I don't know if this issue has been solved, but it appears that Detect Magic has no prohibition against identifying artifacts, but identify (and it's 3rd level cousin) do. So, I interpret this to mean that you can try to identify artifacts using conventional detect magic and the spellcraft skill, but it's just very hard due to the CL (and the DC could be further boosted due to circumstance/background). Is this a correct interpretation?
That's a good question. I give them the basics, e.g., Agrimmosh is a +2 impact warhammer, but they need to investigate to find its other powers. Using that method, there are some artifacts that will remain a complete mystery until they find the proper evidence.
Knowledge History or Religion might give you a clue where to look if you pile on enough conditional modifiers. It's not a monster. You can bring it to a sage, in a library, after buffing their Int. and Wis.
I'm trying to determine what the RAW are on this.
I see that identify says it can't identify artifacts, but detect magic does not say that.
I'm going to take a wild guess that the "doesn't work on artifacts" line is left over from an earlier edition from when identify was more than a spiffy detect magic. Anyone know if it was in 3.5 or 3.0?
Detect Magic works on Artifacts. If you check its tables, it actually gives the aura result (overwhelming) for Artifact-level items. It is absolutely capable of identifying the properties of Artifacts if the user can succeed at the Spellcraft check.
What's the overwelmed condition. Are they passed out or just stunned. Sure, when they recover they know what the properties are, but they still have to recover from overwelming first.
Detect magic can absolutely identify a powerful aura from an artifact.
Other than that it makes no mention of artifacts at all (or determining properties for that matter.) The Spellcraft skill makes no mention of artifacts.
The artifact rules mention that it is possible to identify some artifacts with spellcraft, as determined by the GM.
"The GM should determine whether or not an artifact can be identified using Spellcraft, and the DC of that check if it's nonstandard, before introducing it into his game."
It would be odd that identify, being a higher level spell and more focused, would be weaker than detect magic when it comes to this. I would personally rule that the prohibition for identifying artifacts with identify would only apply to artifacts that couldn't be identified with detect magic and spellcraft. I could see ruling that the +10 enhancement bonus from identify didn't apply in any case though.
Detect magic can absolutely identify a powerful aura from an artifact.
Other than that it makes no mention of artifacts at all (or determining properties for that matter.) The Spellcraft skill makes no mention of artifacts.
The artifact rules mention that it is possible to identify some artifacts with spellcraft, as determined by the GM.
"The GM should determine whether or not an artifact can be identified using Spellcraft, and the DC of that check if it's nonstandard, before introducing it into his game."
It would be odd that identify, being a higher level spell and more focused, would be weaker than detect magic when it comes to this. I would personally rule that the prohibition for identifying artifacts with identify would only apply to artifacts that couldn't be identified with detect magic and spellcraft. I could see ruling that the +10 enhancement bonus from identify didn't apply in any case though.
IMO, the difference is that Identify is attempting to tell you what the thing is but can't for artifacts, e.g., given The Hammer of Unmaking the limitation says "Identify can't tell you what this really is, but you determine that it is a +2 impact warhammer." Detect magic is attempting to discern properties only, not "what is this thing." For non-artifact magic items, "what is this thing" is equivalent to "what are its properties."