Fighting a water elemental Q

[Braden Campbell]

A) Elementals can be damaged by magic weapons (D&G, 55)

B ) Water elementals are impervious to stabbing and kinetic attacks (D&G, 66)

So.... do magic swords/knives/arrows/punches affect a water elemental under rule A, or do they pass through harmlessly under rule B?

[kiralon]

If the weapons damage or penetrative capabilities are changed magically I allow it.
A longsword turned blue magically not so much.
Runeswords that discharge magic energy on hits definitely.

[Library Ogre]

B over-rides A, IMO. While they CAN be damaged by magical attacks, they CANNOT be damaged by stabbing and kinetic attacks. Both A (magical) and B (neither stabbing nor kinetic) must be true for the Water Elemental to be damaged.

[kiralon]

B over-rides A, IMO. While they CAN be damaged by magical attacks, they CANNOT be damaged by stabbing and kinetic attacks. Both A (magical) and B (neither stabbing nor kinetic) must be true for the Water Elemental to be damaged.

Is the extra damage from a rune weapon, or the +6 to monsters power kinetic damage or a magic discharge, I wouldn't allow bonuses to damage or the normal weapon, but I do allow the magical damage to be applied (like the +6 to monsters for example).

[Library Ogre]

B over-rides A, IMO. While they CAN be damaged by magical attacks, they CANNOT be damaged by stabbing and kinetic attacks. Both A (magical) and B (neither stabbing nor kinetic) must be true for the Water Elemental to be damaged.

Is the extra damage from a rune weapon, or the +6 to monsters power kinetic damage or a magic discharge, I wouldn't allow bonuses to damage or the normal weapon, but I do allow the magical damage to be applied (like the +6 to monsters for example).

IMO, unless it is specifically called out as being something other than kinetic damage, it's kinetic damage.

[Greyaxe]

I personally disagree with option B. If a weapon is instilled with magical energy, like a demon death blow from a Palladin, it would damage the elemental despite being immune to physical attacks. All magic weapons are considered a magical attack. Just like the spell that makes weapons magical would do full damage.

[Greyaxe]

I personally disagree with option B. If a weapon is instilled with magical energy, like a demon death blow from a Palladin, it would damage the elemental despite being immune to physical attacks. All magic weapons are considered a magical attack. Just like the spell that makes weapons magical would do full damage.

[kiralon]

IMO, unless it is specifically called out as being something other than kinetic damage, it's kinetic damage.

To me the 4d6 minimum damage of means it not all kinetic even though it could mean the weapon is extra sharp and is guided through the air harder and stronger than normal, but the rules on rune weapons does tend to make me think its more of an energy discharge.
Otherwise how does a 5 year old with a rune dagger do 36 points of damage to something with 1 hit.

[Library Ogre]

IMO, unless it is specifically called out as being something other than kinetic damage, it's kinetic damage.

To me the 4d6 minimum damage of means it not all kinetic even though it could mean the weapon is extra sharp and is guided through the air harder and stronger than normal, but the rules on rune weapons does tend to make me think its more of an energy discharge.
Otherwise how does a 5 year old with a rune dagger do 36 points of damage to something with 1 hit.

Then does "Impervious to Energy" make one immune to most of the damage of a rune weapon?

[kiralon]

IMO, unless it is specifically called out as being something other than kinetic damage, it's kinetic damage.

To me the 4d6 minimum damage of means it not all kinetic even though it could mean the weapon is extra sharp and is guided through the air harder and stronger than normal, but the rules on rune weapons does tend to make me think its more of an energy discharge.
Otherwise how does a 5 year old with a rune dagger do 36 points of damage to something with 1 hit.

Then does "Impervious to Energy" make one immune to most of the damage of a rune weapon?

Yes if impervious to energy makes you immune to the damage done by death wards, as I tend to think it is its own specialised damage type for rune weapons.
Which makes me think, kinetic is an energy type too
you know, kinetic energy. It says it in the name.

