Versatile Weapon Functionality

[Monoxide3009]

Hey All,

Question about how this spell works (not the GMW part, I dont care about that). I have a debate in my game about how this spell works damage reduction wise.

The spell reads: "enabling it [weapon/ammo] to bypass damage reduction of one the following types: bludgeoning, cold iron, piercing, silver, or slashing."

I (DM) am interpreting this to say that if a player is using a bow (piercing arrows) against a creature with damage reduction to piercing, this spell can then enchant the arrows to overcome piercing damage reduction.

The players are interpreting this to mean that they can use the spell on arrows to align them to a certain damage type. Example: same person with same weapon (piercing) fighting a golem with 15/blunt can cast the spell on the arrows to make them overcome this damage reduction.

The way this spell reads to me is that the spell would have to be cast multiple times to overcome 15/blunt (a cast each time to overcome slashing, cold iron, and silver DRs as the arrows would be piercing, the weapon is magic, and blunt is not reduced).

Two overall questions:
1) which interpretation is correct
2) if it would need to be cast multiple times, how many? In other words, would it just be the B/P/S spectrum, or would cold iron, magic, and silver (adamantine?) be in there as well?

EDIT: Thinking about it a little after making this post, are we just arguing semantics? If the player used the spell on arrows to bypass piercing with a golem (15/blunt), would the golem then become 15/blunt or piercing to that player?

[Azothath]

it's best to give a link to the whole text.
Versatile Weapon
The spell reads that the damage type must be chosen from the list based on the first line, "You transform the physical makeup of a weapon as you desire". The wording isn't explicitly clear but for game rules it's reasonably clear. Also all pertinent details of a spell have to be chosen by the end of the casting (when spell effects manifest). If the caster gets it wrong, ahh well. It also bypasses DR/magic.
If that first line wasn't there then the spell would adapt to one of the damage types automatically or the caster could choose another type at the start of his round and THAT would/should have been stated.

[Mysterious Stranger]

You transform the physical makeup of a weapon as you desire.

The first line of spells description specifically states you have a choice of the physical makeup of the weapon. Your way allows no choice. Your players are correct.

[blahpers]

The spell does exactly two things:

1. It produces the effect of greater magic weapon, albeit for a shorter duration.
2. It allows the weapon to overcome one specific kind of DR, chosen from the given list at the time of casting.

It does not actually change the type of damage; it merely allows it to bypass DR as if it were some other type.

Example: A greataxe imbued with versatile weapon (bludgeoning) would deal slashing damage but would count as both slashing and bludgeoning for the purpose of overcoming damage reduction. It would still split a black pudding instead of damaging it, as it is still a slashing weapon, and it would still overcome a giant slug's DR 10/piercing or slashing, as it is still a slashing weapon.

What kind of golem was this? I don't know of a golem that has DR 15/bludgeoning. A mithral golem in fluid form would have DR 15/adamantine and bludgeoning; versatile weapon wouldn't help the above greataxe overcome such damage reduction unless the greataxe was already adamantine.

Edit: Nevermind, that was apparently just an example.

Quote:

EDIT: Thinking about it a little after making this post, are we just arguing semantics? If the player used the spell on arrows to bypass piercing with a golem (15/blunt), would the golem then become 15/blunt or piercing to that player?

Don't overthink it. The golem's damage reduction never changes--the arrows, rather, have the property of overcoming DR/bludgeoning in addition to their existing properties, that's all. Think of damage reduction as "resistant to everything except X", not "resistant to Y, Z, and W".

[Azothath]

bad wording on my part as I echoed the original poster. Bypasses a DR (from list) and dR/magic, but damage type remains unchanged.

[Monoxide3009]

blahpers wrote:

What kind of golem was this?

It was an example, but it was based off of a Clay Golem, I just forgot the /adamantine.

I think you gave the best response. I believe that both the players and I were correct, we were both just thinking about it in different ways. While they were arguing that it "overcomes damage reduction" as a whole (which is incorrect), the spell could still be used for what they were trying to accomplish. I realized later (when I wasnt able to edit) that I didnt fully state the players argument.

The player using it responded to me with "The enemy is 15/bludgeoning damage, so I am using versatile weapon to overcome bludgeoning damage reduction." Which is incorrect to your point of "resistant to everything except X". My players struggle with this differentiation. However, after I thought about it, he was just 'using it wrong' opposed to the spell not working for the purposes he needed.

blahpers wrote:

Don't overthink it.

Not really over thinking it - I get the wording of DR - thats just how I would describe it in my head.