Wizard - Minor Conjuration....weapon whenever you want it?

[DracoKnight]

So, like the title says, I am wondering if this ability allows you to basically create a weapon whenever you want to. The rules read:

"Starting at 2nd level, when you select this school, you can use your action to conjure up an inanimate object in your hand or on the ground in an unoccupied space that you can see within 10 feet of you. This object can weigh no more than 10 pounds, and its form must be that of a nonmagical object that you have seen. The object is visibly magical, radiating dim light out to 5 feet.
The object disappears after 1 hour, when you use this feature again, or when it takes damage."

Looking at the weapon tables of the PHB, most of the weapons in the book are under 10 pounds. If this is rules legal, this is a much better MC for an Arcane Trickster than a bladelock. You are an extremely effective magical assassin. Also, is a weapon conjured this way magical? It says you must have seen a nonmagical version of it, but that "The object is visibly magical..." So, would any DMs out there allow this over come resistance to nonmagical mundane damage?

And finally, how would you handle the clause: "or when it takes damage"? Would you allow enemies to try and attack a weapon conjured this way directly, or would you make the weapon take damage if it was used in an attack.

The reason for all of these questions is that I am currently working on building an Arcane Trickster for a campaign that will go to level 20, and Arcane Trickster 14/Conjuration Wizard 6 is looking very enticing.

[Requiemforlust]

I think that everything that you are asking about technically does work by raw...but I'm having a hard time reading my PHB through all of your cheese.

[GandalfTheWhite]

I would probably allow it, because it's still not nearly as broken as the 10 Mystic levels currently available through the UA. Minor Conjuration used like this is basically the blade meld talent from that UA.

EDIT: I've actually added blade meld to pretty much all of the spell lists as a cantrip for my players.

[ShikomeKidoMi]

Certainly, making a weapon with that is both RAW and RAI.

The weapon counting as magical for overcoming resistance on the other hand? I'm not so sure about that.

[lebefrei]

Out of game logic says a weapon can "take damage" any time it is used, and it wouldn't work.

In game RAW says weapons don't take damage unless specifically targeted by something attacking an inorganic object, and so it should work.

If I allowed it in my game I would use Pact of the Blade as a reference, and that does count as a magic weapon. "The object is visibly magical" makes it difficult to rule against this.

Two level dip forcing a melee character to take the most common dump stat to 13 instead of 8 for a summonable magic weapon, or giving EK and AT (possibly the least popular subclass choice for each class) a little more caster progression... Sure, I'd let it happen.

[mer.c]

As a DM, I'm onboard with it counting as magic for overcoming resistance. I take a pretty broad interpretation of the weapon taking damage, though. Stick it clear through your enemy (i.e. weapon hit)? No problem. Miss an enemy with a shield by 1 or 2, or miss someone in a breastplate or tougher by AC-10? Blade glances off armor/shield. Maybe you roll to see if it takes damage, maybe it just disappears.

But, I'd probably allow you to conjure two daggers as a bonus action every turn as long as you say "Trace, on!" every time you do it. ;)

[rollingForInit]

I would totally allow a character to create a weapon with it. Weapons aren't overpowered. It'll be marginally useful, mostly just flavour. And when it is useful, it breaks nothing.

I would not have it count as magical for the purposes of overcoming resistances. Compare this to the Warlock's Pact Blade. That weapon is obviously magical (it's created from nothing), but the feature specifically mentions that it is also considered magical for the purposes of overcoming resistances. Minor Conjuration does not mention anything like that, therefore any weapons created with it wouldn't count as magical for those purposes.

"Magical weapon" as a counter to resistance, in my opinion, refers to weapons that have been magically enhanced. They are better than normal weapons. A Minor Conjuration weapon is definitely worse, since it'll disappear if the weapon itself takes any sort of damage.

