|
| 8 people marked this as FAQ candidate. 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I've looked around a bit, and it seemed that nobody has really answered this question, but rather assumed it was correct. Take, for example, for following example:
An archer with a orb of scrying scrys the other side of the door to reveal a orge on the other side. He pulls out his brilliant energy bow, tells his friends to hold the door closed, and begins to fire through the wall, checking the orb occasionally to make sure he's hitting.
In essence, do brilliant energy weapons bypass cover/total cover? Assuming you knew the target was there.
Not a new concept, arcane archers can do this, and zen archers (and I think gunslingers with a certain feat) can perform a limited form (requires an opening).
Instead of "scry and fry", do we have "view and spew"?
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I would count Total Cover as Total Concealment if you had a way to shoot through the cover as if it was not present (ie: Brilliant Energy) and you would have to have some way of determining location (such as Tremorsense) or guess location.
|
Concealment still applies from what I can read in the enchantment description. Spellcaster with Blur would still have 20% concealment, but my guess is that Gauss meant when you cannot see target, but can pin point square.
As a GM, I would allow this completely if you can make it work. Some special abilities like tremorsense might work, but not above their ability range. Others might require Perception check, etc.
After reading the text about Brilliant Energy, I am not sure if weapon ignores armor and shield bonuses from spells though. These aren't exactly nonliving matter and spellcaster might retain their armor and shield bonuses. Someone please correct me if I am wrong on this?
Adam
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Assuming that the cover is provided by nonliving matter, brilliant energy should ignore that cover. If someone is crouching behind their horse, however...
|
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Brilliant energy does what it says and nothing more, whatever the fluff itself says.
It does not ignore Cover. Only Armor and Shield bonuses to AC. So, the trick does not work unless the GM houserules it.
And if you need some kind of logical explanation for this, consider the first sentence of its description : "A brilliant energy weapon has its significant portion transformed into light, "
This means that it is not the whole of the weapon that gets transformed into light (and thus ignores nonliving matter), but only the part that impacts the target. For an arrow, that part would be the head of the arrow. While the fletching and the shaft stay material (and do not ignore nonliving matter).
If you shoot at the wall, the head will get through but the rest of the arrow will hit the wall and rebound.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I once had the party face off against a deadly assassin whose main 'shtick' was using a ring of x-ray vision and +2 brilliant energy shuriken to hit his targets from behind closed doors/through walls, etc.
It was fun.
It was also, as The black raven says, total houserules. I didn't mind, and neither did my players but only because we all agreed that for a +4 enhancement, brilliant energy could use a little boost.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The black raven,
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.
The bolded sentence is not "fluff", it is part of the rules just as the sentances that follows it is.
Ignoring Cover is simply the logical conclusion, if it ignores nonliving matter (such as a wall) then you can attack THROUGH that wall.How does it make sense that only the head of an arrow is brilliant?
If only the head of an arrow was brilliant and the shaft was not then the arrow would be unable to penetrate deeply into flesh. The head is only an inch or so long and since it failed to put a hole in armor the shaft would smack into the armor and stop thus stopping the head (which is still attached).
In any case, there is nothing in the rules that state only the head is brilliant. "significant portion" is not defined.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
@The Black Raven
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.
So, if we went by the "significant portion only" train of thought, how does an arrow not harm the undead if the shaft still hits it?
In addition, the part you say is "fluff" is in the middle of the paragraph, whereas the statement you adhere to is where the fluff normally is (the first sentence).
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
James Risner, could you elaborate how you feel the weapon cannot pass through?
If the object was thicker than the weapon is long then I could see it blocking the weapon (the hilt/hand holding the weapon cannot get through). But in the case of an arrow I can easily see it passing through since it ignores objects.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The 'significant portion' section has me thinking. I'd allow it, as a DM, simply because they spent so much gold on the enchantment. Its not cheap.
@The Black Raven
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.So, if we went by the "significant portion only" train of thought, how does an arrow not harm the undead if the shaft still hits it?
