D&D 5E Does a nonmagic arrow from a magic bow pierce nonmagic weapon resistance?

[The Crimson Binome]

Yes. Arrows cannot be magical weapons in 5E; they are ammunition, not weapons, according to the PHB equipment chapter. An attack from a magical weapon like a bow is still a magical weapon attack even if it is using nonmagical ammunition.

When you put it like that, a magical arrow fired from a non-magical bow would fail to pierce resistance.

My rule of thumb is that anything which has a magic bonus to damage counts as a magical weapon, so the sage ruling would make sense in that light. My rule does fail to account for magical weapons or arrows which did not give a bonus to hit or damage, though.

For the record, my first primary GM had long since ruled that an everburning torch was a magical weapon, even though it did not confer a bonus to hit or damage. That was back in AD&D, though, and there were substantially fewer enemies who required a magical weapon without also requiring it to be a +1 or higher.

 

[Kobold Stew]

For the record, my first primary GM had long since ruled that an everburning torch was a magical weapon, even though it did not confer a bonus to hit or damage. That was back in AD&D, though, and there were substantially fewer enemies who required a magical weapon without also requiring it to be a +1 or higher.

that's actually pretty awesome: I can see a low-level party (3-4) getting a village together and arming them with ever burning torches (made with multiple castings of continual light), and holding back a rampaging elemental, or a band of ghosts.

 

[JackOfAllTirades]

But a mundane arrow fired from a magical bow is still a mundane arrow.

I mean, it normally takes a Wizard several weeks of work and thousands of gold pieces to enchant an item and make it magical, but I'm supposed to believe someone nocks an arrow in their bow and POOF it's enchanted!

This makes no sense whatsoever.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

But a mundane arrow fired from a magical bow is still a mundane arrow.

Sure, it's a mundane arrow, but the resistance is to damage from nonmagical weapons, and the magical bow is not a nonmagical weapon, and neither is the arrow.

This is RAI.

@mex_rage "Do magical ranged weapon count as magical to bypass nonmagic weapon resistance and inmunity with mundane ammo?"

Yes, they do!

http://www.sageadvice.eu/2014/12/09/magic-ranged-weapon/

 

[JackOfAllTirades]

Sure, it's a mundane arrow, but the resistance is to damage from nonmagical weapons, and the magical bow is not a nonmagical weapon, and neither is the arrow.

This is RAI.



http://www.sageadvice.eu/2014/12/09/magic-ranged-weapon/

Mundane equals nonmagical. Do you even know what these words mean?

 

[Charles Rampant]

Do you? It seems that your responses are a bit more angry than the topic really deserves. The logic seems simple to me: a magical arrow is magical. A magical bow is magical. You don't make a magical arrow unmagical by firing it out of a non-magical bow (think of Bard and the Black Arrow used to kill Smaug), just as a magical bow doesn't stop being magical just because you are firing normal ammunition out of them. The magical quality of one component (bow/arrow) is overriding the non-magical quality of the other component, just as the magical quality overrides the 'piercing weapon' quality for most monster damage resistance.

So that is the rules justification. The thematic justification is even easier: how is it exciting and interesting for a player to get a powerful magical bow, only to be told that without special ammunition it doesn't actually count as magical for the most important fights? The same for magical ammunition: that should be a rare and exciting thing to use, not something that only works when it doesn't matter. The player got a magical item, and now you are introducing a toll to be able to use its cool magical ability. The melee types have no such problems. So the two magical items, bow and arrow, make any pairing of bow and arrow that they are placed into magical, because to do otherwise would be kind of boring.

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[Umbran]

Let us keep a *respectful* tone, folks. Thanks.

 

[Charles Rampant]

Silver is a physical quality though, like being made of wood, whereas magical is a (deliberately vague) term that, in this context, apparently transfers from the weapon to the ammunition in some kind of metaphysical fashion.

 

[The Grassy Gnoll]

Ok, here's a magic bow. It's a +1 bow. That's +1 to hit and damage.
Why? Why is it magical?
Because there is magic imbued into the bow that makes the shooter better able to penetrate armour and to do more damage.
But a bow without an arrow is just a really lame guitar.
So it must be that the bow's magic imbues the ammunition shot from it with the bow's ability to penetrate and hurt. Thus, the magic transfers itself from the bow onto the arrow. Otherwise it's not a +1 bow.
Is a +1 sword not a +1 sword because the hilt isn't in itself magical, just the blade? Of course not. But the hilt is the delivery mechanism for the blade just as the bow is the delivery mechanism for the arrow.
And as far as RAW, someone pointed out that arrows count as ammo, not a weapon. It's the bow that is the weapon.
The 'silver my bow' argument is silly. The silver doesn't magically transfer itself to the arrow. But magic does. Because it's magic. And because it's magic, physics leaves the room and goes and takes a bath with scented candles.