If I use my staff of fire (without runes) to bop a creature with resistance physical 5 (except magical) on the head, do I ignore the resistance?
Or do I need a +1 rune on my staff to kill that barghest more quickly?
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
The staff of fire has the magical trait, so yes.
Well I'm glad we cleared that one up! XD
I second Salamileg's position.
Each Stave has the magical trait, ergo would bypass any resistance bypassed by Magic. I don't see any reason why they wouldn't.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The magical trait does not seem to have a specific interaction with Resistance to damage, so I would say unclear.
So...maybe, but it needs to be clarified.
Personally, I would want the answer to be no. Just because the staff has magical power does not make it magical as a weapon.
The magical trait does not seem to have a specific interaction with Resistance to damage, so I would say unclear.
So...maybe, but it needs to be clarified.
Personally, I would want the answer to be no. Just because the staff has magical power does not make it magical as a weapon.
Except the Magical trait is the only thing that tells you whether or not an attack is magical in the first place. So it is the only way you could ever bypass such a resistance.
Look at it this way. Why does a weapon potency rune allow you to bypass that resistance? It isn't because the Rune states that you bypass it specifically and it isn't because your weapon is doing any "extra" damage. It is because the rune provides that weapon with the Magical trait.
|
It seems to me that the core of the issue is whether a potential monster is actually resistant to magic weapons (in which case yes the staff would bypass resistance as would punching with healer's gloves because these items are magical)
OR
if a monster is resistant to magic damage (in which case a Potency Rune works because it is adding a magical increase to base damage and a physical bop with the staff or a punch with healer's glove would not bypass the resistance because while they are magic, their magic does not affect the damage being done in those scenarios).
the entry for resistances starts with:
"Resistance
Source Core Rulebook pg. 453
If you have resistance to a type of damage, each time you take that type of damage, you reduce the amount of damage you take by the listed amount"
This indicates to me that the second interpretation is the correct one.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
if a monster is resistant to magic damage (in which case a Potency Rune works because it is adding a magical increase to base damage
Potency rune don't increase damage.
|
|
That was a really good catch that I missed Squiggit! Looks like I may be too used to 5e where the +1 Weapons add to both the attack rolls and to the damage the weapon does.
That does make it a bit murkier but the +1 still does contribute directly to the attack roll. I'd still go with interpretation #2 in my mind (the magic of the weapon is affecting the attack that deals the damage). But that does make it less clear cut.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I would also like to point out that a pair of Healer's Gloves aren't actually a weapon. You are still using your "fist" to attack the opponent. A Stave can be used to attack as a staff weapon, thus granting all of the traits of the stave to attacks made with the weapon.
Edit: I believe that this is an important distinction to make. Handwraps of the Mighty Fist for instance specifically call out that they apply to your unarmed attacks. Which makes sense, you aren't always going to be punching. You could be kicking or headbutting etc...
Handwraps are written this way because they are not the weapon you are striking with, they enhance the weapon you are striking with.
Healer's Gloves or other glove like items don't confer any benefit to your unarmed attacks simply because they don't say that they do, and you don't attack with them.
The magical trait does not seem to have a specific interaction with Resistance to damage, so I would say unclear.
So...maybe, but it needs to be clarified.
Personally, I would want the answer to be no. Just because the staff has magical power does not make it magical as a weapon.
Except the Magical trait is the only thing that tells you whether or not an attack is magical in the first place. So it is the only way you could ever bypass such a resistance.
Look at it this way. Why does a weapon potency rune allow you to bypass that resistance? It isn't because the Rune states that you bypass it specifically and it isn't because your weapon is doing any "extra" damage. It is because the rune provides that weapon with the Magical trait.
That's a fair, but it should be more explicitly clear in the description of the magical trait.
Because otherwise, I think magical gloves would bypass magical resistance with punches, because the rules aren't explicit on how the magical trait is supposed to interact with resistance.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I understand for Unarmed Strikes we have the old familiar statement.
"However, unarmed attacks aren’t weapons, and effects and abilities that work with weapons never work with unarmed attacks unless they specifically say so." So I can see the healer glove example go down the toilet with that.
But quick thought experiment here, would you say that means if someone has a +1 Longbow, runs out of arrows, and decides to hit the boss monster with it. It's an improvised weapon at that point so negatives to the attack roll and the GM determines damage, but does that damage ignore resistance to non-magical weapons?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
There is this to consider.
A potency rune is what makes a weapon a magic weapon (page 599) or armor magic armor (page 556).
So it seems that without a Potency Rune the staff isn't a magic weapon.
There is this to consider.
A potency rune is what makes a weapon a magic weapon (page 599) or armor magic armor (page 556).So it seems that without a Potency Rune the staff isn't a magic weapon.
But it is a staff when wielded in combat, and items dont lose traits due to different usage. Since the stave itself has the magical trait, it would count.
