Talk:Elsebane (3.5e Equipment)

Ratings

	Eiji-kun favors this article and rated it 4 of 4!
	Interesting synergy. It wins extra points for that. I'd take it on a ranger to make everything my favored enemy.

Oh yeah, question!

When their type changes do they lose the properties of their old type? I would assume HD and saves don't change, that'd be nuts, but things like a Devil's See in Darkness or something. Do they retain their abilities but just count as Type X? I presume so, but best clarify. -- Eiji-kun 14:52, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

Are you reading an old version? Their type doesn't actually change. They just are treated as that type for the purposes of things like Bane or Favored Enemy or Charm Person. --DanielDraco 14:54, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

I might have, thanks. -- Eiji-kun 14:55, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

If that's the case, you really ought to both change the fluff in the first paragraph and the wording in the "Bane" category. The former implies heavily that it's intended to strip immunities, and the latter is written somewhat confusingly. --Undead_Knave (talk) 08:26, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

It does strip immunities in exactly the way the fluff describes – if a balor is struck with a Human Elsebane weapon and fails its save, it is now susceptible to things like Dominate Person. Or if a lich is struck with the same weapon, it is now susceptible to effects which require the target to be living (since living/nonliving status is determined by type).

What exactly is unclear in the Bane writeup? --DanielDraco (talk) 20:10, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

That's dangerous. It couldbe used to add powers too then. Here is my Elsebane (Outsider) Sap. I slap myself. Now I am proficient in all martial weapons. What's that, immunity to crits? *Slap* Construct baby. Yeah, please reconsider that. -- Eiji-kun (talk) 23:43, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

It isn't meant to do that. Does it read like it does? It explicitly does not actually change type, so there is no reason to believe the target would gain type traits. --DanielDraco (talk) 22:55, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

To clarify what I was saying before, a Balor struck by a Human Elsebane weapon is treated as having the Humanoid type for all effects, e.g., spells. So since charm person has "one humanoid creature" as its target, the balor now counts as a valid target. Or a lich who has been struck by the same weapon, by virtue of the definition of a living creature, would be a valid target for eyebite. --DanielDraco (talk) 23:09, 15 April 2014 (UTC)