PDA

View Full Version : Artificer - is the Thunder Cannon magical?



Dr. Cliché
2017-01-11, 07:18 AM
Basically the title - does the Artificer's Thunder Cannon count as a magic weapon?

Dman
2017-01-11, 07:28 AM
dont think so unless the page has been updated since I downloaded it

jaappleton
2017-01-11, 07:33 AM
As of this moment, I believe it to be DMs call.

The Thunder Cannon itself is created by combining technology with magic.

I don't think its explicitly stated at all whether its magical or not.

Dman
2017-01-11, 07:38 AM
its not like it really needs magic though I mean unless you going up against werewolves or that one monster that resists force (a ghost of some description) you should be fine by the time it matters too much

Dr. Cliché
2017-01-11, 07:40 AM
its not like it really needs magic though I mean unless you going up against werewolves or that one monster that resists force (a ghost of some description) you should be fine by the time it matters too much

I was actually thinking in terms of the Warlock's Blade Pact.

Dman
2017-01-11, 07:57 AM
I was actually thinking in terms of the Warlock's Blade Pact.

I dunno about Warlock but you could always go EK

Harrumphreys
2017-01-11, 08:38 AM
I've seen people claiming on Twitter that the rounds for the Thunder Cannon are magical because they are produced magically with the Arcane Magazine.

Unsure myself, I'd probably rule mundane.

However, when the Artificer reaches level 7 he can make the Thunder Cannon magical with the Magic Weapon spell!

Besides, what Artificer is adventuring without a Forge Domain Cleric with Blessing of the Forge?

Dman
2017-01-11, 08:49 AM
I've seen people claiming on Twitter that the rounds for the Thunder Cannon are magical because they are produced magically with the Arcane Magazine.

Unsure myself, I'd probably rule mundane.

However, when the Artificer reaches level 7 he can make the Thunder Cannon magical with the Magic Weapon spell!

Besides, what Artificer is adventuring without a Forge Domain Cleric with Blessing of the Forge?

by level 7 though the guns getting 3d6 worth of thunder damage hardly needs to worry about a magic item.

Mortis_Elrod
2017-01-11, 09:29 AM
from what i've read its a non magical weapon. With that said its worth 100gp in materials and is definitely made of metal. The second level Forge Cleric could make a copy of the Thunder Cannon. He wouldn't be proficient with it, but its still 2d6 ranged weapon. The forge cleric could spend his Channel Divinity to make the whole party Thunder Cannons if he wanted to, and the Artificer could just make sure to take long rests, making as much ammo as possible. Only the artificer would have the cool high level effects but that be a swankin party running around shooting people.

Grod_The_Giant
2017-01-11, 09:31 AM
But consuming their bonus actions to do, on average, 2.5 more damage than a longbow... Assuming they're only making single attacks, and get proficiency somehow.

Mortis_Elrod
2017-01-11, 09:34 AM
At low levels its losing a +2 or +3 to the attack roll. Still usable id say. and they all could be variant humans with Weapon Master. So there's your proficiency.

jaappleton
2017-01-11, 09:41 AM
At low levels its losing a +2 or +3 to the attack roll. Still usable id say. and they all could be variant humans with Weapon Master. So there's your proficiency.

How are they losing on the attack roll? It uses Dex like any ranged weapon. Still, I'd start Fighter 1 for Archery fighting style.

It irks me that Artificers can actually manufacture Bracers of Archery but it doesn't technically work with a Thunder Cannon.

Mortis_Elrod
2017-01-11, 09:45 AM
Losing on attack roll if they don't have proficiency.

Dman
2017-01-11, 09:48 AM
How are they losing on the attack roll? It uses Dex like any ranged weapon. Still, I'd start Fighter 1 for Archery fighting style.

It irks me that Artificers can actually manufacture Bracers of Archery but it doesn't technically work with a Thunder Cannon.

or go high elf get prof in the bows and pick one up later.

Harrumphreys
2017-01-11, 09:48 AM
by level 7 though the guns getting 3d6 worth of thunder damage hardly needs to worry about a magic item.

Quite a few creatures will be resistant or immune to a portion of that mundane damage.

Regitnui
2017-01-11, 10:35 AM
I saw a Sage Advice on this... I think it was magical...

jaappleton
2017-01-11, 12:02 PM
I saw a Sage Advice on this... I think it was magical...

But was it Mearls or Crawford? Crawford is the "what he says goes, it's the rules" guy while Mearls is "Here's how I'd rule"

DivisibleByZero
2017-01-11, 12:11 PM
I saw a Sage Advice on this... I think it was magical...
But was it Mearls or Crawford? Crawford is the "what he says goes, it's the rules" guy while Mearls is "Here's how I'd rule"

It was Mearls, and he simply said that he'd treat it as such.
https://twitter.com/mikemearls/status/818582295116292096?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw

MeeposFire
2017-01-11, 12:21 PM
Quite a few creatures will be resistant or immune to a portion of that mundane damage.

The thunder damage will only be reduced by thunder resistance (fairly rare). The only part that normal weapon resistance would affect would be the 2d6+dex damage from the weapon damage itself since that is piercing damage.

Christian
2017-01-11, 04:20 PM
I've seen people claiming on Twitter that the rounds for the Thunder Cannon are magical because they are produced magically with the Arcane Magazine.

That's a ... bizarre argument. If anything created with magic is magical, but the Fabricate spell can't create magical items (as stated in the spell description), then I guess the Fabricate spell can't actually create anything?

If the Thunder Cannon is supposed to count as a magic weapon, it needs to say so in the description. If the rounds are supposed to count as magic ammunition, ditto. If that was RAI, then that's an editing problem that needs to be corrected if and when this class is printed in some official source.

(I'd probably include this as part of the 3rd-level Thunder Monger upgrade, but not in the base 1st-level ability, if I were including this in a home campaign. It's obvious to me that would be a house rule, though.)

RSP
2017-01-11, 11:58 PM
Mundane. Crawford's been consistent with his "if it was X, it would say so," responses.

Plus, with an extremely limited spell selection, I'd imagine the intent was for Magic Weapon to be used to overcome resistances when needed. Otherwise, it's a pretty odd choice for a Spell when you always have a magic ranged super weapon on hand.