[Joe the Rat]

I'm okay with the at-will weaponry, but magic object = magical weapon doesn't quite jibe right to me. If you bludgeon someone with an Immovable Rod, should that overcome damage resistance? Can I use a Sending Stone as a magic sling stone? Can I effectively towel snap a werebear with a wet and twisted Cloak of the Elvenkind? These are magic items, but their magical properties are not "as weapons." They are not enchanted to do damage. Minor conjurations are magical. The magical property is "existing."

So you should really ask the DM to be clear on how he reads it.

On damage:
Obviously, if the weapon is targeted (and hit), it goes bye-bye. Anything area effect should count as damaging a conjured object. Conjured shields getting sundered with an AC miss by 1-2 sounds right. Missing by one with Dual Wielding should shatter the summoned main gauche int he same manner. I might make the case that if you are Dodging - taking defensive steps - a conjured weapon might be sundered if the high die would have hit you - using it as a block or parry.

Conjured ammunition is destroyed after being shot. Conjured thrown weapons I am inclined to have break if they fail to do damage. This is a way to get around the "limit one draw" issue. I might allow a second shot on a loading weapon (provided you have the extra attack), as you can just conjure the ammunition in place.

[randomodo]

If I had a conjuror PC in my game, I'd rule
- Yes, you make a weapon
- It does not count as magical for purposes of damage resistance
- I probably wouldn't make it break after a single use (If a player made a pickaxe for purposes of digging a gem out of a sandstone wall, I wouldn't make her conjure a new axe every swing), but I'm ambivalent on that.

[Segev]

Between this and the thread on a Bladelock using "improvised weapon" definitions to conjure a pact weapon that is actually a tool or piece of light furniture (e.g. a chair), I almost wonder if these aren't the same class feature as each other.

[Joe the Rat]

Technically the bladelock version will always be tougher.
But now you make me want to use an "Infernal Caber" as a weapon.

[SterlingWren]

So, like the title says, I am wondering if this ability allows you to basically create a weapon whenever you want to. The rules read:

"Starting at 2nd level, when you select this school, you can use your action to conjure up an inanimate object in your hand or on the ground in an unoccupied space that you can see within 10 feet of you. This object can weigh no more than 10 pounds, and its form must be that of a nonmagical object that you have seen. The object is visibly magical, radiating dim light out to 5 feet.
The object disappears after 1 hour, when you use this feature again, or when it takes damage."

Looking at the weapon tables of the PHB, most of the weapons in the book are under 10 pounds. If this is rules legal, this is a much better MC for an Arcane Trickster than a bladelock. You are an extremely effective magical assassin. Also, is a weapon conjured this way magical? It says you must have seen a nonmagical version of it, but that "The object is visibly magical..." So, would any DMs out there allow this over come resistance to nonmagical mundane damage?

And finally, how would you handle the clause: "or when it takes damage"? Would you allow enemies to try and attack a weapon conjured this way directly, or would you make the weapon take damage if it was used in an attack.

The reason for all of these questions is that I am currently working on building an Arcane Trickster for a campaign that will go to level 20, and Arcane Trickster 14/Conjuration Wizard 6 is looking very enticing.

RAW, definitely. RAI, a weapon is definitely within the realm of possibility, a magical one - probably not. You definitely have a RAW argument. "Visibly Magical" is hard to argue with.

[KorvinStarmast]

@RollingforInit: nicely done, I'm going to C&P your post for future ref at our table. Well reasoned.

(A few others said much the same thing).

@Randomodo: good points, this might be a good place to toss in check on "does this happen" whenever a hit is not scored with the weapon. Adds to the work a DM has to do, but it then better aligns with "takes damage" as noted in other answers about blocking etc.

[Slipperychicken]

I don't think it's supposed to count as a magic weapon. Instead, the distinction should be made that while it is a weapon created by magic, it does not have the properties of a magic weapon. Either way, this is contentious enough to deserve attention from sage advice.


I think that using a weapon does not deal hit point damage to it. Otherwise, we would need to track the hit points of weapons and their degradation. If that was the intent, we would have gotten rules to this effect.

