1) What I mean is: do you think such creatures are really tough but have, I dunno, a magic allergy which makes their hide softer? Or do you think maybe it's a mechanic that's intended to represent creatures that require extraordinary means to take down?
2)Now, if you see no difference between an actual magic sword -- even if it doesn't have a bonus to hit or do damage or otherwise have combat-oriented magic to it -- and a magic lantern used as an improved weapon, then what about if you cast light on a normal weapon? Would you rule it also bypasses resistance to non-magical attacks?
3)For that matter, let's back-track to that everbright lantern. The description makes it clear the magical part isn't the lantern casing, it's the shard inside it. So why would bonking something with the metal part of the lantern count as a "magical attack"?
This is how i rule my table and why. If that logic doesn't work for you just be up front and say so if your players ask, if your DM allows it and you are a player *shrug* either it will bother you and you should have a polite conversation about it or it doesn't. There was a conversation about the RAW above that seems to have been completed as of response # 7 that includes the quote that specifically states that magic items bypass resistance. The following is how i would rule and my personal explanation.(numbers added to your quote for clarity in my responses)
1)As far as a magical allergy, actually that is kinda how I imagine it at my table... well more of a field disrupted by other magic. Tough hide is represented by the creatures ac, and resistance to mundane damage is as I said a field or property disrupted by magic at my table.
2)No i wouldn't count casting light on an object as making a magic item so that would not bypass these resistances at my table(if you want a cantrip for that there are a few ways to get shillelagh) it may be a minor distinction but hey, its my table.
3)Because Everbright lantern is a magic item and its being used for an attack, I would rule it as a magical attack for the purposes of damage reduction.
In response to the example by Tanksoldier: "The problem with making every magic item a magic weapon, is that every tree limb with Light or some other cantrip cast on it becomes a magic weapon able to penetrate resistance " technically a tree limb can be a magic weapon using the cantrip shillelagh. I also never argued that you could make a magic item by casting a spell on it.
In response to Stavros_Araatan:"And if a Player is wearing a fist full of magic rings and uses unarmed strikes?" the rings are not being used for the attack. If they were the player would have to use the improvised weapon rules not the unarmed attack rules so no proficiency to hit(without tavern brawler). Also any DM that would allow that specific example would probably just give you one of the magic items I listed above that turn your unarmed attacks into magical attacks.
At the end of the day I trust my players not to be jerks about it, and it's usually sub optimal to use improvised weapons anyway. Have fun taking whatever you agree with to your table and ignoring whatever you don't
In a similar fashion I also houserule that any rod automatically counts as a mace or club too, depending on the PC’s proficiencies or the player’s preferences. I don’t personally mind if crunking somthin’ on the dome with a rod of the pact keeper or whatever and treating it as a magic club for damage resistance/immunity purposes. It’s D&D, that seems like fun D&D to me. But that is my houserule, and not RAW.
However, I would not allow lanterns or belts and such from counting as magical sources of damage unless it specifically says so.
There's so many ways you could stretch it even without allowing improvised magical weapons. Whip proficiency and a rope of mending, for instance
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock) Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric) Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
In a similar fashion I also houserule that any rod automatically counts as a mace or club too, depending on the PC’s proficiencies or the player’s preferences. I don’t personally mind if crunking somthin’ on the dome with a rod of the pact keeper or whatever and treating it as a magic club for damage resistance/immunity purposes. It’s D&D, that seems like fun D&D to me. But that is my houserule, and not RAW.
However, I would not allow lanterns or belts and such from counting as magical sources of damage unless it specifically says so.
There's so many ways you could stretch it even without allowing improvised magical weapons. Whip proficiency and a rope of mending, for instance
This is definitely "talk to your DM" territory. I know plenty of DMs, including myself, that would rule that a magic item whose magic is not bent to the specific purpose of harming a foe cannot be used to bypass nonmagical damage resistance. Nonmagical damage resistance is already far too easy to get around; slapping someone with your immovable rod or wrapping your nekkid monkey paw in your Cloak of Protection before punching somebody isn't gonna cut it. The magic needs to do the damage, or at the least actively aid in doing the damage, or it becomes similar to "because I taped this picture of a fireplace to my warhammer, my warhammer now deals fire damage! See? it makes perfect sense!"
