Roy's Sword

[ZerglingOne]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but Roy's sword should still function as a +5 sword within an anti-magic field shouldn't it? It is not technically "enhanced" by magic, it's just made of an alloy of steel and starmetal with a corresponding +5 to both hit and damage.

Since an adamantine sword is still an adamantine sword within an AMF, it would still retain its damage bonus. Since the Greenhilt blade now has a +5 to hit and damage via a crafting check to create a steel/starmetal sword, this wouldn't qualify as a magical bonus. The green haze that harms the undead may not function, but if it's a +5 sword, that won't matter if Xykon is just a 30+hd skeleton with avg 6hp/level.

Here's why I thought of this: (part of the AMF description)Furthermore, while a magic sword does not function magically within the area, it is still a sword (and a masterwork sword at that).

So if I understand it correctly, Roy essentially has a crazy-good version of a masterwork sword essentially. If someone could set me straight on this, please do.

[TriForce]

could be, but it doesnt have to be the case.
it could be that the starmetal alloy gives the sword a supernatural effect, and that would mean it wont work in a antimagic field.
The giant never really let us know how the starmetal works, but my personal feeling is that the sword will just be a masterwork sword in a antimagic field, since a +5 bonus plus the undead slaying part are simply too good not to be magical

[ZerglingOne]

could be, but it doesnt have to be the case.
it could be that the starmetal alloy gives the sword a supernatural effect, and that would mean it wont work in a antimagic field.
The giant never really let us know how the starmetal works, but my personal feeling is that the sword will just be a masterwork sword in a antimagic field, since a +5 bonus plus the undead slaying part are simply too good not to be magical

Good point, plus, I just realized, it registers as what appears to be a particularly powerful magical aura according to V's arcane sight in panel 4. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0693.html)

[Goonthegoof]

Holy crap, I never noticed that. I've read that page maybe 20 times and I never noticed the sword registered, I thought it was just a very masterwork-y sword.

[Ancalagon]

Awesome obervation!

His armour also registers...

[Daefos]

I just thought that was a coloring error...

[i6uuaq]

erm, i think it's just the "colour-negative" effect - you'll notice Roy's shoulder pads, which are usually also grey-ish in colour, have turned green under arcane sight. Same thing happened to the sword.

[hamishspence]

His boots do not change though- nor does his skin- which is why most people concluded it wasn't colour negative, but an actual detection of magic.

Armour, belt, and sword all develop thick pink outlines, and change colour.

[Optimystik]

Assuming it's the same material, Starmetal is specifically described as "magical" in Complete Arcane.

"Glorious and sinister auroras glimmer in the dusk for weeks on end, and from time to time shooting stars of burning emerald fall from the sky. These fallen stars are the only known source of starmetal, a rare and precious ore infused with mighty magical power."

"Starmetal is extraordinarily hard, and is equal to adamantine for all purposes (see page 283 of the Dungeon Master’s Guide), including overcoming damage reduction or granting damage reduction when used in armor construction. Starmetal also possesses an inherent magical connection to the Material Plane..."

Given that their starmetal has the same origin as Roy's, the properties should be similar. More evidence of non-core material used by the Giant?

And other references to Complete Arcane have been made in the strip as well - Tsukiko's orbs, and "warlocks."

[martinkou]

Good point, plus, I just realized, it registers as what appears to be a particularly powerful magical aura according to V's arcane sight in panel 4. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0693.html)

Does anyone find it strange that V's robe isn't enchanted?

That, or Blackwing's field of vision is incredibly narrow.

[Ancalagon]

erm, i think it's just the "colour-negative" effect - you'll notice Roy's shoulder pads, which are usually also grey-ish in colour, have turned green under arcane sight. Same thing happened to the sword.

I pondered that option as well: But take a look: In another panel the ray crosses his head as well. But the only colour-changes (no background, no head etc) are his armour, which is probably magical and his sword, of which we know it is magical.

Also, the lines around the sword/armour are WAY to thick to "just" be "inverted colours".

[Le Piaf]

and his legs are magical too?

[Sanguine]

and his legs are magical too?

One word Greaves. It's the part of the armor that covers your legs. Or you know magic pants.

[Red XIV]

Or you know magic pants.
Gotta protect the Trouser Titan, after all.:smallbiggrin:

[theMycon]

Or, perhaps the thick black outline goes pink, as his dark-brown skin goes kinda pink. Maybe it's just a consistent negative coloration effect?

