Antimagic and Orbs

[Hypersmurf]

Fortunatly, Core Mechanics prevent this from happening. You occupy a 5x5 square, the AMF effects that square or not. To stick your hand out, you need to move into the next square in which you are no longer in the AMF.

This is the situation where the fighter activates his AMF item, and says "Nah, nah - wizard can't get me!"

The wizard, outside the AMF, proceeds to fling his Orb of Acid into the AMF, where it has its normal effect on the fighter. Or, alternatively, conjure a Wall of Iron on the fringe of the field, and let it topple onto the fighter.

Naturally, this only works until the fighter gets close enough so that the wizard is in the field. But if the wizard is flying, it's unlikely that the fighter (in a zone of antimagic) will be able to fly as well in order to catch him...

-Hyp.

 

[kerbarian]

Orb Spells: I think so.
Mass Cure: Nope, since it's targeted, and the AMF breaks line of effect.

Hmm... where does it say that AMF breaks line of effect? As far as I can tell, the only effect it has on spells is to suppress their effects.

It's not entirely clear as you say, and a point could be made, that there must be some magic involved in the transportation of the elemental or force material to keep it in shape and everything, though.

My preferred interpretation for this is based on the rest of the sentence from antimagic field (emphasis added): "The effects of instantaneous conjurations are not affected by an antimagic field because the conjuration itself is no longer in effect, only its result." While instantaneous conjuration spells are generally no longer in effect by the time an AMF would interact with what they've created, I'd say that's not true of either Orbs or healing spells. Healing spells are the clearer example -- no part of the effect happens outside of the AMF, so obviously the spell would have to be in effect at some point inside the AMF for anything to happen. Therefore, the clause about instantaneous conjurations doesn't apply to healing spells. I'd also argue that Orb spells are in effect for the entire flight path and impact of the Orb, even though that whole duration, by the rules, is instantaneous (just like firing an arrow is instantaneous). Which would mean that the Orb spells also don't benefit from the instantaneous conjuration clause.

No, you cannot cast spells in an antimagic field. Unless you are an initiate of Mystra, that is.

Any spell you cast while in an AMF would be suppressed, but I think you could still cast it. And if the AMF went away (dismissed, etc.), I believe any such spells would come into effect if their durations hadn't expired yet.

Also, I don't see any reason you couldn't cast a Wall of Force or Prismatic Wall/Sphere inside an AMF. There's nothing that explicitly prevents you from casting inside an AMF, and those spells (unlike most others) wouldn't be suppressed after they're cast.

 

[Hypersmurf]

I'd also argue that Orb spells are in effect for the entire flight path and impact of the Orb, even though that whole duration, by the rules, is instantaneous (just like firing an arrow is instantaneous). Which would mean that the Orb spells also don't benefit from the instantaneous conjuration clause.

Creation: A creation spell manipulates matter to create an object or creature in the place the spellcaster designates (subject to the limits noted above). If the spell has a duration other than instantaneous, magic holds the creation together, and when the spell ends, the conjured creature or object vanishes without a trace. If the spell has an instantaneous duration, the created object or creature is merely assembled through magic. It lasts indefinitely and does not depend on magic for its existence.

Once the Orb of Acid is assembled - at your palm - the conjuration's job is over. The Orb of Acid is no longer magical as it sails through the air.

I'm not sure how one can claim that a rule about the effects of instantaneous conjurations doesn't apply to the effect of an instantaneous conjuration...?

-Hyp.

 

[kerbarian]

Creation: A creation spell manipulates matter to create an object or creature in the place the spellcaster designates (subject to the limits noted above). If the spell has a duration other than instantaneous, magic holds the creation together, and when the spell ends, the conjured creature or object vanishes without a trace. If the spell has an instantaneous duration, the created object or creature is merely assembled through magic. It lasts indefinitely and does not depend on magic for its existence.

Once the Orb of Acid is assembled - at your palm - the conjuration's job is over. The Orb of Acid is no longer magical as it sails through the air.

I'm not sure how one can claim that a rule about the effects of instantaneous conjurations doesn't apply to the effect of an instantaneous conjuration...?

I'm saying that the rule about instantaneous conjurations only applies to some of them, due to its wording.

