what AC stops brilliant engery


Rules Questions


A brilliant energy weapon has its significant portion transformed into light, although this does not modify the item’s weight. It always gives off light as a torch (20-foot radius). A brilliant energy weapon ignores nonliving matter. Armor and shield bonuses to AC (including any enhancement bonuses to that armor) do not count against it because the weapon passes through armor. (Dexterity, deflection, dodge, natural armor, and other such bonuses still apply.) A brilliant energy weapon cannot harm undead, constructs, or objects.

what im wanting is clarification on "Armor and shield bonuses to AC (including any enhancement bonuses to that armor) do not count against it because the weapon passes through armor. (Dexterity, deflection, dodge, natural armor, and other such bonuses still apply.)"

so if you could be so kind as to say weather or not a insight, luck, sacred, profane, size, monk ac bonus, cover, un-typed ac (and any others i may have missed)


All AC bonuses apply except for Armor and Shield bonuses.

So the Mage Armor and Shield spells would provide no protection against a Brilliant Energy weapon. But insight, luck, and the other things you list would all work.


Matthew Downie wrote:

All AC bonuses apply except for Armor and Shield bonuses.

So the Mage Armor and Shield spells would provide no protection against a Brilliant Energy weapon. But insight, luck, and the other things you list would all work.

I'm sure it's regarding AC enhancement on Armor and shield, Mage Armor and Shield spells are force effects and would count against Brilliant Energy as would bracers of defense. An AC enhancement on a Robe would not.


If the target is wearing armor and/or using a shield, the Brilliant Energy weapon will ignore all AC, including Enhancements, from that source, but all other types still count


they should


None of those are armor or shield bonuses, so they still apply.


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Scrapper wrote:


I'm sure it's regarding AC enhancement on Armor and shield, Mage Armor and Shield spells are force effects and would count against Brilliant Energy as would bracers of defense. An AC enhancement on a Robe would not.

Force effect or not they're still armor or shield bonuses, so there's no reason to think they'd work.


Force AC is effective against the attacks of Incorporeal creatures but not against most attacks that target Touch AC.

Brilliant Energy is not defined as an incorporeal attack.


The way I always remember it is that brilliant energy weapons pass right through any kind of physical barrier that isn't made up of living matter. Any kind of armor or shield bonus to AC is made up of physical barriers of some kind (yes, even shield and mage armor), whereas any other bonus is either living matter (natural armor), some kind of non-physical barrier (sacred, profane, deflection), or you simply avoiding the attack rather than it failing to get through your defenses (Dex, dodge, insight, monk AC and similar abilities).


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Is it an armour bonus? is it a shield bonus? is it an enhancement bonus to either of those? If the answer is no, it is effective against brilliant energy.

It is that simple.


The description states that it ignores nonliving matter. A force effect is probably made up of energy instead of matter. It is not as clear cut as people think. Armor or shield made of greenwood would also count vs a brilliant weapon even though it provides an armor or shield bonus. Greenwood is still living so a brilliant weapon does not ignore it and thus still counts as towards your AC.


Greenwood is the only source of armor or shield bonus that would work against BE (that I know of).

All other sources of armor or shield bonuses would not apply.

The easy generic litmus test here is: Is it an armor or shield bonus? Then it doesn't apply against BE (unless Greenwood armor/shield).


There is always an 'unless' in a game this big.


Brilliant Energy ignores armor and shield bonuses to AC because brilliant energy passes through armor, arguably because brilliant energy ignores non-living matter.

Brilliant energy does not ignore not non-living matter, so it would follow that it would also not ignore armor and shield bonuses from armor that are not made of non-living matter.

Greenwood armor is made living matter, so it would count. Mage Armor is made force, which is not matter at all, so it would count.

Claxon wrote:

Greenwood is the only source of armor or shield bonus that would work against BE (that I know of).

All other sources of armor or shield bonuses would not apply.

The easy generic litmus test here is: Is it an armor or shield bonus? Then it doesn't apply against BE (unless Greenwood armor/shield).

