-
The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
D&D 5E Making a magic item.
- Thread starter Clancey
- Start date
The Crimson Binome
Hero
I don't believe that's the intent, but my 2E DM ruled that Continual Light worked that way.
His logic was that some monsters required a magic weapon to hit, and others required a magic weapon of +1 or higher to hit, suggesting that there must be a difference between those two things. Since every magical weapon in the book also had a bonus of +1 or higher, he reasoned that any magic item that didn't have a bonus must count as a magical weapon with a +0 bonus.
His logic was that some monsters required a magic weapon to hit, and others required a magic weapon of +1 or higher to hit, suggesting that there must be a difference between those two things. Since every magical weapon in the book also had a bonus of +1 or higher, he reasoned that any magic item that didn't have a bonus must count as a magical weapon with a +0 bonus.
pming
Legend
Hiya.
Generally speaking, no. The rock isn't magic...it's still juts a rock. The rock isn't "enchanted" at all, it simply has a spell on it.
That said, some DM's do allow items with spell effects on them to be considered "magic". So definitely check with your DM.
My take: As light is a simple cantrip in 5e, I'd definitely rule that is isn't sufficiently 'magic' enough to qualify. I may allow a level 1 and 2 spell to count as "silver" or "iron" if the spell was appropriate (some kind of enhanced light spell for silver, or maybe an earth-type spell for iron). Level 3 or higher may count as magic on a case by case basis. I'd be inclined to let a spellcaster figure out some kind of alchemical "enhancement" that, when combined with a certain spell or spells, on a particular item, with a ritual performed in some specific way, give that item a temporary "only a [item], enhanced by the [ritual] of [somename] can so pierce the shell of the Beast of the Moor's".
^_^
Paul L. Ming
Generally speaking, no. The rock isn't magic...it's still juts a rock. The rock isn't "enchanted" at all, it simply has a spell on it.
That said, some DM's do allow items with spell effects on them to be considered "magic". So definitely check with your DM.
My take: As light is a simple cantrip in 5e, I'd definitely rule that is isn't sufficiently 'magic' enough to qualify. I may allow a level 1 and 2 spell to count as "silver" or "iron" if the spell was appropriate (some kind of enhanced light spell for silver, or maybe an earth-type spell for iron). Level 3 or higher may count as magic on a case by case basis. I'd be inclined to let a spellcaster figure out some kind of alchemical "enhancement" that, when combined with a certain spell or spells, on a particular item, with a ritual performed in some specific way, give that item a temporary "only a [item], enhanced by the [ritual] of [somename] can so pierce the shell of the Beast of the Moor's".
^_^
Paul L. Ming
bjorn.almroth
Villager
There are some lvl 1 (and higher) spells that create magical items though. 
Bacon Bits
Hero
No.
A spell or ability must have a wording similar to the magic weapon spell or the Monk's Ki-Empowered Strikes ability to create a magic weapon.
Clancey
First Post
Thanks all for the input. I will still run it past the dm, but I was hoping there was a specific rule that I missed that would have addressed this in some way. My Rogue Assassin with Magic Initiate will be at quite a disadvantage unless he can find a magic weapon - especially since he thinks of himself as support in most battles and uses a crossbow as his main weapon. My DM is a real miser with magic. I did come across a Wand of Magic Missiles, but it was confiscated by a group of much higher level npcs who captured us. I'm hoping, once I reach a high enough level, to take it back from them.
BTW - the only reason I took Magic Initiate was to gain a familiar.
BTW - the only reason I took Magic Initiate was to gain a familiar.
Mistwell
Crusty Old Meatwad (he/him)
I would allow it. It takes an action to cast Light. So you'd have one prepared prior to battle - a simple rock that does very little damage to begin with even as a sling stone. And then you're out (light can only be cast one at a time). So you'd need another action to re-cast it, and another action to sling it at a foe. That seems balanced, and it's a clever use of the cantrip. So sure, I'd allow it.
Ridley's Cohort
First Post
I would bet that most DMs would say "no", because based on an interpretation of implied intent that "magical weapons" are things that have a +1 or better bonus to hit. Now, I personally think that a +0 magical weapon is perfectly logical thing to exist, even more so with 5e flat math. D&D has not yet gone that way.
Even if we allow for such, whether "any object with any kind of magic acting upon it" is a "magical weapon" is an interesting question.
I like Mistwell's reasoning. And I would be inclined to open up avenues for "+0 weapons". So for your specific example, I would choose yes.
That said, I am uncomfortable with "any object with any kind of magic acting upon it" is a "magical weapon" kind of logic, because it may open up a loop hole for creating massive numbers of temporary magical weapons on the cheap.
Even if we allow for such, whether "any object with any kind of magic acting upon it" is a "magical weapon" is an interesting question.
I like Mistwell's reasoning. And I would be inclined to open up avenues for "+0 weapons". So for your specific example, I would choose yes.
That said, I am uncomfortable with "any object with any kind of magic acting upon it" is a "magical weapon" kind of logic, because it may open up a loop hole for creating massive numbers of temporary magical weapons on the cheap.
Similar Threads
