Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Deset Gled" data-source="post: 1785048" data-attributes="member: 7808">Of course, the fact that it is made out of light (not metal) is also rather inconvenient in that light is not solid.  Since you have no solid blade (just rather heavy light), it can never actually hit anything.  You just kind of swing it around and look at the pretty shadows.   <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /> The above is, of course, ridiculus, but if what you claim were completely true, it would be as well.  The bottom line is that you can't expect a magic weapon to follow real life physics.It is obvious from the weapon description that some properties of the original weapon's material have to remain the same.  Unfortunately, the only one that is spelled out is weight.  Most people would assume that other mundane properties such as damage type (slashing, etc) also remain the same.  Since it gives no statement to the contrary, I can see no reason why the weapon's damage reduction properties would not remain the same.  There is no pure proof of this, but it is both the simplest (as interpreting it other ways gets into the strangeness above) and most balanced way of doing things.  At the same time, there is no actual proof that what you are stating is true.  But since the proof you give leads to unrealistic situations, I see it as an arguement against your side rather than for it.</blockquote>

Verification