Troll Lord Games

Quick question. If a creature can only be hit by magic weapons, does of +1 (or greater) bow count if, the arrows are mundane? I couldn't find it mentioned in the PHB nor, in the M&T book.

I've always said no. The pointing bit needs to be magic.

-Mike

While Mike makes sense, I always allowed it.

So we're no help at all. LOL

Thanks guys. I'll go with the item contacting the creature having to be magic itself in order to damage. Barring something I missed in the PHB or M&T.

My interpretation has always been that it doesn't matter which is imbued with the magic, the bow or the projectile. The only thing is that only the highest bonus applies. I don't really think of magic is a substance, like a poison, that gets in the bloodstream or a special metal like silver that the monster reacts to. It's something more external and universal.

The ranged weapons are always a peculiar case though and either way can probably be safely interpreted in isolation.

While I am talking about bows

* PLEASE LET BOW-SPEC'D FIGHTERS HAVE COMBAT DOMINANCE WITH BOWS! *

In my games, the + on the bow only affects the bonus to hit.
The + on the arrow only affects the bonus to damage.
Therefore in order for the creature to be affected, the arrows need to be magical.

~O

Omote wrote:In my games, the + on the bow only affects the bonus to hit.
The + on the arrow only affects the bonus to damage.
Therefore in order for the creature to be affected, the arrows need to be magical.

~O

That's a very interesting way to look at it, hoss, and something I may have to consider.

I go by what's written in the book, concerning magic weapons.

Monsters & Treasure, page 87 wrote:Weapons: These are weapons that have been magically enchanted, giving them bonuses to hit, bonuses to damage and in some cases, other magical properties.

I think that's pretty cut and dried. In addition, I would allow magical arrows to "stack" with a magical bow - so a +1 longbow firing a +2 arrow would get a +3 to attack and damage. I'm not led to believe otherwise in either case

Lord Dynel wrote: I think that's pretty cut and dried. In addition, I would allow magical arrows to "stack" with a magical bow - so a +1 longbow firing a +2 arrow would get a +3 to attack and damage. I'm not led to believe otherwise in either case

Yeah, I think I got that from the 3.5 stacking rules. Your interpretation matches the 1e DMG. I actually like the higher bonus better and will go with that from now on.

I'll have to look it up a bit later since I'm a bit busy at the moment, but I believe OD&D explicitly mentions magic bows only adding their plusses on "to hit", not damage. You would need a magic arrow to give a bonus to damage.

So Omote may have channelled Gary in coming up with his rule.

Traveller wrote:I'll have to look it up a bit later since I'm a bit busy at the moment, but I believe OD&D explicitly mentions magic bows only adding their plusses on "to hit", not damage. You would need a magic arrow to give a bonus to damage.

So Omote may have channelled Gary in coming up with his rule.

AD&D DMG: "Bow + 1 gives + 1 "to hit" and + 1 damage potential to arrows fired from
it. If magic arrows are used, the bonus is the total of the bow's and the
arrows'."

Traveller wrote:I'll have to look it up a bit later since I'm a bit busy at the moment, but I believe OD&D explicitly mentions magic bows only adding their plusses on "to hit", not damage. You would need a magic arrow to give a bonus to damage.

So Omote may have channelled Gary in coming up with his rule.

Right, Men & Magic has:

Magic Arrows have a +1 chance of hitting their target and do additional damage to their target unless specified otherwise due to the type of monster being shot. Thus, a Magic Arrow normally does from 2-7 points of damage when it hits.

Magic Bows give all arrows a +1 for hit probability, but they confer no damage bonus. A Magic Arrow shot from a Magic Bow has a +2 chance of hitting.

Arduin wrote:

Traveller wrote:I'll have to look it up a bit later since I'm a bit busy at the moment, but I believe OD&D explicitly mentions magic bows only adding their plusses on "to hit", not damage. You would need a magic arrow to give a bonus to damage.

So Omote may have channelled Gary in coming up with his rule.

AD&D DMG: "Bow + 1 gives + 1 "to hit" and + 1 damage potential to arrows fired from
it. If magic arrows are used, the bonus is the total of the bow's and the
arrows'."

Yeah, I knew the AD&D ruled it this way. I think both editions (1st & 2nd) do, if I recall correctly. The OD&D way is pretty interesting. It's a nuance, but a nuance that I like.

Lord Dynel wrote: The OD&D way is pretty interesting. It's a nuance, but a nuance that I like.

Yes, definitely.

Odd that neither version addresses the original Q. I could have sworn it was in there somewhere but, I guess I was mistaken.