This is most certainly "converse with your DM" region. I know a lot of DMs, including myself, that would decide that a wizardry thing whose sorcery isn't adapted to the particular motivation behind hurting an enemy can't be utilized to sidestep nonmagical harm obstruction. Nonmagical harm opposition is now unreasonably simple to get around; hitting somebody with your relentless pole or wrapping your nekkid monkey paw in your Cloak of Protection prior to punching someone isn't going to cut it. The enchantment needs to do the harm, or basically effectively help in doing the harm, or it becomes like "since I taped this image of a chimney to my warhammer, my warhammer now bargains fire harm! Isn't it obvious? it bodes well!"
You gonna directly rip off exactly what someone else already stated alost verbatim?!?
Couple of thoughts, since this is purely a semantics issue for mechanics and game balance purposes. It's all GM interpretation, but hear me out.
First, you'll notice that Improvised weapons are found under the weapons section of the book, this infers that they are in fact "Weapons" in general. You'll notice that Martial arts, Unarmed attacks and Natural weapons are not in this section and it's followed by rules for silvered and special weapons which implies that we're to consider this class of weapons to itself.
Second, the text gives several examples of normal objects to use as improvised weapons, per the basic rules, "Sometimes characters don't have their weapons and have to attack with whatever is at hand. An improvised weapon includes any object you can wield in one or two hands, such as broken glass, a table leg, a frying pan, a wagon wheel, or a dead goblin." If You're using a normal non weapon object to inflict harm it becomes an improvised weapon. Now the next line, "Often, an improvised weapon is similar to an actual weapon and can be treated as such. For example, a table leg is akin to a club." Seems easy enough, any Improvised weapon similar enough to a weapon on the weapon table is just that weapon then. "At the DM's option, a character proficient with a weapon can use a similar object as if it were that weapon and use his or her proficiency bonus." DM decides if it's just straight up the weapon so you don't even need tavern brawler.
Now, That all implies to me that the intent of it is that Improvised weapons are weapons, merely a special property assigned to them depending on the situation. My interpretation obviously and this how I rule it in my games. But this is my thought process on it.
This means they can have Magic weapon cast on them, or be used for anything that requires a "Weapon" etc. You can even dip the dead goblin in Silver if you want and beat a werewolf to death with it. It's fine. (That's a Great club imo btw) If you think of it like this, like I do, it really doesn't affect the balance much. You might say, "Well why wouldn't they just carry the dead goblin around as an improvement to their gear?" Answer it with common sense, bodies rot. And once the DM decides the condition applying the Property of "Improvised weapon" no longer applies, it's no longer a "weapon" too. The Glass shatters, the leg breaks, the wheel splinters(now it's 8 clubs!) etc.
So the wrap up.
If you hit someone with a magic object, the DM decides if it counts as an Improvised weapon.
If it does, it's now considered one of the Weapons on the weapons table with the property "Improvised weapon."
It bypasses resistances just like any Magic weapon would until it no longer is considered an Improvised weapon.
Bonus opinion! The Light Cantrip would obviously not over come the damage resistance, you're not making the the object magical, it's merely benefiting from the effects of the spell, and the spell would tell you if it overcame those resistances.
1) What I mean is: do you think such creatures are really tough but have, I dunno, a magic allergy which makes their hide softer? Or do you think maybe it's a mechanic that's intended to represent creatures that require extraordinary means to take down?
2)Now, if you see no difference between an actual magic sword -- even if it doesn't have a bonus to hit or do damage or otherwise have combat-oriented magic to it -- and a magic lantern used as an improved weapon, then what about if you cast light on a normal weapon? Would you rule it also bypasses resistance to non-magical attacks?
3)For that matter, let's back-track to that everbright lantern. The description makes it clear the magical part isn't the lantern casing, it's the shard inside it. So why would bonking something with the metal part of the lantern count as a "magical attack"?
