PDA

View Full Version : The Shatter Spell



Seatbelt
2009-11-16, 12:35 AM
Can the Shatter spell shatter magic weapons and armor? I had a barbarian fight the party today. The Warmage shattered his weapon, so he stole the Ridiculous Sword (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/BFS) from the orc fighter. He was going to sunder the (mundane) tower shield the cleric was hiding behind with it. I was having a ton of fun terrorizing the party. He got to act last, so they surrounded him, and then he proceeded to hit all 5 of them in one full attack, and since he was a vampire he got to Falcon Punch someone in the face for negative levels. The fear and terror and general respect they showed my baddy is probably going to be one of the highlights of the campaign for me.

But then the Warlock shattered the Ridiculous Sword too. The original owner of the ridiculous sword was very sad, as he used all his feats to wield it. So he looked up shatter, and we couldn't decide if the spell could destroy attended magic items. The Orc argues that it makes the spell really powerful. I tend to agree. The party argues that without it many of them would have died, which is possible.

We fixed the weapon with some retconning and the Make Whole spell, but in the future we cant to know: Can you shatter an (attended) magic item, like a weapon or armor?

AstralFire
2009-11-16, 12:38 AM
Being attended to or not is irrelevant.

However, Shatter can't affect any magical object, so it wouldn't have been able to affect the magical weapon in question.


Shatter creates a loud, ringing noise that breaks brittle, nonmagical objects; sunders a single solid, nonmagical object; or damages a crystalline creature.

Pharaoh's Fist
2009-11-16, 01:11 AM
You have to dispel a magical object before you can shatter it.

PhoenixRivers
2009-11-16, 01:19 AM
You have to dispel a magical object before you can shatter it.

Contested. A magic item with suppressed functions is not nonmagical. It's a magic item with suppressed abilities.

GoodbyeSoberDay
2009-11-16, 01:23 AM
Contested. A magic item with suppressed functions is not nonmagical. It's a magic item with suppressed abilities.SRD (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/dispelMagic.htm) agrees with PF.


A suppressed item becomes nonmagical for the duration of the effect.

Gametime
2009-11-16, 01:32 AM
Contested. A magic item with suppressed functions is not nonmagical. It's a magic item with suppressed abilities.

Counter-contested. A magic item with suppressed functions most certainly IS non-magical.


If the object that you target is a magic item, you make a dispel check against the item’s caster level. If you succeed, all the item’s magical properties are suppressed for 1d4 rounds, after which the item recovers on its own. A suppressed item becomes nonmagical for the duration of the effect.

EDIT: Thrice-accursed ninjas!

PhoenixRivers
2009-11-16, 01:39 AM
I stand corrected.

GoodbyeSoberDay
2009-11-16, 01:40 AM
I figured I'd look it up because I never like being on the bad end of a poor man's disjunction.

sambo.
2009-11-16, 01:41 AM
o, rly?

soooo, target the BBEG's super duper sword with a dispel, then Shatter it.......

the opportunity cost of giving up the BBEG's itam of godl3hn3ss could be rather large....

GoodbyeSoberDay
2009-11-16, 01:45 AM
o, rly?

soooo, target the BBEG's super duper sword with a dispel, then Shatter it.......

the opportunity cost of giving up the BBEG's itam of godl3hn3ss could be rather large....This tactic has the same problem as sundering. The PCs are less likely to succeed (in this instance the sword probably has mondo CL), and if they do they destroy their own loot. The enemies are more likely to succeed (enemy caster probably has high CL), and if they do they destroy the PC's loot.

PhoenixRivers
2009-11-16, 01:48 AM
Indeed. It's much better to shatter the locked gauntlet, disarm, and use some sort of magic effect (telekinesis?) to TAKE the mondo weapon.

GoodbyeSoberDay
2009-11-16, 01:50 AM
Indeed. It's much better to shatter the locked gauntlet, disarm, and use some sort of magic effect (telekinesis?) to TAKE the mondo weapon.Grease can work, especially if the sword is only really useful in the BBEG's hands.

PhoenixRivers
2009-11-16, 01:55 AM
Grease can work, especially if the sword is only really useful in the BBEG's hands.

If it falls in the macguffin category, then shatter is likely a solid option again.

Lycanthromancer
2009-11-16, 02:04 AM
If it falls in the macguffin category, then shatter is likely a solid option again.Or is [evil] and unusable and unsellable, is magical solely because it's the property of a kensai or psychic weapon master, if it's the result of various spells (such as greater magic weapon and shillelagh), or the person wielding it has Vow of Poverty.