Is there a rule that directly states that greenwood armor is not ignored by brilliant energy, or are you just making an assumption? I do not see any such rule on the d20pfsrd or Archives of Nethys.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Steve,

Greenwood armor wrote:
The secret of greenwood lies in its harvesting. Each length is taken, with leaves still attached, from a tree animated by a treant and cut with care to avoid the death of the tree. A dryad then speaks to and shapes the wood, coaxing the living green of the leaves into the grain of the wood itself. The resulting wood remains alive as long as it is doused with at least one gallon of water (plus 1 gallon for every 10 pounds of the item's weight) once per week and allowed to rest for an hour in contact with fertile soil. Any wooden or mostly wooden item (such as a bow or spear) made from greenwood is considered a masterwork item. Items not normally made of wood or only partially of wood (such as a battleaxe or a mace) either cannot be made from greenwood or do not gain any special benefit from being made of greenwood.

Since it is alive, brilliant energy description itself says that that it is not ignored.


I was also thinking along the lines of getting Armor or shield bonus from something that's still living.

On the other hand, what good would a cover bonus to AC be vs brilliant energy ? Shouldn't it be treated as concealment instead ?
This is not addressed by the rules as well


I suppose the cover bonus would depend on two thing. If it is living material covering you, then it would apply. If it was unliving material material it shouldn't help unless it physically keeps the wielder too far away to actually attack.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

Greenwood is alive, but the "non-living" line is likely "fluff" and the rule is "ignores armor and shield bonues". So I'd say greenwood isn't designed to fix for Brilliant Energy.

I don't have an issue with someone using Greenwood as a protection against Brilliant Energy, I just don't think that is intended.


Yeah, the way it is written we run into the rather ridiculous situation where if someone is using a tower shield as a shield, the brilliant energy weapon passes right through it. But if the character places the tower shield down and gets cover, then it blocks the weapon.


James, I have to disagree with you.

Brilliant Energy wrote:
Brilliant Energy: A brilliant energy weapon has its significant portion transformed into light, although this does not modify the item's weight. It always gives off light as a torch (20-foot radius). A brilliant energy weapon ignores nonliving matter. Armor and shield bonuses to AC (including any enhancement bonuses to that armor) do not count against it because the weapon passes through armor. (Dexterity, deflection, dodge, natural armor, and other such bonuses still apply.) A brilliant energy weapon cannot harm undead, constructs, and objects. This property can only be applied to melee weapons, thrown weapons, and ammunition.

If the first bolded sentence is fluff, then is the second one? After all, they are both describing the same effect.

Oxy, as to cover, since the cover rules themselves don't really make a lot of sense to me, they don't make any more sense here.

Brilliant missiles obviously ignore cover, but wouldn't a concealment effect apply then?
A sniper who can see and shoot through walls is the obvious exploit here.

If the cover stops a Melee wielder's hand and arm, how would that affect the attack?


_Ozy_ wrote:
Yeah, the way it is written we run into the rather ridiculous situation where if someone is using a tower shield as a shield, the brilliant energy weapon passes right through it. But if the character places the tower shield down and gets cover, then it blocks the weapon.

I don't agree with this either since brilliant energy explicitly passes through armour, and by extension, shields ( a type of armour). Even if they provide cover.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

@Daw, there are several 500-1000 post threads with many instances of clean up by Chris when things got heated that says what you think it means isn't something everyone agrees.


James,
Agreed, but there are about as many that go the other way. I like the armor working this way, whether it was deliberate or not. Saying it is just fluff makes it feel less believable, and less fun. I also rather loath the whole anti-fluff attitude.


+1 on liking this as a use for Greenwood. Also potentially add Living Steel.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I guess there are two reasonable ways to look at it. Either the crunch is "A brilliant energy weapon ignores nonliving matter" and the rules after that give examples of what that means, or that line is fluff and the crunch is "Armor and shield bonuses to AC (including any enhancement bonuses to that armor) do not count against it because the weapon passes through armor... A brilliant energy weapon cannot harm undead, constructs, and objects."

I favor the latter interpretation because it's easier to adjudicate but I wouldn't resent a GM who was willing to go to the effort of doing it the other way.

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / what AC stops brilliant engery All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.