This is how i rule my table and why. If that logic doesn't work for you just be up front and say so if your players ask, if your DM allows it and you are a player *shrug* either it will bother you and you should have a polite conversation about it or it doesn't. There was a conversation about the RAW above that seems to have been completed as of response # 7 that includes the quote that specifically states that magic items bypass resistance. The following is how i would rule and my personal explanation.(numbers added to your quote for clarity in my responses)
1)As far as a magical allergy, actually that is kinda how I imagine it at my table... well more of a field disrupted by other magic. Tough hide is represented by the creatures ac, and resistance to mundane damage is as I said a field or property disrupted by magic at my table.
2)No i wouldn't count casting light on an object as making a magic item so that would not bypass these resistances at my table(if you want a cantrip for that there are a few ways to get shillelagh) it may be a minor distinction but hey, its my table.
3)Because Everbright lantern is a magic item and its being used for an attack, I would rule it as a magical attack for the purposes of damage reduction.
In response to the example by Tanksoldier: "The problem with making every magic item a magic weapon, is that every tree limb with Light or some other cantrip cast on it becomes a magic weapon able to penetrate resistance " technically a tree limb can be a magic weapon using the cantrip shillelagh. I also never argued that you could make a magic item by casting a spell on it.
In response to Stavros_Araatan:"And if a Player is wearing a fist full of magic rings and uses unarmed strikes?" the rings are not being used for the attack. If they were the player would have to use the improvised weapon rules not the unarmed attack rules so no proficiency to hit(without tavern brawler). Also any DM that would allow that specific example would probably just give you one of the magic items I listed above that turn your unarmed attacks into magical attacks.
At the end of the day I trust my players not to be jerks about it, and it's usually sub optimal to use improvised weapons anyway. Have fun taking whatever you agree with to your table and ignoring whatever you don't
So the kinetic energy imparted by swinging a magic lantern that isn’t itself magic, only the casing for something that is, overcomes magic resistance but the kinetic energy of swinging a fist full of magic rings, which are in fact magic does not overcome magic resistance? I’m being very picky here please don’t take it the wrong way.
IMO it comes down to situation - if the characters manage to roll up an encounter that isn’t predetermined (hence no magic weapons) and they encounter something that the DM decides, “well why the hell not, wererats it is” and at a low level they are scratching to hurt the monster that has resistance to non-magic weapons, then by all means let them use a bag of silver powder thrown in the enemy’s eyes, a chair ripped apart for the leg with Shillelagh cast on it (strength check to pull it apart please), a magic shield with the edge used to smash into the face or their opponent - whatever, let them roll play. Or not - that is the DMs choice
the attack is sub-optimal but the example of a magic rope used as a whip is good, either all magic items can be used as an improvised magic weapon to overcome magic resistance or not. Can I as a character try to choke the life out of the wererat with a magic rope? its up to the DM, but if the DM allowed the placement of the player characters in that situation then let them work out a way of getting the heck out with whatever comes to hand
I wouldn’t let them continue the campaign with an infinity gauntlet just punching things but it will be a fun session they will talk about for years
The Devs discussed weapons and improvised weaponry in a DragonTalk Podcast and Twitter clarified that when the rules refer to weapons, they intend it to mean weapons from the Weapon Table (07:00)
@DaveWil33 I just can't. Seriously? I mean. Dammit. If they could pin down exactly what does and does not count as a weapon for features that require actual weapons I'd probably dance a jig.
@JeremyECrawford I'll boil it down for you. When we wrote the "Player's Handbook," we meant the weapons on the weapon table when we wrote "weapon," unless we said otherwise. But you break nothing in the game if you let natural weapons go along for the ride.
The problem with this ruling is that it is saying that even weapons that are written as weapons and are thus blatantly obviously weapons do not actually count as weapons unless they are on that list in the PHB.
Well the Weapons rules says the Weapon table shows the most common weapons used in the worlds of D&D, so a D&D can certainly expand that list of weapon with additional ones. But what this ruling do is prevent existing items that are not classified as a weapon count as one if they were not already.
