Toxifier: What counts as an "enchanted weapon"?

[evileeyore]

For my money, it's Enchantments that improve damage or accuracy (IE everything on the Enchantment list but Light, Defending Weapon, and Shatterproof and that's for Weapons or Projectiles).


And yeah, I'd even let temporary magical effects like the Wizard or Cleric casting Flaming Weapon or Affect Spirits to apply.

[Anthony]

Incidentally, it's not clear how diffuse interacts with followup (this matters for flaming weapon/etc). Is the damage capped at 2 for the entire blow, or can it do 2 damage for the weapon and 2 damage for the followup.

[ArchonShiva]

On the contrary, it is quite clear, despite not necessarily making sense: the cap is per attack. So no.

House rule it if you want something better.

[Bruno]

Originally Posted by ArchonShiva

On the contrary, it is quite clear, despite not necessarily making sense: the cap is per attack. So no.

House rule it if you want something better.

A Follow-up is a separate attack though.

[ArchonShiva]

That’s GURPS. DFRPG defines follow-up as a secondary effect, it’s not called another attack (although there is mention of the “primary attack” in the case of Contact Agent).

[evileeyore]

Originally Posted by ArchonShiva

That’s GURPS. DFRPG defines follow-up as a secondary effect, it’s not called another attack (although there is mention of the “primary attack” in the case of Contact Agent).

'Primary' is right there under Follow-Up: "The primary effect is always damage of some kind..."


My ruling? It's a second effect, so it's separate.

[ArchonShiva]

I’m not arguing that it doesn’t distinguish primary and secondary effects, I’m arguing that it never describes the secondary effect as a separate attacks, which is the word that diffuses caps injury on.

Yes, I absolutely house rule them as separate in my campaign. No, RAW is not ambiguous on this point.

[Dalin]

Originally Posted by evileeyore

For my money, it's Enchantments that improve damage or accuracy (IE everything on the Enchantment list but Light, Defending Weapon, and Shatterproof and that's for Weapons or Projectiles).

This fits the standard genre assumptions pretty well.

Incidentally, I've been rereading The Lord of the Rings aloud with my children and we came across a description that seems like it must be one of the literary roots of the "only magic weapons" trope. When the Fellowship is in Moria, they encounter what Gandalf describes as a "great cave-troll." When it tries to push through the door into the Chamber of Mazarbul, Boromir strikes its unarmored hide "with all his might; but his sword rang, glanced aside, and fell from his shaken hand. The blade was notched." A moment later, Frodo uses Sting, an enchanted blade, to strike the creature. He is successful, despite his lesser strength, drawing blood and driving the troll back. Aragorn then cries, "You have a good blade, Frodo son of Drogo!"

This reminds me that despite DF's penchant for generic magic items, I prefer to attach a bit of history and legend to key items. Much more satisfying to know that the enchantments on your ancient elf blade overcame your foe's defenses than that +1 sword you picked up somewhere.