Enhancing Your White Magic Tarot Practice with Rituals

White magic tarot is a form of divination that uses a deck of cards to gain insight and guidance. Unlike black magic, which is associated with negative and harmful intentions, white magic tarot focuses on positive and benevolent energy. The cards in a white magic tarot deck typically feature beautiful and uplifting imagery, such as angels, fairies, and other mystical creatures. White magic tarot readings are intended to provide clarity, guidance, and support in various areas of life, including love, career, and personal growth. The main idea behind white magic tarot is to tap into the higher power of the universe and use it for positive transformation and healing. It is believed that these cards have the ability to connect with the subconscious mind and provide insights and messages from the divine realm.

It is believed that these cards have the ability to connect with the subconscious mind and provide insights and messages from the divine realm. A white magic tarot reading can help individuals gain a better understanding of their current situation, make informed decisions, and navigate through life's challenges with grace and ease. It is important to approach white magic tarot with an open and receptive mind, as the cards can offer profound wisdom and guidance when interpreted with intention and sincerity.

Unarmored Clothing, Potency Runes, and Hardness / Hit Points

Just ran into a situation that was quite harsh. An enemy critically hit my monk wearing +1 unarmored clothing with a corrosive weapon property rune weapon. The run says it does 3d6 acid damage to the individual's armor. This isn't much damage for a plate wearer, can be dangerous for a chain wearer,and is absolutely devastating for a cloth or leather armor wearer. It completely wrecked my armor.

So a few questions came from this:

Do armor potency or resilient runes increase hardness or hit points of armor or unarmored clothing?

If your armor is destroyed, are the armor potency and resilient runes destroyed?

This type of attack which is automatic as a corrosive rune crit or can be done as part of an Abrikandilu attack completely destroys unarmored clothing with no save or defense. If the runes are destroyed, that means any class using armor can have a major investment of their wealth immediately and irrevocably destroyed with fair ease. This makes plate wearers the main way to go for defense as investing in for example +3 greater resilient unarmored clothing only to have it easily destroyed a single critical hit from a corrosive rune or similar attack seems like a real liability when playing a defensive monk type.

Anyone know if there any rule that allows higher level magical armor to have greater hardness or hit points?

I don't have an answer to your question, but given the way Shields work, it seems the devs are perfectly fine with expensive items being permanently destroyed in combat.

I think it will be up to your house rules on how to handle it. If your DM is feeling kind, he might say that the clothes are destroyed, but the rune then drops to the ground because it's magical. Or at least give it a saving throw vs the effect.

I'm not convincing the clothing should have taken the acid damage.

From the archives of Nethys:
Explorer’s clothing can have armor runes etched on it even though it’s not armor, but because it’s not in the light, medium, or heavy armor category, it can’t have runes requiring any of those categories.

Clothing isn't armor and isn't damaged by attacks that effect armor.

That point aside, I would allow the runes to be recovered by transferring as outlined in the rules for transferring runes (CRB pg 580)

Just because the armor is destroyed doesn't mean it completely disintegrates.

the CRB is silent of whether a runestone is destroyed when the item is destroyed, so expect GMN variation. Personally I would rule no it is not effect.

the CRB is silent of whether a runestone is destroyed when the item is destroyed, so expect GMN variation. Personally I would rule no it is not effect.

There is a difference between a Runestone and a Rune.

The CRB says quite clearly on page 571 that a Runestone has the 'consumable' trait and

"When a rune is transferred from the runestone to another object, the runestone cracks and is destroyed.

What isn't clear is whether a rune etched on armor is destroyed when the armor is destroyed.

From the "Repair" crafting activity

You can't Repair a destroyed item.

Since it can't be repaired, it might also be true that the rune cannot be transferred from that item. Transferring runes requires you to successfully use the Crafting skill to do so.

As Jared Walter 356 says, Explorer's Clothing is explicitly stated not to be armor. Your Explorer's Clothing is undamaged.

The Abrikandilu wreck targets an object, not limited to armor. So yeah, bye bye clothing.

The Abrikandilu wreck targets an object, not limited to armor. So yeah, bye bye clothing.

The OP was hit with a Corrosive weapon, not an Abrikandilu wreck attack.

the CRB is silent of whether a runestone is destroyed when the item is destroyed, so expect GMN variation. Personally I would rule no it is not effect.

There is a difference between a Runestone and a Rune.

The CRB says quite clearly on page 571 that a Runestone has the 'consumable' trait and

"When a rune is transferred from the runestone to another object, the runestone cracks and is destroyed.