Orb spells are arguable, as I said, so let's stick to a simpler case first. Do you believe that mass cure spells can heal targets inside an AMF? If not, why not? They're instantaneous conjuration spells...

For Orb spells, I agree that the passage you quoted is relevant. Consider it with Arc of Lightning, though. If you go by the wording of that passage, the arc of lightning spell will leave a bolt of lightning hanging in the air indefinitely. Do you believe that's what happens according to the RAW? Do you believe that an arc of lightning can materialize inside the space covered by an AMF?

Also, if that rule applies to all instantaneous conjurations, what in the wording of AMF prevents the casting of Orb spells *out* of an AMF?

 

[Hypersmurf]

Do you believe that mass cure spells can heal targets inside an AMF? If not, why not? They're instantaneous conjuration spells...

They're instantaneous conjurations, but they are not instantaneous conjurations that have an effect (so the line about the effects of instantaneous conjurations is irrelevant), nor are they Creations (so the line from the Creation subschool is irrelevant).

The space within the barrier is impervious to spells, and prevents their functioning within its confines. If you cast a cure spell on a target inside the field, the spell will be attempting to come into effect inside the field, where it is prohibited from functioning. Compare the Orb, where the spell comes into effect outside the field.

For Orb spells, I agree that the passage you quoted is relevant. Consider it with Arc of Lightning, though. If you go by the wording of that passage, the arc of lightning spell will leave a bolt of lightning hanging in the air indefinitely. Do you believe that's what happens according to the RAW? Do you believe that an arc of lightning can materialize inside the space covered by an AMF?

I'm away from my books, and don't have access to Arc of Lightning's wording...

Also, if that rule applies to all instantaneous conjurations, what in the wording of AMF prevents the casting of Orb spells *out* of an AMF?

Because the AMF prevents the functioning of spells within its confines, so the conjuration cannot create its effect within that area. The Orb is assembled through magic; within the magic-free zone, that assembly cannot take place.

Same reason you can't create a Wall of Force inside the AMF. An existing WoF is unaffected by an AMF that approaches it, but the spell that evokes the Wall in the first place can't function within an already-existing AMF.

-Hyp.

 

[Fieari]

Actually, since wall of force is one of the exceptions called out in the spell description, there is a precedent for force effects persisting in an AMF.

Oh, sure, there's precedent for that. I was just saying that regardless of AMF, when you create the orb of magical force, after the instantaneous spell is over, that orb of magical force is no longer magical in any way, nor does it require magic to sustain it. It's a non-magical orb of magical force. Go figure.

 

[kerbarian]

They're instantaneous conjurations, but they are not instantaneous conjurations that have an effect (so the line about the effects of instantaneous conjurations is irrelevant), nor are they Creations (so the line from the Creation subschool is irrelevant).

AMF doesn't refer to creations -- that part's not an issue. So you're saying that the AMF exclusion is for instantaneous conjurations with an "Effect:" entry? WotC clearly uses "effect" in a general sense in at least some cases, but I could see the argument that AMF is referring to the "Effect:" line in spell descriptions.

The space within the barrier is impervious to spells, and prevents their functioning within its confines. If you cast a cure spell on a target inside the field, the spell will be attempting to come into effect inside the field, where it is prohibited from functioning. Compare the Orb, where the spell comes into effect outside the field.

Okay, so the idea is that the "effect" of an instantaneous conjuration is to create an "Effect:", and the "effect" would be suppressed but the "Effect:" wouldn't?

What I'm getting at is that AMF says that the "effects of instantaneous conjurations are not affected." How do you suppress a spell without affecting its effects? The answer could be (as I awkwardly described above) that the creation of an "Effect:" could be suppressed, but the "Effect:" itself can't be.

That requires some rather careful and specific interpretations of the words used, though. Is that what you meant?

It also requires that spells have some sort of pre-effect effect which seems sortof logical, but I don't see any support for it in the rules. Consider this case:

A cleric has an AMF up. A wizard casts a Summon Monster and attempts to summon the creature within the area of the AMF. Obviously the creature doesn't appear, but what happens when the cleric moves away? Does the summoned creature wink into existence? "An antimagic field suppresses any spell ... but does not dispel it." Based on that, I'd say the summoned creature does appear when the AMF moves away. Do you agree?

