This is a follow-up to this question: Can a magical net be destroyed?

Let’s say you have a +1 net which you throw at a target. The target then uses one of its attacks to attack the net, touching it and dealing enough damage to break it.

After defeating the target, you take the pieces of your destroyed net and mend them back together (using the Mending cantrip). Would that give you back your +1 net, or just a plain non-magical one?

This question is in the scope of Adventurers League, where it is indeed possible to get a +X net (if the magic item is a +X weapon if any kind).

  • \$\begingroup\$ Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat. \$\endgroup\$ Mar 22, 2018 at 20:37

3 Answers 3


The magical net would be repaired with magical nature intact

Mending says:

The spells repairs a single break or tear in an object you touch...[a]s long as the break or tear is no larger than 1 foot in any dimension... This spell can physically repair a magic item or construct, but the spell can't restore magic to such an object.

Magical items do not lose their magic when they break

There are also no general or specific rule that says or even implies that magic items lose their magic when broken. In fact the wording of mending itself implies the opposite.

Mending says it can "repair a magic item". If magic items automatically lost their magical properties when they broke what purpose would this sentence even have? All broken items would be mundane and there would be no need to say anything about repairing magic ones.

So even while broken, the net is still magical. Thus, the spell does not need to restore the magic to that item, because it never lost it to begin with. Thus, when repaired, the net is still magical.

If a magic item had lost its magical properties from some other effect (eg a wand using all of its charges) then mending would not restore those.

Be careful about the specific restriction of mending

As long as your repair meets all the rest of the requirements for mending, the rules should allow it to work.

Of specific concern will probably be the fact that mending can only mend a 1 foot tear. This will likely come down to a DM ruling on whether the damage fits this criteria and if it will take multiple mendings to repair.

  • \$\begingroup\$ Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat. \$\endgroup\$ Mar 22, 2018 at 20:37
  • 5
    \$\begingroup\$ I can't bring myself to downvote this, but I do disagree. I think they include the last clause to specify that broken magic items DO lose their magic, so the net becomes a net. \$\endgroup\$
    – SeriousBri
    Mar 23, 2018 at 10:39
  • \$\begingroup\$ "There are also no general or specific rule that says or even implies that magic items lose their magic when broken." So I can expend the last charge of my wand of magic missiles, roll a 1, have it crumble into ash, then cast repeated mending on it until I have repaired every tear, and wait for the next recharge at dawn? \$\endgroup\$
    – Kirt
    Jan 2, 2021 at 5:49

No, according to the Adventurers League rules

I asked a similar question on the Adventurers League Dungeon Masters Facebook group, and the consensus seemed that when a magical object has hit points and receives enough damage to get to 0 HP, it is destroyed and looses its magic forever, without possibility to repair it. Here is a relevant extract from the AL FAQ (emphasis mine) :

Shatterspike can't be used to destroy magic items, unless the item itself specifically provides an AC, hit points, etc. in its description. In that case, it's hella good at destroying them. Take that, magic net!

Here, we can see that the AL FAQ hints that magic nets can be destroyed, not only broken. It continues :

Unless the conditions of an item's destruction is specifically stated (talon card from deck of many things, ioun stone, +1 nets, etc.) permanent magic items can't be destroyed, Items destroyed in such a manner follow the normal rules for intentional or unintentional destruction.

We can determine that a net's destruction clause (AC 10, 5 HP) is intentional, and so the AL guidance states :

Some items have conditions that include the ability or potential to intentionally destroy the item. If destroyed, these items still count.

So, to summarize : a magical net that gets destroyed by having its HP reduced to 0 will lose its magic, and if repaired, will simply be a plain non-magical net. However, the magical net will still count towards the wielder's Magic Item Count.

Potential counterargument

Still citing the AL rules, you could argue that a destroyed magic item is not necessarily rendered nonmagical, because of the following text :

Permanent Effects : Some items are destroyed or rendered nonmagical when used, [...]

If so, you could then say that a destroyed magic item could be repaired and keep its magic. I think there's AL rules preventing that, but not quite sure at the moment (edit needed).

  • \$\begingroup\$ Especially since the AL documents are updated fairly regularly over time, it would be good to include the specific version (and page number) of the relevant document that the quotes are from. \$\endgroup\$
    – V2Blast
    May 28, 2020 at 6:13

In the past I was informed that Rule of Magic #1 is: Magic can not be broken unless the magic being used is greater than or equal to the magic in it.

So a +1 sword can not be broken unless another +1 weapon is being used to break it. A +1 weapon can not break a +2 weapon. But a +2 weapon can break a +1 weapon. So a maul can not be used to break a +1 weapon.

For the same reason, a Magic net or a rope or a string can not be broken unless greater or equal Magic is being used to break it with. So a +1 net can not be broken unless a +1 or greater is being used to break it. Just because someone says a DC 10 will get you out of a +1 Net does not mean the +1 Net is broken. But to cut 10 points of damage would require a +1 weapon first before any damage can be applied.

  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ Welcome to the site! Please take the tour when you get the chance. Can you cite a source for this Rule of Magic? \$\endgroup\$
    – Oblivious Sage
    May 26, 2020 at 20:35
  • \$\begingroup\$ This definitely sounds like a house rule to me, I don't recall anything like that from any edition of D&D I've played. \$\endgroup\$ May 26, 2020 at 21:26
  • \$\begingroup\$ Welcome to RPG.SE! Take the tour if you haven't already, and check out the help center for more guidance. In addition to what the others have said, note that Adventurers League organized play must follow the official rules, in addition to AL-specific rules listed in the AL documents. There is no such official rule in D&D 5e in general or AL in particular that corresponds to what you suggest, as far as I know. You may want to double-check that your answer is correct, and potentially delete your answer otherwise. \$\endgroup\$
    – V2Blast
    May 28, 2020 at 6:18

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .