Looking for Unenchanted Dragon Body Part Weapons.........

[cornholioprime]

Could somebody out there tell me, if they've run into CRUDE, unenchanted Weapons made from Dragon Parts?? There is a debate of sorts going on; some of us are of the opinion that the Dragon's Parts can ONLY damage Supernatural Creatures while the Dragon is still alive (and the part attached to his Body, of course). Others of us believe that the Parts of the Dragon RETAIN their abilities to damage OTHER Supernatural Creatures, including those that are invulnerable to most Attacks like Weres and Vampires, even AFTER the Dragon's Death.

If you can, please point us to a specific PFRPG Book (and Page Number) that has an unenchanted Dragon Part used as a Weapon; say, a Dragon's Tooth affixed to a normal Knife Hilt, or tied to a Spear or affixed to an Arrowhead.

P.S. If the Weapon you find has ANY other abilities apart from causing damage to even normally invulnerable Creatures like Vampires, then it has EXTRA Enchantments on it; and for the purposes of our Discussion, we can't use an Enchanted Weapon to settle the Argument in favor of one side or the other.

Thanks in advance for any help you can provide..........

[Entiago]

Dragons & Gods page 16. first colum second paragraph, #18.

That just describes that bones and teeth of dragons are instilled with magic.... But also states that the parts of a dragon (especially the skull) are usually turned into a magical item.

[cornholioprime]

Dragons & Gods page 16. first colum second paragraph, #18.

That just describes that bones and teeth of dragons are instilled with magic.... But also states that the parts of a dragon (especially the skull) are usually turned into a magical item.

Yeah, I've got that particular Book...but unfortunately, Debates can be agued by both Parties even when the language is clear; unfortunately the semi-ambiguous language in Dragons and Gods doesn't help one side of the Debate or the other...

But please, Entiago, if you come across an OCC or RCC that, say, slays Dragons and then keeps/uses the Parts as crude weapons, (I forget if the Cult of Dragonwright is as established in the Palladium World as it is in Rifts), then please let me know.......Again, asking for specific Book and page Number.......

[Marcethus]

There are many "Cults" of Dragonwright as well as the Religion.

[Natalya]

Thanks in advance for any help you can provide..........

I've been watching that debate. All I can offer is more circumstantial evidence.

PFRPG 1st edition, under "Dragons", pg. 203, states quite clearly "1. All dragons are magic." (Their boldface, not mine.) It goes on to list that most dragons use magic, so knowing magic spells or using magic is different that being magic.

That section continues on by listing dragons by species, and gives damage per claw. Example, pg. 213, the Great Horned Dragon has "4 claws do 2-12 damage each".

PFRPG 2nd edition, under Miscellaneous Magic Components, pg 261, lists Dragon Claws. So they retain the magic of the dragon after death.

Now, I don't have Dragons & Gods, so I don't know what it lists for dragon species. However, PFRPG 1st edition, pgs 203-215, lists (for species):
Serpent of the Wind
Mighty Wooly Dragon
Night Stalkers
Basilisk
Seven Headed Hydra
Thunder Lizards
Kukulcan
Ice Dragon
Great Horned Dragon
Fire Dragon
Sea Serpent
Cockatrice

So, if you can find a cockatrice or basilisk body part on a weapon, that would technically be a dragon weapon.

Unfortunately, after watching the debate, nothing is going to help. It's too commonsense that a magical creature (like a dragon) would retain its magical damage (or ability to inflict MDC) after death; so it's not going to be printed. However, because its not printed, certain people won't accept it.

[cornholioprime]

Thanks in advance for any help you can provide..........

I've been watching that debate. All I can offer is more circumstantial evidence.

PFRPG 1st edition, under "Dragons", pg. 203, states quite clearly "1. All dragons are magic." (Their boldface, not mine.) It goes on to list that most dragons use magic, so knowing magic spells or using magic is different that being magic.

That section continues on by listing dragons by species, and gives damage per claw. Example, pg. 213, the Great Horned Dragon has "4 claws do 2-12 damage each".

PFRPG 2nd edition, under Miscellaneous Magic Components, pg 261, lists Dragon Claws. So they retain the magic of the dragon after death.

Now, I don't have Dragons & Gods, so I don't know what it lists for dragon species. However, PFRPG 1st edition, pgs 203-215, lists (for species):
Serpent of the Wind
Mighty Wooly Dragon
Night Stalkers
Basilisk
Seven Headed Hydra
Thunder Lizards
Kukulcan
Ice Dragon
Great Horned Dragon
Fire Dragon
Sea Serpent
Cockatrice

So, if you can find a cockatrice or basilisk body part on a weapon, that would technically be a dragon weapon.

