Do you suffer penalties when you summon a weapon that requires a proficiency to use without penalty? From the wording of the card, I would think the penalty would apply, but for practical purposes that makes the card exceptionally limited.
We're playing it as if the card is in your hand, with all functions of the card available. So lack of weapon proficiency counts against you, if applicable, and we play it as if the "discard" powers were in play. But yeah, Kyra drew a card that required proficiency and suffered for it, failing the check.
The spell causes you to summon and play a weapon.
-Yes, non-proficiency counts, since Sacred Weapon doesn't grant (or allow you to ignore) proficiency.
-Since you're playing the weapon, you MAY use the discard/bury/banish power. There are cases where you might not want to, such as if it adds a trait that is resisted or immune.
Thanks for the confirmation.
Makes me kinda wonder who this spell is for, though. Except I guess that it's untyped damage, so to speak? Doesn't work on monsters immune to spells with the Attack trait, because you have to play the spell with the Attack trait to get at the weapon and even before the random element of what weapon you get is considered, you're nerfing your Divine die in most cases.
Makes me kinda wonder who this spell is for, though. Except I guess that it's untyped damage, so to speak? Doesn't work on monsters immune to spells with the Attack trait, because you have to play the spell with the Attack trait to get at the weapon and even before the random element of what weapon you get is considered, you're nerfing your Divine die in most cases.
I second that question.
Can anyone suggest any possible practical use to this card? Or if one of the devs can pitch in with a hint as to the design intent? I have a strong inclination to think this spell should lack the "Attack" trait, as it's not targeting the creature in any way, it's essentially a Summon/Conjure spell I guess (and maybe it also telekinetically controls the weapon, idk, I'm not familiar with the RPG equivalent)? That would at least be SOME recourse against the f@%$*& Flesh Golem...
I imagine you can't use the summoned weapons power to recharge or discard for an extra die. What happens when you summon a weapon with a trait that the monster is immune to?
I imagine you can't use the summoned weapons power to recharge or discard for an extra die. What happens when you summon a weapon with a trait that the monster is immune to?
Tough luck? :D
|
I imagine you can't use the summoned weapons power to recharge or discard for an extra die. What happens when you summon a weapon with a trait that the monster is immune to?Tough luck? :D
Yup. It says you play the weapon, right? Well you draw a random weapon (it does not specify a weapon that can work on the monster as far as I know), and you play it if you can. As for recharging / discarding, yes you can use those powers, it just goes back to the box instead of the usual action because it was summoned.
Of course, I could be forgetting an explicit ruling written on the card the contradicts what I say, but from what I remember that's how you play it.
I get that you would not be able to play the weapon if the monster is immune but then what? Can I just cast a different spell or is the monster undefeated?
I'm just going to punch it in the face.
|
|
I get that you would not be able to play the weapon if the monster is immune but then what? Can I just cast a different spell or is the monster undefeated?
That depends. If Sacred Weapon says "For your combat check", then you've already played your one card that determines the check, and yes you're basically limited to blessings / items / etc that only modify a check. You have also played a spell, even if it fizzled due to you summoning a Flaming Sword Fiery Fireness against the Living Being of Elemental Immunity. It's not common for it happen, but yea summoning a fail-to-immunity would be a pretty Sacred Weapon.
Given the name and the d8s, I'm guessing Sacred Weapon is the translation of spiritual weapon from the RPG. Spiritual weapon is an evocation [force] effect, not a summoning, and the resulting attacks do a fixed amount of magical [force] damage, not damage based on the form of the weapon. Some big changes!
There's a couple aspects of spiritual weapon that are different from your standard damage spells: it requires standard attack rolls, not touches; those attack rolls use your base attack + Wisdom (but should be "divine spellcasting") modifier; and the critical range and multiplier are determined by the weapon's form. Some of that is modeled here by the summoned weapon from the box.
Personally: I wouldn't have added the weapon's traits to the check; just let the thing do Force damage. That might make it too good, though. Maybe if it only summoned Basic weapons, but they get purged. Hard to say.