[eliakon]

To me its pretty easy
The general rule A (can be damaged by magic weapons) is over ridden by the specific rule B (can not be harmed by swords and the like).
Rule A is the general rule for elementals with B being a specific rule that amends the general rule.
Just like how "humans can be damaged by poison" (general) is over ridden by the super power "immune to poison" (specific)

[kiralon]

To me its pretty easy
The general rule A (can be damaged by magic weapons) is over ridden by the specific rule B (can not be harmed by swords and the like).
Rule A is the general rule for elementals with B being a specific rule that amends the general rule.
Just like how "humans can be damaged by poison" (general) is over ridden by the super power "immune to poison" (specific)

So you don't think a runesword would damage a water elemental ?

[Library Ogre]

To me its pretty easy
The general rule A (can be damaged by magic weapons) is over ridden by the specific rule B (can not be harmed by swords and the like).
Rule A is the general rule for elementals with B being a specific rule that amends the general rule.
Just like how "humans can be damaged by poison" (general) is over ridden by the super power "immune to poison" (specific)

So you don't think a runesword would damage a water elemental ?

The idea that a runesword CAN damage a water elemental is based on your unsubstantiated idea that there's some sort of energy discharge associated with a rune weapon's damage level.

And Impervious to Energy specifically calls out several things one is not immune to, which includes pretty much everything kinetic.

[kiralon]

Well, its not really unsubstantiated. Rune weapons do far too much damage for it to be normal kinetic damage. Some of them do close to catapult damage. That's not normal physics there, and as rune weapons have to have a particular power to control themselves which then could assist a swing by adding speed and strength there is definitely an unknown force that increases the damage. A rune pin would do minimum of 4d6 damage by the rules, and is that classed as normal kinetic damage? You're assuming just as much as I am for it to be just kinetic damage, because I don't know of any pins that could do that much damage, and a rune pin could theoretically do 1d6x10. Stick a guy and he explodes.

So what is the extra damage from with runeswords if its not a magic discharge of some sort. Logically as normal weapons cant do that much damage its not normal damage.

Right after where it says Immune to kinetic attacks it says they still have standard elemental vulnerabilities which is
Elementals are vulnerable to magic, psionic and energy attacks/weapons
So the vulnerability to magic weapons is written into their description, rather then just being a general overview. I do believe that the idea of them would be to take damage from magic weapons as well from the read up.

air elementals are damaged by magic weapons too
Impervious to poison, chemicals, drugs, disease, heat, cold, punches, normal weapons (magic weapons do full damage)

Dark conversions also says that they are hurt by magic weapons.

[eliakon]

To me its pretty easy
The general rule A (can be damaged by magic weapons) is over ridden by the specific rule B (can not be harmed by swords and the like).
Rule A is the general rule for elementals with B being a specific rule that amends the general rule.
Just like how "humans can be damaged by poison" (general) is over ridden by the super power "immune to poison" (specific)

So you don't think a runesword would damage a water elemental ?

No a runesword can not damage a water elemental.
Since water elementals can not be damaged by swords...they can not be damaged by swords. Even that one, yes that one too, and that one.
It does not say "Can not be damaged by non-magical swords"
Thus the "is impervious to X" means that it is, indeed impervious to X.

The only runeswords that can harm water elementals would be ones that have, as a special feature "can harm water elementals"
Then their even more specific rule over rides the previous one.

[eliakon]

Well, its not really unsubstantiated. Rune weapons do far too much damage for it to be normal kinetic damage. Some of them do close to catapult damage. That's not normal physics there, and as rune weapons have to have a particular power to control themselves which then could assist a swing by adding speed and strength there is definitely an unknown force that increases the damage. A rune pin would do minimum of 4d6 damage by the rules, and is that classed as normal kinetic damage? You're assuming just as much as I am for it to be just kinetic damage, because I don't know of any pins that could do that much damage, and a rune pin could theoretically do 1d6x10. Stick a guy and he explodes.

So what is the extra damage from with runeswords if its not a magic discharge of some sort. Logically as normal weapons cant do that much damage its not normal damage.

Its magic. That's it. There is no 'discharge' it simply is.