It's not specifically mentioned in OD&D because they had very little room in those three little books to explain everything and encouraged the referee to make the decision. Based upon the OD&D rule however, my opinion is that a non-magical arrow fired from a magical bow is in fact sufficient to damage a creature that can only be damaged by magical weapons. My reasoning is that the bow's magic guides the arrow to its target, thus the arrow has an aura of magic on it from the bow (the +1 to hit) that wears off upon contact with the target (no bonus to damage).

This is one area where you will have to decide for yourself whether the bow will be enough to damage a magical creature.

Arduin wrote:

Lord Dynel wrote: The OD&D way is pretty interesting. It's a nuance, but a nuance that I like.

Yes, definitely.

Odd that neither version addresses the original Q. I could have sworn it was in there somewhere but, I guess I was mistaken.

Well, I would say that a magical bow would be okay. Since the bow confers a +1 to attack and damage, according to the C&C rules, it can be interpreted that the magic that the bow has is infusing the arrow with some bit of its magic (I would rationalize that the +1 damage would be represenative of this). Therefore, it would be safe to say that a mundane arrow fired from a magical bow would suffice for surpassing damage reduction.

However...

Traveller wrote:This is one area where you will have to decide for yourself whether the bow will be enough to damage a magical creature.

...I agree with my esteemed colleague. If you want a magic bow to affect damage reduction, regardless of the arrow, that's up to you. You're probably right, it's probably not spelled out in the book (I haven't been able to find anything, either). In my gaming experiences, the bow confers the bonus to the arrow, and if both are magical, then components would add together. But in the end, it's whatever you decide it to be for your table.

My understanding has always been that a magic bow imparts it's magic onto the missile fired from it. That's why it "reads funny" in OD&D (a +1 bow is +1 to hit, and an arrow fired from it is +1 to damage - this is really the same thing as saying a +1 bow is +1 to hit and damage when an arrow is fired from it). To address the question, if a +1 bow imparts its magic onto a missile fired from it, then (in my most humble opinion) a +1 bow can be used to strike a creature with DR/magic, because the arrow is enchanted as +1 from the time its fired to the time it hits its target.

3.x was pretty clear about this, so it's a ruling I've always stuck with. From the 3.5 SRD:

3.5 SRD wrote:Ranged Weapons and Ammunition: The enhancement bonus from a ranged weapon does not stack with the enhancement bonus from ammunition. Only the higher of the two enhancement bonuses applies.
Ammunition fired from a projectile weapon with an enhancement bonus of +1 or higher is treated as a magic weapon for the purpose of overcoming damage reduction. Similarly, ammunition fired from a projectile weapon with an alignment gains the alignment of that projectile weapon (in addition to any alignment it may already have).

redwullf wrote:To address the question, if a +1 bow imparts its magic onto a missile fired from it, then (in my most humble opinion) a +1 bow can be used to strike a creature with DR/magic, because the arrow is enchanted as +1 from the time its fired to the time it hits its target.

I think that is a safe assumption redwullf. Since weapons impart a +1 bonus to damage, which comes from it being magical and magical bows grant this bonus (according to page 87 of the CKG), then I believe it can be inferred that the arrow (mundane or otherwise) fired from the magical bow is "carrying" the +1 damage bonus with it to its target. To me, that's enough justification to allow it to affect DR.

redwullf wrote:

3.5 SRD wrote:Ranged Weapons and Ammunition: The enhancement bonus from a ranged weapon does not stack with the enhancement bonus from ammunition. Only the higher of the two enhancement bonuses applies.
Ammunition fired from a projectile weapon with an enhancement bonus of +1 or higher is treated as a magic weapon for the purpose of overcoming damage reduction. Similarly, ammunition fired from a projectile weapon with an alignment gains the alignment of that projectile weapon (in addition to any alignment it may already have).

Thanks!

redwullf wrote:That's why it "reads funny" in OD&D (a +1 bow is +1 to hit, and an arrow fired from it is +1 to damage - this is really the same thing as saying a +1 bow is +1 to hit and damage when an arrow is fired from it).

I think you meant to say AD&D, not OD&D. Magic bows with mundane arrows in OD&D don't have a damage bonus, just +x to hit. Magic bows with magic arrows get +(x+y) to hit, +y to damage, where x is the bonus of the bow and y is the bonus of the arrow.

Traveller wrote:

redwullf wrote:That's why it "reads funny" in OD&D (a +1 bow is +1 to hit, and an arrow fired from it is +1 to damage - this is really the same thing as saying a +1 bow is +1 to hit and damage when an arrow is fired from it).

