Forums of the Megaverse®

I am assuming that the seemingly real, physical weapon out of thin air created by the simple weapon tattoo is actually composed of a solid magic, ectoplasm-like substance like animals created by a tattoo per the reference listed below. Generally Magic on Rifts Earth does hit point damage equal to its MD and SDC magic does not harm vampires. Thus I conclude simplecweapon tattoos do not harm vampires. Question can a simple weapon tattoo repressing a wooden or silver weapon harms vampire? Would the wood or silver seemly be real? Ironwood is specifically stated as not harming vampires so I tend to think "seemly" real wood made from some kind of magical ectoplasm would not harm a vampire. Thoughrs?

Pg 88 Atlantis " Note: The animals aren't actually alive, but composed of a magic, ectoplasm-like substance"

My opinion: simple tattoo weapons would not harm a vampire, but mega-damage ones would.

I don't think there is a canon answer on the subject.

Is there any text anywhere that says Simple Weapons do a different type of damage than what the weapon would normally do?

If not, then they would only hurt a vampire if the weapon type could hurt the vampire.

This is something that is not stated in the Books.

@ CT: magic weapons hurt vamps, and weapon simples are technically magic.

I would say that each GM would have to make up his or her mind themselves if they do or not. This is because I can see it ruled both ways since the weapon simple are indeed magic. But then why would the MoH weapon be a Magic weapon?

I might if confronted with this in a game as a GM have the SW do their normal damage to vamps and the magic weapons do double damage to vamps.

Sir Galahad in the England book explicitly has a simple weapon silver knife, and simple weapon wood arrows.
The only reason I can think to specify silver or wood in simple weapons is that it mimics those properties as a weapon with the related effects.

13eowulf wrote:Sir Galahad in the England book explicitly has a simple weapon silver knife, and simple weapon wood arrows.
The only reason I can think to specify silver or wood in simple weapons is that it mimics those properties as a weapon with the related effects.

@ all… is there any other places that have T-man/TAUS that have a material describer to a weapons simple tattoo?

If a material describer is an add-on like 'wing'…how much would you set the addition cost to activate?
(note to RLs, the 2nd question is asking for opinions. So hold you 'this ain't canon' complaints to yourselves.)

13eowulf wrote:Sir Galahad in the England book explicitly has a simple weapon silver knife, and simple weapon wood arrows.
The only reason I can think to specify silver or wood in simple weapons is that it mimics those properties as a weapon with the related effects.

Yes I believe this is correct. Once it wears off it goes poof but for the duration I believe it is treated as the material it mimics.

drewkitty ~..~ wrote:

13eowulf wrote:Sir Galahad in the England book explicitly has a simple weapon silver knife, and simple weapon wood arrows.
The only reason I can think to specify silver or wood in simple weapons is that it mimics those properties as a weapon with the related effects.

@ all… is there any other places that have T-man/TAUS that have a material describer to a weapons simple tattoo?

If a material describer is an add-on like 'wing'…how much would you set the addition cost to activate?
(note to RLs, the 2nd question is asking for opinions. So hold you 'this ain't canon' complaints to yourselves.)

I havent looked at many Magic Tattoo'd NPCs to be able to answer that, I only remembered Galahad as he is the subject of other Tattoo Magic debates I have had, such as the multiple magic weapon properties on a single weapon, etc. However one is enough to set precedent, if only it went into more detail what those descriptors meant.

IF house-ruling material descriptors as wing-like additions to tattoos I personally wouldnt put a high cost on it, maybe 1 PPE for wood, and 2 PPE for silver.
And before things get out of hand with material descriptors I would limit it to one material per weapon, and only 'common' material, like silver, iron, wood, etc. No really exotic material like Gantrium, or Strata Crystal, or Dragon Bone, or Mutant Bone, etc.

kaid wrote:

13eowulf wrote:Sir Galahad in the England book explicitly has a simple weapon silver knife, and simple weapon wood arrows.
The only reason I can think to specify silver or wood in simple weapons is that it mimics those properties as a weapon with the related effects.

Yes I believe this is correct. Once it wears off it goes poof but for the duration I believe it is treated as the material it mimics.

