D&D 5E Artifact effects
- Thread starter Balfore
- Start date
The Crimson Binome
Hero
It can, if you really want it to, but expect your player to complain.
If they have immunity to Fear and Charm, but they end up getting Feared and Charmed anyway, then they might call shenanigans; and your only response is to say that you're the DM and it looks like they weren't completely immune after all. The player might be more accepting of this turn of events if you spend a lot of time foreshadowing how big and scary this new artifact is, or if they hear a legend about a great hero who carried the artifact they currently have, and how they were completely immune to mundane and lesser-magical fear and charms, but they were still affected by this even-more-powerful artifact.
For the most part, I agree. If you wanted, you could rate artifact by power level, allowing more powerful artifacts to override lesser ones, but this is a lot of work.
The sole exception to this would be an artifact who's purpose is to counter a specific artifact. The Sentinel and the Gauntlet (from the classic adventures UK2 & UK3) are a prime example of this. The Sentinel was made as a counter to the Gauntlet, so its power should be able to override its nemesis if a direct conflict occurs. Another example would be the Vecna artifacts and the Sword of Kas, but I don't know which would override which.
When in doubt, roll dice to decide!
Addendum: Letting the dice decide is good because:
- If the fearing/charming artifact allows a saving throw, the immunity artifact gives advantage on the saving throw, or maybe just a flat +5 bonus (which is generally better, and stacks with advantage).
- If the fearing/charming artifact doesn't allow a saving throw normally, then the immunity artifact allows a saving throw at some reasonable DC.
Addendum: Letting the dice decide is good because:
- Both artifacts do something, which is better than nothing, so the player in question might not feel quite as ripped off.
- You don't have to decide; you just need to figure out the relative power of the artifacts (which can inform the saving throw bonus or DC that you use). This is easier for you, and lets you take less blame for the outcome. ;}
Last edited:
I would say no, the first artifact makes you immune. If the second artifact had an effect, that specifically overrode immunity, that would change things, but as stated that seems not to be the case.
Sent from my HTC One M9 using EN World mobile app
steeldragons
Steeliest of the dragons
Depends on the artifact...and the story...and the setting's internal consistency...probably a couple of other variables.
Since I can't speak to your game's story or setting, I'll just address the first. It's a matter of degrees, really. How do you [or, more importantly, the DM] see it working in the game world?
To my thinking, the Bauble of Uber-Over-Deity is going to beat the Super Weapon of Hero-spirit-of-legend. There might be a momentary "tete-a-tete", a couple of rounds of "Oh no, can we do this/will this work?" But the Bauble's going to wipe the floor with the Super Weapon on round 3 or 4.
The Demonlord's Handy-Dandy-Thingamabob-of-Wow versus the Archmage's Animated-Whoozits-of-Wuh? Probably pretty evenly matched, if in fact, they effect the same things at all. But gather together 3 very rare [powerful] magic items that effect the same thing with 5 very powerful mages, to work in concert, you can bet both the Thingamabob and Whoozits are going down.
As to the presented example...it, again, would depend on the artifact. If the first artifact is saying while you have it, you are immune to X. Then, another artifact says you automatically/at will can X targets...then I'd say they cancel each other out. So nothing, really happens. They are still immune to X from any other source. The X from the second artifact doesn't take effect.
Unless, and gods know stranger things have been made artifacts in the history of D&D, you have 2 artifacts that are specifically made/designed to work, either in concert, or against one another...Those things that share an ancient backstory, were always wielded against each other by ancient enemies, or designed to work in tandem against common threats, inherently balance the cosmos around them (destroying either destroys the multiverse
, etc... In which case, the artifact description would stipulate, "attacks by the Whoozits overcome protections from the Bauble, while the spell attacks amplified by the Bauble cannot be dispelled, counterspelled, or otherwise negated by the Whoozits," simply "no effect from the Thingamabob can effect someone wielding the Super Weapon, and vice versa," etc...
Since I can't speak to your game's story or setting, I'll just address the first. It's a matter of degrees, really. How do you [or, more importantly, the DM] see it working in the game world?
To my thinking, the Bauble of Uber-Over-Deity is going to beat the Super Weapon of Hero-spirit-of-legend. There might be a momentary "tete-a-tete", a couple of rounds of "Oh no, can we do this/will this work?" But the Bauble's going to wipe the floor with the Super Weapon on round 3 or 4.
The Demonlord's Handy-Dandy-Thingamabob-of-Wow versus the Archmage's Animated-Whoozits-of-Wuh? Probably pretty evenly matched, if in fact, they effect the same things at all. But gather together 3 very rare [powerful] magic items that effect the same thing with 5 very powerful mages, to work in concert, you can bet both the Thingamabob and Whoozits are going down.
As to the presented example...it, again, would depend on the artifact. If the first artifact is saying while you have it, you are immune to X. Then, another artifact says you automatically/at will can X targets...then I'd say they cancel each other out. So nothing, really happens. They are still immune to X from any other source. The X from the second artifact doesn't take effect.
Unless, and gods know stranger things have been made artifacts in the history of D&D, you have 2 artifacts that are specifically made/designed to work, either in concert, or against one another...Those things that share an ancient backstory, were always wielded against each other by ancient enemies, or designed to work in tandem against common threats, inherently balance the cosmos around them (destroying either destroys the multiverse
, etc... In which case, the artifact description would stipulate, "attacks by the Whoozits overcome protections from the Bauble, while the spell attacks amplified by the Bauble cannot be dispelled, counterspelled, or otherwise negated by the Whoozits," simply "no effect from the Thingamabob can effect someone wielding the Super Weapon, and vice versa," etc...darkrose50
First Post
If two artifacts do opposite things, then one option would be to just have them cancel each other out.
Artifact A: causes fear
Artifact B: causes immunity to fear
Put them together and you get normal.
Artifact A: causes fear
Artifact B: causes immunity to fear
Put them together and you get normal.
Last edited:
Similar Threads
