Are spells 'Magical'?

[Zacchaeus]

I can't remember if this has come up before but I can't find anything about it.

Of course spells are magical; I chose that title so that you would be properly intrigued and so read this and we'd get opinions flowing.

Many creatures have resistances; let's for example take the Peryton (since it was a bug report about this creature which got me thinking about this). It has resistance to bludgeoning, piercing and slashing damage from non-magical weapons. So this seems straight forward enough; if you hit the Peryton with a non magical weapon it will only take half damage. But what happens if you throw a spell at it which does, say, slashing damage, such as Blade Ward? Using the spell as parsed the Peryton resists. However we have not hit the creature with a weapon and so should the Peryton not take the full amount of damage? I'm not arguing that the blades created by Blade ward are not magical but they are not weapons and so don't, I think, count as such for the purpose of considering resistances.

I've had a bit of a Google look at this question in some other forums and there doesn't seem to be a consensus. So have you chaps come across this (I hadn't until now) and if so how do you handle it both in terms of mechanics and how do you set up FG to automate such things.

[Mellock]

I'd reason a spell is not a "weapon" because it would never be in the weapons list, and make it do full damage. And it's magical anyway, so that just adds to it.

[Nylanfs]

Most spells that do a damage like weapons is slashing damage and are probably Force damage, which is always magical.

[Zacchaeus]

I'd reason a spell is not a "weapon" because it would never be in the weapons list, and make it do full damage. And it's magical anyway, so that just adds to it.

Indeed. So do you set up all of your spells to include the magic keyword in the damage?

[Zacchaeus]

Most spells that do a damage like weapons is slashing damage and are probably Force damage, which is always magical.

So you are concluding that the slashing damage from Blade Ward for example is magical and would defeat resistance? But what about the fact that it isn't a weapon?

[damned]

So you are concluding that the slashing damage from Blade Ward for example is magical and would defeat resistance? But what about the fact that it isn't a weapon?

Semantics? My wife can even turn words into weapons - and ones to which I have no defenses to, natural, physical or magical.
:bandit:

[Zacchaeus]

Semantics? My wife can even turn words into weapons - and ones to which I have no defenses to, natural, physical or magical.
:bandit:

Ah, you Aussies have such an interesting outlook to life :)

It may possibly be semantics but as it stands without interfering with anything beasties which have resistance specifically against certain weapon attacks are also getting that resistance against spells attacks of a similar nature. Is this intended or should the magical attacks overcome resistance. I favour the latter but it is still I think open to some interpretation. Perhaps in fact it is up to each DM to decide since there is nothing which is absolutely definitive.

[Wonderbringer]

Firstly, I'm sure you meant Blade Barrier, as Blade Ward is defensive.

Secondly, as I've always seen it, there are spells that use magic to create purely magical effects and there are spells that use magic to create mundane effects. For instance, Blade Barrier, perhaps the magic merely summons mundane, metal blades and magically makes them spin, but all-in-all, they are regular blades. Then on the other end you have something like Mordenkainen’s Sword which creates a magical blade that deals force damage.

Lastly, Fabricate. It's a spell, uses magic, but the items it creates are mundane. Weapons created (with the right proficiency) won't do magical damage, just plain ol' mundane bludgeoning, slashing, and piercing.

So, clearly, not all effects created by a spell are fully magical, in the end.

[jshauber]

Ummm, Blade Ward gives you resistance to weapon attacks....

If you meant say casting a "Cloud of Daggers" on the creature for making an attack then I would play Devil's Advocate here....You use magic to summon what is in effect a non-magical weapon i.e. Blades.

Much the same as a Summon Monster spell "magically summons" a monster to aid you, but the monster itself is not magical.

Take the Spiritual Weapon spell, it specifically says that the weapon does "force" damage so that would not be resisted regardless of which weapon was created when the spell was cast.

[Zacchaeus]

You are correct, Wonderbringer, I did mean Blade Barrier. My puzzlement is whether the blades produced by such spells are actually weapons, not whether they are magical or not. Blade Barrier produces razor sharp blades which are not specifically weapons and if they are not weapons then it seems to me that a creature which resists say slashing damage from weapons should not be able to resist whatever it is that such spells produce, since they are not specifically weapons. As damned says in his eloquent Aussie way perhaps it is just semantics

[Zacchaeus]

Ummm, Blade Ward gives you resistance to weapon attacks....

If you meant say casting a "Cloud of Daggers" on the creature for making an attack then I would play Devil's Advocate here....You use magic to summon what is in effect a non-magical weapon i.e. Blades.

Much the same as a Summon Monster spell "magically summons" a monster to aid you, but the monster itself is not magical.

Take the Spiritual Weapon spell, it specifically says that the weapon does "force" damage so that would not be resisted regardless of which weapon was created when the spell was cast.

Yes, this is where it gets complicated when you start to consider spells which specify a weapon type, but again I am asking because these daggers have been produced magically are they actually a weapon? What I'm trying to get at is, is there a difference between someone stabbing you with an actual physical dagger held in his hand and being stabbed by a magically constructed dagger floating about in the air?