An alternative (but much less interesting) translation would have been a bog-standard damage spell based on your combat skills:
[Magic][Divine][Attack][Force][Veteran]
For your combat check, discard this card to use Melee or Ranged + 1d8 + the adventure deck number of the scenario. (Divine recharge check.)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Or more likely, Sacred Weapon is a spell version of Sacred Weapon from the RPG ;) and all that trying to recover it is irrelevant.
I don't know of any PFRPG spell by that name. There's a Warpriest ability that's along the same lines as the Magus ability to enhance weapons, but not a spell.
The card game normally changes the spell names, but if you know a PFRPG spell by that name please link to it or its source. I'd like to see it! :)
|
|
Y'all might want to check this FAQ.
Alright so I was playing right. Play it if you can, using whatever powers it has that are legal options, and then banish it. If there are no legal options, then... well, deal with it.
|
You only add a card's traits to the check when that card determines the skill you're using for the check. The skill is determined by the weapon, not by the card that summons the weapon, so you add the traits from the weapon card, not the summoning card.
Huh. That makes Sacred Weapon actually useful against Carrion Golems then. I hadn't thought of it that way before, but you're totally right.
Chief Technical Officer
|
Sorry—Carrion Golem says "You may not play spells that have the Attack trait." And since Sacred Weapon is a spell that has the Attack trait, you can't play it.
However, Wand of Sacred Weapon from Wrath 2 is an item, so even though it also has the Attack trait, you can play it against the Carrion Golem.
... the implication that the weapon you are summoning is not actually real, it would make much more thematic sense if the power on the card stated that you should add the divine and magic traits to your check.
That, or the weapon is real, and it makes no sense for the spell to have the Attack trait. Oh well, just another card that will never be used in my games, I guess.
Incidentally, it could be interesting if there was a thread similar to "your adventurers at the mid-point" , but showing the starting gear...
|
|
... the implication that the weapon you are summoning is not actually real, it would make much more thematic sense if the power on the card stated that you should add the divine and magic traits to your check.That, or the weapon is real, and it makes no sense for the spell to have the Attack trait. Oh well, just another card that will never be used in my games, I guess.
Incidentally, it could be interesting if there was a thread similar to "your adventurers at the mid-point" , but showing the starting gear...
But you are summoning a (temporary) magic weapon to attack with ... using a spell. It should have the Attack trait.
In the RPG, summoning something doesn't make that thing magic.
In the RPG, summoning something doesn't make that thing magic.
Summoned creatures/items are certainly magical.
This is the difference between conjuration creation and conjuration summoning. Creation makes a permanent non-magical thing. Summoning means the thing exists only for the duration of the magic, and for instance is blocked by things like antimagic field.
At least in the PRG.
|
|
In the RPG, summoning something doesn't make that thing magic.
Okay, I meant magical in the fact that it was summoned for a period of time and then goes away. Not that it was magical in nature and could be considered a magical weapon.
(I was talking general terms, not technical in regards to Magic weapons.)
Because that cards don't track whether SR applies (and shouldn't!), creatures with SR and/or immunity have to work a bit differently.
|
Chief Technical Officer
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
IMO, and I know I am repeating myself, theme is important in a game like this and given the artwork and name of the spell, and the implication that the weapon you are summoning is not actually real, it would make much more thematic sense if the power on the card stated that you should add the divine and magic traits to your check.
Allow for Abstractions. Sometimes the story you imagine can get in the way of playing the game. Despite their aquatic nature, Bunyips can be encountered in the Manor House. Caltrop Bead works against Skeletons, even if they don’t have flesh on their feet. Don’t force the cards to fit your story; let the cards tell you their stories.
|
|
Is there a case for errata-ing Sacred Weapon NOT to have the Attack trait? It feels like it should be a summoning spell, with the actual attack coming from the wielder and the weapon summoned. The purpose of the spell isn't to directly damage your opponent, but to put a weapon in your hands temporarily (which, in the scheme of game-mechanics, would be the duration of one combat). Whether it's used to fight, pick your toenails, or hammer a notice of eviction onto a tenant's door is up to the wielder. It just so HAPPENS that game mechanics prevent you from playing it at any other time than the "Play cards and use powers that affect the check" stage of a combat check.
"Gad, my toenails are dirty... (*BAMF*) Dangit! Another mace..."
Just playing Asmodeus' advocate, here.