Antimagic and Orbs

[DreamChaser]

Phase Door? Unseen Servant? Sepia Snake Sigil?

-Hyp.

Good points. I did not actually re-read every single conjuration spell. I referenced primarily the one's you had listed.

The first in theory creates a "passage" through the ether but as the XPH demonstrated Teleportation and other travel spell spell do not actually fit well into the schools as they are currently defined (Psychoportation being the single discipline without an equivalent school).

The second, by all rights could easily be evocation. It creates basically a localized telekinesis effect that can carry out commands. It is another awkward one. If the spell described the thing created as a thing, rather than the proverbial invisible intangible turtle (I trip on that thing all the time...wait, i'm just clumsy), I would be cool with Conj (Creation).

SSS creates a sigil. This one fits the school better than the others. Unfortunately, it then goes on to do something so painfully abjuration or evocation that it renders the first part irrelevant.

On many levels, 3.x made Conjuration what Transmutation has always been in the past: the dump school.

Dev 1: "How does this spell work? What school is it?"
Dev 2: "It does a bunch of stuff...hard to say."
Dev from 2ed: "I must be transmutation. The spell changes the target from a healthy state to a hurt one."
Dev from 3ed: "No it is a conjuration. Because things are moving and I called them things and conjuration conjures things. so it must be conjuration."

DC

 

[Hypersmurf]

No, because they create permanent effects (that are non-magical) as opposed to permanent objects or creatures.

What are the hardness and hit points of the water from Create Water? Of the small orb of acid from Acid Splash?

Which are they... permanent objects, or permanent creatures?

-Hyp.

 

[Hypersmurf]

On many levels, 3.x made Conjuration what Transmutation has always been in the past: the dump school.

So, based on the established precedent of the Core rules, the Orb spells are not out of place.

-Hyp.

 

[DreamChaser]

So, based on the established precedent of the Core rules, the Orb spells are not out of place.

-Hyp.

Yes. I am actually arguing that the violation of the precedent occured with Acid Arrow and Acid Splash. Precedent is not rule. It is precedent. The magic chapter outlines the "rules" of magic. The spells chapter goes on to violate those rules.

DC

 

[schporto]

First I do want to thank everyone. Most folks have strong opinions about these spells, and I know they are irksome to discuss. I'll also get on the bandwagon of - don't like 'em. My reason is that there is very little in the way of defense against them. Increase your touch attack. That's it. And most things don't have a good touch attack, and relatively speaking, these provide a much bigger bang for the buck. Shrug.
I think the designers when they were making these went something like:
1. Conjuration is a fairly weak school. They need a good direct attak spell besides acid arrow.
2. We'll make acid arrow more powerful. Push it up to 4th. More damage. No SR. Yeah but Acid arrow sucks over rounds so make it instantaneous.
3. And hey someone made a feat 'Energy Substitution', we might as well apply that to make more spells.
4. Profit!

I think at the end I'm gonna go with:
1. You cannot cast spells while within an AMF (answered early, but recapping).
2. You can cast any orb spell into an AMF without problems. Because the orbs are concentrated energy that is released on impact. I'm thinking like a water baloon here. Magic provides the initial propulsion, but nothing else in terms of flight.

My reasoning is that this is closest to the RAW. Most of the arguements against this have seemed to have needed some house ruling or changing of the Orb spells.
Thanks again.
-cpd

 

[Hypersmurf]

Yes. I am actually arguing that the violation of the precedent occured with Acid Arrow and Acid Splash. Precedent is not rule. It is precedent.

If I create a new spell, 'Plant Suggestion', which allows me to suggest a course of activity to a plant creature (which it must undertake to the best of its ability), what school should it be?

The magic chapter outlines the "rules" of magic. The spells chapter goes on to violate those rules.

The magic chapter tells us "Transmutation spells change the properties of some creature, thing, or condition."

Does Animal Growth violate those rules, since it can change the properties of multiple creatures? That's not catered for in the school description.

-Hyp.

 

[KarinsDad]

Absolutely. If the spells occur within the field.

But the effects of those spells?