I think you meant to say AD&D, not OD&D. Magic bows with mundane arrows in OD&D don't have a damage bonus, just +x to hit. Magic bows with magic arrows get +(x+y) to hit, +y to damage, where x is the bonus of the bow and y is the bonus of the arrow.

I don't doubt that you're correct, and I referenced no prior versions of the game for my comments. I played very little OD&D, in fact, moving to AD&D pretty much within 6 months of learning the game from the red box. From AD&D onward, we've always treated magic bows, slings, etc., as imparting their bonuses to mundane missiles. Prior to 3.5, we also stacked magic bows with magic missiles. For example, a +2 Longblow firing +1 arrows would be a flat +3 to hit and damage. It was simply easier to handle it this way. In 3.x and beyond, of course, we stopped stacking because the rules were very clear on this matter.

Just to be precise, when I say OD&D I don't refer to the red box, which is B/X, but the original woodgrain/white box set.

I've always ruled that a bow is a weapon and the arrow is the ammunition. If a creature is only able to be hit by magic weapons, the bow qualifies as a weapon so any ammunition it fires is considered magical for the purposes of whether it can hit a creature immune to non-magical weapons. Also, we play that a +1 bow firing a +1 arrow would get a +2 to hit and +2 damage. Essentially, if the magical bow imparts a +1 to hit with a mundane arrow then the attack is considered a magical attack.

I'll grant the bow + for hit and damage, and stack the bonuses if using a magic arrow. However, I do not consider any arrow to be magical simply because it is fired from the bow. The normal arrow is still non-magical irregardless of the bow unless the bow has a power specifically stating that it imparts magic to arrows fired from it.

Go0gleplex wrote:I'll grant the bow + for hit and damage, and stack the bonuses if using a magic arrow. However, I do not consider any arrow to be magical simply because it is fired from the bow. The normal arrow is still non-magical irregardless of the bow unless the bow has a power specifically stating that it imparts magic to arrows fired from it.

Sorry for the confusion if you're responding to me, I meant that for the purposes of determining if the attack can hit a creature immune to non-magical attacks, an arrow fired from a magical bow qualifies.

I'm curious as to whether y'all (on either side of the fence, really) would say that's true of all missile weapons that require a means other than throwing to propel them.... for instance, would you hold the same to be true for a crossbow or a sling?

(And to weigh in, personally, my own homerules are that the weapon itself can imbue the magic necessary to hit anything that requires a +1 (or more) to hit, that a +1 on anything works as both to-hit and damage, and the bonuses to hit and damage stack, so a +1 bow and +1 arrow could hit a creature requiring a +2 to hit. I would also probably not be averse to someone asking me if they could take the +1 from to-hit and add it instead to damage, 3E Power Attack-like, but no one has done so before.)

ArgoForg wrote:I'm curious as to whether y'all (on either side of the fence, really) would say that's true of all missile weapons that require a means other than throwing to propel them.... for instance, would you hold the same to be true for a crossbow or a sling?

Looking at it as a GM I've decided that:

1) the bow (x-bow, sling, et al) impart the bonus (and ability to hit because of magic) to the projectile fired.

2) Bonuses from an already magic projectile don't stack with a magic bow and, only the higher bonus is in effect.

Arduin wrote:

ArgoForg wrote:I'm curious as to whether y'all (on either side of the fence, really) would say that's true of all missile weapons that require a means other than throwing to propel them.... for instance, would you hold the same to be true for a crossbow or a sling?

Looking at it as a GM I've decided that:

1) the bow (x-bow, sling, et al) impart the bonus (and ability to hit because of magic) to the projectile fired.

2) Bonuses from an already magic projectile don't stack with a magic bow and, only the higher bonus is in effect.

I'm the same on point 1 but allow stacking on point 2.

They way me and my friends have always played it was the bow and arrows grant separate bonus' that are cumulative for stacking purposed. But not in the sense that a +1 bow and a +1 arrow can hit a create only hit by +2 or greater. It is still only a plus one arrow striking the crit.

But the magic from the bow, be it to hit or damage was coming from the magics strictly from bows, and the arrow , if mundane, was causing extra damage from the bow, not from magic transferred from the bow. IE: more magical force propelling the arrow or such.


Thus a magical arrow is needed to hit such creatures in our campaign.


The argument can be justified by any CK.

I would also like to know the scarcity of magic in your campaign ?


If you are a Monty Hall CK, they make them use their magic arrows, if your campaign is one where magic is very uncommon, use your judgment to create balance in your campaign.