Pricing for weapon unaffected by magic

[ARandomGod]

A Monk's bonus to AC isn't magical, it represents their seeing the attack coming so they can get out of the way.

And not all of a mages armor will be magical, either. For instance, an amulet of natural armor, while magical in itself, will not produce a magical armor as much as it magically alters the user to have thicker skin. I wouldn't say that this item would negate that. Sure, it'll cut right through your rings of resistance, and mage armor or bracers of armor. It'll decimate your shield spell. But it won't affect your magically boosted dexiterity. It won't change you back from your "alter self" troglodyte form, it won't negate your thickened skin. A good item, but not a great one.

 

[Andre]

I'm looking for pricing advice and wording advice for creating a weapon that is unaffected by magic defenses. By that, I mean that it would ignore AC bonuses derived from magical sources: enhancement bonus of armor/shield, magical deflection/armor/shield/profane/sacred/natural armor bonuses. Dodge bonuses would still be in effect, as would dexterity bonuses (even if from magically augmented dexterity), mundane armor, natural armor, and shield bonuses.

Hmm, seems like the item described would negate bonuses from an amulet of natural armor. And an argument could certainly be made that it would negate any bonuses derived from spells, even alter self, if the weapon functions similarly to an anti-magic shell. Of course, adjudicating such things would make the polymorph spell seem simple by comparison.

(Note: DrN did not define this as based on antimagic shell, so much of the discussion on what is/is not negated depends on how the item works. That would, of course, make a big difference in how powerful the item is.)

As for the monk bonuses - I agree, the monk's class AC bonus is an extraordinary ability. I was referring to high-level monks having numerous magical, non-armor protective items (bracers, rings, amulets, etc.) to boost their AC. Put another way, a high-level monk will typically at least as much of his AC come from magic as a high-level fighter will, and probably more.

BTW - as with any proposed item, this one's power depends a great deal on the individual campaign. A low-magic, weak-magic campaign might see this item as equal to a fabled longsword +2. A standard D&D campaign would see this item at least at +5, maybe as a minor artifact. A very high-magic campaign would see this as artifact level. As with so many things, it depends on the context.

I like the flavor of the item, but for a typcial campaign (IMO) I still think it would be very, very powerful.

GM: "You see a blackish, slightly dull and pitted sword"

Player "Does it look finely crafted?"

GM: "No.. as I said, it looks rather dull and pitted. Not well balanced either. And it's not a 'light absorbing' black. It's more a dark grey, really."

Player: "Hrmm... I detect magic"

GM: "Nope, no magic at all"

I love it.

 

[drnuncheon]

So your wanting an 'anti-magic' magic weapon?

Well, it doesn't have to be magic per se - I just figured that would be the easiest way to price it. I mean, if you had a weapon that somehow nonmagically emulated a shocking weapon, you'd expect it to be priced about the same.

Antimagic shell would be the most logical base. Now, does reducing it to (say) a field just a hair larger than the sword significantly increase or reduce the price? You lose the negative aspects of it as it applies to you - but you also lose the perfect anti-magic defense it provides to you. Clearly the defense is worth more than the drawbacks of not being able to use magic, otherwise it wouldn't be as high a level as it is...

Hmm, seems like the item described would negate bonuses from an amulet of natural armor.

Actually, I hadn't considered the thought that it wouldn't. On the one hand, the hardening is clearly magical. On the other hand, I would think that someone polymorphed into a form that granted natural armor would keep it, if only to avoid ugly questions about what happens when a 18' giant gets hit and the flesh around the wound reverts to the size of a 6' human. On the other other hand, it ought to go through the field of force generated by bracers of armor without even flinching.

I'll have to consider.

The base thought that I'm working from is that the weapon is completely and utterly unaffectable by magic, which is what I'm trying (clumsily) to express in game rules.

J

 

[ARandomGod]

Well, it doesn't have to be magic per se - I just figured that would be the easiest way to price it. I mean, if you had a weapon that somehow nonmagically emulated a shocking weapon, you'd expect it to be priced about the same.

Antimagic shell would be the most logical base. Now, does reducing it to (say) a field just a hair larger than the sword significantly increase or reduce the price? You lose the negative aspects of it as it applies to you - but you also lose the perfect anti-magic defense it provides to you. Clearly the defense is worth more than the drawbacks of not being able to use magic, otherwise it wouldn't be as high a level as it is...

I'd say it reduces the price... A smaller radius should generally reduce the price. And, of course, it's not *actually* an antimagic field (as I understand what you're asking about), but more simply a sword that's unaffected by magic.

