dnd 5e – Does Blessed Strikes count as a magical effect?

No, it’s not magical

The Sage Advice Compendium, in the question “Is the breath weapon of a dragon magical?”, lays out a series of tests for whether or not a particular ability is magical for the purposes of the game’s rules:

  • Is it a magic item?
  • Is it a spell? Or does it let you create the effects of a spell that’s mentioned in its description?
  • Is it a spell attack?
  • Is it fueled by the use of spell slots?
  • Does its description say it’s magical?

In the case of Blessed Strikes, the answer to all of these questions is no; it’s not a magic item, is not a spell or replicating a spell’s effects, doesn’t involve a spell attack, doesn’t require spell slots, and the words “magic” or “magical” don’t appear in the ability’s description. Therefore, Blessed Strikes are not a magical effect for game rule purposes and still work fine in an antimagic field.

As Sage Advice explains, the rules draw a distinction between what it calls the “background magic” of the D&D world and the “concentrated magical energy” that is involved in magic items, spells, and similar magical effects. As far as the rules are concerned, your cleric’s ability to dish out radiant damage is just a part of how the world works and is no more magical than the ability of dragons to fly and breathe fire or whatever else.

dnd 5e – Is this an ironclad wish?: “I wish for just my body to be young again but to keep all of my physical, mental and magical prowess”

The spell description gives the DM liberty to rule however they want, even up to ruling that the spell simply fails.

When making a wish for something outside the scope of the given examples, the spell description (PHB, pg. 288) gives the DM total freedom to rule however they like:

The GM has great latitude in ruling what occurs in such an instance; the greater the wish, the greater the likelihood that something goes wrong. This spell might simply fail, the effect you desire might only be partly achieved, or you might suffer some unforeseen consequence as a result of how you worded the wish.

So even if you studied contract law and worded your wish in such a way to be technically free from any linguistic loop holes, the spell description gives the DM explicit liberty to simply say: “Your wish fails.”

Access to wish should trigger a series of conversations between the players and the DM.

D&D 5e is decisively not a “players vs. DM” game.1 Working together to create a fun and enjoyable social space is the player-DM relationship described in the game rules, as presented in the introduction to the Dungeon Master’s Guide (pg. 4-5):

The D&D rules help you and the other players have a good time, but the rules aren’t in charge. You’re the DM, and you are in charge of the game. That said, your goal isn’t to slaughter the adventurers but to create a campaign world that revolves around their actions and decisions, and to keep your players coming back for more! If you’re lucky, the events of your campaign will echo in the memories of your players long after the final game session is concluded.

(…)

The success of a D&D game hinges on your ability to entertain the other players at the game table. Whereas their role is to create characters (the protagonists of the campaign), breathe life into them, and help steer the campaign through their characters’ actions, your role is to keep the players (and yourself) interested and immersed in the world you’ve created, and to let their characters do awesome things.

Knowing what your players enjoy most about the D&D game helps you create and run adventures that they will enjoy and remember. Once you know which of the following activities each player in your group enjoys the most, you can tailor adventures that satisfy your players’ preferences as much as possible, thus keeping them engaged.

What we often see with wish is DMs twisting the wording of the wish into undesirable outcomes, and being aware of this possibility, we see this endless cycle of linguistic one-upmanship where players try to word their wishes as precisely as possible, and DMs try to find the loophole.

Let’s break the cycle.

I have had great success with wish, both as a player and a DM, and this success depends on one thing: communication out of game between the player and the DM. As a player, when you get access to the wish spell, it is time to have a conversation about how the table wants to handle the spell. As a DM, this is the first of many conversations I will have about the spell. When a player gets access to a wish, I like to talk about what my personal limitations are as a DM and my philosophy for its use. Much like Genie from Aladdin, I like to establish three things:

  • Wishes should be worded as non-meta as possible, though I will be flexible about this, so let’s talk about it.
  • Wishes that make changes to the game rules are probably just not going to happen, but let’s talk about it.
  • If you are cool with me twisting wishes, I’ll twist them while trying to keep things fun, if you aren’t cool with twisting wishes, I’ll tell you beforehand if it will work as intended.

We’re going to talk a lot about wish once it is available, and if you aren’t into wishes being twisted, we’re going to talk about it some more every time you cast it. At my tables, I have had great success with telling my players what the outcome of the wish will be before we set it in stone. Let’s be real, everyone wants to use wish to make something cool happen. And as a DM, I am 100% on board with making this happen. So when a player wants to cast wish, we workshop together what it’s going to look like.

I use wish as an opportunity to let my players participate in world building.

After all, this is the entire premise of the spell:

you can alter the very foundations of reality in accord with your desires.

Rather than viewing wish as a player vs. DM pedantry contest, view wish as a tool for letting your players shape the world with the power of their voices. And as always, communication is key. Talk about these things, workshop these ideas together.


