Iot7FV - anything block +1 arrows

[Demelain]

you could get a psionic arrow through both if you have the 'psionics are different' variant

Then you still technically deal with a psionic arrow being a non-magical attack.
This isn't a case where 1 blocks A and 2 blocks B, it is one where 1 blocks A and 2 blocks ~A.

[zook1shoe]

lol very true

[ksbsnowowl]

As such, one of them blocks it.  Specifically whether it was red or orange was technically not a question asked by the OP, so I feel that my work here is done.

Sorry for the abbreviated question; it was a question from one of my players, and the answer was not immediately apparent as the game was about to start.  I am interested in which one blocks it (I would assume Orange, if either of them does).

[Demelain]

I would tentatively say Orange, based on what I've seen in the thread. There has been some interesting discussion about whether a +1 arrow is actually a magical attack or not in an attempt to bypass this, but at best it would mark the arrow as being both a magical ranged attack and a non-magical ranged attack, and if you subscribe to that then either veil would do.

[Kethrian]

And then a Bloodstorm Blade throws a weapon, and the universe implodes ...

[NunoM]

Indeed the only question in this, is if a +1 arrow is actually a magical attack or not...

I keep my opinion regarding the red veil: a +1 arrow is a magical missile (in the sense of "ammunition"), and, therefore, not subject to be blocked by it.

Now, the orange veil would be the likely candidate to block a +1 arrow, but only if the attack is considered magical. Personally, i rate the arrow as a "simple" magic weapon, not a magical attack, and that's also the general opinion in my gaming group.
I never considered the attack of a +1 longsword a magical attack. The weapon is magically enhanced, but it's still a weapon dealing weapon damage + the magical enhancement...

Bottom line, IMHO, the orange veil wouldn't cover it either, but i'm interested in seeing where the discussion on the +1 arrow goes.

[Kethrian]

I think the most obvious part to solve this is where it states that veils duplicate Prismatic Wall.  The writer of the PrC then just fucked up and likely never looked up the orange layer description from Prismatic Wall, and went with an incorrect idea when writing the orange veil.  Prismatic Wall's orange layer clearly states it stops magical weapons.

[Demelain]

Indeed the only question in this, is if a +1 arrow is actually a magical attack or not...

I keep my opinion regarding the red veil: a +1 arrow is a magical missile (in the sense of "ammunition"), and, therefore, not subject to be blocked by it.

Now, the orange veil would be the likely candidate to block a +1 arrow, but only if the attack is considered magical. Personally, i rate the arrow as a "simple" magic weapon, not a magical attack, and that's also the general opinion in my gaming group.
I never considered the attack of a +1 longsword a magical attack. The weapon is magically enhanced, but it's still a weapon dealing weapon damage + the magical enhancement...

Bottom line, IMHO, the orange veil wouldn't cover it either, but i'm interested in seeing where the discussion on the +1 arrow goes.

I'd like to know what the third option is, then. What kind of attack is a +1 arrow, if it is neither [Magical] nor [Non-Magical]?

A warding imbued with this veil blocks all nonmagical ranged attacks and missiles.

A warding with this veil halts magical ranged attacks, including spells that conjure missiles (such as Melf’s acid arrow) or create rays (such as disintegrate or a beholder’s eye rays) but not spells that do not require a ranged attack (such as magic missile).

The way I read it, whatever you consider the arrow to be, it's blocked. If a magical attack is of type A, and whatever a +1 arrow is is an attack of type B, you still run up against the wording. Orange blocks A, Red blocks ~A. By definition, B is ~A. There could be a dozen different types of ranged attack which are separately defined, but all of them would be ~A.

[zook1shoe]

a third option for magical and non-magical is basically the same argument as a third option between psionic and non-psionic

[Raineh Daze]

a third option for magical and non-magical is basically the same argument as a third option between psionic and non-psionic

Are you saying psionics would be neither? That is hilariously false.

If psionic-magic transparency is in effect, the orange veil will stop it, because the attack registers as magical.

If psionic-magic transparency isn't in effect, the red veil will stop it, because the attack registers as nonmagical.

[Demelain]

I don't really know what you're saying. I have been on the minmax boards for a relatively short time, so if that's a reference to an argument which has been hashed out before then I am unfamiliar with it. In default transparency, psionics = magic anyway, if I'm not mistaken.