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
I agree with Gisher and Goldryno, the statement from the CRB seems pretty definitive. "Magic weapon" is a specific term that refers to a weapon with a potency rune, so any weapon that doesn't have a potency rune or equivalent isn't a "magic weapon" even if it is magical.
I disagree. When looking at resistances, the primary consideration is the traits of the attack being resisted. Since wielded weapons confer their traits to any attack made with them, their traits count for both being resisted and bypassing resistance.
And since we dont have rules for taking away traits based on usage, a stave being used to attack would bypass a resistance bypassed by magic.
Then is a wand effectively an improvised magic light mace? And does casting barkskin on my wolf companion make it effectively a magical animal companion and make its unarmed attacks magical?
Be consistent with your logic and you will see how much sense it makes.
Barkskin doesn't grant the Magical Trait, so no.
I'd treat the wand as an improvised magical piercing weapon that deals 1 damage if you wanted to poke things with it. Wands are too flimsy to be maces.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Then is a wand effectively an improvised magic light mace? And does casting barkskin on my wolf companion make it effectively a magical animal companion and make its unarmed attacks magical?
Do scrolls produce magic paper cuts that bypass DR?
Then is a wand effectively an improvised magic light mace? And does casting barkskin on my wolf companion make it effectively a magical animal companion and make its unarmed attacks magical?Do scrolls produce magic paper cuts that bypass DR?
Sure, but if you try to use that offensively you're going to destroy the scroll as it gets ripped to shreds.
By the way, I noticed something interesting: a magic weapon is clearly described as a weapon with fundamental runes and has the magical trait:
A magic weapon is a weapon etched with only fundamental runes. A weapon potency rune gives an item bonus to attack rolls with the weapon, and a striking rune increases the weapon’s number of weapon damage dice.
The Prices here are for all types of weapons. You don’t need to adjust the Price from a club to a greataxe or the like. These weapons are made of standard materials, not precious materials such as cold iron.
The magic weapon spell makes no mention of etching runes or the magical trait:
The weapon glimmers with magic and energy. The target becomes a +1 striking weapon, gaining a +1 item bonus to attack rolls and increasing the number of weapon damage dice to two.Does this mean that the magic weapon spell doesn't give the magical trait to weapons and doesn't allow them to bypass resistances accordingly?
Well, let's examine what it means to be a "+1 Striking Weapon". What confers +1? A Potency rune. Which provides the Magical trait.
Checks out.
As to your argument that "Magical" bypassing DR is somehow an exploit... how exactly? What situations exactly do you mean? How many creatures have Resistance except Magical wherein something like this would even matter?
You can also add traits to actions. Let’s say that during a
fight, Seelah dips her sword into a brazier of hot coals before
swinging it at an enemy with a weakness to fire. You could
add the fire trait to this attack. A PC getting an advantage
in this way should usually have to use an action to do so,
so Seelah would get the benefit for one attack, but to do it
again she’d need to bury her sword in the coals once more.
Why would a player spend an action to add the fire trait to their attack if it didn't confer a benefit? The fire trait itself doesn't deal extra damage, nor does it mention specifically bypassing resistance:
fire (trait) Effects with the fire trait deal fire damage or either conjure or manipulate
fire. Those that manipulate fire have no effect in an area without fire. Creatures
with this trait consist primarily of fire or have a magical connection to that element.
The Magical trait, or any of the tradition traits, indicate that an item is magical. There is no "magical weapon" trait that states that an item does "magical damage". So the only trait that could ever bypass resistance except Magical, would be Magical.
Staves have Magical. Therefore they bypass such a resistance.
By the way, I noticed something interesting: a magic weapon is clearly described as a weapon with fundamental runes and has the magical trait:
A magic weapon is a weapon etched with only fundamental runes. A weapon potency rune gives an item bonus to attack rolls with the weapon, and a striking rune increases the weapon’s number of weapon damage dice.
The Prices here are for all types of weapons. You don’t need to adjust the Price from a club to a greataxe or the like. These weapons are made of standard materials, not precious materials such as cold iron.
The magic weapon spell makes no mention of etching runes or the magical trait:
The weapon glimmers with magic and energy. The target becomes a +1 striking weapon, gaining a +1 item bonus to attack rolls and increasing the number of weapon damage dice to two.Does this mean that the magic weapon spell doesn't give the magical trait to weapons and doesn't allow them to bypass resistances accordingly?
Nice try, but you took that quote completely out of context. It is referring to a specific Magic Weapon entry, not magic weapons generally.
What it is actually saying is that a 35gp +1 Weapon does not also have a Flaming Rune.
