Magic/Epic Damage Reduction and Overcoming it

[Khellendross]

Overcoming 15/magic damage reduction is simple. You need a magic weapon or to have your attacks count as magic. Epic which is an advanced form of the previous damage reduction is only overcome by epic weapons or weapons that count as epic. So would it stand to reason that if your weapons count as epic they would also count as magic? I've seen rules that support this and I'm 99.9% sure it would. What do you think? My rm/player seems to think that epic wouldn't overcome magic damage reduction that epic only overcome epic and magic only overcome magic.

I bring this up because the Tarrasque vs Allip thread always has the Allip winning because the Tarrasque can't hit it. Well it's got epic damage reduction so therefor it can overcome magic like damage reduction and would be able to hit it. Am I wrong? We are looking at their Pathfinder versions.

[Eldariel]

Epic weapons are magic weapons by default since it takes an enhancement to be an epic weapon and every weapon with enhancement is a magic weapon...

[Runestar]

Given that dr/epic is basically an improved version of dr/magic, it makes sense that dr/epic lets you overcome dr/magic.

For what it is worth, I asked wotc's customer service this very question many years ago, and their response was in the affirmative.

[Flickerdart]

Epic weapons are magic weapons by default since it takes an enhancement to be an epic weapon and every weapon with enhancement is a magic weapon...

Creatures whose natural weapons count as epic for bypassing DR do not necessarily count as magic, though.

[Godskook]

Is there really an example of something that counts as epic but not magic?

[Flickerdart]

Is there really an example of something that counts as epic but not magic?

Tarrasque.

[PId6]

Tarrasque.

Well, there's something to add to the list of all those Tarrasque improvement threads out there.

[Khellendross]

Creatures whose natural weapons count as epic for bypassing DR do not necessarily count as magic, though.

Okay, where does it say that it doesn't when it says that you're natural attacks are treated as epic weapons. If I remember right if two creatures have magic damage reduction they negate each other. So why wouldn't epic also negate it if epic is a magic weapon+? Or is this we dont' know so best guess is...

[Flickerdart]

Okay, where does it say that it doesn't when it says that you're natural attacks are treated as epic weapons. If I remember right if two creatures have magic damage reduction they negate each other. So why wouldn't epic also negate it if epic is a magic weapon+? Or is this we dont' know so best guess is...

Damage types aren't inherently "better" than others. Unless explicitly stated, a weapon that overcomes Epic DR because of a clause and not a +6 bonus does not overcome Magic DR.

[Eldariel]

Creatures whose natural weapons count as epic for bypassing DR do not necessarily count as magic, though.

Actually, a look at Rules Compendium:
"Epic
Weapons that have a magical enhancement bonus of +6 or higher can overcome epic damage reduction. An “epic weapon” isn’t enough. This type of damage reduction is supernatural. If a creature has this kind of damage reduction, such as DR 5/epic, it also has the epic strike ability (see page 100)."

"Epic Strike
Natural weapon attacks made by a creature that has this supernatural special attack are treated as having a +6 magical enhancement bonus for the purpose of overcoming damage reduction."


So yeah, creatures with epic DR do pierce DR/Magic now.

[Khellendross]

Thank you for that answer. I knew they did overcome magic but wanted verification to back it up.

This means that the Tarrasque vs Allip argument is not the Tarasque can win.

[Eldariel]

This means that the Tarrasque vs Allip argument is not the Tarasque can win.

Except it's only treated as magic for purposes of overcoming DR; Allip doesn't have DR. Big T's attacks are perfectly normal with regards to hitting incorporeals; that is, it can't do it.

[Douglas]

The Tarrasque's attacks may count as magic for beating DR, but I don't think there's anything that says they count as magic for being able to hit incorporeal, which is the real problem in the Tarrasque vs Allip matchup.

[Lord Vukodlak]

Thank you for that answer. I knew they did overcome magic but wanted verification to back it up.

This means that the Tarrasque vs Allip argument is not the Tarasque can win.

Logically, a creature that overcomes epic DR should overcome magic DR.
Epic DR is simply xx/+6 or higher, its a greater version of DR/magic. Back in 3.0 it was just vs +6, +7, +8 etc. In the switch to 3.5 the hierarchy was eliminated and it become simply DR/epic.

Well you can argue that technically..., but it sounds kinda silly to me.

That being said, even if a creature's natural weapons count as magic for the purposes of overcoming damage reduction. That is utterly meaningless with incorporeal creatures. It has to be a +1 enchantment bonus or higher.

[Optimystik]

I bring this up because the Tarrasque vs Allip thread always has the Allip winning because the Tarrasque can't hit it. Well it's got epic damage reduction so therefor it can overcome magic like damage reduction and would be able to hit it. Am I wrong? We are looking at their Pathfinder versions.

To sum up the last few posts, your logic is sound but that is not the Tarrasque's real handicap vs. the Allip. The Tarrasque cannot hit incorporeal creatures; that's really all there is to the fight.

[Glimbur]

There's an interesting clause in the Incorporeal Subtype, whether it's in the SRD, MMI, or MMV. It states they can be struck by creatures that strike as magic weapons. This is a bit ham handed and not entirely airtight because they are stated to strike as magic only for purposes of overcoming DR, but it seems to be an effort to let big T hit incorporeals, among other things.

[hamishspence]

The SRD version of incorporeality says "magic weapons" not "weapons with a +1 or higher bonus."

Incorporeality
Incorporeal creatures can be harmed only by other incorporeal creatures, by magic weapons, or by spells, spell-like effects, or supernatural effects. They are immune to all nonmagical attack forms. They are not burned by normal fires, affected by natural cold, or harmed by mundane acids.

Even when struck by magic or magic weapons, an incorporeal creature has a 50% chance to ignore any damage from a corporeal source—except for a force effect or damage dealt by a ghost touch weapon.

If "Magic strike" counts as a magic weapon, and epic strike counts as an epic weapon, and an epic weapon is always a magic weapon- then it works.

I'm guessing the MMV version (or maybe the Rules Compendium version?) had the clause clarifying that Magic Strike counts as a magic weapon.

[Lord Vukodlak]

The SRD version of incorporeality says "magic weapons" not "weapons with a +1 or higher bonus."

If "Magic strike" counts as a magic weapon, and epic strike counts as an epic weapon, and an epic weapon is always a magic weapon- then it works.

I'm guessing the MMV version (or maybe the Rules Compendium version?) had the clause clarifying that Magic Strike counts as a magic weapon.

The various things on creatures always say "For the purposes of overcoming damage reduction" Which would exclude, regeneration, incorporeality and anything else that isn't damage reduction.

Such as a monk's ki strike makes his unarmed attack count as magic "For the purposes of overcoming damage reduction"

It does appear however Incorporeality is listed twice in the SRD,
http://www.d20srd.org/srd/typessubtypes.htm
—Incorporeal Subtype
In this case "magic weapons or creatures that strike as magic weapons"

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/specialAbilities.htm#
—Incorporeality
In this case "by magic weapons"

Using the special abilities wording, you need an actually enchantment bonus on your weapon, as creatures that strike as magic do so only for the purposes of overcoming damage reduction.

Using the subtype wording creatures that strike as magic weapons qualify so that includes. The Rules Compendium only uses the "magic weapons or creatures that strike as magic weapons" version.

[hamishspence]

The subtype version may be the most helpful in this regard- since I think it was revised in MMIII and Libris Mortis, and the revised version of the subtype used in MMIV and MMV.

So if we consider that the subtype text is more recent, and so more valid, than the Incorporeality text in the DMG, then it takes precedence.