Yuki Akuma
2009-11-16, 05:34 AM
Or is [evil] and unusable and unsellable, is magical solely because it's the property of a kensai or psychic weapon master, if it's the result of various spells (such as greater magic weapon and shillelagh), or the person wielding it has Vow of Poverty.

Objection!

Weapons wielded by people with the Vow of Poverty aren't magical - the VoP guy just has an enhancement bonus to weapon attack rolls and can overcome damage reduction.

Just like a Solar wielding a nonmagical cold iron (silver? I forget) longsword can still smite a devil with it.

Acanous
2009-11-16, 05:38 AM
Still, Yes- You can use Shatter to do such cheesery- you must simply do so on a nonmagical weapon.

Coidzor
2009-11-16, 06:20 AM
In general though, there're better options for reducing or eliminating a combatants' effectiveness, especially a melee-type, than going for destroying their weapon.

ericgrau
2009-11-16, 07:41 AM
Indeed. In a system where things die in 2-3 rounds, there are usually better options than a 2 round strategy, which may or may not succeed, to merely hamper the enemy.

kentma57
2009-11-16, 08:46 AM
Undead are affected by spells as though they where objects. Because you can't dispel undead it has been concluded that they considered are non-magical (objects).
I think I made the lich cry. :smallbiggrin:

JeenLeen
2009-11-16, 09:00 AM
Undead are affected by spells as though they where objects. Because you can't dispel undead it has been concluded that they considered are non-magical (objects).
I think I made the litch cry. :smallbiggrin:

I don't think that's how it works. Undead are only affected by Fort-save spells that affect objects, but they are still creatures, not objects. I'm pretty sure it's not that they count as objects, but that 'spells that can target objects' are excluded from undead magical immunities.

SparkMandriller
2009-11-16, 09:08 AM
Shatter wouldn't work that well on undead anyway. You'd need to get your CL pretty high before it'd even work on something that heavy, and you're targeting their strong save. Too bad, the idea is pretty awesome.

kentma57
2009-11-16, 09:30 AM
The shatter allows a fort save, to which undead are not immune.
(Though for undead it would be a will save anyways)
The spell effects 10lb/per level.
An average adult human skeleton makes up 14% of their weight.
Above average human weight 200lb * 14% = 28lb(weight of the skeleton)
CL needed to effect your average human skeletal creature = 3.
And as I said before Undead are mundane objects for the purposes of spells.

The concept works, though sadly it is Will negates.

But hey if you end up fighting a litch with only 2nd level spell on hand, it's worth a shot.

Optimystik
2009-11-16, 09:37 AM
Indeed. It's much better to shatter the locked gauntlet, disarm, and use some sort of magic effect (telekinesis?) to TAKE the mondo weapon.

Lower the BBEG's will save and have the Psion manifest Retrieve - bypasses SR. Yoink!

SparkMandriller
2009-11-16, 10:00 AM
An average adult human skeleton makes up 14% of their weight.
Above average human weight 200lb * 14% = 28lb(weight of the skeleton)

Liches aren't just skeletons though. No idea how much they'd weigh, but it'd be more than that. Maybe. I dunno.


And as I said before Undead are mundane objects for the purposes of spells.

Where you getting that from, bro?

Douglas
2009-11-16, 10:23 AM
And as I said before Undead are mundane objects for the purposes of spells.
No, they are not. Spells that can affect objects bypass the undead immunity to effects with fort saves, but that's the only way they are related. Undead are still creatures.

kentma57
2009-11-16, 10:45 AM
Liches aren't just skeletons though. No idea how much they'd weigh, but it'd be more than that. Maybe. I dunno.


No, they are not. Spells that can affect objects bypass the undead immunity to effects with fort saves, but that's the only way they are related. Undead are still creatures.

Well, I know I have seen it printed some where, but...

Given that spells that effect objects bypass undead spell imunity I would assume that they are effected by said spells(undead are effected by spells that effect objects, shatter effects objects). Also D&D FAQ has clarified that undead can not be dispelled because while magic created them it is no longer present on their persons, there for they are not magical.

So when shatter effects them they can be destroyed like a normal object would be.

Claudius Maximus
2009-11-16, 11:01 AM
You seem to be arguing the following:

Undead are immune to all effects that allow fortitude saves unless they would also affect objects.

Therefore, undead are affected by every effect that affects objects, even if it does not work on creatures.

Your conclusion does not follow. Undead are still creatures, and therefore immune to any effect that affects objects but not creatures, like shatter.

ghashxx
2009-11-16, 11:02 AM
Well, I know I have seen it printed some where, but...

