, no?