Well, it is speculation, it isnt factually correct. The concept of specific material isnt addressed in the original tattoo magic rules.
The counter arguments to the above could either be "NPCs dont always or have to follow the rules that PCs do" or "The described material is for appearance, not effect."
Which are about as equally valid as "serves no other purpose then to mimic those properties".

It boils down to GM call.

A related question might be would a weapon made via "create steel" harm vampires since it includes some magically-created steel.

I will double check the atlantis books when I get home as I am starting to second guess myself on this. One thing to note is almost all true atlanteans have the marks of heritage one is the protection from vampire thing that keeps them from being able to charm you and the other is a magic weapon in flames of some flavor typically. That would be a magical weapon capable of hurting vampires but I don't recall any that start with just wood weapons/stakes.

Given the whole point of the marks of heritage is to give you a way to defend yourself from vampires I am now not so sure that a simple wood stake tattoo would help.

Axelmania wrote:A related question might be would a weapon made via "create steel" harm vampires since it includes some magically-created steel.

Nope. The magic works and is gone. Leaving the metal behind.

kaid wrote:I will double check the atlantis books when I get home as I am starting to second guess myself on this. One thing to note is almost all true atlanteans have the marks of heritage one is the protection from vampire thing that keeps them from being able to charm you and the other is a magic weapon in flames of some flavor typically. That would be a magical weapon capable of hurting vampires but I don't recall any that start with just wood weapons/stakes.

Given the whole point of the marks of heritage is to give you a way to defend yourself from vampires I am now not so sure that a simple wood stake tattoo would help.

Im quite sure it would, but it wouldn't be nearly as versatile as a flaming weapon.

Looking at the text, there is literally nothing that intimates that simple weapons are anything other than exact replicas of what they appear to be. If it's wood, it's wood. Just because a different tattoo power uses ectoplasm to simulate a creature does not mean the weapons summoned are also ectoplasm or some such.

If it doesn't say it is, it isn't.

And again, for the Marks of Heritage - why give someone a tattoo of a wooden stake (which will largely ONLY help against vampires or simple SDC creatures, and then not much) when you can give them a flaming sword that will hurt pretty much anything?

the marks of heritage don't include a wooden stake weapon tattoo. the tattoo with a stake is a power tattoo, and it's protection from vampires (and mind control from similar undead. also certain transformation effects, but that's supposed to be a built-in part of being a true atlantean anyways, as i recall).

only the flaming sword is a weapon tattoo.

Shark_Force wrote:the marks of heritage don't include a wooden stake weapon tattoo. the tattoo with a stake is a power tattoo, and it's protection from vampires (and mind control from similar undead. also certain transformation effects, but that's supposed to be a built-in part of being a true atlantean anyways, as i recall).

only the flaming sword is a weapon tattoo.

Umm.. you missed the point entirely.

A Simple Weapon Tattoo COULD be a wooden stake.

The guy i was responding to thought the Marks should have included such a tattoo. I was pointing out why a flaming weapon tat made more sense.

I would rule that while simple weapons is made with magic the damage it inflicts is not magic based and it would not damage a vampire. Just because a weapon is summoned with magic does not make it a magic weapon.

Tattoo weapons are created by magic and maintaned by magic. Not brought from elsewhere.


If there are other examples, other then the ones in R:E, of weapon simples having matiriale aspects in them it would validate the thinking that they do not hurt vamps. W/o more….things…at in my mind …are still in the air. I do wish this had been brought up earlier this year so KS could include supporting text for this in the just published Secrets'otA book.

As it is we have just one stand alone example of a NPC having such tattoos.

BlueLion wrote:I would rule that while simple weapons is made with magic the damage it inflicts is not magic based and it would not damage a vampire. Just because a weapon is summoned with magic does not make it a magic weapon.

^this^
To me it neatly splits the difference... and frankly simple weapons are so cheap to create (even at the x2 cost for non T-men) that it gets into "potentially abusive" territory IMHO.