[mephnick]

I'm not sure a glowing weapon would make you a very good assassin. :smalltongue:

[Slipperychicken]

I'm not sure a glowing weapon would make you a very good assassin. :smalltongue:

They'll be so busy looking at your shining longsword that they won't notice the sharp poisoned dagger until it's between their ribs.

[Grod_The_Giant]

I think that everything that you are asking about technically does work by raw...but I'm having a hard time reading my PHB through all of your cheese.
Oh god no, not a weapon! There's literally nothing in the game more powerful than the ability to create a single weapon! Dear god, no! And a MAGIC weapon! That's, like, a full half of a 2nd level spell!

[JumboWheat01]

Oh god no, not a weapon! There's literally nothing in the game more powerful than the ability to create a single weapon! Dear god, no! And a MAGIC weapon! That's, like, a full half of a 2nd level spell!

The sarcasm is strong with this one.


On the topic, I was literally just thinking this the other day when drafting up yet another one of my myriad of potential characters. Though I also had the mind of "can I conjure up an orb or a wand whenever I want and have an arcane focus that way."

Still, as others have said, I'd totally let you make a weapon with it. They totally fit in the required measurements in the book. As for it being magical, well... I'm not entirely sure. It is glowing of its own accord, so that does mean there is some trace magical energy in the conjured thing, but it's not really an offensive enchantment. It's just glowing. Whoop-dee-flippin-doo. How many races have Darkvision anyway?

[Grod_The_Giant]

I suspect the idea of the glow was so that you couldn't conjure up fake gold coins or art objects to swindle people with. Never mind that a glowing, obviously magical item could probably be sold for far more...

[Slipperychicken]

I suspect the idea of the glow was so that you couldn't conjure up fake gold coins or art objects to swindle people with. Never mind that a glowing, obviously magical item could probably be sold for far more...

I get the feeling people might have gotten wise to it after the last three conjuration-artists went through hawking fake magical items.

[Vogonjeltz]

So, like the title says, I am wondering if this ability allows you to basically create a weapon whenever you want to. The rules read:

"Starting at 2nd level, when you select this school, you can use your action to conjure up an inanimate object in your hand or on the ground in an unoccupied space that you can see within 10 feet of you. This object can weigh no more than 10 pounds, and its form must be that of a nonmagical object that you have seen. The object is visibly magical, radiating dim light out to 5 feet.
The object disappears after 1 hour, when you use this feature again, or when it takes damage."

Looking at the weapon tables of the PHB, most of the weapons in the book are under 10 pounds. If this is rules legal, this is a much better MC for an Arcane Trickster than a bladelock. You are an extremely effective magical assassin. Also, is a weapon conjured this way magical? It says you must have seen a nonmagical version of it, but that "The object is visibly magical..." So, would any DMs out there allow this over come resistance to nonmagical mundane damage?

And finally, how would you handle the clause: "or when it takes damage"? Would you allow enemies to try and attack a weapon conjured this way directly, or would you make the weapon take damage if it was used in an attack.

The reason for all of these questions is that I am currently working on building an Arcane Trickster for a campaign that will go to level 20, and Arcane Trickster 14/Conjuration Wizard 6 is looking very enticing.

Good questions all.

I'd say:
1) Yes, it's magical, the ability even says so. But it doesn't provide any bonuses, just the minimal lighting effect.

2) Weapons don't take damage by attacking per se, but if you tried to sunder something that it couldn't plausibly harm before itself breaking (i.e. trying to chop through steel bars with a dagger) you'd probably damage the knife (granted, at that point, why not just conjure a hack saw?); so unless an enemy sunders the weapon (or something else that should obvious damage the item) I'd probably leave it be.

[mer.c]

I think that using a weapon does not deal hit point damage to it. Otherwise, we would need to track the hit points of weapons and their degradation. If that was the intent, we would have gotten rules to this effect.

And then we'd be playing Fire Emblem instead of D&D.