Magic damage/resistance

How does Magic damage/resistance work?
I know the magic resistance would add a red die to the armor rating, but I don’t know exactly wich damage is Magic.
Any Spell and Shout does Magic damage wich I could resist with, for example, the Solitude Shield, so it does not matter if the Spell or Shout does elemental damage too, they are Magic sources wich would add the Red die, like defending against Unrelenting Force… but there is no “Magic” term on the cards, just “Enchanted”, but the Enchanted keyword does not say anything about Magic, Magic damage is a general rule for every Spell.
So what happens against Enchanted weapons? Are they considered as magical weapons? Do you get a Red die against any Enchanted weapons, even if the weapon is just an Axe with Absorb Stamina? Do you need elemental damage to add the Red die? Do you defend the physical hit as normal and negate the absortion, rolling an Endurance test?

I read it along the lines of “All Magic Damage is also Enchanted but not all Enchanted attacks are Magical”.

So an Enchanted weapon that doesn’t also have a Magic attack type (such as Fire, Frost etc.) isn’t affected by Magic Resistance. So in your example of Absorb Stamina enchantment, it would ignore any Magic Resistance (because it is Enchanted but not Magical).

By that logic (assuming it’s correct of course), Unrelenting Force would also ignore Magic Resistance as shouts are Enchanted but not necessarily of the Magic Damage type. Spells are different because they always have the Magic Damage type as well as being Enchanted, (as per page 51 of the updated rules) whereas Shouts are only Enchanted.

So what do you think Magic damage means? Just the 3 elemental damages? There is no Magic damage as such.
Is there any non-elemental damage from a Spell?
If so, Magic Resistance would protect you against the 3 elements only, so it could have been named Elemental Resistance and it would be clearer :sweat_smile:.


After reading this, Shouts are treated as Spells, so they should be Magical as Spells are.
And the Magical is a different type, not an elemental one, wich usually comes with Elemental, but as far as I know, there is no Spell or weapon wich does Magic damage only

There’s now Blood Magic spells which are Magic Damage (because they’re spells) but don’t have an element attached so there’s absolutely examples of ‘just’ Magic Damage now. Also Magic Resistance is what it’s called in the Video Games so it is what it is.

Shouts are treated the same as Spells for purposes of range/targeting etc. but I don’t see any mention of them automatically being Magic Damage type themselves (just Enchanted). So, as it currently reads, Shouts are Enchanted but ignore Magic Resistance (because they don’t inherently do ‘Magic Damage’.

In the videogame, Magic Resistance protects you against dragon Shouts :sweat_smile:.
There is no exactly Elemental Resistance in the videogame, but there are a lot of references to “Elemental things”, even Elemental Protection as a Perk (Block)

Well who can say then? :sweat_smile: Rules as Written currently for Call to Arms though, I don’t believe it would protect against Dragon Shouts that don’t have an associated Element (such as Unrelenting Force).

Well no, because the Elemental resistances are separated out, just as they are in Call to Arms (and Elemental Protection is in the Tabletop too).

Regardless, I think there’s enough reason for a clear distinction between the Magic Damage type and the Enchanted keyword as they interact with different things, even if they often overlap (such as with spells).

I think yes, in the videogame protects you, because it is Nordic Magic, with elements or not, so I would add a red die here too, to protect against an Unrelenting Force shout, if you have Resistance: Magic.
In this wargame, they are very refined with all the details of the videogame, so I think it is fine.

Hey both,

Don’t forget to submit a feedback form for this point on the new rulebook. It looks like we have gotten to an agreement but there is always space for things to change.

To me, the summary of this matter looks to be the following;

  • Shouts have Enchanted, but they do not have the Magic Damage Type. The same applies to weapons that are Enchanted that don’t have Magic Damage applied from elsewhere.
  • This means they are not (currently) effected by Resistance (Magic).

If this doesn’t feel like the Skyrim you know, let us know in that feedback form. If you have some tabletop evidence of it, so much the better!


Anyway, I read in this forum, 3 months ago, they are treated “exactly” as Spells, so it is normal to play as that😅 even more if you know they are Magical in the videogame and the Wards protect you against them… You can avoid even the push back!

Thanks for the report!

I had a look on the FAQ, my questions spreadsheet and the forum itself and couldn’t find that statement about them working exactly like Spells. Can you recall where you saw it?


It was written by @JimmyW (it is not official, I know) but anyway, when you read some answers about Shouts/Spells, you read the rulebook again, and you play the Skyrim (videogame), your conclusion is, easily, Shouts are treated the same as Spells (they get the same “invisible” keywords in their cards).
So it is normal to think they do Magic Damage, they are “Magic” you learn in any case, so any damage caused by an Staff, Scroll, Spell or Shout, with elemental damage or not, should be Magical.

By the way, I did not find anything yet about gaining something against “Enchanted” things (so the Enchanted keyword in Shouts would have a purpose, it is pretty obvious you cannot enchant a Shout), is there a character or item wich obtains something when they are hit by an exclusively Enchanted thing?