MAGIC WEAPON ITEM 2+
EVOCATION MAGICAL
Usage held in 1 hand
A magic weapon is a weapon etched with only fundamental
runes. A weapon potency rune gives an item bonus to attack
rolls with the weapon, and a striking rune increases the
weapon’s number of weapon damage dice.
The Prices here are for all types of weapons. You don’t need
to adjust the Price from a club to a greataxe or the like. These
weapons are made of standard materials, not precious
materials such as cold iron.
Type +1 weapon; Level 2; Price 35 gp
This weapon has a +1 weapon potency rune (+1 item bonus to
attack rolls with the weapon).
Type +1 striking weapon; Level 4; Price 100 gp
This weapon has a +1 weapon potency rune (+1 item
bonus to attack rolls with the weapon) and a striking
rune (one extra damage die).
Type +2 striking weapon; Level 10; Price 1,000 gp
This weapon has a +2 weapon potency rune (+2 item bonus
to attack rolls with the weapon) and a striking rune (one
additional damage die).
Type +2 greater striking weapon; Level 12; Price 2,000 gp
This weapon has a +2 weapon potency rune (+2 item bonus
to attack rolls with the weapon) and a greater striking rune
(two extra damage dice).
Type +3 greater striking weapon; Level 16; Price 10,000 gp
This weapon has a +3 weapon potency rune (+3 item bonus to
attack rolls with the weapon) and a greater striking rune (two
extra damage dice).
Type +3 major striking weapon; Level 19; Price 40,000 gp
This weapon has a +3 weapon potency rune (+3 item bonus to
attack rolls with the weapon) and a major striking rune (three
extra damage dice).
Just having the magical trait doesn't mean the staff of fire is automatically treated as a magic weapon since it's been created to cast fire spells and needs weapon runes to be a magic weapon. I wouldn't argue for a magic staff with a built-in magical property that affects melee attacks, and for now the staff of power and the staff of the magi are the only ones with such properties.
What about a potency rune makes a weapon magic? Does a potency rune specifically say that it is the only way for a weapon to bypass resistance or trigger weaknesses?
The answer is no. The Magical trait does that by virtue of being the magical trait. It doesnt need to spell out that it bypasses said resistance or trigger said weakness in the same way that a blunt weapon or fire weapon doesnt. Those weaknesses and resistances work on the keyword provided by the trait.
Staves have magical. Therefore they interact with weaknesses and resistances.
Except it's not the definition of the magical trait, like, at all. You're making it up. The only explanation is that you have a problem with hard magic systems in general and shouldn't play Pathfinder in such a case.
Lol Wut?
Resistances and Weaknesses both operate on traits. You are the one inventing rules.
Magical enhancements make this weapon strike true. Attack
rolls with this weapon gain a +1 item bonus, and the weapon
can be etched with one property rune.
You can upgrade the weapon potency rune already
etched on a weapon to a stronger version, increasing the
values of the existing rune to those of the new rune. You
must have the formula of the stronger rune to do so, and
the Price of the upgrade is the difference between the two
runes’ Prices.
What about this says that it specifically interacts with Weaknesses and Resistances, but no other magical "item" does?
The only thing that indicates that a Potency Rune makes a weapon interact with such weaknesses and resistances is the fact that the rune itself is magical, and thus confers that trait to the weapon it is etched onto and any attack made with that weapon.
Who here doesn't have a grasp of the "hard magic system"?
As an aside to Ravingdork, by the time you have access to a Staff of Fire, you have access to at least Potency Runes, and probably Striking Runes as well. Why not just put Runes on the damn thing and avoid the argument entirely?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
As an aside to Ravingdork, by the time you have access to a Staff of Fire, you have access to at least Potency Runes, and probably Striking Runes as well. Why not just put Runes on the damn thing and avoid the argument entirely?
Because then none of us would ever learn anything.
You.
In literally every edition of D&D and in Pathfinder a specific magic enhancement to weapons or unarmed strikes is needed to ignore resistances against non-magical attacks (i.e magical upgrades specific to weapons), and any other item that doesn't get the same kind of magical enhancement is not a valid magical damage source when striking with it.
The text about resistances that mentions magical attacks mentions magic weapons precisely. Everything that allows to ignore resistances against non-magical attacks mentions that it works like magic weapons if they don't mention anything more precise like spells that add the effects of fundamental runes.
Or be consistent with your logic that anything magical works since using spells is apparently enough to have a magic weapon even when the magical trait isn't mentioned, and admit that anyone or anything under an ongoing magical effect should definitely count as a magical source of damage. Until then You don't make any sense.
Magic weapon makes a weapon operate as a +X striking weapon. Shilleleigh does the same for a stick. This confers the magical trait to a weapon, making it a magical weapon, even though it doesnt actually have a rune attached.
The only thing that resistances and weaknesses care about are traits. If you don't know this to be true, you are not playing the game as intended.