I would allow a simple weapon to be made of a "simple" element though (wood, generic bone, silver, a specific wood such as juniper, gold, brass, obsidian, jade, quartz) etc.. This would allow both visual thematic elements and the ability to have a weapon/item that can be tailored to a specific need. I would rule that something like Gantrinium is not possible. OOC because of meta-game abuse potential, IC I would make noises about 'the nature of magic and bootstrapping" and then explain that since none of the players is a master alchemist/Tattoo Maker they are not exactly sure of the whole reason why it is not possible.

BlueLion wrote:I would rule that while simple weapons is made with magic the damage it inflicts is not magic based and it would not damage a vampire. Just because a weapon is summoned with magic does not make it a magic weapon.

No but you dont need magic weapons to harm vampires.

That was the question. If it's a wooden weapon, you can stake a vampire with it. If it's a silver weapon, you can harm them with it, and we have canon sources (Undead Slayers) with Simple weapons of both types of weapons.

Colonel_Tetsuya wrote:

BlueLion wrote:I would rule that while simple weapons is made with magic the damage it inflicts is not magic based and it would not damage a vampire. Just because a weapon is summoned with magic does not make it a magic weapon.

No but you dont need magic weapons to harm vampires.

That was the question. If it's a wooden weapon, you can stake a vampire with it. If it's a silver weapon, you can harm them with it, and we have canon sources (Undead Slayers) with Simple weapons of both types of weapons.

Is it really wood or something pretending to be wood. I would think the fact it was not real wood was self evident. It is all part of the same ruling it is something made with/of magic not wood and it would not damage a vampire. The only way a magical construct would damage a vampire is if the damage was treated as magic. Specification is a mater of flavor.

Blue_Lion wrote:

Colonel_Tetsuya wrote:

BlueLion wrote:I would rule that while simple weapons is made with magic the damage it inflicts is not magic based and it would not damage a vampire. Just because a weapon is summoned with magic does not make it a magic weapon.

No but you dont need magic weapons to harm vampires.

That was the question. If it's a wooden weapon, you can stake a vampire with it. If it's a silver weapon, you can harm them with it, and we have canon sources (Undead Slayers) with Simple weapons of both types of weapons.

Is it really wood or something pretending to be wood. I would think the fact it was not real wood was self evident. It is all part of the same ruling it is something made with/of magic not wood and it would not damage a vampire. The only way a magical construct would damage a vampire is if the damage was treated as magic. Specification is a mater of flavor.

Which ruling is that though? I am aware of the ruling that Ironwood is not 'real wood'. But that is not a universal ruling on conjured materials, just on that one specific spell. I am not aware of any other rulings on this outside of ones made by individual GMs for their own tables.

-We know that animals and monsters are not actually alive and instead are some sort of 'ectoplasm'. And yet even so they do manage to have all the abilities, capabilities and powers of the portrayed animal or monster. Even ones that would normally be dependent on their substance (such as a magma monster burning, or a acid monster dissolving things.)
-We have at least one example of a person with a "silver" tattoo
-There is the issue that you CAN use conjuring to make things to harm a vampire. (RAW that is.)

So yes... it is possible that tattoo weapons are just facsimiles with no abilities other than raw damage.
It is also possible that tattoo weapons are just like animal tattoos and have all the abilities of the item portrayed.
BOTH are possible interpretations, though it would appear to me that the second one is the one that has book support but individual GMs can rule as they wish.

One possible solution may be that simple weapon tattoos can harm vampires and supernatural creatures at the regular damage rate (no wood or silver bonuses) because they are magic but that the more powerful flaming magic weapons harm them at x2 dmg.

Just one idea.

eliakon wrote:

Blue_Lion wrote:

Colonel_Tetsuya wrote:

BlueLion wrote:I would rule that while simple weapons is made with magic the damage it inflicts is not magic based and it would not damage a vampire. Just because a weapon is summoned with magic does not make it a magic weapon.

No but you dont need magic weapons to harm vampires.

That was the question. If it's a wooden weapon, you can stake a vampire with it. If it's a silver weapon, you can harm them with it, and we have canon sources (Undead Slayers) with Simple weapons of both types of weapons.

