Iot7FV - anything block +1 arrows

[ksbsnowowl]

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?

[linklord231]

An attack with a +1 arrow is either a "magical attack" or a "nonmagical attack."  If the latter, it's blocked by the red veil.  If the former, it's blocked by orange.  Why wouldn't one of those two block it?

[NunoM]

I think the confusion lies with the fact that a +1 arrow is a magical missile, which puts it out of the scope for the red veil, but isn't considered a magical ranged attack for the purposes of the orange veil...

I think you found a real hoop there, snowowl... but help is on the way, with Gloves of Arrow Snaring and the Deflect arrows feat. Other than that, the "Protection from Arrows" spell (in an eternal wand, if needed) and items that grant concealment could work for that...

[linklord231]

I think the confusion lies with the fact that a +1 arrow is a magical missile, which puts it out of the scope for the red veil, but isn't considered a magical ranged attack for the purposes of the orange veil...

I think you found a real hoop there, snowowl...

Why wouldn't it be considered a magical ranged attack with respect to the Orange veil, but it would be with respect to the Red?  Orange says "...including spells that conjure missiles (such as Melf’s acid arrow) or create rays..." but isn't limited to spells.  Any "magical ranged attack" that requires an attack roll gets blocked.  If a +1 arrow is a magical ranged attack, then it gets blocked by Orange.  If it is not a magical ranged attack, then it must be a nonmagical one, so it's blocked by Red. 

[NunoM]

This is why the red veil doesn't block a magical arrow:

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

(emphasis mine)

According to the rules, magic arrows, or mundane arrows fired from a magic bow, are considered magical for the purposes of damage reduction, but the way i read it, they don't become magical attacks because of that.

[X-Codes]

I have to go with the logical conclusion: If something isn't a magical attack, then by definition it's a non-magical attack.  As such, if it's a ranged attack not blocked by red then it should be blocked by orange.

[zugschef]

A magic weapon doesn't make a weapon attack magical --> Orange veil blocks magic arrows.

[kitep]

I agree.  It's a non-magical attack with a magic weapon.  Looks like it gets through.

[Peanutch]

With the wording of the orange veil, I would say a magical attack is something more like a melf's acid arrow or similar ranged touch ray spell, rather than a bolt or arrow fired from a bow.

[linklord231]

A magic weapon doesn't make a weapon attack magical

...Yes it does.  That's why magic weapons can hurt incorporeal things.

[Raineh Daze]

Including means it's a non-exhaustive list, but the only thing it excludes is ranged spells that don't require a ranged attack. Looks like the orange veil stops it, to me.

[zook1shoe]

agreed

+1 arrow = attack w magical weapon = magical weapon attack = blocked by orange
+1 adamantine arrow = attack w nonmagical weapon = non-magical attack = blocked by red

[zugschef]

A magic weapon doesn't make a weapon attack magical

...Yes it does.  That's why magic weapons can hurt incorporeal things.

I don't care what's stated under the incorporeal subtype because that's definitely not the primary source on what counts as a magical attack. Saving throws are an integral part of DnD's mechanics and the rules on saving throws say this:

Generally, when you are subject to an unusual or magical attack, you get a saving throw to avoid or reduce the effect.

You don't get a save when you are hit by a magic weapon or missile to avoid or reduce the effect.

[Raineh Daze]

A magic weapon doesn't make a weapon attack magical

...Yes it does.  That's why magic weapons can hurt incorporeal things.

I don't care what's stated under the incorporeal subtype because that's definitely not the primary source on what counts as a magical attack. Saving throws are an integral part of DnD's mechanics and the rules on saving throws say this:

Generally, when you are subject to an unusual or magical attack, you get a saving throw to avoid or reduce the effect.

You don't get a save when you are hit by a magic weapon or missile to avoid or reduce the effect.

By this definition, Magic Missile isn't a magic attack.

[zugschef]

By this definition, Magic Missile isn't a magic attack.

Learn to read: it says "generally". There are spells which don't allow saving throws. But the word "generally" definitely isn't used to make a case for including weapon attacks. And also, we're not talking about "magic attacks" but magical attacks.

[X-Codes]

By this definition, Magic Missile isn't a magic attack.

Learn to read: it says "generally". There are spells which don't allow saving throws. But the word "generally" definitely isn't used to make a case for including weapon attacks. And also, we're not talking about "magic attacks" but magical attacks.

Generally speaking, generally means whatever you generally want it to mean.  If we generally interpret general statements generally enough, then we generally wind up with generally useless information.

You know... in general.

[linklord231]

By this definition, Magic Missile isn't a magic attack.

Learn to read: it says "generally". There are spells which don't allow saving throws. But the word "generally" definitely isn't used to make a case for including weapon attacks. And also, we're not talking about "magic attacks" but magical attacks.

The wording was changed in Rules Compendium.  It no longer includes the word 'generally'. 

[X-Codes]

By this definition, Magic Missile isn't a magic attack.

Learn to read: it says "generally". There are spells which don't allow saving throws. But the word "generally" definitely isn't used to make a case for including weapon attacks. And also, we're not talking about "magic attacks" but magical attacks.

The wording was changed in Rules Compendium.  It no longer includes the word 'generally'.

Because I stole it.

Anyway, a very simple logical argument follows:

Question: Is the attack magical?
If yes, then the attack is magical.
If no, then the attack is non-magical.
If the attack is magical, then it is stopped by orange veil.
If the attack is non-magical, then it is stopped by red veil.

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.

[Yirrare]

An attack with a +1 arrow is either a "magical attack" or a "nonmagical attack." [...]

This pretty much answers the original question in my opinion. That is, one of the veils would block it.

I would personally say it's a magical ranged attack. This since 1: it's a ranged attack (no, not ranged touch attack or ray. But definitely an attack and definitely ranged) and 2: the arrow is magical.

Best Regards
Yirrare

Edit: pretty much ninja'd by X-codes.

[zook1shoe]

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