Unfortunately, after watching the debate, nothing is going to help. It's too commonsense that a magical creature (like a dragon) would retain its magical damage (or ability to inflict MDC) after death; so it's not going to be printed. However, because its not printed, certain people won't accept it.

EXACTLY.

I'm sure that the instant that I find eveidence one way or the other, someone will say something to the effect of "just because they said so and so right there in the text, doesn't mean that they meant what they said..."

[Entiago]

PFRPG 2nd edition, under Miscellaneous Magic Components, pg 261, lists Dragon Claws. So they retain the magic of the dragon after death.

Yes, but that is a component used in creating a circle or ward. The parts of a dragon are components in that list, not a magical item or weapon.

[Entiago]

OK, the only other thing I have found is in Adventures on the High Seas. pg 33 (whole page if you like) Its under the Necromancer O.C.C.'s abilities Union with the Dead.



to basically answer your question in DoomIII form: No, the supernaturility of creatures die with said creature.

[cornholioprime]

Could you be more specific as to what types of weapons you are talking about?

Simple, unadorned, (perhaps) crude Weapons that do NOT have any extra Enchantments; we are trying to conclude definitively whether or not the Dragon's Body Parts still damage otherwise invulnerable Supernatural Creatures even after removed from the dragon and/or the Dragon is dead. For example, you could pound on a Werebeast, Undead, or Vampire all day long with the Claw of a regular Animal, but would cause NO damage regardless of your strength; The attacks of a Dragon (as do other Creatures of Magic) do, however, and we are trying to resolve if the Body Part retains this ability away from the Dragon's Body.

I have a shaman that used Animate Object to animate and use a dragon arm/claw normal damage for the claw but no supernatural strength bonus.

Not looking for the SN Strength Bonus; we are looking for the ability to cause damage to otherwise invulnerable Magical Creatures.

If someone thinks they can use a haunch of dragon as a magic club I would laugh them out the door! Or maybe a of bolo out of dragon nads. Not hardly!

If one Dragon's Body Part can cause Damage to the Supernatural, then it only makes sense that ALL of them can, no matter how weird or disgusting; that is to say, there's NO logical reason only some Dragon Parts cause damage but not others.

If they wanted to carve a knife from a claw, tooth or bone then yes it would count as a magic weapon.
I believe only bones, teeth, claws, organs and scales retain any magical qualities.

You realize, of course, that you've essentially listed ALL of the Physical components of the Dragon, do you not???

[cornholioprime]

OK, the only other thing I have found is in Adventures on the High Seas. pg 33 (whole page if you like) Its under the Necromancer O.C.C.'s abilities Union with the Dead.



to basically answer your question in DoomIII form: No, the supernaturility of creatures die with said creature.

Not true. We know that the Parts retain Magical Energy (hence their value to Necromancers and Alchemists, as opposed to the Parts of Non-Supernatural Creatures); unfortunately, we haven't been told exactly how this Magical Energy manifests itself.....

[Entiago]

to basically answer your question in DoomIII form: No, the supernaturility of creatures die with said creature.

Not true. We know that the Parts retain Magical Energy (hence their value to Necromancers and Alchemists, as opposed to the Parts of Non-Supernatural Creatures); unfortunately, we haven't been told exactly how this Magical Energy manifests itself.....

Right, and it's never been brought up in any of the books. I'm on both sides of the fence. Technically the "magical" side of the dead supernatural should be dead along with the creature. But there is also the reason they are needed for components.

[J. Lionheart]

The greatest argument to support the statement that unenchanted dragonbone weapons don't damage supernatural stuff or maintain their magic is the very existence and description of enchanted dragonbone weapons:

If you check page 231 of D&G, it lists dragonbone weapons, with no other magic abilities other than that they are magic and harm supernatural beings... and these are the enchanted ones! Why would you enchant something to do the exact same thing it would do unenchanted?

Alchemists would never expend their power for no reason. Case closed.

[Entiago]

The greatest argument to support the statement that unenchanted dragonbone weapons don't damage supernatural stuff or maintain their magic is the very existence and description of enchanted dragonbone weapons:

If you check page 231 of D&G, it lists dragonbone weapons, with no other magic abilities other than that they are magic and harm supernatural beings... and these are the enchanted ones! Why would you enchant something to do the exact same thing it would do unenchanted?

Alchemists would never expend their power for no reason. Case closed.

I completly forgot about those. so then: the supernaturility of creatures die with said creature.

[cornholioprime]

The greatest argument to support the statement that unenchanted dragonbone weapons don't damage supernatural stuff or maintain their magic is the very existence and description of enchanted dragonbone weapons:

If you check page 231 of D&G, it lists dragonbone weapons, with no other magic abilities other than that they are magic and harm supernatural beings... and these are the enchanted ones! Why would you enchant something to do the exact same thing it would do unenchanted?