Given that spells that effect objects bypass undead spell imunity I would assume that they are effected by said spells(undead are effected by spells that effect objects, shatter effects objects). Also D&D FAQ has clarified that undead can not be dispelled because while magic created them it is no longer present on their persons, there for they are not magical.

So when shatter effects them they can be destroyed like a normal object would be.

While it's true that they aren't magical, how exactly are they not creatures? They aren't breathing and thinking and alive, but they're still creatures. I get how you're logically getting to your conclusion, but in the end I disagree that saying undead are objects just because they're non-magical and not alive.

Douglas
2009-11-16, 11:15 AM
Given that spells that effect objects bypass undead spell imunity I would assume that they are effected by said spells(undead are effected by spells that effect objects, shatter effects objects).
No, they are not. Spells that can affect objects ignore a specific undead immunity. That does not mean that they are universally able to affect undead.

Baleful Polymorph: can affect creatures, allows a fort save, cannot affect objects
Disintegrate: can affect creatures, allows a fort save, can affect objects
Shrink Item: cannot affect creatures

Undead are immune to Baleful Polymorph, subject to Disintegrate, and immune to Shrink Item.

jiriku
2009-11-16, 11:31 AM
Pretty much anything with a Wisdom score and a Charisma score is a creature. Even constructs and plant creatures don't count as objects if they have Wisdom and Charisma.

kentma57
2009-11-16, 12:21 PM
Fair arguments, but I stand by my view of the rules(though I am sure I read a book that agread with me), as do several DM I know and their respective groups.

Douglas
2009-11-16, 02:02 PM
If you did, that book is most likely third party and is flat out wrong. Traits of the undead type (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/typesSubtypes.htm#undeadType):

Features

An undead creature has the following features.

* 12-sided Hit Dice.
* Base attack bonus equal to ½ total Hit Dice (as wizard).
* Good Will saves.
* Skill points equal to (4 + Int modifier, minimum 1) per Hit Die, with quadruple skill points for the first Hit Die, if the undead creature has an Intelligence score. However, many undead are mindless and gain no skill points or feats.

Traits

An undead creature possesses the following traits (unless otherwise noted in a creature’s entry).

* No Constitution score.
* Darkvision out to 60 feet.
* Immunity to all mind-affecting effects (charms, compulsions, phantasms, patterns, and morale effects).
* Immunity to poison, sleep effects, paralysis, stunning, disease, and death effects.
* Not subject to critical hits, nonlethal damage, ability drain, or energy drain. Immune to damage to its physical ability scores (Strength, Dexterity, and Constitution), as well as to fatigue and exhaustion effects.
* Cannot heal damage on its own if it has no Intelligence score, although it can be healed. Negative energy (such as an inflict spell) can heal undead creatures. The fast healing special quality works regardless of the creature’s Intelligence score.
* Immunity to any effect that requires a Fortitude save (unless the effect also works on objects or is harmless).
* Uses its Charisma modifier for Concentration checks.
* Not at risk of death from massive damage, but when reduced to 0 hit points or less, it is immediately destroyed.
* Not affected by raise dead and reincarnate spells or abilities. Resurrection and true resurrection can affect undead creatures. These spells turn undead creatures back into the living creatures they were before becoming undead.
* Proficient with its natural weapons, all simple weapons, and any weapons mentioned in its entry.
* Proficient with whatever type of armor (light, medium, or heavy) it is described as wearing, as well as all lighter types. Undead not indicated as wearing armor are not proficient with armor. Undead are proficient with shields if they are proficient with any form of armor.
* Undead do not breathe, eat, or sleep.

The phrase I bolded is the only reference to objects in the entire section, and it implies nothing more than an exemption from a particular immunity.

Kelb_Panthera
2009-11-16, 10:37 PM
If you really want to get nit-picky, the description of undead traits says that they are immune unless the spell "also affects objects" Also implies that the spell affects objects and something else........ creatures maybe.:smallwink:

Gan The Grey
2009-11-16, 11:57 PM
If you really, REALLY wanna get nit-picky, you could say that the 'also' is used in reference to the 'Immunity to any effect that requires a Fortitude save'. If you go by that logic, then any spell that requires a Fortitude save and also works on objects would work on undead.

I mean, this is RAW, not RAI, right? :smallsmile:

And, for added paradox-goodness, if they were immune to Shatter, then Shatter would be considered harmless, which means they wouldn't be immune to it, which means it wouldn't be harmless anymore, thus making them immune to it, and then...

Lycanthromancer
2009-11-17, 12:02 AM
Objection!