Traits are;
A trait is a keyword that conveys additional information about a rules element, such as a school of magic or rarity. Often, a trait indicates how other rules interact with an ability, creature, item, or another rules element that has that trait.
Nothing about using a stave as a weapon takes away the magical trait. So it does in fact qualify as a "magical" weapon. If you were to use a wand as an improvised weapon, sure it would have the magical trait. It just wouldn't be a very good weapon as Aratorin pointed out.
What I am not saying is that being under the effects of a magical effect gives you magical by default. An effect has to specify in some way that it is granting such an effect, and in fact all of the examples I can find do.
Barkskin doesnt make you or any of your equipment magical. You are simply under the effects of a magic effect. There is a subtle difference that I dont think you quite grasp.
Run it how you will. If you dont want staves to count as magical weapons, that is your prerogative. But don't claim that the rules support your position. Because they certainly do not.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Because then none of us would ever learn anything.
You just like poking the hornets nest with a stick don't you...
As an aside to Ravingdork, by the time you have access to a Staff of Fire, you have access to at least Potency Runes, and probably Striking Runes as well. Why not just put Runes on the damn thing and avoid the argument entirely?Because then none of us would ever learn anything.
ROFL!
The only thing that resistances and weaknesses care about are traits. If you don't know this to be true, you are not playing the game as intended.Adamantine is neither a damage type nor a trait while many resistances mention it. If only traits matter, how do you explain this?
Precious trait essentially covers this, with the descriptor being the specific material in question.
What I am not saying is that being under the effects of a magical effect gives you magical by default. An effect has to specify in some way that it is granting such an effect, and in fact all of the examples I can find do.The magic weapon spell doesn't mention the magical trait. Neither do magic fang and shillelagh.
No but they do mention treating the affected weapon as though it was a +X Striking weapon, meaning it gains all of the traits of such a weapon.
Barkskin doesnt make you or any of your equipment magical. You are simply under the effects of a magic effect.So does a weapon affected by magic weapon, claws affected by magic fang and a staff affected by shillelagh.
Not wrong, but incomplete. Those spells, as stated previously specifically provide the benefits of being a magic weapon, as though they had the proper runes.
Run it how you will. If you dont want staves to count as magical weapons, that is your prerogative. But don't claim that the rules support your position. Because they certainly do not.It's not as if they supported yours either. Every DM I know would laugh at your face if you told them about your opinions on magic items and resistances.
And you haven't provided a scrap of evidence to support your claim. Quote me a rule that states that an item loses a trait when used as a weapon. I'll wait.
Edit: You actually bring up a good point. Precious metals dont inherently have a trait. But what zi dont think you realize is this is destructive unto your own argument. If traits are not factored into resistances and weaknesses as you claim, then how does a +1 weapon interact with them? A potency rune only makes a weapon magical by conferring the magical trait to it.
Even more interesting: the scrollstaff. It is identified as a Specific Magic Weapon as far as I can tell, away from home at the moment so dont have my books in front of me. But it operates exactly like a standard Stave.
It doesnt have a potency rune by default. Shouldn't this item appear with Stave rather than specific magic weapon on Nethys if this was not the case?
Indeed, instead of traits being the only descriptors that indicates what does and does not interact with resistances, in fact they are simply key descriptors. I was mistaken in this I will fully admit. After spending some time perusing the book this became very clear to me. It is easy to begin thinking that traits are the sole descriptor that qualifies an item or action due to their use: They are general descriptors that describe how other rules interact with them. Notable exceptions being damage types like slashing, blunt and piercing. Those are not specifically traits and are instead simply spelled out in the weapon stat block.
However, it is important to note that Traits are a factor that resistances and weaknesses look at. For instance;
When an attack deals a type of damage, the attack action
gains that trait. For example, the Strikes and attack
actions you use wielding a sword when its flaming rune is
active gain the fire trait, since the rune gives the weapon
the ability to deal fire damage.
Going back to my original argument, nothing has really changed. A stave does in fact have the Magical Trait, which means that it interacts with any rule that looks at magic. A resistance or weakness to magic would trigger based on that trait, as there are no rules for removing or ignoring the traits of a weapon based on usage.
Again, I point to the difference between using a non-Handwraps of Mighty Fist glove to punch and a Stave to attack. You are not using that magical glove as your weapon, you are using whichever part of your body you decide you hit the enemy with. Handwraps bypass this by stating that they apply to any unarmed attack you make.
A stave specifically is the weapon that you are attacking with, and thus ALL of it's descriptors and traits are applied to an attack with it. So it does blunt and magical damage. Adding a Potency and Striking wound to such a Stave does not suddenly make the stave "more magical".
I do apologize for my error earlier, however my point still stands. And the rules do address this point clearly. A Potency Rune does not state that it makes the weapon magical. It provides the weapon with the Magical Trait. You can't dispute this.