I would be cautious about taking an unofficial answer as gospel.

The video game and tabletop games are ultimately, different entities. We are sort of bound to what is written down in the book on occasion. It would appear the section that JimmyW was referring to is in the section for Range and Targeting Types. From this, we can infer that Shouts interact with Range and Targeting like Spells, but I couldn’t find any other indication beyond Shouts needing to be equipped like Spells.

There is no reference I can find regarding how the damage of Spells is treated. But again, not to say this couldn’t change come rulebook update. We’ll definitely look into it.

DK-Dark, could you elaborate on your point regarding Enchanted?

That’s obvious, but when you read a lot of answers/statements about ruling, the videogame is used as argument too.
Sometimes a missing thing in the rulebook is interpreted as “isn’t it written? You cannot do it”, and sometimes is interpreted as “it is not written, but this thing let you think how this works”, or maybe it was forgotten/mistaken, much like other things. Sometimes there is ambiguity.
At the end, the only real thing you can refer to is the videogame, where this game is based on (approved by Bethesda).

Shouts are a good example for this.
Actually, I cannot find any “written” rule where you could not use an Attack action and then any Shout (even a damaging one).
The written rules say you cannot repeat the same Action, and you cannot Prepare/Attack or Move/Withdraw, but Special/Attack is not mentioned, so I could perform an Attack action (choosing Ranged attack Action) using a Spell of the Ranged attack type, and then I could cast a Rune or Shout, because they use a Special action to perform them, and they are not subdivided later between attacks or not. Any Shout use always a Special action to use it, as written, it does not matter later if they are treated as Spells for targeting purposes, so to perform them you need to spend a Special action, wich let you use an Attack action later, as written. Or do I need to figure out what Shout needs a Special action to be performed and what Shout not? Because as written, you can only infer they must use a Special action, in all cases, and then, for considering Range and targeting types, they work as Spells, this not change the obligatory nature of using a Special action, so it lets you using an Attack action.

About the Enchanted keyword, I just like to know if there is something/someone wich/who interacts with this, I did not find yet anything/a yone vulnerable/resistant. It is pretty obvious that the Spells/Shouts cannot be “enchanted” (but it is fine to have that written to avoid confusion), so the only real purpose of giving this keyword to them would be the vulnerability/resistance of someone, so they can be affected by Enchanted things.

Yeah, don’t take anything I say as gospel in the slightest. With that particular comment elsewhere (which is quite probably mistaken; you may well be able to do a Shout Attack and a ‘regular’ Attack in the same activation), it was in relation to a Shout’s Action type; nothing directly to do with the Enchanted/Magic Damage question; more to do with targeting etc.

Appreciate that it may differ from the video game but there’s quite a clear point of differentiation between the Enchanted keyword and Magical Damage (and Blood Magic offers a tangible example now of a non-elemental magical damage). Personally I don’t see any issue with the distinction; if nothing else it bakes a degree of granularity into the rules and I don’t see any particular confusion.

As to something interacting with Enchanted specifically; Ethereal and its bonus armour against non-enchanted attacks. So Shouts and Spells both negate this, even if only the latter is also Magical Damage.

There is no confusion, the only confusion is just this game treats differently a Magic Damage from a Shout of whose game is based on, something that seems weird.

I forgot the Ethereal, good point. Do you know if there are anyone vulnerable?

Shouts that require a hit roll and/or do damage are absolutely intended to be an Attack. You cannot FusRoDah! and then follow up with an Attack. We don’t have the right language for that, but if your shout results in you attacking someone, it’s an Attack.


I know these are Attacks, but the thing is they are performed using a Special action, and not an Attack action, that’s the key.
I know the intention, you cannot Attack twice, but after discussing this long time ago and now, nothing has changed, even in the new rulebook or faqs.

When I teach people to play this game, I need to say this is a mistake, because they want to use 2 different Action types, as usual. So I need to say everything relative to an Attack (except a Rune, wich is not literally an Attack) cannot be performed twice

Thanks Gavin. Might be worth an extra line in the rulebook just to make that explicit (I’ll submit a form for it). Currently the wording just says Shouts are Special Actions but makes no further mention (unlike for Spells) that if they’re treated the same as an Attack for targeting etc. then they also count as an Attack.

There’s not a particularly large sample size to be fair. The only damaging ones I can think of that aren’t also associated with an element are Unrelenting Force (which I think does count as magic damage in Skyrim) and Drain Vitality (which doesn’t and isn’t affected by magic resistance?). Personally I don’t see too much need to change how it currently seems to work in CtA for the sake of one Shout (even if it is the iconic one) but I’m also not stubbornly against it changing.

I would prefer a rulebook with clear rules, even if there is just one thing in the whole game.
But I would say Fire breath would do Magic Damage and Fire Damage, not only Fire Damage, so if I am resistant to Magic and not resistant to Fire… Or what should be the reason to think Fire breath does Magic damage? The fire thing?