If I Create Water outside the field (so the spell is not stopped), and then throw that water into the field, does the field do anything to the water? No; the water is the effect of an instantaneous Creation spell.

If I create an Orb of Acid outside the field (so the spell is not stopped), and that orb travels into the field, does the field do anything to the orb? No; the orb is the effect of an instantaneous Creation spell.

You cannot have it both ways.

Water is non-cohesive. Splash damage for water and acid is 5 feet.

So, the instant an Acid Orb hits air, it too (being a water effect) should immediately dissipate at splash rate. It should hit multiple targets, not a single one.

Instead, the Orb spell maintains the cohesiveness of the Acid until it reaches its target (by using magic to do so). Hence, it is magic. And it is magic during the entire "instantaneous" effect.

Ditto for a Fire Orb. The instant it is created, it should dissipate according to the "laws of physics" unless the laws of magic prevent it. You cannot swing a torch or flaming sword and fling the fire from it 30 feet, hence, you cannot do this with a 3 inch orb of fire UNLESS magic maintains the cohesiveness of the orb.


You are claiming that it is no longer magical and then are also claiming that these non-solid (often liquid or gases or even magical) effects can avoid the natural properties of these types of effects. But, this is a descrepency.


On the other hand, adjudicating that it is magic, instantaneous magic (i.e. the effect for all intents and purposes gets created by magic, propelled by magic instanteously to its target, and then damages the target) resolves the spash rules issue and breaks the how these effects work in the game issues.

This type of adjudication especially handles Orb of Force. It is magical energy and magic keeps it together.


You are using the Conjuration rule which obviously was not even looked at when the Orb spells were created to give the Orbs properties that they should not have.

Either they are magic, or they are not. If not, they would not work according to the rest of the rules concerning natural effects of this nature. If so, they do not penetrate AMF.


Granted, if the Orb spells stated that these effects were created in little glass orbs, then your adjudication would make some amount of sense. But, using RAW to create nonsensical effects (like the Orbs sticking around forever, being non-magical, and ignoring how these effects interact with their environment) is silly.

 

[Hypersmurf]

So, the instant an Acid Orb hits air, it too (being a water effect) should immediately dissipate at splash rate. It should hit multiple targets, not a single one.

Splash damage occurs on impact...?

As for Acid Orb, it's apparently not big enough (three inches?) to have a splash radius...

-Hyp.

 

[KarinsDad]

Splash damage occurs on impact...?

Impact and breaking of a container (i.e. a flask). No container, no impact. You cannot throw a handful of acid (or fire or even oil) 30+ feet (and having it hit a single target and only a single target) in my game without using magic or a container.

Can you do that in your game?

As for Acid Orb, it's apparently not big enough (three inches?) to have a splash radius...

Apparently.


The point is that if it is not big enough to do splash damage, it is also not big enough to maintain its cohesiveness without either a container (such as oil and acid flasks have) or magic in order to be propelled 30 feet.

You are effectively claiming that it has neither of these, but it can still be propelled without interacting with its environment.

That's a dichotomy. And it's a dichotomy created by the Conjuration School of Magic rules where the designers obviously did not follow those rules when they created the Orb spells. Hence, those rules should not be followed when adjudicating the Orb spells (i.e. the spells are magic just like other spells and the orbs do not last indefintely).


PS. I resolved the entire issue in my campaign by giving the Orb spells SR and stating that they are magical for their entire instantaneous (i.e. short term) existance. Hence, no getting past Antimagic fields or Globes of Invulnerability, no more powerful (basically across the board) than single target Evocation spells, no damaging of Golems, no indefinite existance, etc. Virtually all of the problems with these spells basically go away just by making them totally magical and giving them Spell Resistance.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Impact and breaking of a container (i.e. a flask). No container, no impact. You cannot throw a handful of acid (or fire or even oil) 30+ feet (and having it hit a single target and only a single target) in my game without using magic or a container.

Can you do that in your game?

If the acid comes from an Orb of Acid spell? Apparently

What if it's acid that's 'gummy' enough to maintain that cohesion?

-Hyp.