[SoC175]

As adventures of their level they should immediately go home to start new careers as dirt farmers if they don't glow like christmas trees under observation of detect magic

[Zherog]

Since an adamantine sword is still an adamantine sword within an AMF, it would still retain its damage bonus.

Adamantine weapons don't receive a bonus to damage.

[Hatman]

Does anyone find it strange that V's robe isn't enchanted?

That, or Blackwing's field of vision is incredibly narrow.

it has to do with eye size, if you notice in
http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0693.html
V's vision has 2 sizes, one for her large eye and one for her smaller eye. o.0

[derfenrirwolv]

From the srd

A normal creature can enter the area, as can normal missiles. Furthermore, while a magic sword does not function magically within the area, it is still a sword (and a masterwork sword at that).

So no, it does not function as a +5 magic sword in an antimagic field. It functions as a masterwork sword. ( +1 to hit,0 to damage)

[ZerglingOne]

I just found another interesting point. How adamantine worked in 3rd edition (which is how I learned it originally after playing BG where it dissolved immediately). From DMG 3.0: "Weapons fashioned from adamantine have a natural enhancement bonus to attack and damage(a greatsword would have a +2)......These bonuses do not stack with any other enhancement bonuses thus an adamantine sword enchanted with a +5 enhancement bonus effectively has a +5 enhancement bonus. In an area where magic does not function, it still retains its natural +2 enhancement bonus." Under these rules, Roy's sword is completely un-magical and would work in an AMF, but since it's 3.5, it's hard to say whether it follows a rule similar to this.

[FujinAkari]

Under these rules, Roy's sword is completely un-magical and would work in an AMF, but since it's 3.5, it's hard to say whether it follows a rule similar to this.

Not really... 3.5 is pretty explicit about adamantine not granting a bonus to damage.


Adamantine

This ultrahard metal adds to the quality of a weapon or suit of armor. Weapons fashioned from adamantine have a natural ability to bypass hardness when sundering weapons or attacking objects, ignoring hardness less than 20. Armor made from adamantine grants its wearer damage reduction of 1/- if it’s light armor, 2/- if it’s medium armor, and 3/- if it’s heavy armor. Adamantine is so costly that weapons and armor made from it are always of masterwork quality; the masterwork cost is included in the prices given below. Thus, adamantine weapons and ammunition have a +1 enhancement bonus on attack rolls, and the armor check penalty of adamantine armor is lessened by 1 compared to ordinary armor of its type. Items without metal parts cannot be made from adamantine. An arrow could be made of adamantine, but a quarterstaff could not.

[ZerglingOne]

Not really... 3.5 is pretty explicit about adamantine not granting a bonus to damage.

I'm quite aware of the 3.5 rules, I'm just saying that in 3.0, having an adamantine weapon was like always wielding a +2 weapon which appears to be how the blacksmith describes it working(except +5 in this case) since we have no indication that the smith is capable of casting any spell. Normally to make a +5 weapon, the spell Greater Magic Weapon would be required. My point was, there at a time existed rules for having a +x weapon without it actually being magical.

[Wind d8/d12]

Which edition was Roy's Grandfather using? I don't see how dragging logic and rules into this is going to get us anywhere :smallannoyed:

[Mystic Muse]

probably 1st edition since Haley's dad (who's a lot younger than Roy's grandfather) was a 1st edition thief.

[Kish]

probably 1st edition since Haley's dad (who's a lot younger than Roy's grandfather) was a 1st edition thief.
*bonk* No Feats in 1st edition. Try again.

(It starts with 3 and ends with .5.)

[Mystic Muse]

apologies:smallredface:. I've never played 1st edition.

[Ash_Gazn]

*bonk* No Feats in 1st edition. Try again.

(It starts with 3 and ends with .5.)

Just because he was a 1st edition fighter does not mean he couldn't be aware of 3.5 rules. Just because he's been dead since before 3rd edition doesn't mean he wasn't upgraded to the new rules along with everyone else.

Together, that means that something he learned as a 1st edition fighter could be taught to Roy, as long as Roy took a feat for it when he got back.

[Ancalagon]

Which edition was Roy's Grandfather using? I don't see how dragging logic and rules into this is going to get us anywhere :smallannoyed:

Doesn't matter. As the sword was reforged under 3.5. It also is quite different than before (originally it was not +5, no starmetal, and probably no extra-rage-damage-vs-undead-and-others).