In addition, the part you say is "fluff" is in the middle of the paragraph, whereas the statement you adhere to is where the fluff normally is (the first sentence).
The distinction between fluff and rule is sometimes fuzzy to say the least. There is no rule where a rule begins and fluff ends.
Either way the train of thought is correct - for an arrow only the head is made of brilliant energy and a wall will stop the shaft. Still it's the head that's the significant part, the parth with the most "weight" and sharpness that deliver the atual damage. The shaft itself is insignificant damage-wise. It could perhaps deal like what..0,4 damage? ok rounded down like everything else is that's still 0.That said the trick can still be pulled off with things like sling bullets, gun bullets and shurikens..crossbow bolts are an open question as they make more of a whole and discerning the significant part is more difficult and the balancing part is negligible enough that it might get blown off the shaft while passing through solid material while the rest flies on..on a thought that would be enough for me to say the bolt gets destroyed and the brilliant energy dissipates before it reaches its target though.
that leaves bullets and shurikens. Not that bad - at least it isn't making archers even more overpowered
|
|
The shaft itself is insignificant damage-wise. It could perhaps deal like what..0,4 damage? ok rounded down like everything else is that's still 0.The shaft is still heavier and propelled with more force than a throwing dart. In fact, not all arrows need to have a "head" - a sharpened wooden shaft with some fletching to keep it stable will to just fine against skin and flesh.
Not that it makes a difference, since an arrow with head would probably have a blunt shaft (and thus do less damage than an arrow with just a sharpened shaft), and an arrow's fletching would probably just rip off on impact (which would also cause the arrow to lose direction and fall to the ground).That being said, I remember a D&D 3.5 discussion about someone building a "dungeon sniper" using some form of remote sense who could clear out a dungeon without even entering it.
Would it not be the equivalent to a blunt arrow, as defined in the PRD?
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
StDrake, could you please point to the rule, sentance, or passage that indicates or states that only the head of the arrow ignores objects?
As I pointed out earlier, if only the head of the arrow ignores objects then it is utterly impossible for an arrow to harm someone in armor.
Why? Because if we use your house-rule then the head of the arrow is not creating a hole in the armor for the arrow shaft to follow. Thus, the head of the arrow goes through the armor (about 0.5 to 1 inch) without causing a hole and then the shaft hits the armor and stops. This would have the result of stopping the arrow head since it is still part of the arrow.
In short, it doesn't make sense.
Either the ammunition ignores objects or it doesn't, there is no half measures here because that is not in the rules and it would lead to the absurdity shown above.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
As a side note, I hope everyone knows that each brilliant energy arrow costs 1,000 gold. Not cheap, especially if your shooting 5+ a round."Projectile weapons with this ability bestow this power upon their ammunition."
StDrake, could you please point to the rule, sentance, or passage that indicates or states that only the head of the arrow ignores objects?
As I pointed out earlier, if only the head of the arrow ignores objects then it is utterly impossible for an arrow to harm someone in armor.
Why? Because if we use your house-rule then the head of the arrow is not creating a hole in the armor for the arrow shaft to follow. Thus, the head of the arrow goes through the armor (about 0.5 to 1 inch) without causing a hole and then the shaft hits the armor and stops. This would have the result of stopping the arrow head since it is still part of the arrow.
In short, it doesn't make sense.
Either the ammunition ignores objects or it doesn't, there is no half measures here because that is not in the rules and it would lead to the absurdity shown above.
Unless we take "half measures" literally and turn half the arrow into light. That's more than plenty enough to penetrate armour, but not enough to penetrate cover.
And if we really, really want to be realistic?
The fletching of an arrow needs to interact with the surrounding air (which is non-living, usually, though it being an "object" is debatable), or otherwise it can't create the rotation necessary to stabilize the arrow. So, it has to stay solid. The fletching impacting with cover not only rips it off, but also stops the arrow in its flight.
I didn't realize that brilliance could be put on ranged weapons, my bad O.o.