1 It should be mentioned that a “players vs DM” style of play is not “bad wrong fun”, rather it is a style of play that should be agreed upon prior to starting play. The cooperative style of play is the default style for Dungeons & Dragons, as outlined in the DMG quotes, but when everyone agrees upon a “players vs DM” style of play, it can work just fine. It is when the players expect a cooperative style and the DM is competing against them that we run into conflict.

dnd 5e – How does the Arcane Archer fighter’s Piercing Arrow interact with magical ammunition such as +3 arrows?

5th Edition D&D doesn’t stipulate that there’s an “order” to which creatures get hit first by Area-of-Effect effects, and the effect of the Piercing Arrow Shot is to turn an arrow into an area-of-effect.

Piercing Arrow. You use transmutation magic to give your arrow an ethereal quality. When you use this option, you don’t make an attack roll for the attack. Instead, the arrow shoots forward in a line, which is 1 foot wide and 30 feet long, before disappearing. The arrow passes harmlessly through objects, ignoring cover. Each creature in that line must make a Dexterity saving throw. On a failed save, a creature takes damage as if it were hit by the arrow, plus an extra 1d6 piercing damage. On a successful save, a target takes half as much damage.
The piercing damage increases to 2d6 when you reach 18th level in this class.

Arcane Archer, Xanathar’s Guide to Everything, pg. 29

So while some DMs might interpret this to logically mean “it hits the first target in the line, then the creature behind them, then the creature behind them, …”, the rules don’t expressly say that this is how it is meant to work, and in most other terms (things like Saving Throws, etc.) the damage is occurring simultaneously against all targets.

So by my reading of the rules (and their absence of any clarifying information in relation to this question), if the damage occurs simultaneously for all creatures, then that also means the arrow must “hit” all creatures simultaneously as well. So because no one creature is hit before any other, all of them must take the bonus damage associated with the arrow, if it applies to them (like in the Arrow of Slaying example).

dnd 5e – Are the long-lasting effects of prestidigation magical?

Yes, they are magical.

To determine if something is magical, we can consult the Sage Advice Compendium:

Determining whether a game feature is magical is straightforward. Ask yourself these questions about the feature:

  • Is it a magic item?
  • Is it a spell? Or does it let you create the effects of a spell that’s mentioned in its description?
  • Is it a spell attack?
  • Is it fueled by the use of spell slots?
  • Does its description say it’s magical?

If your answer to any of those questions is yes, the feature is magical.

The relevant question for us is “is it a spell?”, and since prestidigitation is a spell, its effects are magical. This is confirmed by the spell description:

You create one of the following magical effects within range

The effects of a spell are magical unless explicitly stated otherwise, as in the trinkets created by prestidigitation:

You create a nonmagical trinket

Because prestidigitation is a spell, and because it says it creates magical effects, the following effect is magical and will be detected as such by detect magic:

You make a color, a small mark, or a symbol appear on an object or a surface for 1 hour.

pathfinder 1e – Are Lower Tier Magical Items Available in a City if They’re Under the Base Value but Not the Spellcasting Limit?

Let’s take a look at the explanation of settlement statblocks:

Base Value and Purchase Limit: This section lists the community’s base value for available magic items in gp. There is a 75% chance that any item of this value or lower can be found for sale in the community with little effort. If an item is not available, a new check to determine if the item has become available can be made in 1 week. A settlement’s purchase limit is the most money a shop in the settlement can spend to purchase any single item from the PCs. If the PCs wish to sell an item worth more than a settlement’s purchase limit, they’ll either need to settle for a lower price, travel to a larger city, or (with the GM’s permission) search for a specific buyer in the city with deeper pockets. A settlement’s type sets its purchase limit.

First, there’s a flat 75% chance of any item below the Base Value being there. This means that +2 stat items, which only cost 4000 gp, have great odds of being there, and you can retry in a week to get them if they’re not.

Spellcasting: Unlike magic items, spellcasting for hire is listed separately from the town’s base value, since spellcasting is limited by the level of the available spellcasters in town. This line lists the highest-level spell available for purchase from spellcasters in town. Prices for spellcasting appear on page 159 of the Core Rulebook. A town’s base spellcasting level depends on its type.

Secondly, the spellcasting line isn’t the caster level limit of the town, it’s the highest level spell you can buy services for. This means that the highest caster level available spellcasting services is, at minimum, 14 (the level a spontaneous caster needs to cast 7th level spells, and higher for 4th and 6th casters as all of their spells are available). The caster level for purchased spellcasting services could even be higher as there’s no minimum set for them, but it’s also reasonable for a gm to restrict this.

Pathfinder 1E – Are Lower Tier Magical Items Available in a City if They’re Under the Base Value but Not the Spellcasting Limit?

Let’s take a look at the explanation of settlement statblocks:

Base Value and Purchase Limit: This section lists the community’s base value for available magic items in gp. There is a 75% chance that any item of this value or lower can be found for sale in the community with little effort. If an item is not available, a new check to determine if the item has become available can be made in 1 week. A settlement’s purchase limit is the most money a shop in the settlement can spend to purchase any single item from the PCs. If the PCs wish to sell an item worth more than a settlement’s purchase limit, they’ll either need to settle for a lower price, travel to a larger city, or (with the GM’s permission) search for a specific buyer in the city with deeper pockets. A settlement’s type sets its purchase limit.

