Weapon Augmentation Vs Shatter Spell

[scrubkai]

We had this situation come up in our last game session.

An Artificer cast Weapon Augmentation on a long sword.

Then someone cast Shatter on the sword. The wilder failed his Save.

Should the sword shatter, or does Weapon Augmentation make this a magic item?

 

[jaelis]

I don't think weapon augmentation makes it a magic item any more than the magic weapon spell does. So I'd say shatter wins.

 

[Sitara]

Wait wait...shatter only works on ceramics, pottery, etc. it can't affect wood or steel iron. So even your cheap rusty dagger which you have since level 1 should be abkle to withstand shatter.

 

[moritheil]

Wait wait...shatter only works on ceramics, pottery, etc. it can't affect wood or steel iron. So even your cheap rusty dagger which you have since level 1 should be abkle to withstand shatter.

Not true. Only the area effect version is restricted to ceramics, etc.

Shatter creates a loud, ringing noise that breaks brittle, nonmagical objects; sunders a single solid, nonmagical object; or damages a crystalline creature.

Used as an area attack, shatter destroys nonmagical objects of crystal, glass, ceramic, or porcelain. All such objects within a 5-foot radius of the point of origin are smashed into dozens of pieces by the spell. Objects weighing more than 1 pound per your level are not affected, but all other objects of the appropriate composition are shattered.

Alternatively, you can target shatter against a single solid object, regardless of composition, weighing up to 10 pounds per caster level. Targeted against a crystalline creature (of any weight), shatter deals 1d6 points of sonic damage per caster level (maximum 10d6), with a Fortitude save for half damage.

 

[scrubkai]

Yes this was the little used targeted version of the spell.

 

[Patlin]

I don't think weapon augmentation makes it a magic item any more than the magic weapon spell does. So I'd say shatter wins.

I agree that the two should be consistent, but I'd say either renders the sword magical and immune to shatter for the duration.

 

[eamon]

I agree that the two should be consistent, but I'd say either renders the sword magical and immune to shatter for the duration.

I agree. Magic weapon should work similarly, and magic weapon makes a weapon, well, magic ;-). A weapon augmented by an artificer would have a magic aura, and I see no reason to consider it anything other than a regular magic item. Of course, just because an item is magic, doesn't mean it bypasses DR/magic - for that, it would need to have a magical enhancement bonus. To compare, hitting a creature with your lesser rod of extend spell wouldn't bypass DR either.

 

[jaelis]

Isn't that inconsistent with how dispel magic works? It would dispel the effect of the magic weapon spell, but only temporarily suppress an intrinsic enhancement bonus. So spells definitely can tell the difference between a "true" magic item and one that has only been targed by a spell.

Would you let magic aura protect agains shatter?

 

[Eldragon]

When I run into a question of "Which Spell Trumps the other?". I fall back to opposed caster level checks. Whomever wins the check trumps the other's spell.

 

[moritheil]

When I run into a question of "Which Spell Trumps the other?". I fall back to opposed caster level checks. Whomever wins the check trumps the other's spell.

Shouldn't you try looking at the spell levels, or is that unsatisfactory?

Isn't that inconsistent with how dispel magic works? It would dispel the effect of the magic weapon spell, but only temporarily suppress an intrinsic enhancement bonus. So spells definitely can tell the difference between a "true" magic item and one that has only been targed by a spell.

Would you let magic aura protect agains shatter?

So, what happens when I throw quickened dispel on your sword followed by shatter? Isn't your sword temporarily nonmagical?