But as for your counter argument, maybe. But the general idea is still the same with crossbows and guns. Sure, maybe not with a bow with your very nitpicky intrepetation, but a bolt that has no need for fletching? A bullet?
Also, one word we might forget from time to time: Magic. Perhaps the arrow is interacting with a thin layer of magic in the atmosphere, causing the fletching to work as intended even though it doesn't interact with the air around it O.o
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
How do you even hold brilliant energy bullets? If you try to put them over a table, they would just fall through it and through the floor.
I guess you could say they only turn brilliant when you fire them. This could explain how an arrow can become completly made of brilliant energy to be able to completly pass though walls.
The "significant portion" thing shoudn't really matter, as long as you are living you could hold a weapon completly made of brillant energy (just don't get disarmed). As long as you are using it right, to bypass armor and shield (and in this case other non living things) and not attacking vampires who just "ate" with it, the significant portion or no-portion should not matter to game mechanics.
I think we're leaving an important portion of the quoted text unbolded:
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.
Up to interpretation, but I think we could probably assume the "major portion" refers to the portion of a weapon that is intended to deal damage, like the blade of a sword, or in this case, the arrowhead (and maybe the top half of the shaft). Therefore, only the major portion is intended to ignore cover, and cannot be outright hurled or shot through the earth, or other solid objects (the back half would still be solid and stopped by the solid door).
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think we're leaving an important portion of the quoted text unbolded: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.Up to interpretation, but I think we could probably assume the "major portion" refers to the portion of a weapon that is intended to deal damage, like the blade of a sword, or in this case, the arrowhead (and maybe the top half of the shaft). Therefore, only the major portion is intended to ignore cover, and cannot be outright hurled or shot through the earth, or other solid objects (the back half would still be solid and stopped by the solid door).
We could also assume the significant portion of a bow & arrow is the arrow.
I think we're leaving an important portion of the quoted text unbolded:We could also assume the significant portion of a bow & arrow is the arrow.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.Up to interpretation, but I think we could probably assume the "major portion" refers to the portion of a weapon that is intended to deal damage, like the blade of a sword, or in this case, the arrowhead (and maybe the top half of the shaft). Therefore, only the major portion is intended to ignore cover, and cannot be outright hurled or shot through the earth, or other solid objects (the back half would still be solid and stopped by the solid door).
But you're not putting the enchantment on the bow, it has to go on the arrow. (As has already been discussed)
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
But you're not putting the enchantment on the bow, it has to go on the arrow. (As has already been discussed)I think we're leaving an important portion of the quoted text unbolded:We could also assume the significant portion of a bow & arrow is the arrow.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.Up to interpretation, but I think we could probably assume the "major portion" refers to the portion of a weapon that is intended to deal damage, like the blade of a sword, or in this case, the arrowhead (and maybe the top half of the shaft). Therefore, only the major portion is intended to ignore cover, and cannot be outright hurled or shot through the earth, or other solid objects (the back half would still be solid and stopped by the solid door).
Actually, there's been some misinformation about that.
Apparently, the text describing Brilliant Energy in the CRB and UE differ. UE allows Brilliant Energy to be placed on projectile weapons, whereas the CRB doesn't.
If we go by newest source, then you can, in fact, place brilliant energy on a bow. As for the discrepancy, thrown in your two bit here.
Then I withdraw my comment. Carry on.
(Edit: I will say that it works better on the arrow rather than the bow because you cannot shut off that particular enchantment. Putting it on the bow leaves you with a weapon unable to harm constructs or undead.)
And if we really, really want to be realistic?
The fletching of an arrow needs to interact with the surrounding air (which is non-living, usually, though it being an "object" is debatable), or otherwise it can't create the rotation necessary to stabilize the arrow. So, it has to stay solid. The fletching impacting with cover not only rips it off, but also stops the arrow in its flight.
Question, if the whole arrow ignores non-living matter, wouldn't it be like firing an arrow in a vacuum? You would get no deceleration from air resistance, and no lift from Aerodynamics. :)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The bow string would also pass through the arrow. The arrow would never launch. :)