First, there’s a flat 75% chance of any item below the Base Value being there. This means that +2 stat items, which only cost 4000 gp, have great odds of being there, and you can retry in a week to get them if they’re not.

Spellcasting: Unlike magic items, spellcasting for hire is listed separately from the town’s base value, since spellcasting is limited by the level of the available spellcasters in town. This line lists the highest-level spell available for purchase from spellcasters in town. Prices for spellcasting appear on page 159 of the Core Rulebook. A town’s base spellcasting level depends on its type.

Secondly, the spellcasting line isn’t the caster level limit of the town, it’s the highest level spell you can buy services for. This means that the highest caster level available spellcasting services is, at minimum, 14 (the level a spontaneous caster needs to cast 7th level spells). The caster level for purchased spellcasting services could even be higher as there’s no minimum set for them, but it’s also reasonable for a gm to restrict this.

pathfinder 1e – What Parts Of Price Are Reduced By Magical Item Restrictions?

My question here is that, for creating magical items in Pathfinder 1e, when applying item price reductions due to restrictions (like only for certain classes, or requiring skill usage), do you apply the price reduction at the very end of calculating up the items cost (thus also reducing the included base item’s price, the masterwork addition and any special material cost components)? Or, do you only apply the reductions to whatever portion of the price is derived from magical enhancements?

So, for example, for a ranger’s flaming longbow +1, would the final price be 5,975 gp (8,000 x 0.7 = 5,600, + 75 + 300), or 5,862 gp and 5 sp (8,375 x 0.7)?

I was applying the reductions at the very end, but on second thought, have realized that may not be right. Does anyone have any thoughts on this?

dnd 5e – Are you aware that you are cursed when you attune to a cursed magical item?

This is pretty much answered on page 139 of the DMG:

Cursed Items

Most methods of identifying items, including the identify spell, fail to reveal such a curse, although lore might hint at it. A curse should be a surprise to the item’s user when the curse’s effects are revealed.
Attunement to a cursed item can’t be ended voluntarily unless the curse is broken first, such as with the remove curse spell.

So in general, no, you don’t immediately know that you’re cursed until “the curse’s effects are revealed” or until you try to unattune from the item and can’t, though it is up to the DM and how they want to play it.

If the DM decides that the curse should be a surprise then you’re not going to know about it until the effect bite you in the… well, you know.

If the DM decides that something like the identify spell will reveal a magic item’s curse then that’s their prerogative.

pathfinder 1e – Does a weapon imbued with the Inquisitor Bane ability count as magical for bypassing DR and damaging incorporeals?

The Inquisitor’s bane ability just says the targeted weapon gets the bane weapon quality.

The bane weapon quality says:

[..]Against a designated foe, the weapon’s enhancement bonus is +2 better than its actual bonus[..]

But this text kind of assumes the weapon already has at least a +1 enhancement, because the Weapons section in the Magic Items chapter of the Core rulebook says:

[..] A weapon with a special ability must also have at least a +1 enhancement bonus [..]

But the bane ability just says the inquisitor can imbue the bane weapon quality without specifying any limitation to whether it needs to be magical already before doing so. Thus, nothing seems to limit the inquisitor to give bane to a non magical weapon.

Can the Inquisitor use bane to bypass DR/magic or damage incorporeals with his otherwise mundane weapon?

For example the masterwork quality also gives an enhancement bonus to the weapon without making the weapon magical.

dnd 5e – What happens when you use the knock spell on an object with a magical lock that isn’t specifically arcane lock?

The knock spell’s description reads:

Choose an object that you can see within range. The object can be a door, a box, a chest, a set of manacles, a padlock, or another object that contains a mundane or magical means that prevents access.

A target that is held shut by a mundane lock or that is stuck or barred becomes unlocked, unstuck, or unbarred. If the object has multiple locks, only one of them is unlocked.

If you choose a target that is held shut with arcane lock, that spell is suppressed for 10 minutes, during which time the target can be opened and shut normally.

When you cast the spell, a loud knock, audible from as far away as 300 feet, emanates from the target object.

As far as I see it, the description of the knock spell describes 4 things:

  • What the knock spell can target.
  • What happens if the knock spell targets something locked by a mundane lock, or is stuck or barred.
  • What happens if the locking mechanism is specifically the spell arcane lock.
  • The spell creates noise.

Valid spell targets include magical locks. But it doesn’t seem the spell says what it does when such a target is selected (except for create a loud knock sound). This is the case, unless a magical lock is considered ‘stuck’ in which it is according to the spell the lock would be unstucked.

However, the spell says what it does to stuck things where it specifies what happens to a target that is held shut by a mundane lock, or stuck or barred. If magical locks were considered stuck, there wouldn’t have been any need to specifically say what happens to a mundane lock, because it would apply to non-mundane locks too.


I originally asked this question here, but the question unfortunately got edited into a different question. The answer there addresses the question it got edited to. So I feel it is appropriate readdress the main issue in a new thread. For this reason, I don’t think this is a duplicate question, even though I copied the majority of the content of this question from that thread.