What isn't clear is whether a rune etched on armor is destroyed when the armor is destroyed.

From the "Repair" crafting activity

You can't Repair a destroyed item.

Since it can't be repaired, it might also be true that the rune cannot be transferred from that item. Transferring runes requires you to successfully use the Crafting skill to do so.

TYPO, sorry I typed runestone, but meant rune when I said it's unclear if it's destroyed.

I don't know that the DM (even when I DM) that I would see Unarmored Clothing as immune to a corrosive rune. By RAW this might be the case that clothing is not armor, but RAI and the visual workings of this rune indicate it would burn away clothing.

I may have to switch to Bracers of Armor as that argument against bracers is far more reasonable as just bracers is not armor.

Just ran into a situation that was quite harsh. An enemy critically hit my monk wearing +1 unarmored clothing with a corrosive weapon property rune weapon. The run says it does 3d6 acid damage to the individual's armor. This isn't much damage for a plate wearer, can be dangerous for a chain wearer,and is absolutely devastating for a cloth or leather armor wearer. It completely wrecked my armor.

So a few questions came from this:

Do armor potency or resilient runes increase hardness or hit points of armor or unarmored clothing?

If your armor is destroyed, are the armor potency and resilient runes destroyed?

This type of attack which is automatic as a corrosive rune crit or can be done as part of an Abrikandilu attack completely destroys unarmored clothing with no save or defense. If the runes are destroyed, that means any class using armor can have a major investment of their wealth immediately and irrevocably destroyed with fair ease. This makes plate wearers the main way to go for defense as investing in for example +3 greater resilient unarmored clothing only to have it easily destroyed a single critical hit from a corrosive rune or similar attack seems like a real liability when playing a defensive monk type.

Anyone know if there any rule that allows higher level magical armor to have greater hardness or hit points?

You can't have +3 Greater Resilient Explorer's Clothing. Explorer's Clothing is not Armor, and only grants an exception for Potency Runes. You can't put Property Runes on Explorer's Clothing.

"Explorer’s clothing can have armor runes etched on it even though it’s not armor, but because it’s not in the light, medium, or heavy armor category, it can’t have runes requiring any of those categories."

Nothing says it can't have property runes. That second part doesn't make sense if it can't.

Just ran into a situation that was quite harsh. An enemy critically hit my monk wearing +1 unarmored clothing with a corrosive weapon property rune weapon. The run says it does 3d6 acid damage to the individual's armor. This isn't much damage for a plate wearer, can be dangerous for a chain wearer,and is absolutely devastating for a cloth or leather armor wearer. It completely wrecked my armor.

So a few questions came from this:

Do armor potency or resilient runes increase hardness or hit points of armor or unarmored clothing?

If your armor is destroyed, are the armor potency and resilient runes destroyed?

This type of attack which is automatic as a corrosive rune crit or can be done as part of an Abrikandilu attack completely destroys unarmored clothing with no save or defense. If the runes are destroyed, that means any class using armor can have a major investment of their wealth immediately and irrevocably destroyed with fair ease. This makes plate wearers the main way to go for defense as investing in for example +3 greater resilient unarmored clothing only to have it easily destroyed a single critical hit from a corrosive rune or similar attack seems like a real liability when playing a defensive monk type.

Anyone know if there any rule that allows higher level magical armor to have greater hardness or hit points?

You can't have +3 Greater Resilient Explorer's Clothing. Explorer's Clothing is not Armor, and only grants an exception for Potency Runes. You can't put Property Runes on Explorer's Clothing.

You can have +3 Greater Resilient Explorer's Clothing just fine. The only property runes you can't put on Explorer's Clothing is Fortification, Invisibility and Shadow.

Plus explorer's clothing is included in the "Magic Armor" description ("A suit of magic armor is simply a suit of armor or explorer’s clothing etched with fundamental runes."), and the Robe fo the Archmagi is +2 Greater Resilient Explorer's Clothing.

The Abrikandilu wreck targets an object, not limited to armor. So yeah, bye bye clothing.

They also mentioned the Abrikandilu in their first post. I was speaking to that.

Losing +3 Greater Resilient unarmored clothing to a critical hit from a corrosive rune is immensely lame.

"Explorer’s clothing can have armor runes etched on it even though it’s not armor, but because it’s not in the light, medium, or heavy armor category, it can’t have runes requiring any of those categories."

Nothing says it can't have property runes. That second part doesn't make sense if it can't.

