Log in

No account? Create an account
D&D 3E
18th-Feb-2006 01:49 am
Evil Drew
If I'm wearing Armour of Spell resistance, and I get attacked by someone with a Flaming Weapon, do they have to roll to overcome spell resistance?
18th-Feb-2006 07:26 am (UTC)
Do you mean the druid spell flame blade? Or just a regular ol' magic weapon with the Flaming enchantment? In the former case, yes they would, but not in the latter. The only defense against the Flaming enchantment that I'm aware of is some sort of energy resistance (or immunity) against fire.
18th-Feb-2006 09:31 am (UTC)
But it's a spell effect. I figured there'd be a caster-level check, or something.
18th-Feb-2006 12:26 pm (UTC)
There might be a caster level check if someone cast a targetted Dispel Magic against the sword, but not spell resistance.
19th-Feb-2006 01:31 am (UTC)
Not even in that case.

The spell effect is upon the weapon, not against the person wearing the armor. The person wearing the armor would have the SR against having 'flaming' cast on their items.
19th-Feb-2006 01:49 am (UTC)
I'm confused. Are you talking about flame blade? Flame blade is never cast on a weapon. It's a spell that acts as a melee touch attack.
19th-Feb-2006 03:26 am (UTC)
I'm not talking about flame blade.

I'm talking about WEapon Augmentation, an Artificer Invocation (Spell) cast upon someone's weapon to give it a +1 weapon enhancement.

Or, Earth Hammer (Races of Stone), which makes a weapon do damage as if it were one weapon size larger, or Holy Sword (Add Holy to a weapon) or Bless Weapon (WQeapon auto-confirms Crits), etc.

The WEapon could have SR that would stop the spells from affecting the weapon (or the weapon holder). SR would not stop the weapon's abilities.

If the sword had a Spell Like Ability (intellegent weapon, Spell Storing ability, etc.), SR would apply to that. But not the base weapon, or its base effects.

19th-Feb-2006 05:43 pm (UTC)
Oh. I thought you were replying to my initial post, but I see that's clearly not the case.
18th-Feb-2006 08:02 am (UTC)
with the weapon enchantment "flaming" no, they don't roll to overcome SR. its not a spell.
18th-Feb-2006 09:32 am (UTC)
No, it's a spell effect. Wouldn't that be the same thing?
18th-Feb-2006 09:35 am (UTC)
It's not a spell-effect, it's a magical enhancement. Such distinctions are important for 3.5.

Thus, while it is magical, it is not a spell or spell-effect, so SR does not affect it. Else, a Fighter would have to make a caster level or Use Magic Device check just to activate the ability. o_O
18th-Feb-2006 04:46 pm (UTC)
Spell Resistance is not the same as anti-magic, and it has some significant limitations. For instance, you can hit someone with SR 50 with almost any offensive Conjuration spell without having to make any rolls at all. A flaming magic weapon is a magical effect on the weapon, not on the target of an attack, and thus SR doesn't apply (unless the weapon has SR and wishes to resist the flaming ability for whatever reason it might have).

Also, there's a difference between a direct spell effect and an indirect spell effect. SR, for instance, only applies to the telekinesis spell when used to move or push someone with SR; throwing something at them with TK doesn't allow an SR roll.

To contrast, flame blade is an Evocation: a sheath of magical energy filled with magical flame. As such, it is subject to SR, and the spell lists "Spell Resistance: Yes" in its stat block.
18th-Feb-2006 03:04 pm (UTC)
From the SRD:

Only spells and spell-like abilities are subject to spell resistance. Extraordinary and supernatural abilities (including enhancement bonuses on magic weapons) are not.

I think that if a +1 weapon can get through SR, a +1 ability on a weapon should be able to also. But it's hard to say. It's a question of whether you treat it as a spell-like ability (which doesn't make sense to me) or a supernatural ability (which does make sense).
18th-Feb-2006 03:06 pm (UTC)
But I just found:

Magic items produce spells or spell-like effects.

Which would suggest that spell resistance does apply to the flames.
18th-Feb-2006 04:40 pm (UTC)
But what is the context of that though? Where did you find this?
18th-Feb-2006 04:54 pm (UTC)
It's from the "Saving Throws Against Magic Items" section of the Magic Items rules. In this context, I think it's misworded, and should have said "Many magic items produce spells or spell-like effects." In this context, I'd say any magic item effect that permits a saving throw is likely to also be a magic item effect that allows Spell Resistance. (Obviously, if the magic item effect duplicates an effect that doesn't allow Spell Resistance, it still doesn't, and if the item effect explicitly disallows it, it doesn't.)
18th-Feb-2006 04:58 pm (UTC)
It is the first line on the chapter on Saving Throws for effects generated from magic items. Google is your friend.

In combination, this implies a Thundering weapon that critical-hits a dwarf with spell resistance will ignore the spell resistance for the extra damage but allow the dwarf their racial bonus on the saving throw for deafness.
19th-Feb-2006 01:37 am (UTC)

The SR is against spell effects or spell like abilities when they are cat.

In this case, the spell equivelent, Weapon Augmentation (Eberron) has Spell Resistance as 'Yes (harmless)' or 'Yes (object, harmless)' (I forget which, and my Eberron book is not at hand). Which means the target of the spell gets the resistance, not the victim of the weapon.

Equivelent to this is Disrupting Weapon or Keen Edge, both of which affect the weapon, not a victim of the weapon, and only then does the weapon holder get SR.

SR only works against spells, and the direct (rather than indirect) effects of those spells (or spell like abilities). In this case, the direct effect is making the weapon better. It is an indirect effect that the weapon hurts more.

19th-Feb-2006 02:47 am (UTC)
Sheesh, all the odd answers here. (Sorry I missed this one.)

In order for spell resistance to apply, the effect must be a spell or spell-like ability. These are always described as the name of a spell, and described in depth in some book's "spells" chapter. Even then, ONLY the subset of spells with "Spell Resistance: Yes" need roll.

For the flaming weapon, since the description doesn't describe it in terms of a spell like ability (see Mace of Terror for an example that does) your Armor of Spell Resistance doesn't apply.

20th-Feb-2006 04:01 am (UTC)
If you cast "True Strike" on yourself, and then attack with a mundane weapon, the monster you whack doesn't get Spell Resistance against the True Strike part of the attack roll.

So: no, absolutely not.
This page was loaded Jan 23rd 2019, 9:44 am GMT.