In response to Stavros_Araatan:"And if a Player is wearing a fist full of magic rings and uses unarmed strikes?" the rings are not being used for the attack. If they were the player would have to use the improvised weapon rules not the unarmed attack rules so no proficiency to hit(without tavern brawler). Also any DM that would allow that specific example would probably just give you one of the magic items I listed above that turn your unarmed attacks into magical attacks.
So the kinetic energy imparted by swinging a magic lantern that isn’t itself magic, only the casing for something that is, overcomes magic resistance but the kinetic energy of swinging a fist full of magic rings, which are in fact magic does not overcome magic resistance? I’m being very picky here please don’t take it the wrong way.
Here are the quotes.
I didn't say the rings couldn't overcome the resistance, I said that the player would have to use the Improvised weapon rules to do so. So at my table the damage would be 1d4+str and no proficiency bonus without taking a feat (tavern brawler). Where an unarmed attack (always proficient by the rules) is one of 1+str or more with specific class features/feats but do not bypass resistance to non magical damage.(i am excluding monks 6+ from this since their unarmed attacks count as magical from that point forward.)
So I might allow using rings to bypass resistance, but it will be no more damage than tavernbrawler strike. This gets deep enough into the nitty gritty that the rules start to get funky, and at my table this is unlikely to come up because any player showing an interest in unarmed combat as their primary combat option is either a monk(making this irrelevant past lvl 6) or likely to find an insignia of claws or equivalent (https://www.dndbeyond.com/magic-items/insignia-of-claws)
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
This is how i rule my table and why. If that logic doesn't work for you just be up front and say so if your players ask, if your DM allows it and you are a player *shrug* either it will bother you and you should have a polite conversation about it or it doesn't. There was a conversation about the RAW above that seems to have been completed as of response # 7 that includes the quote that specifically states that magic items bypass resistance. The following is how i would rule and my personal explanation.(numbers added to your quote for clarity in my responses)
1)As far as a magical allergy, actually that is kinda how I imagine it at my table... well more of a field disrupted by other magic. Tough hide is represented by the creatures ac, and resistance to mundane damage is as I said a field or property disrupted by magic at my table.
2)No i wouldn't count casting light on an object as making a magic item so that would not bypass these resistances at my table(if you want a cantrip for that there are a few ways to get shillelagh) it may be a minor distinction but hey, its my table.
3)Because Everbright lantern is a magic item and its being used for an attack, I would rule it as a magical attack for the purposes of damage reduction.
In response to the example by Tanksoldier: "The problem with making every magic item a magic weapon, is that every tree limb with Light or some other cantrip cast on it becomes a magic weapon able to penetrate resistance " technically a tree limb can be a magic weapon using the cantrip shillelagh. I also never argued that you could make a magic item by casting a spell on it.
In response to Stavros_Araatan:"And if a Player is wearing a fist full of magic rings and uses unarmed strikes?" the rings are not being used for the attack. If they were the player would have to use the improvised weapon rules not the unarmed attack rules so no proficiency to hit(without tavern brawler). Also any DM that would allow that specific example would probably just give you one of the magic items I listed above that turn your unarmed attacks into magical attacks.
At the end of the day I trust my players not to be jerks about it, and it's usually sub optimal to use improvised weapons anyway. Have fun taking whatever you agree with to your table and ignoring whatever you don't
There's so many ways you could stretch it even without allowing improvised magical weapons. Whip proficiency and a rope of mending, for instance
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock)
Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric)
Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
Not even remotely, no.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
You gonna directly rip off exactly what someone else already stated alost verbatim?!?
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Couple of thoughts, since this is purely a semantics issue for mechanics and game balance purposes. It's all GM interpretation, but hear me out.
First, you'll notice that Improvised weapons are found under the weapons section of the book, this infers that they are in fact "Weapons" in general. You'll notice that Martial arts, Unarmed attacks and Natural weapons are not in this section and it's followed by rules for silvered and special weapons which implies that we're to consider this class of weapons to itself.
