Spells ruling: Shatter

[ElectricDragon]

The first line in the spell description disallows magical objects.

Shatter creates a loud, ringing noise that breaks brittle, nonmagical objects; sunders a single solid, nonmagical object; or damages a crystalline creature.

Boldface added by me for clairification.

Ciao
Dave

 

[Selganor]

Reference, please... From what I can read in the SRD, nothing makes a magical item immune to Shatter.

It's in the spell description of Shatter. Only nonmagical items can be broken/sundered.

 

[Corsair]

It's in the spell description of Shatter. Only nonmagical items can be broken/sundered.

Always a good place to start your investigation when trying to figure out how a spell works.

 

[Olaf the Stout]

I also rule that non-magical weapons that have the Magic Weapon spell cast on it are immune to Shatter.

Olaf the Stout

 

[ElectricDragon]

What about a crystaline creature with Magic Fang?

Ciao
Dave

 

[wolff96]

What about a crystaline creature with Magic Fang?

A crystalline creature is not a magical object, regardless of whether or not you allow Shatter to work on items currently under Magic Weapon.

And since Shatter specifically calls out dealing damage to crystalline creatures, I'd call that a slam-dunk. I'm guessing you were joking anyway.

 

[Corsair]

I also rule that non-magical weapons that have the Magic Weapon spell cast on it are immune to Shatter.

Olaf the Stout

I'd contend that a magical item is inherently different than a nonmagical item which happens to be under the effect of a spell targeting it.

 

[moritheil]

I'd contend that a magical item is inherently different than a nonmagical item which happens to be under the effect of a spell targeting it.

Indeed, the real question is: What happens if I cast a shatter on the weapon in an antimagic field (via Initiate of Mystra or an artifact)?

 

[Corsair]

Indeed, the real question is: What happens if I cast a shatter on the weapon in an antimagic field (via Initiate of Mystra or an artifact)?

Nothing.

SRD: "Likewise, it prevents the functioning of any magic items or spells within its confines."

It is still a magic item, merely a non-functioning one. It's actually status as a magic item does not change.

 

[eamon]

I'd contend that a magical item is inherently different than a nonmagical item which happens to be under the effect of a spell targeting it.

Sure - a permanent magic item is permanantly magical, while a spell usually is not. If a magic item's powers are suppressed by dispel magic, would you allow shatter to function?

I don't see a problem with lumping temporary and permanently magical items together for the purposes of shatter. They both have an aura.

I suppose it's a matter of taste. I doubt it'll ever come up anyway, to be honest, in my games.