Brilliant Energy + Flaming (ETC)?


Rules Questions


I'm inclined to say 'no' to this already with how it's written, but I'm in need of confirmation anyways.

Assuming I've got a +1 Brilliant Energy Flaming Shocking Corrosive Frost Longsword, I make an attack vs Dr. Lichdoom, his Iron Golem, and the Macguffin Bomb (because, for some reason, they're all in a clutter and I can full attack). Does the energy damage from Flaming/Shocking/Corrosive/Frost affect them?

Like I said. Strictly as written, I myself would see that as a strict no, thanks to the silly little last line of the Brilliant Energy description.

Makes me wonder if that was intended or not.


The chance to hit for the weapon is tied to the brilliant energy feature... so to be fair I would apply it's restriction to ALL extra damage adds the weapon is enchanted with as well (after all, by ignoring the armor of the target in the attack you are in effect saying that ALL the weapon's damage types are phasing through that armor not just the weapon's base damage). So the energy effects stacked onto the weapon would not harm undead, constructs, or objects.


If the undead was immune to a steel weapon, magical or not, but was hit with a steel weapon with flaming, flaming would apply. There is no reason to rule differently with a brilliant weapon. It just means the flam [passes through the armor easier to get to the "juicy" parts, if undead have "juicy" parts.


I disagree Komoda. This isn't immunity this is a phasing effect. We all know the brilliant energy part phases past non-living stuff, but IF the fire part doesn't phase past armor then the armor WOULD fully apply toward stopping the attack. And the you effectively just have a weak fire sword without the ability to phase past stuff.


The damage type (good, infernal, fire, cold, etc.) doesn't change. If the creature is affected by that type of damage, and the roll to hit is successful, then there is no reason to believe that the energy damage does not take effect.


Normal damage reduction would allow energy damage to still apply, however, brilliant energy property is very specific: "A brilliant energy weapon cannot harm undead, constructs, and objects."

So by a strict reading, the weapon won't do any damage, of any type, to those categories of creatures.


Since the weapon can not harm undead then nothing on the weapon will do any harm. The attack must land before the flaming can do any damage.

Grand Lodge

Artemis Moonstar wrote:

I'm inclined to say 'no' to this already with how it's written, but I'm in need of confirmation anyways.

Assuming I've got a +1 Brilliant Energy Flaming Shocking Corrosive Frost Longsword, I make an attack vs Dr. Lichdoom, his Iron Golem, and the Macguffin Bomb (because, for some reason, they're all in a clutter and I can full attack). Does the energy damage from Flaming/Shocking/Corrosive/Frost affect them?

Like I said. Strictly as written, I myself would see that as a strict no, thanks to the silly little last line of the Brilliant Energy description.

Makes me wonder if that was intended or not.

To be quite frank, It could be said that it was never intended that players would be creating +1/+9 items. But yes, the fact that your sword has Brilliant Energy on it means that the golem can basically laugh at it.. if it's creator had put in the Humor Rune upgrade.

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Brilliant Energy + Flaming (ETC)? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.