You're right, that is in the text on page 581. I was going by the text of Explorer's Clothing itself, which only mentions Potency Runes.

Explorer’s Clothing: Adventurers who don’t wear armor travel in durable clothing. Though it’s not armor and uses your unarmored defense proficiency, it still has a Dex Cap and can grant an item bonus to AC if etched with potency runes (as described on page 581)

I really wish they would put all the rules for an Item in one place, instead of listing parts of them in multiple places.

Losing +3 Greater Resilient unarmored clothing to a critical hit from a corrosive rune is immensely lame.

Yeah, it sucks. I'm not entirely sure the Corrosive would work on Explorer's clothing because it's not technically armor, but the Wrecker Demon's ability would work, which still sucks.

If you're willing to house rule (not sure how your table feels about it), you can copy PF1s system, where every +1 (in this case it'd be potency) gave +2 Hardness and +10 HP.

So your +3 greater resilient explorer's clothing would be Hardness 7, HP 34 and BT 17. It'll hurt when hit with corrosive, but it won't destroy it completely even on max damage from Greater Corrosive, or an Abrikandilu's Wreck (unless it crits, I think).

(I was unable to find any similar rule in PF2, hence why I'm defaulting to PF1)

Losing +3 Greater Resilient unarmored clothing to a critical hit from a corrosive rune is immensely lame.

Yeah, it sucks. I'm not entirely sure the Corrosive would work on Explorer's clothing because it's not technically armor, but the Wrecker Demon's ability would work, which still sucks.

If you're willing to house rule (not sure how your table feels about it), you can copy PF1s system, where every +1 (in this case it'd be potency) gave +2 Hardness and +10 HP.

So your +3 greater resilient explorer's clothing would be Hardness 7, HP 34 and BT 17. It'll hurt when hit with corrosive, but it won't destroy it completely even on max damage from Greater Corrosive, or an Abrikandilu's Wreck (unless it crits, I think).

(I was unable to find any similar rule in PF2, hence why I'm defaulting to PF1)

Greater Resilient Runes are a Level 14 Item. A Wrecker Demon is Level 4. By the time you get the Runes, that will not be a thing you have to worry about.

Losing +3 Greater Resilient unarmored clothing to a critical hit from a corrosive rune is immensely lame.

While white magic tarot can provide valuable insight, it is important to remember that we always have free will and the power to shape our own destiny. The cards serve as a tool for self-reflection and empowerment, allowing individuals to tap into their own intuition and make choices that align with their highest good. Whether used for self-reflection or seeking guidance from a professional reader, white magic tarot can provide individuals with a sense of peace, clarity, and inspiration on their spiritual journey..

Reviews for "Using White Magic Tarot to Enhance Your Intuition and Psychic Abilities"

1. Lily - 2 stars

The White Magic Tarot deck did not live up to my expectations. The artwork is too simple and lacks the intricate details I love in tarot cards. The guidebook that comes with it is quite limited and doesn't provide enough context or explanation for each card. I was hoping for a more comprehensive and detailed interpretation of each card, but unfortunately, this deck fell short for me.

2. Max - 1 star

I was extremely disappointed with the White Magic Tarot deck. The quality of the cards is not up to par, as they feel flimsy and easily get scratched. The colors used in the artwork are dull and lack vibrancy, making the whole deck look uninspiring. Additionally, the symbolism on the cards is ambiguous and hard to interpret, leaving me frustrated and disconnected from the overall reading. I would not recommend this tarot deck to anyone looking for a visually appealing and insightful experience.

3. Emily - 2 stars

While the White Magic Tarot deck has an interesting concept, I found it to be quite repetitive. The artwork on the cards feels monotonous and lacks variation, making the readings feel repetitive and predictable. The guidebook that accompanies the deck tries to provide interpretations, but it often feels forced and lacking depth. Overall, I was hoping for a more diverse and engaging tarot deck, but unfortunately, this one did not meet my expectations.

4. Alex - 2.5 stars

The White Magic Tarot deck fell short for me. The illustrations on the cards are beautiful, but they lack clarity and detail, making it difficult to connect with the symbolism. The guidebook provides short interpretations but fails to offer in-depth explanations, leaving me wanting more insight into the cards' meanings. While the concept behind this deck is intriguing, its execution leaves much to be desired. If you're a beginner looking for a more straightforward tarot deck, this may work for you, but for those seeking a deeper and more nuanced experience, I would recommend exploring other options.

The Connection Between White Magic Tarot and Astrology