Casting spells in Antimagic Fields

[Jimlock]

Rules Compendium (2007), page 5 "Introduction"

Introduction
The book you hold in your hands is the definitive guide for how to play the 3.5 revision of the DUNGEONS & DRAGONS Roleplaying Game. Years in the making, it gathers resources from a wide variety of supplements, rules errata, and rules clarifications to provide an authoritative guide for playing the D&D game. It updates and elucidates the rules, as well as expanding on them in ways that make it more fun and easier to play. When a preexisting core book or supple- ment differs with the rules herein, Rules Compendium is meant to take precedence. If you have a question on how to play D&D at the table, this book is meant to answer that question.

Rules Compendium, page 11 "Antimagic/Spells"

SPELLS
Spells don’t function in an anti- magic area, but an antimagic area doesn’t block line of effect. If a spell’s point of origin is inside an antimagic area, that spell is entire- ly suppressed. When a spell’s point of origin is located outside an anti- magic area, but part of that spell’s area overlaps the antimagic area, that spell’s effect is suppressed where the two areas overlap. Time elapsed within an antimagic area still counts against a
spell’s duration.
If an instantaneous spell is entirely
suppressed, that spell is effectively can- celed. (It’s suppressed, and its duration instantaneously expires.) An instantaneous area spell is only entirely suppressed and effectively canceled if its point of origin is within the antimagic area. Otherwise it works like any other area spell that has a point of origin outside the antimagic area—only where its area overlaps the antimagic area is its effect is suppressed
(and effectively canceled).
A wall of force, prismatic wall, or prismatic sphere isn’t affected
by antimagic. Break enchantment, dispel magic, and greater dispel magic spells don’t dispel antimagic. Mordenkainen’s disjunction has a 1% chance per caster level of destroying an antimagic field. If the antimagic field survives the disjunction, no items within it are disjoined.

For [MENTION=6669384]Greenfield[/MENTION] & [MENTION=88006]dakuth[/MENTION]

 

[Dandu]

I think someone's head is going to explode.

 

[Nezkrul]

can't cast lightning bolt while in an AMF because the point of origin is the caster, the lightning bolt starts at the caster and goes to the designated spot in range; RC says it is cancelled. Fireball would also be cancelled because of the bead described in the spell streaking toward its destination.

 

[Deset Gled]

Rules Compendium (2007), page 5 "Introduction"



Rules Compendium, page 11 "Antimagic/Spells"



For [MENTION=6669384]Greenfield[/MENTION] & [MENTION=88006]dakuth[/MENTION]

Counterpoint:

When we release errata, it will always be free.

It logically follows that if the change is rules is not free, it is not errata. The changed text in the Rules Compendium is not free, therefore it is not official errata.

Reference: This quote originally came from Chris Perkins on the WotC boards, at this link: http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=12291698&postcount=149 The page is no longer there (maybe it's just moved). It was referenced in this thread on ENWorld: http://www.enworld.org/forum/general-rpg-discussion/202969-wasnt-there-supposed-big-errata-push.html

Of course, this is now entering a world of errata discussions, which got pretty hairy at the end of 3.5. I give WotC credit for releasing errata to their old product line after 4e was announced and they new there was no money in it, but they did manage to dig themselves into a bit of a hole when it comes to editing the re-releases that they have coming out.

Personally, I find it's easiest to just consider the Rules Compendium (along with Bo9S, Complete Psionics, and PHB2) to essentially be something like D&D 3.5.5.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Vernon374
has no status.

Registered User

Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 10
Novice (Lvl 1)

Reported

 

[Greenfield]

Sooooo...


The D&D 3.5 Rules Compendium isn't really D&D 3.5 because it includes D&D 3.5 errata that was freely available, but wasn't actually free in and of itself?

That makes sense. Not to me, but it makes sense.

 

[Dandu]

But the Rule's Compendium is available for free. At least that's how I got it.

 

[Greenfield]

So that means that it's 3.5 for some people, but not for the people silly enough to actually buy their books?

I can follow logic like that.

I'll probably follow it with raucous laughter, but I can follow it.

Seriously though, this does spell a certain amount of trouble for the most infamous Anti-Magic user out there, the Beholder.

Consider that his famed Antimagic eye effect is a 60 foot cone, starting in the squares right in front of him.

A spell caster more than 60 feet away throws a spell like Lightning Bolt (just to keep in line with our examples). The bolt leaps out on course, then vanishes as it enters the Antimagic cone's area, only to reappear when it leaves that area. Which is to say, right in the Beholder's square.

It limits him even further.

Normally the smart tactic for him is to use Anti-Magicon to dis-enchant the bulk of the party, then use his other eye-beams on the people beyond the edge of his cone (melee types, preferably). He can shift the cone round by round to make new targets available.

He can still do that, but he has to have some way of keeping people from backing beyond the central eye's range.

And two Beholders are actually weaker than one, since their main "weapon" protects its targets from the offensive beams of the other Beholder. They get in each others way.

 

[Nezkrul]

if you can lightning bolt the beholder through his antimagic cone, the beholder can eye ray your butt through his buddies antimagic cone, so long as you aren't standing in it.

 

[Greenfield]

Oh, absolutely.