If that's the case, it means that the spell created its Effect, but the AMF suppressed it.

Now consider a Wizard with an AMF up who tries to cast an Orb out of the AMF. He successfully casts the spell, because nothing about an AMF prevents that. However, the AMF suppresses it. Except, what is there to suppress except the existence of the Orb? And an AMF doesn't suppress that, per the instantaneous conjuration rule.

Basically, what is there about an Orb spell to be suppressed that doesn't qualify as the effect of an instantaneous conjuration?

I'm away from my books, and don't have access to Arc of Lightning's wording...

It's an Area spell, rather than an Effect. So by your arguments, it could not materialize within an AMF. However, it is a Conjuration (Creation) spell with instantaneous duration. So do you think that the lightning would hang around indefinitely after the spell is cast?

Same reason you can't create a Wall of Force inside the AMF. An existing WoF is unaffected by an AMF that approaches it, but the spell that evokes the Wall in the first place can't function within an already-existing AMF.

This is similar to the case above for casting an Orb out of an AMF. What is there about the Wall of Force spell to be suppressed by AMF aside from the wall itself (which isn't affected by an AMF)?

 

[Hypersmurf]

Okay, so the idea is that the "effect" of an instantaneous conjuration is to create an "Effect:", and the "effect" would be suppressed but the "Effect:" wouldn't?

What I'm getting at is that AMF says that the "effects of instantaneous conjurations are not affected." How do you suppress a spell without affecting its effects? The answer could be (as I awkwardly described above) that the creation of an "Effect:" could be suppressed, but the "Effect:" itself can't be.

Spells do not function within the AMF. Producing the Effect (like One summoned creature, or An orb of acid) is part of the spell's function. In the case of the Orb, if that function is successfully concluded, the Effect (the orb of acid) exists and is nonmagical. But inside the AMF, that function cannot be concluded, because spells don't function.

So yes, the creation of the Effect within the AMF is impossible. But an instantaneous Effect created outside the field is unaffected if it enters the field. A non-instantaneous Effect is suppressed by the field.

Casting Orb of Acid inside the field doesn't result in a suppressed effect; the spell does not function, and the effect never exists to be suppressed. Casting Orb of Acid to conjure the orb outside the field works fine, and sending into the field is no problem - the instantaneous conjuration effect is not suppressed.

Casting Spiritual Weapon inside the field doesn't result in a suppressed effect, for the same reason. Casting Spiritual Weapon to evoke the weapon of force outside the field works fine... but sending it into the field will result in the (non-instantaneous, non-conjuration) effect being suppressed.

Creating a Wall of Force inside the field can't be done; the spell does not function, so the Wall is not evoked. Creating the Wall outside the field is fine, and if the field is subsequently maneuvered to contact the Wall, the Wall is unaffected per its description.

So do you think that the lightning would hang around indefinitely after the spell is cast?

It would hang around doing what non-magical lightning does.

A non-magical orb of acid will presumably seep into the ground. A non-magical orb of fire will gutter out for lack of fuel. A non-magical orb of electricity will ground out. A non-magical orb of force will, I would assume, sit there being impervious to just about everything and tripping up passing ethereal filchers.

-Hyp.

 

[DreamChaser]

A non-magical orb of force will, I would assume, sit there being impervious to just about everything and tripping up passing ethereal filchers.

-Hyp.

"Non-magical orb of force...a lovely oxymoron.

Which is why wall of force is permanent duration not instantaenous and has a specific exception to AMF. The idea of an "instant" orb of force is not absurd; the idea that said orb could be maintained in the absence of magic iIS absurd.

Of course so is the idea of an Orb of Cold (not Ice, Cold) or Orb of Sound. Cold, the absense of a thing, or sound being held in "orb" form and hurled is silly. Acid, fine. Fire, a stretch. The others, absolutely not.

These spells are blatent buff the conjurer spells and make no sense within the internal mechanics of the school or the few consistant premises of the D&D magic system.

I agree with someone above. One of the many reasons I don't allow the Orb spells in any of my games.

DC

 

[Hypersmurf]

Which is why wall of force is permanent duration not instantaenous...

If by 'permanent' you mean '1 round/level (D)', then I agree completely.

-Hyp.