Weapons wielded by people with the Vow of Poverty aren't magical - the VoP guy just has an enhancement bonus to weapon attack rolls and can overcome damage reduction.

Just like a Solar wielding a nonmagical cold iron (silver? I forget) longsword can still smite a devil with it.Simply means that you can shatter with impunity.

And all the easier, since you don't have to worry about dispelling anything first.

Tokiko Mima
2009-11-17, 12:16 AM
I guess you could try to define an undead that lack fluids or gases as part of their structure as inherently 'crystalline' in the sense that that are 'a solid body having a characteristic internal structure and enclosed by symmetrically arranged plane surfaces, intersecting at definite and characteristic angles.' At the very least they are definitely calcified.

Therefore you could explode the dried bodies of skeletons and lichs with shatter, but not zombies and vampires. That makes a bit more sense to me, but you know what happens when you mix magic and science.... :smallwink:

PhoenixRivers
2009-11-17, 12:50 AM
Undead is a creature type.

Thus, Undead are Creatures (though they are not living).
This is further supported by the SRD: An undead creature has the following features...

Not affected by raise dead and reincarnate spells or abilities. Resurrection and true resurrection can affect undead creatures. These spells turn undead creatures back into the living creatures they were before becoming undead.


For an effect which requires a Fort save to bypass their immunity, it must affect objects.

For any effect to be able to even target them, it must target creatures (and not be restricted to living creatures).

So, if it can't even target them, immunity doesn't factor in. Once it targets, however, if the affect also affects objects, then an undead is not immune to it.

One side seems to be offering that an exclusion from an immunity means an inclusion of a targeting allowance. The two do not go hand in hand.

ghashxx
2009-11-17, 12:42 PM
Gasp, do you mean that since they're creatures that they have to be considered as...creatures!?!? Now that's just crazy:smalltongue:. But seriously, if you were to consider undead as objects then you could try to sunder them. Sundering undead...just doesn't make any sense. Friends don't let friends treat others as objects.

Lycanthromancer
2009-11-17, 01:05 PM
Gasp, do you mean that since they're creatures that they have to be considered as...creatures!?!? Now that's just crazy:smalltongue:. But seriously, if you were to consider undead as objects then you could try to sunder them. Sundering undead...just doesn't make any sense. Friends don't let friends treat others as objects.Egoists disagree with you. (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/powers/metamorphosis.htm)

ghashxx
2009-11-17, 01:13 PM
Egoists disagree with you. (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/powers/metamorphosis.htm)

Whuh? I'm lost with where the psionic version of alter self disagrees with me. It says something about you can become any creature of any type except construct, elemental, outsider, or undead. But it's still calling all of those types of creatures as being creatures.

Lycanthromancer
2009-11-17, 01:14 PM
Whuh? I'm lost with where the psionic version of alter self disagrees with me. It says something about you can become any creature of any type except construct, elemental, outsider, or undead. But it's still calling all of those types of creatures as being creatures.Obligatory text.

Friends don't let friends treat others as objects.

ghashxx
2009-11-17, 01:24 PM
Haha, now I got it. Nice one :smallsmile:

Gorbash
2009-11-17, 02:17 PM
Still, Yes- You can use Shatter to do such cheesery- you must simply do so on a nonmagical weapon.

Why is it cheesy, pray tell?

It's kinda dumb, if you ask me. You either spend two round trying to destroy your own loot, or a quickened spell. You're basically wasting resources in an attempt (which won't likely succeed since DC for a first lvl spell isn't that high) to deprive yourself of gold.

Karoht
2009-11-18, 06:42 PM
Why is it cheesy, pray tell?

It's kinda dumb, if you ask me. You either spend two round trying to destroy your own loot, or a quickened spell. You're basically wasting resources in an attempt (which won't likely succeed since DC for a first lvl spell isn't that high) to deprive yourself of gold.

A ranger without a bow isn't much of a threat. You might even be able to talk him down at that point.

A Raging Barbarian without a sword however, is still a Raging Barbarian. He doesn't need a weapon, he can just wield YOU as a weapon.
Dual wielding massive swords or axes to smite your foes: x amount of GP.
Dual wielding a pair of sorcerers to beat down an enemy cleric because you can: Priceless.

It is just a level 2 spell. It's use is limited. Probably because it is a level 2 spell. The tactic however can still be useful, but it is mostly useful when you are low level, not high level.
Trapped behind a wooden door you just can't seem bash down yourself? Pissed off at the door and your unlucky roll on the strength check? Under 200 lbs? Shatter it.
Shield providing cover? Shatter.
Integral wooden cotter pin in an enemy siege engine? Shatter. (duck afterwards)