Magical Objects and Saving Throws Versus Beneficial Spells

[Jeff Carlsen]

Do magic items always make a saving throw to resist beneficial spells such as magic weapon or mending?

As far as I can tell from the rules, they do, but I've never seen a group actually require this.

Some relevant points:

1. A person can choose to fail a save in the case of a beneficial spell. But this is a person, not an object.

2. A magic item's saves are based on the caster level of the object unless it's sentient, implying that these saves represent a general resistance to spell effects. I don't see how this resistance would know the difference between a beneficial and a harmful spell.

3. An attended object uses the object's save or that of the person holding it, whichever is greater. Again, more evidence that it's a general protection.

4. It is stated that a magic item should always get a saving throw against a harmful effect. This implies that someone who is both holding a magical item and trying to cast a harmful spell on it can't choose to fail the save against a harmful effect. But, it does allude to the idea that saving throws for magic items exist more as a game concern than a simulation concern.

Obviously, I can run it how I want, but I find the topic fascinating. Any thoughts on the matter?

[Alydos]

From a real-world logic viewpoint, I don't see how a magic items resistance to magical effects could differentiate betwixt a harmful and beneficial spell.

But from a Golarion viewpoint I could see the creator putting in a stipulation that the wielder could over-write it's resistances with his own as long as they were stronger than the magical item itself, and he could automatically fail his resistance to a helpful effect.

Sort of someones supernatural resistance being more powerful than those forged into the item. A sentient item by that logic shouldn't be able to choose to pass or fail if it's saves are weaker than the wielders, however.

[Jeff Carlsen]

Alydos wrote:

But from a Golarion viewpoint I could see the creator putting in a stipulation that the wielder could over-write it's resistances with his own as long as they were stronger than the magical item itself, and he could automatically fail his resistance to a helpful effect.

True, but there are two forms that could take.

First, the object is bonded to an individual, and allows only that person the ability to drop the items defenses. This could either mean the object will only ever do this for one person or that there's a bonding ritual of some sort.

Second, anyone who holds the item is allowed to drop the item's defenses, which is simply, but means that the object is vulnerable to anyone who holds it.

Both are cool possibilities, even if they're making magic items a little more complex.