Alchemists would never expend their power for no reason. Case closed.

Sorry, Lionheart, but that is incorrect. ALL of the Dragon Bone Weapons listed on Page 231 of "Dragons and Gods" have ADDITIONAL enchantments added to them (i.e., some are enchanted to fly farther as arrows or spears, some are indestructible, see the invisible, etc.). Hence the reason why we couldn't say, one way or the other, whether Dragon Parts have ANY additional abilities other than retaining Magic Energy after being removed from the Dragon (and what form or innate Ability this Magic Energy takes remains unclear).....

[J. Lionheart]

The greatest argument to support the statement that unenchanted dragonbone weapons don't damage supernatural stuff or maintain their magic is the very existence and description of enchanted dragonbone weapons:

If you check page 231 of D&G, it lists dragonbone weapons, with no other magic abilities other than that they are magic and harm supernatural beings... and these are the enchanted ones! Why would you enchant something to do the exact same thing it would do unenchanted?

Alchemists would never expend their power for no reason. Case closed.

Sorry, Lionheart, but that is incorrect. ALL of the Dragon Bone Weapons listed on Page 231 of "Dragons and Gods" have ADDITIONAL enchantments added to them (i.e., some are enchanted to fly farther as arrows or spears, some are indestructible, see the invisible, etc.). Hence the reason why we couldn't say, one way or the other, whether Dragon Parts have ANY additional abilities other than retaining Magic Energy after being removed from the Dragon (and what form or innate Ability this Magic Energy takes remains unclear).....

Nope, sorry to parrot you, but that's incorrect in return.

Look at the very first item on the page (pg 231, Dragons and Gods):
The average dragon bone weapons are...

It describes them as lightweight, strong as steel, and they do regular damage for their type with the added bonus that they hurt supernatural creatures and radiate magic. They cost 50k to 150k each. For an added 50% cost, they can be made indestructible. There are no other powers. These are just run of the mill enchanted dragon bone weapons, no special powers.

Below that is the listing for special spears and javelins, special arrows, and other dragon weapons. I'd print the entire page for people to see, but I don't think that's allowed

[Entiago]

Alas, underneath the title Dragone Bone Weapons it states, and I quote:

Dragon bone weapons are usually made and enchanted by alchemists or deities.

The average dragon bone weapons are...

It describes them as lightweight, strong as steel, and they do regular damage for their type with the added bonus that they hurt supernatural creatures and radiate magic. They cost 50k to 150k each. For an added 50% cost, they can be made indestructible. There are no other powers. These are just run of the mill enchanted dragon bone weapons, no special powers.

and this is true as well

[Natalya]

I completly forgot about those. so then: the supernaturility of creatures die with said creature.

If that's true, then why does PFRPG state (pg. 204):

"25) Dragon bones and teeth are instilled with great magic and as such are coveted components in the creation of the most powerful wards, circles, and magic.
"26) Dragon blood is also possessed of powerful magic and equally desired for various magic creations. Still warm blood is scalding to the touch."

Now, while I'll admit it's an older book, has anything been printed in anything newer that specifically contradicts these statements? If not, they are still valid, and they state quite clearly that great and powerful magic remain in dragon body parts following death.

Therefore, the question comes in, what is the magic? Well, as stated previously, pg 203 stated:
"1) All dragons are magic." (Again, their boldface, not mine.)

It then went on to state that most dragons wield some degree of magic and most dragons are well versed in more than one type of magic. Therefore, being magic is different than using magic.

Just looking at that, the only reasonable conclusion to me is that the magic that is the essence of a dragon, the magic that makes them supernatural, is what is left imbued in their body parts. They are still supernatural body parts.

Following that conclusion, tying a claw or a tooth to a stick, turning it into a spear, means the pointy part of the spear would be a supernatural weapon. Keeping to that thread of logic, it would be able to damage anything that a supernatural creature can.

From there, the descriptions of the various dragons list claw damage separated by claw. So, not only do you know how many claws each dragon has, you know their individual damage.

Anybody find anything that specifically negates the above book statements, or have another conclusion for what the magic left in the body parts are?

[Entiago]

I completly forgot about those. so then: the supernaturility of creatures die with said creature.

If that's true, then why does PFRPG state (pg. 204):

"25) Dragon bones and teeth are instilled with great magic and as such are coveted components in the creation of the most powerful wards, circles, and magic.
"26) Dragon blood is also possessed of powerful magic and equally desired for various magic creations. Still warm blood is scalding to the touch."

Now, while I'll admit it's an older book, has anything been printed in anything newer that specifically contradicts these statements?