Second, the text gives several examples of normal objects to use as improvised weapons, per the basic rules, "Sometimes characters don't have their weapons and have to attack with whatever is at hand. An improvised weapon includes any object you can wield in one or two hands, such as broken glass, a table leg, a frying pan, a wagon wheel, or a dead goblin." If You're using a normal non weapon object to inflict harm it becomes an improvised weapon. Now the next line, "Often, an improvised weapon is similar to an actual weapon and can be treated as such. For example, a table leg is akin to a club." Seems easy enough, any Improvised weapon similar enough to a weapon on the weapon table is just that weapon then. "At the DM's option, a character proficient with a weapon can use a similar object as if it were that weapon and use his or her proficiency bonus." DM decides if it's just straight up the weapon so you don't even need tavern brawler.
Now, That all implies to me that the intent of it is that Improvised weapons are weapons, merely a special property assigned to them depending on the situation. My interpretation obviously and this how I rule it in my games. But this is my thought process on it.
This means they can have Magic weapon cast on them, or be used for anything that requires a "Weapon" etc. You can even dip the dead goblin in Silver if you want and beat a werewolf to death with it. It's fine. (That's a Great club imo btw) If you think of it like this, like I do, it really doesn't affect the balance much. You might say, "Well why wouldn't they just carry the dead goblin around as an improvement to their gear?" Answer it with common sense, bodies rot. And once the DM decides the condition applying the Property of "Improvised weapon" no longer applies, it's no longer a "weapon" too. The Glass shatters, the leg breaks, the wheel splinters(now it's 8 clubs!) etc.
So the wrap up.
Bonus opinion! The Light Cantrip would obviously not over come the damage resistance, you're not making the the object magical, it's merely benefiting from the effects of the spell, and the spell would tell you if it overcame those resistances.
So the kinetic energy imparted by swinging a magic lantern that isn’t itself magic, only the casing for something that is, overcomes magic resistance but the kinetic energy of swinging a fist full of magic rings, which are in fact magic does not overcome magic resistance? I’m being very picky here please don’t take it the wrong way.
IMO it comes down to situation - if the characters manage to roll up an encounter that isn’t predetermined (hence no magic weapons) and they encounter something that the DM decides, “well why the hell not, wererats it is” and at a low level they are scratching to hurt the monster that has resistance to non-magic weapons, then by all means let them use a bag of silver powder thrown in the enemy’s eyes, a chair ripped apart for the leg with Shillelagh cast on it (strength check to pull it apart please), a magic shield with the edge used to smash into the face or their opponent - whatever, let them roll play. Or not - that is the DMs choice
the attack is sub-optimal but the example of a magic rope used as a whip is good, either all magic items can be used as an improvised magic weapon to overcome magic resistance or not. Can I as a character try to choke the life out of the wererat with a magic rope? its up to the DM, but if the DM allowed the placement of the player characters in that situation then let them work out a way of getting the heck out with whatever comes to hand
I wouldn’t let them continue the campaign with an infinity gauntlet just punching things but it will be a fun session they will talk about for years
Well the Weapons rules says the Weapon table shows the most common weapons used in the worlds of D&D, so a D&D can certainly expand that list of weapon with additional ones. But what this ruling do is prevent existing items that are not classified as a weapon count as one if they were not already.
Here are the quotes.
I didn't say the rings couldn't overcome the resistance, I said that the player would have to use the Improvised weapon rules to do so. So at my table the damage would be 1d4+str and no proficiency bonus without taking a feat (tavern brawler). Where an unarmed attack (always proficient by the rules) is one of 1+str or more with specific class features/feats but do not bypass resistance to non magical damage.(i am excluding monks 6+ from this since their unarmed attacks count as magical from that point forward.)
So I might allow using rings to bypass resistance, but it will be no more damage than tavernbrawler strike. This gets deep enough into the nitty gritty that the rules start to get funky, and at my table this is unlikely to come up because any player showing an interest in unarmed combat as their primary combat option is either a monk(making this irrelevant past lvl 6) or likely to find an insignia of claws or equivalent (https://www.dndbeyond.com/magic-items/insignia-of-claws)