Antimagic shell (I know, I know ...)

[Caliban]

Ah, thats what I thought, but the Dragon response seemed to indicate otherwise (ie AMF is a super Globe of Inv).
So it does block line of effect then?

Yup.

That makes a huge difference. Certainly a big enough difference to have been mentioned in the response. The more I think about his response, the more I wonder why he wrote it at all. Its just confusing and doesn't really seem to have a point.

Someone asked if you could cast spells within an AMF. He answered that question. (i.e. yes you can, but they are instantly suppressed.) They didn't ask about line of effect, so he didn't say anything about it.


Someone else asked about the line of effect thing earlier and he answered it then.

The Sage usually gives answers only to the specific question he was asked, he doesn't often go into detail about any other effects or considerations. I think it would be a good idea if he did, just to stop possible misinterpretations of his answers, but unfortunately he doesn't.

 

[Gromm]

He is normally very short as far as responses, though in the Dragon magazine write ups I've seen they usually voer explain everything, just odd that they didn't this time.
I don't actually have the issue myself, so I can't read the other questions or even really reference the older rulings that might apply.
At least things are back in line with the way I thought they were. It makes more sense that way anyway, for a number of reasons.

 

[Caliban]

He is normally very short as far as responses, though in the Dragon magazine write ups I've seen they usually voer explain everything, just odd that they didn't this time.
I don't actually have the issue myself, so I can't read the other questions or even really reference the older rulings that might apply.
At least things are back in line with the way I thought they were. It makes more sense that way anyway, for a number of reasons.

You can get the D&D FAQ, which has all the "official" Sage rulings for 3e from the WOTC website here:

http://www.wizards.com/dnd/article.asp?x=dnd/er/er20020524a

 

[JLXC]

You can cast all spells you want within a AMF, read the spell description.



The fly spell grants you a fly speed that is just a natural as having wings, read the fly spell.

And Boot of S&S is a magical item that grants a continious expeditious retreat spell on you, read the spell and the magic item description and compare.

Expeditious retreat spell doubles all normal movement, ie everything which listed as <movement type> speed, that includes the fly speed granted by the fly spell.



Read the rules, learn them, and wise up.



A bonus from a spell cannot stack with bonus granted from the same spell.



Yep, we figured you haven't read them, the rules that is.

Since you are wrong on every point, I guess I wont be offended.

 

[Magus_Jerel]

Someone asked if you could cast spells within an AMF. He answered that question. (i.e. yes you can, but they are instantly suppressed.) They didn't ask about line of effect, so he didn't say anything about it.


Someone else asked about the line of effect thing earlier and he answered it then.

The question was concerning wether or not it would be possible to cast a spell directly through and AMF. The Sage's answer was in the affirmative - as the spell would NOT be dispelled on contact with the AMF field.

Now, how in the WORLD it can "block line of effect" for spells cast inside the field, and not do so for spells cast outside the field - I haven't the faintest clue. Asking the sage to be both psychic and consistent in e-mail responces is one matter...

Asking him to do the same with His published replies is another. Considering that His published replies are not consistent with one another - I am forced to state that the Sage's "rulings" are more like guidelines. Furthermore, the sage has (on occasion) directly contradicted the core rules; and IIRC - he is supposed to explain them as is...

 

[AGGEMAM]

Now, how in the WORLD it can "block line of effect" for spells cast inside the field, and not do so for spells cast outside the field - I haven't the faintest clue. Asking the sage to be both psychic and consistent in e-mail responces is one matter...

Actually it blocks line of effect, just as a wall of force (or a regular wall) does, from within and through, read the (newly updated) FAQ.

 

[Caliban]

Actually it blocks line of effect, just as a wall of force (or a regular wall) does, from within and through, read the (newly updated) FAQ.

Just ignore him. That's what I do.

He spouts stuff like this all the time, and trying to use logic or reason with him doesn't accomplish anything. It just sets him up for a multi-page rant about how he's smarter than everyone else and we're all mean to him.

 

[Magus_Jerel]

Actually it blocks line of effect, just as a wall of force (or a regular wall) does, from within and through, read the (newly updated) FAQ.

Well - that statement is logically inconsistent with itself.


1. