Firing into a Antil magic shell

[Bauglir]

Were you firing a +2 arrow it could be interpreted that post-launch, the arrow guides itself towards the target slightly, and accelerates slightly, to produce the increased chance to hit and damage. (I might rule a +1 to hit and damage in this case, as the arrow has already been in the air for some time before it hit the anti-magic field)

However you are firing a non-magical arrow from a +2 bow, so it will hold steadier, and release the arrow a little faster than a normal bow; its trajectory and speed is decided the moment it leaves the bow - in other words the attack enjoys both the hit and the damage bonuses.

Another way to look at it - you are firing a non-magical arrow - why should an anti-magic field affect it in the slightest? Only the bow is magical, and it's outside the field.

 

[Pax]

Bauglir, that's about how I'd rule it: full magic bow benefits, no magic arrow benefits at all.

Then again, all magic arrows in core D&D are also masterwork arrows, so you would still enjoy the +1 to hit from that source, regardless of antimagic fields.

 

[Camarath]

I understand that a if you attack was higher that the tragets touch AC this is due to the tragets armor preventing a good hit by deflecting (stopping etc.) the blow. When I speak of a "hit" I am talking about a blow that makes contact and has the potianial to deal damage. Armor makes it more difficult to score a "hit" not deal damage (i.e. it has no aftect on the prossece of rolling damage). D20 makes no mechanical provision for the penetration of armor as opposed to the circumvention of that armor with regard to the bonus to hit. Since the ability to overcome armor is resolved when you roll your attack you do not have to reevaluate your ability to penetrate the tragets armor. It does not realy matter why the Enchantment bonus to hit works just how (mechanically). If you have rules that provide for the reevaluation of you attack bonus after the attack was rolled or a rule based reson why the archer should not get the bonus to hit I would be intersed in hearing it.

Note: When I use game terms I try to use the in-game definition rather than the actual dictionary definition. This may have caused some confusion since by hit I did not mean make contact but score a successful attack. I am sorry for any misunderstanding.

 

[Pax]

I understand that a if you attack was higher that the tragets touch AC this is due to the tragets armor preventing a good hit by deflecting (stopping etc.) the blow. When I speak of a "hit" I am talking about a blow that makes contact and has the potianial to deal damage. Armor makes it more difficult to score a "hit" not deal damage (i.e. it has no aftect on the prossece of rolling damage).

The problem here is, in D&D, the two are one and the same. And apparently you don't understand how armor works; more often than not, the blow is NOT "deflected", it's plain out stopped cold. Armor -- modern and otherwise -- works by dissipatign the energy input of a blow to levels that reduce or eliminate actual injury to nonlethal levels.

Note: When I use game terms I try to use the in-game definition rather than the actual dictionary definition. This may have caused some confusion since by hit I did not mean make contact but score a successful attack. I am sorry for any misunderstanding.

Well, the thing is, you can make contact, but be prevented from "hitting" solely by dint of the armor. Even teh DMG says so (see above, where someone else quoted the passage about heavy armor, etc).

Then, it comes down to deciding either why an Enhancement bonus makes it easier to get through or around armor, or, you have to decide when in an arrow's flight it's enhancement bonus matters.

I say, for an arrow, it's more likely to be aid in penetration, than accuracy. With a bow at 200 yards, or even at 30', you don't try to aim for "chinks in his armor" ... you aim center-mass, and hope you punch a hole straight through his breastplate.

Thus, it would seem the arrows + to hit would be at least as important at the moment of impact, as during flight. Thus, an antimagic field would deny you that part of any magical bonusses you might have.

 

[Camarath]

Well, the thing is, you can make contact, but be prevented from "hitting" solely by dint of the armor. Even teh DMG says so (see above, where someone else quoted the passage about heavy armor, etc).

I said this in my post and you said.

The problem here is, in D&D, the two are one and the same. And apparently you don't understand how armor works; more often than not, the blow is NOT "deflected", it's plain out stopped cold. Armor -- modern and otherwise -- works by dissipatign the energy input of a blow to levels that reduce or eliminate actual injury to nonlethal levels.

Apparently you don't understand or read peoples posts. Do you have any RULE BASED reson to to speretate a bonus to attack form the actual attack roll, which is what you are suggesting? I understand how real armor works but that has no relation to the way armor function in this non-real roleplaying game. Armor in D20 works by reducing your ability to succeed in an attack not your ability succefuly deal damage to a foe. Real world armor works in a way that is not congruent with the way D&D armor works. Thus, you can not use it to decide how the rules work you must use the RULES. Bonuses matter at the time of the roll not before or after.


Also real world armor does deflect blows as well as abosrb and distribute kinetic energy. When you strike a hard curved suface your weapon does not instantly stop, it is instead rediected along the surface because of momentum and friction. Unless the coefficient of friction is infinitely high the will be some deflection any time any object any other object.

 

[Pax]

Apparently you don't understand or read peoples posts. Do you have any [/i]RULE BASED[/i] reson to to speretate a bonus to attack form the actual attack roll, which is what you are suggesting?

Yes, allof which you've ignored or dismissed out of hand. They boil down to this:

Anti Magic Field ... when the arrow actually reaches it's target, it's nonmagical ... have a nice day. And arrows single enhancement bonus is to BOTH attack AND damage; it's all or nothing, and just like a magic spear sticking into the AMF, it stops having an enhancement bonus when it gets to the target.

Because the DM bloody well says so ... were you a player in my campaign, at this stage, the BOW would stop working, too.

I understand how real armor works but that has no relation to the way armor function in this non-real roleplaying game.

Aside form teh fact that D&D is trying to model real armor, albeit in a quick-and-dirty, abstract fashion that promotes faster gameplay.

Armor in D20 works by reducing your ability to succeed in an attack not your ability succefuly deal damage to a foe. Real world armor works in a way that is not congruent with the way D&D armor works. Thus, you can not use it to decide how the rules work you must use the RULES[/b]. Bonuses matter at the time of the roll not before or after.[/b]

Tell you what, why don't YOU quote rules to ME, which say explicitly and exactly what you've just asserted -- that the plusses from a magic ranged weapon, and/or it's ammunition, apply even when the target is within an antimagic field.

There wouldn't BE a question, if there were any. And the interpretation that an arrow's + to hit is EQUALLY likely to be penetration over course-correcting accuracy is perfectly valid. There are TWO ways to hit an armored target -- accurately seeking unarmored places, or, plowing straight through the armor itself. Enhancing either or both of those, would enhance your chances to score a "hit"; the enhanced penetration, however, would not function in an antimagic field, if the enhancement were itself magical.

Since the DMG doesn't define what method is used, you cannot say it is NOT penetration with any greater certainty than anyone can say it IS.

Which brings us back to: it's a magic arrow hitting someone in an antimagic field. Magic doesn't work in an antimagic field, so the arrow doesn't benefit from it's magic. Ergo, the arrow's plusses (and elemental damages, if any) don't apply.

Have.

A.

Nice.

Day.

 

[Camarath]

1) It is not all or nothing there are two separate rolls and two separate times the bonus is aplied. When you attack and when you damage. You attack before the arrow gets to the target and roll damage after.

2) You are not my DM.

3) It is modeled on real armor but the game mechanics do not function in the same maner as real armor. Like many thing in D&D it is based on a real world thing but it does not function in the same way.

4) That is not what I asserted. I asserted that you get bonus when and where you perform actions. It does not apply inside the anti-magic field but outside where you performed the attack.

5) It does not matter why you get the bonus, penetration or accuracy, what matters are the conditions under which action occurs. When you roll your attack you have a magical bow and arrow thus you get the bonus to attack. When you roll your damage you do not have a magical arrow so you get no bonus to damage.

6) I agree, you do not get the bonus to damage or other magical properties your arrow might have had when it hit the target.

7) Have a nice day

 

[Hypersmurf]

When you roll your attack you have a magical bow and arrow thus you get the bonus to attack. When you roll your damage you do not have a magical arrow so you get no bonus to damage.

But you still have a magic bow when you roll your damage. Do you assert that you should add the bow's enhancement to damage but not the arrow's?

-Hyp.

 

[mmu1]

1) It is not all or nothing there are two separate rolls and two separate times the bonus is aplied. When you attack and when you damage. You attack before the arrow gets to the target and roll damage after.

The rules say absolutely nothing about the times those separate bonuses are applied. To say that "to hit" is applied as the arrow leaves the bow and "to damage" as it hits the target is pure speculation on your part.

Perhaps the "to hit" bonus comes into play because the arrow homes in on the target all along its path, perhaps it veers towards chinks in the armor... Same with the bonus to damage, for all the rules mention it, the enhancement might give the arrow extra speed as it leaves the bow, not because of some magical effect as it strikes the target.

You're assuming certain things for which you have no rule support, and ingoring the simplest explanation, which we have rules for - magical weapons don't work in an antimagic field...

 

[Pax]

1) It is not all or nothing there are two separate rolls and two separate times the bonus is aplied. When you attack and when you damage. You attack before the arrow gets to the target and roll damage after.

One action. One set of circumstances. Either the arrow is magical, or it is not, for that action, in that set of circumstances. You don't get to go half-and-half.

2) You are not my DM.

Whichis very fortunate for you, and something I am very grateful for.

3) It is modeled on real armor but the game mechanics do not function in the same maner as real armor. Like many thing in D&D it is based on a real world thing but it does not function in the same way.

However, when a question not previously addressed by rules which model a real-world situation comes up ... the best thing to do is go back to the real-world situation you're modelling, and answer the question from there.

4) That is not what I asserted. I asserted that you get bonus when and where you perform actions. It does not apply inside the anti-magic field but outside where you performed the attack.

An attack with a bow is one action, not two. You either get the arrow bonus to the whole action, or to none of it.

And IMC, you personally, and maybe ONLY you, would notonly not get the arrow bonus, you probably wouldn't get the BOW bonus anymore, either. Debating the rules is one thing, but your hair-splitting goes well and truly beyond acceptible limits.

5) It does not matter why you get the bonus, penetration or accuracy, what matters are the conditions under which action occurs. When you roll your attack you have a magical bow and arrow thus you get the bonus to attack. When you roll your damage you do not have a magical arrow so you get no bonus to damage.

Penetration woudl have to occur at the target; accuracy could occur before the target, at the target, or both.

"At the target" is an antimagic field, wherein magical benefits no longer apply. Ergo ... the arrow benefits don't apply ... especially if any or all of the benefit to hit is based on enhanced armor penetration.

6) I agree, you do not get the bonus to damage or other magical properties your arrow might have had when it hit the target.

The bonus to damage is from the same (single) enhancement bonus as teh bonus to hit. Either that bonus functions all the way, or, not at all.

You can't have your cake and eat it too.