[jshauber]

Yes, this is where it gets complicated when you start to consider spells which specify a weapon type, but again I am asking because these daggers have been produced magically are they actually a weapon? What I'm trying to get at is, is there a difference between someone stabbing you with an actual physical dagger held in his hand and being stabbed by a magically constructed dagger floating about in the air?

I see where you are coming from and go back to the summon monster spell. Is there a difference in being attacked by an angry beaver in nature or being attacked by an angry beaver that was just summoned by the evil spellcaster. As a GM I say 'no' unless it specifically mentions a type of damage in the spell description like you get with spiritual weapon. Some spells just create/summon ordinary blades to be used, while others create magical weapons.

I suppose it really comes down to how each GM wants to intepret the spells and effects of those spells.

[Mellock]

I just ask myself "What would Chris Perkins do?"
The answer is more often than not "Get on with it."

Spells do magic stuff to me. Easy peasy. I don't really think too hard about how D&D spells affect the phsysical realm from a metaphysical standpoint. I leave that to guys in pointy hats.

[Zacchaeus]

Jolly good.

I think I have been persuaded that it is indeed semantics and that if the thing does slashing damage and there is no specification that the attack is also magical then any beastie with resistance will resist it. :)

Now, what was I doing before I got side tracked?

[Griogre]

Killing that Flail Snail? :)

[Zacchaeus]

Killing that Flail Snail? :)

Gosh, that's very prescient of you :)

[TinCanKing]

Jeremy Crawford actually weighed in on this a month ago:

"Regardless of damage type, the direct damage of a spell is magical."

I can't find the tweet, but at one point he also stated that non-magical damage from sources that aren't weapons are also unaffected by resistance. The example he provided was a werewolf that takes falling damage; that bludgeoning damage isn't resisted, because it did not come from a weapon. This is only partially related to the topic, I know, but it could come up if a monster triggers a boulder trap, or something similar.

I guess it either hasn't come up in my games, or I didn't catch that the damage was resisted, but I'll have to go through and make sure spells list the damage as magical. Up until today, I assumed that FG treated all spell damage as magical.

[Zacchaeus]

I'm guessing you mean this (https://www.sageadvice.eu/2015/08/30/magic-resistance-against-physical-damage/) post from twitter. From that then it would appear that all spells damage is magical and regardless of the nuances resistance, as 7 of 9 once said, is futile. See what I did there :)
(https://www.sageadvice.eu/2015/08/30/magic-resistance-against-physical-damage/)
So I've changed my mind again then :)

[TinCanKing]

That's the one! I usually only follow Crawford, as he gets to determine the "official" answers to questions like these, but Mike Mearls often provides great insight into stuff like this as well.

[Moon Wizard]

By the way, this is why spell resistance in 5E has not been attempted to date.

Not only was direct damage not directly specified (before pointing out tweet, which isn't technically RAW), but all monster abilities that cause effects (fear, confusion, ...) are not clearly defined as to what is "magical" vs "non magical" for saving throw triggers. (Breath weapon, petrifying gaze, frightening presence, etc. )

Regards,
JPG

[Zacchaeus]

Quite right, Moon, it's a minefield! :)

[Zacchaeus]

Well that answers this question :)

[Willot]

I tend to look at it as.
The energy of the spell goes into creating the effect
EG: It creates the blades and powers the spin and all the energy is going into that. It is the metal of the blades that causes the damage (slashing)

The only spell that Id consider to have MAGIC damage are the force damage spells, Magic Missile? Where part of the magic "charge" (33%?) is discharged into the target?
(spit balling here)

Now weapons in themselves need to be powered by magic to drive the magical effect.

Think of the sword as a battery that powers the 100w light blub
If you touch the blub its HOT OW!
If you touch the battery you get an electric shock OW!

I guess this is why some items have "charges" and some have daily uses before they "recharge" (recharging items probably had some sort of link created to "The Weave" or whatever where they pull energy to "recharge")

So I guess a simple +1 longsword is just like swinging a Magic battery around. You get the slashing and you get the Magic Shock! (+1)

Even spells have a limited charge IE duration.

I guess what im saying Magic = energy and how that energy is used depends on it application. Spells (the energy is being channeled into the spell) or Item (the energy is being channeled to increase the properties of the weapon directly and/or channel for effect too)

I Feel a +1 flametongue longsword use to be a more simple +2 longsword and some of the energy powering the increase in damage/hit was sacrificed to power up an effect

Think of Magic as an energy and things start to fall into place. Remember energy can neither be created or destroyed it can only change forms.



Wow this got complicated very quickly!


Thats sorta how I look at it

[Zacchaeus]

I tend to look at it as.
The energy of the spell goes into creating the effect
EG: It creates the blades and powers the spin and all the energy is going into that. It is the metal of the blades that causes the damage (slashing)



As you can see from the attachment to my last post the blades created are in fact magical and so resistance is, indeed, futile.