A Sadistic/Compassionate Runeforged weapon acts as a bane weapon to abjurers and any creatures with an active abjuration spell effect. If a creature has a constant abjuration effect, like freedom of movement, would this count as an “abjuration spell effect” to trigger the bane weapon properties?
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Can you make an example?
I don't get if you are speaking of some creature that has an SU constant Freedom of movement effect, a guy with a Ring of Freedom of movement, a guy with a permanent Freedom of movement spell, or a creature with a constant Freedom of movement spell.
As a general rule, the sadistic weapon will work if the creature is the target of an Abjuration spell or spell-like ability, and it is in effect when the one wielding the weapon attacks.
Given the context of runeforged weapons—being made to “grant the wielder additional prowess over practitioners of an opposing school of magic”—I would say they only work against the beneficiaries from arcane spells or magic items of that specific school of magic.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yes.
It is bane vs. any creature under the effect. Which means it doesn't differentiate between spell or spell-like. And it doesn't matter how it got the effect. Innate, cast on it, or received from a magical item.
The runeforged weapons do require a bit of GM judgment. They also function as bane weapons vs. features that aren't exactingly defined. A tyrannical weapon is bane vs. "conjurers." A wizard with the conjuration school would clearly qualify, but a GM might decide that a summoner counts as well.
Can you make an example?
I don't get if you are speaking of some creature that has an SU constant Freedom of movement effect, a guy with a Ring of Freedom of movement, a guy with a permanent Freedom of movement spell, or a creature with a constant Freedom of movement spell.
As a general rule, the sadistic weapon will work if the creature is the target of an Abjuration spell or spell-like ability, and it is in effect when the one wielding the weapon attacks.
The Hollow Serpent,Cayhound,Linnorm, Crag Linnorm, ect. have the constant defensive effect of "Freedom of Movment". Wanted to know the interaction if one of these kind of creatures (going to pop up in my game) was hit with a sadistic runeforged weapon.
The runeforged weapons do require a bit of GM judgment. They also function as bane weapons vs. features that aren't exactingly defined. A tyrannical weapon is bane vs. "conjurers." A wizard with the conjuration school would clearly qualify, but a GM might decide that a summoner counts as well.
This is where I think the context of the weapon in question is paramount. Runeforged weapons were made in a specific era, by Thassilonians, against Thassilionians: specifically, to oppose one of the seven Thassilonian schools of magic. A Conjurer would clearly qualify, yes, but an arcane spellcaster who simply had access to the Conjuration school would not, unless said caster was under the effects of a Conjuration spell effect. On the other hand, the wielder of a tyrannical weapon would benefit from the added saving throw bonus against any Conjuration spell, whether the caster was a Conjurer or just a generalist Wizard.
Given the context of runeforged weapons—being made to “grant the wielder additional prowess over practitioners of an opposing school of magic”—I would say they only work against the beneficiaries from arcane spells or magic items of that specific school of magic.
Do they think that Divine or extraordinary abjuration spell/abilities would be immune to the Runeforge effects then?
|
|
The runeforged weapons do require a bit of GM judgment. They also function as bane weapons vs. features that aren't exactingly defined. A tyrannical weapon is bane vs. "conjurers." A wizard with the conjuration school would clearly qualify, but a GM might decide that a summoner counts as well.This is where I think the context of the weapon in question is paramount. Runeforged weapons were made in a specific era, by Thassilonians, against Thassilionians: specifically, to oppose one of the seven Thassilonian schools of magic. A Conjurer would clearly qualify, yes, but an arcane spellcaster who simply had access to the Conjuration school would not, unless said caster was under the effects of a Conjuration spell effect. On the other hand, the wielder of a tyrannical weapon would benefit from the added saving throw bonus against any Conjuration spell, whether the caster was a Conjurer or just a generalist Wizard.
I am definitely not going to argue that I have the absolutely correct answer here. There's plenty of room for GMs to decide if the descriptors apply to wizards only or could affect other classes. A GM might rule that a summoner counts as a conjurer, or a shifter counts as a transmuter, or various archetypes count as specialists in certain schools. While the context of "Thassilon was all about the wizards" is very true, so is "the shifter wasn't even a class until well after the runeforged weapons were published."
Do they think that Divine or extraordinary abjuration spell/abilities would be immune to the Runeforge effects then?
I would say they would not be affected by said weapon. It's very important to consider the language used in their description:
"Each runeforged weapon opposes a school of magic," and, more specifically, "each of the seven Thassilonian schools of magic" (emphasis mine), which are by definition arcane. Expanding their effect to divine spells that happen to be of the same school (even though schools of magic are largely irrelevant to divine spellcasters) or to extraordinary abilities that have nothing to do with a spell or spell effect (such as with the Crag Linnorm) would be an overreach.
I am definitely not going to argue that I have the absolutely correct answer here. There's plenty of room for GMs to decide if the descriptors apply to wizards only or could affect other classes. A GM might rule that a summoner counts as a conjurer, or a shifter counts as a transmuter, or various archetypes count as specialists in certain schools. While the context of "Thassilon was all about the wizards" is very true, so is "the shifter wasn't even a class until well after the runeforged weapons were published."
I take your point, and offer no disagreement to it whatsoever, Belafon. If a GM wants to reframe that era as one where, e.g., Summoners served the Runelord in charge of Conjuration, then it absolutely makes sense that the people making the weapons in question would have included that class in their "target group."
|
|
The Hollow Serpent,Cayhound,Linnorm, Crag Linnorm, ect. have the constant defensive effect of "Freedom of Movment". Wanted to know the interaction if one of these kind of creatures (going to pop up in my game) was hit with a sadistic runeforged weapon.Can you make an example?
I don't get if you are speaking of some creature that has an SU constant Freedom of movement effect, a guy with a Ring of Freedom of movement, a guy with a permanent Freedom of movement spell, or a creature with a constant Freedom of movement spell.
As a general rule, the sadistic weapon will work if the creature is the target of an Abjuration spell or spell-like ability, and it is in effect when the one wielding the weapon attacks.
Hollow Serpent, Cayhound
Spell-Like AbilitiesConstant—freedom of movement
Spell-like, it will work.
Linnorm, Crag
Freedom of Movement (Ex)
Exceptional ability, the bane effect will not trigger.
From my point of view, it doesn't matter what is the source of the abjuration spell, only that it is a spell. For the background, it uses Evocation and Necromantic magic. Abjuration is a banned school for Evocation or Necromantic Thassilonian Specialists and they can't cast the spells at all, so it is reasonable that the bane effect will target all kinds of Abjuration spells.
Abjurer instead is a specific specialist school of magic, so the bane effect triggers for the standard Abjurer of the CRB and the Thassilonian Specialists Envy (Abjuration) school, but not against other casters that know or have memorized Abjuration spells (as long as they aren't the target of one).
Thank you all for your input!
I am going to go with Diego Rossi's Ruling of Spell-Like Vs Exceptional Ability’s in regards to my original Question.
And in Regards to any Conjuerors/Abjurers/ect. I also like Diego’s School specialist explanation as well, in the context of the game I am running now.
Thank you also Phoebus Alexandros and Belafon, I did appreciate your impute as well.