Obviously you are looking at the 1st edition rule book. In case you were in a coma for the past 8 years PFRPG 2nd editions is out. In way of numers of editions a 2nd superceeds a 1st deition. So this is what we are looking at. But I do like the referances to how it was laid out in 1st ed. (as I have not read that the whole way thru yet).

If not, they are still valid, and they state quite clearly that great and powerful magic remain in dragon body parts following death.

Therefore, the question comes in, what is the magic? Well, as stated previously, pg 203 stated:
"1) All dragons are magic." (Again, their boldface, not mine.)

It then went on to state that most dragons wield some degree of magic and most dragons are well versed in more than one type of magic. Therefore, being magic is different than using magic.

Just looking at that, the only reasonable conclusion to me is that the magic that is the essence of a dragon, the magic that makes them supernatural, is what is left imbued in their body parts. They are still supernatural body parts.

So far it seems an open argument...that is what we are trying to figure out.

Following that conclusion, tying a claw or a tooth to a stick, turning it into a spear, means the pointy part of the spear would be a supernatural weapon. Keeping to that thread of logic, it would be able to damage anything that a supernatural creature can.

From there, the descriptions of the various dragons list claw damage separated by claw. So, not only do you know how many claws each dragon has, you know their individual damage.

Anybody find anything that specifically negates the above book statements, or have another conclusion for what the magic left in the body parts are?

Yes, it is left out of 2nd ed- to my knowledge. But still I am conflicted...

[Natalya]

Obviously you are looking at the 1st edition rule book. In case you were in a coma for the past 8 years PFRPG 2nd editions is out. In way of numers of editions a 2nd superceeds a 1st deition.

No, not in a coma. However, I don't own Dragons and Gods, and I couldn't find dragons listed in 2ed. If they're in there, let me know where to look.

While I agree that anything newer printed supercedes an older book, I don't agree that omissions count as deleting an old rule. Otherwise, every new book that comes out (main book, source book, add-on) would be the only useable book, and anything not mentioned in it would no longer exist. As Palladium doesn't put out books thousands of pages long to ensure they've got everything in a single book, it's fair to assume that one is meant to use old material until something is printed to change it.

So IMO, unless I missed the section entirely, if 2ed didn't print information about dragons, 1ed rule about dragon parts holding magic still stands unless another source that I don't have states clearly that dead dragon parts no longer hold magic. If there is, could someone mention the source?

[J. Lionheart]

Dragons and Gods, page 16, item 18 does have the equivalent to what Natalya posted above, but in more detail. It specifies that "the bones and teeth of adult dragons are instilled with great magic" and are desired for use in wards, circles, and magic spells. It doesn't say anything about weapons, but it does specify they have magic in them.

Your point is well made as to their retaining magic, but I believe my own point about the existence of enchanted weapons with no additional special powers remains valid. No alchemist is stupid enough to expend their magical ability enchanting something to be exactly the same as it already is.

[Entiago]

Obviously you are looking at the 1st edition rule book. In case you were in a coma for the past 8 years PFRPG 2nd editions is out. In way of numers of editions a 2nd superceeds a 1st deition.

No, not in a coma. However, I don't own Dragons and Gods, and I couldn't find dragons listed in 2ed. If they're in there, let me know where to look.

Oh, Then that explains it- dragons are not listed in the 2nd ed book.

While I agree that anything newer printed supercedes an older book, I don't agree that omissions count as deleting an old rule. Otherwise, every new book that comes out (main book, source book, add-on) would be the only useable book, and anything not mentioned in it would no longer exist. As Palladium doesn't put out books thousands of pages long to ensure they've got everything in a single book, it's fair to assume that one is meant to use old material until something is printed to change it.

So IMO, unless I missed the section entirely, if 2ed didn't print information about dragons, 1ed rule about dragon parts holding magic still stands unless another source that I don't have states clearly that dead dragon parts no longer hold magic. If there is, could someone mention the source?

So true. J. Lionheart is on the money, but I belive the question still stands. If a person was to take a dead adult dragons bone and carve one end into a point, would it count as supernatural damage?

[cornholioprime]

Dragons and Gods, page 16, item 18 does have the equivalent to what Natalya posted above, but in more detail. It specifies that "the bones and teeth of adult dragons are instilled with great magic" and are desired for use in wards, circles, and magic spells. It doesn't say anything about weapons, but it does specify they have magic in them.

Your point is well made as to their retaining magic, but I believe my own point about the existence of enchanted weapons with no additional special powers remains valid. No alchemist is stupid enough to expend their magical ability enchanting something to be exactly the same as it already is.

Thank you, J.J Lionheart. I hadn't thought of it in that way. I'm going to Copy and Paste your statement and send it over to the (non-Palladium) Forum where we are asking the same Question........