Is it really wood or something pretending to be wood. I would think the fact it was not real wood was self evident. It is all part of the same ruling it is something made with/of magic not wood and it would not damage a vampire. The only way a magical construct would damage a vampire is if the damage was treated as magic. Specification is a mater of flavor.

Which ruling is that though? I am aware of the ruling that Ironwood is not 'real wood'. But that is not a universal ruling on conjured materials, just on that one specific spell. I am not aware of any other rulings on this outside of ones made by individual GMs for their own tables.

-We know that animals and monsters are not actually alive and instead are some sort of 'ectoplasm'. And yet even so they do manage to have all the abilities, capabilities and powers of the portrayed animal or monster. Even ones that would normally be dependent on their substance (such as a magma monster burning, or a acid monster dissolving things.)
-We have at least one example of a person with a "silver" tattoo
-There is the issue that you CAN use conjuring to make things to harm a vampire. (RAW that is.)

So yes... it is possible that tattoo weapons are just facsimiles with no abilities other than raw damage.
It is also possible that tattoo weapons are just like animal tattoos and have all the abilities of the item portrayed.
BOTH are possible interpretations, though it would appear to me that the second one is the one that has book support but individual GMs can rule as they wish.

sigh, i was talking about how I would rule it, not an official ruling. I did make that clear that I was talking about how I would rule it in my first post the second post I made I stated it was part of the same ruling so I obviously referring to my ruling I stated in my first post.

Really it is like you are trying to make it sound like I am making an augment that I did not make. Your whole post is irrelevant l to what I was talking about almost like you did not read the quote thread or where trolling.

Sondoes simple weapon work like create steel?

Can I use a simple tattoo to kill a Zavor and only Magic Weapon Splits them?

It also could be argued that they do flaming sword/weapon, to not only hurt Vampires (it will inflict HP anyhow), but also any other uglies they come across.

Or wreck any armor the vamp is wearing.

Axelmania wrote:Sondoes simple weapon work like create steel?

Can I use a simple tattoo to kill a Zavor and only Magic Weapon Splits them?

All the physical objects created by magic tattoos are made from ectoplasim.

Okay.. but can it kill Zavor like psychic ectoplasm or is it magical?

drewkitty ~..~ wrote:

Axelmania wrote:Sondoes simple weapon work like create steel?

Can I use a simple tattoo to kill a Zavor and only Magic Weapon Splits them?

All the physical objects created by magic tattoos are made from ectoplasim.

Probably.
We know that all the animals, monsters and monster shells are ectoplasm at least.
Thus at the very least anything that must replicate "being alive" is ectoplasm.
It is therefore pretty logical that weapons and objects are too, though it is not stated as such (that I know of. It could say so in the final draft of the SotA book, I have not done a detailed check of that yet)

Makes me wonder what call ectoplasm spell from nightbane would do.

drewkitty ~..~ wrote:

Axelmania wrote:Sondoes simple weapon work like create steel?

Can I use a simple tattoo to kill a Zavor and only Magic Weapon Splits them?

All the physical objects created by magic tattoos are made from ectoplasim.

Amongst the list of weapons that a tattoo can create and the SDC damage they do is the entry for staff. The staff has a parenthetical notation for bonus damage if the weapon is iron. I'm not sure if this does anything but muddy the waters, but I thought I would mention it.

SereneTsunami wrote:

drewkitty ~..~ wrote:

Axelmania wrote:Sondoes simple weapon work like create steel?

Can I use a simple tattoo to kill a Zavor and only Magic Weapon Splits them?

All the physical objects created by magic tattoos are made from ectoplasim.

Amongst the list of weapons that a tattoo can create and the SDC damage they do is the entry for staff. The staff has a parenthetical notation for bonus damage if the weapon is iron. I'm not sure if this does anything but muddy the waters, but I thought I would mention it.

On one hand it could be argued that it reinforces the Galahad entry with silver and wood specified items.
However on the other hand the oft-copy-&-pasted SDC weapons chart lists 'Iron Staff' as a separate weapon from Quarterstaff, Bo Staff, and other staves, and this 'Iron Staff' does indeed have a higher damage than the rest.

So I suppose the question really is if that listing is for a staff made of iron, or an 'Iron Staff'.