Right after where it says Immune to kinetic attacks it says they still have standard elemental vulnerabilities which is
Elementals are vulnerable to magic, psionic and energy attacks/weapons
So the vulnerability to magic weapons is written into their description, rather then just being a general overview. I do believe that the idea of them would be to take damage from magic weapons as well from the read up.

air elementals are damaged by magic weapons too
Impervious to poison, chemicals, drugs, disease, heat, cold, punches, normal weapons (magic weapons do full damage)

Dark conversions also says that they are hurt by magic weapons.

So we have
1) a rule that says that they are vulnerable to
Magic
Psionics
Energy attacks/weapons
It does not say "magic weapons" just "energy weapons"

2) Air elementals explicitly say that magic weapons can harm them. They also say they are immune to normal weapons not kinetic ones. Thus, they have zero to do with water elementals.

3) Dark Conversions changes the rules, it does not clairify them. Thus the text that matters is the most current text.
We know that this is so becuse the write ups for things in Dark Conversions do not line up with the write ups in the source material. Ergo the write ups in DC are new rules that change the old ones where Rifts is concerned.
HOWEVER Dark Conversions is a book for Rifts not Palladium Fantasy.
Ergo the rules in Rifts apply to Rifts, the rules in PF apply to PF.
One can invoke rule zero to import the rules from the other games if that is desired, but they are not rules for the other games, only their own game.

based on 1,2, and 3
We are still at "Water Elementals in PF are not damaged by magic weapons because they are immune to those weapons and there is no text in PF that says otherwise. They have different rules in other games, but for PF they follow the PF rules."

[kiralon]

1) a rule that says that they are vulnerable to
Magic
Psionics
Energy attacks/weapons
It does not say "magic weapons" just "energy weapons"

I see what the issue is here how we read the next line. Im reading it "magic, psionics and energy attacks/weapons"
you are reading it "Magic, psionics" and energy attacks/weapons

Its another one of those wonderful interpreted how you read it. To me it reads as one line.
Under their specific vulnerabilities it says 2. Elementals are vulnerable to magic, psionic and energy attacks/weapons (magic fire ball, flaming swords, lightning bolt javelins, high-tech energy weapons, etc.).
Which means to me
magic attacks/weapons hurt them
Psionic attacks/weapons hurt them
energy attacks/weapons hurt them.

otherwise the following line would parse that they are only resistant to normal weapon weapons, fire, heat and cold but only cold does half damage.
Resistant to normal weapons, fire, heat, and cold (does half damage)



Do you allow psi swords to hurt them (Damage from psionic energy attacks such as psi-sword)
if yes
but its a sword, its solid so you can parry with it so its kinetic and a psi sword is a stabbing weapon so it should be immune to it.
if no
its also an energy weapon so it should hurt it.

Does immune to energy make you immune to a psi sword.



Impervious to Kinetic & Stabbing Attacks (Special): The physical nature of the flowing water makes it so that stabbing attacks, punches, kicks, thrown spears, arrows, and even bullets from a gun slosh right through the Elemental without damage.However having a great weight slam into it or falling only does %10 the normal damage. That's not immune to kinetic damage.


However it mostly comes down to how you read the sentence I guess, and from what I have read immunity to rune weapon damage isn't particularly likely as they tend to be the only thing that can hurt everything. Otherwise a water elemental with immune to energy is a tough nut to crack indeed.

[kiralon]

Its magic. That's it. There is no 'discharge' it simply is.

and it specifically says magic hurts it. Doesn't need to be a discharge, and it doesn't specify magic spells.

[dreicunan]

The fact that all elementals are impervious to normal,weapons anyways would seem to argue in favor of magical weapons not doing damage unless they are magical fire weapons (and maybe water and ice weapons as well depending on how you interpret it).

[kiralon]

I think its just bad wording and editing and the writer wanted differences in the descriptions rather then just copy pasting. If you check the earth elementals they are impervious to normal weapons because they are elementals, and resistant to normal weapons and take half damage from normal weapons because they are earth elementals. That's one of the reasons why I think water elementals aren't immune to magic weapons. Air elementals are even more ethereal, and would give less resistance then water, yet magic weapons hurt them on the way through, but they don't to water elements? That's certainly an odd way of looking/doing it.