[zook1shoe]

psionic = magic transparency is not what i'm referring to.

i'm referring to something is either psionic or not, there is no 3rd option

i'm also referring to something is either magical or non-magic, there is no 3rd option

[Demelain]

Right. So we have
Magic = A
Non-magic = ~A
Psionic = Magic = A
Non-psionic = non-magic = ~A

[zugschef]

[...]magical or non-magic[...]

You are mixing up the words magic and magical. It's a magic weapon but a magical attack, and that's not merely a matter of DnD lacking a definition because there is a semantic difference between a magic and a magical scenery, which is exactly my point when I argue that an attack with a magic weapon is not a magical attack.

[zook1shoe]

so then the magic weapon is a non-magical attack? that makes no sense to me

what about a eldritch blast? if its in glaive form, would that be a magical attack or a non-magical magic weapon attack?

[linklord231]

[...]magical or non-magic[...]

You are mixing up the words magic and magical. It's a magic weapon but a magical attack, and that's not merely a matter of DnD lacking a definition because there is a semantic difference between a magic and a magical scenery, which is exactly my point when I argue that an attack with a magic weapon is not a magical attack.

mag·i·cal 
/ˈmajikəl/
Adjective
1.  Relating to or using magic.
2.  Resembling, produced or working as if by magic.

Is an attack with a magic weapon related to or using magic?  Yes.  Therefore it is a "magical" attack.

[zugschef]

what about a eldritch blast? if its in glaive form, would that be a magical attack or a non-magical magic weapon attack?

An attack with an eldritch glaive is not even a weapon attack to begin with.

mag·i·cal 
/ˈmajikəl/
Adjective
1.  Relating to or using magic.
2.  Resembling, produced or working as if by magic.

Is an attack with a magic weapon related to or using magic?  Yes.  Therefore it is a "magical" attack.

So the act of swinging a sword becomes magical when the weapon itself is magic but is non-magical when the weapon isn't?

[Chemus]

The red veil "blocks all nonmagical ranged attacks and missiles."

The orange veil "halts magical ranged attacks, including spells that conjure missiles (such as Melf’s acid arrow) or create rays (such as disintegrate or a beholder’s eye rays) but not spells that do not require a ranged attack (such as magic missile)."

It seems neither of these would block a simple +1 arrow.  Is this correct?  Is there no way to block the attacks of an archer w/ a magic bow?

The definition of "magical attack" is nebulous. Either the an attack is magical, or it is not. Once the determination/decision is made, that +1 arrow (or the arrow fired from the +1 bow, which is 'considered to be a magic weapon for the purposes of DR') is then blocked by one or the other veil, if that veil happens to be up. Since I haven't seen anyone come up with a good game definition of "magical attack", it looks to be up to the DM. Personally, I'd rule that any ranged attack by a magic weapon is a 'magical ranged attack'.

PS, the 'magic missile' thing that one or two folks keep referring to is a red herring; the reference in the orange veil is for the spell magic missile; "...but not spells that do not require a ranged attack (such as magic missile)."

[linklord231]

So the act of swinging a sword becomes magical when the weapon itself is magic/i] but is non-magical when the weapon isn't?

Precisely.

[NunoM]

From what i've seen, there isn't a clear definition of "magical attack", with these exact words. The only references i've seen were on the "Items Surviving after a Saving Throw" sidebar and on the "Incorporeal Subtype" description... The wording on the latter seems to put "spells" and "magic weapons" on the same level, in this sentence:

[...] It is immune to all nonmagical attack forms. Even when hit by spells or magic weapons, it has a 50% chance to ignore any damage [...]

That's the closest i got to a proper definition... and it's still not definite enough!

EDIT: Found another reference, in the FAQ, regarding tower shields. This one seems to limit magical attacks to spells/spell-like abilites only:

Magical Attacks: A tower shield’s effects on magical attacks depend on the kind of magical attack. Any attack aimed at your equipment is aimed at you.
If a magical attack has you as a specific target (that is it does not merely affect the area that contains you but is aimed right at you), the shield has no effect. All rays fall into this category, as does any spell that has a Target entry in its header and any spell that has an Effect entry and affects creatures (provided, of course, that the attacker can and does choose the shield user as a target). Magical attacks that fill areas (bursts, cones, cylinders, lines, emanations, and spreads) are subject to all the rules for cover on page 151 of the PH. Such attacks are completely blocked if line of effect between you and the attack’s point of origin passes through the side of your space the shield blocks.