Actually, I hadn't considered the thought that it wouldn't. On the one hand, the hardening is clearly magical. On the other hand, I would think that someone polymorphed into a form that granted natural armor would keep it, if only to avoid ugly questions about what happens when a 18' giant gets hit and the flesh around the wound reverts to the size of a 6' human. On the other other hand, it ought to go through the field of force generated by bracers of armor without even flinching.

I'll have to consider.

The base thought that I'm working from is that the weapon is completely and utterly unaffectable by magic, which is what I'm trying (clumsily) to express in game rules.

J

A sword unaffected by magic... which is why I'd say that the magically hardened skin would stay magically hardened. It's not going to unpolymorph someone, it's not going to affect that magic. However how do you justify that it does undo the magical reinforcements of armor? I'd say that the magic of armor is different, more inherent than a magically hardened skin. I mean, you're not going to magically get rid of the invisibility spell around the target either, you're not going to magically remove the curse they're afflicted by, and you're not going to remove the hardened skin. You are going to ignore their deflection bonus, their magical armor bonus... their mage armor and magic shield spell. Wall of force, cuts right through. Wall of stone? Clang...

Just my opinion. I'd probably price it at about half the antimagic shell's cost. Because, really, as a fighter a sword with a permanent antimagic shell will do the trick even better. So very, very much better.

 

[drnuncheon]

A sword unaffected by magic... which is why I'd say that the magically hardened skin would stay magically hardened.

I guess it depends on how the hardening 'works'. If it's an actual physical change to the skin, no...if it's more like a subcutaneous layer of force, then yes.

However how do you justify that it does undo the magical reinforcements of armor? I'd say that the magic of armor is different, more inherent than a magically hardened skin.

Well, again the question is, how does the enhancement bonus for armor work?

Is it just that the armor is harder? Then the sword wouldn't affect it. But adamantine armor is harder, and that's represented by DR (at least in 3.5).

Is it a magical field that repels blades? Admittedly, that sounds more like a deflection bonus...but it could also describe the effects of bracers of armor. Perhaps it's a magical network of force that covers the gaps in the armor needed for maneuverability.

Since we don't have information about whether the magic is active or passive, or exactly how it works, it could go either way.

I mean, you're not going to magically get rid of the invisibility spell around the target either, you're not going to magically remove the curse they're afflicted by, and you're not going to remove the hardened skin. You are going to ignore their deflection bonus, their magical armor bonus... their mage armor and magic shield spell. Wall of force, cuts right through. Wall of stone? Clang...

I'll note that a wall of stone, once created, is nonmagical, so that'd be true of any interpretation of the blade.

J

 

[jaker2003]

Hmm, seems like the item described would negate bonuses from an amulet of natural armor.

I would limit the capabilities of the weapon to bypassing only force effects, deflection, sacred, and profane bonuses to AC. As for the shields and armors, just supe the actual weapon up to +5 enhancement bonus and that'll handle most things.

Here's a concept to consider, the Sanctuary spell prevents physical combat. Would a weapon with this ability ignore that, or will the weilder just have to wait it out?

 

[drnuncheon]

Here's a concept to consider, the Sanctuary spell prevents physical combat. Would a weapon with this ability ignore that, or will the weilder just have to wait it out?

Sanctuary appears to be at least in part a mental effect, since it requires a will save. I'd say it has full effect on the weilder.

Also, I'd rather not crank it up to +5 - it shouldn't be any better at hitting or damaging an opponent without magical defenses.

J

 

[ARandomGod]

Sanctuary appears to be at least in part a mental effect, since it requires a will save. I'd say it has full effect on the weilder.

Also, I'd rather not crank it up to +5 - it shouldn't be any better at hitting or damaging an opponent without magical defenses.

J

Yea, its *up tp* plus five, not plus five itself. It does nothing against plate mail that a normal sword wouldn't do. But against chainmail +5... NOW it's better.

I'd say that in general natural armor is about making the skin tougher. Alter self gives magical armor through poly morph... an amulet of natural armor I'd say makes the skin tougher, although I suppose that's somewhat up to GM interpretation. But I also think that's a good general rule to further limit the power of this particular sword. I mean, you don't want to cut through everything the mage does... just most everything. And natural armor you can justify it not working against, I think I'd go with that. Plus it makes a nice complimentary statement with weapons "of brilliance", which also don't effect natural armor.

Bracers of armor I rule do the same thing that enhancing normal armor does... just without the matrix of the armor. Which is why it would work against both of those, it nullifies the enhancement bonus of the armor. In the bracers case, what's left is air. In the plate mail's place, you've still got a large chunk of metal left.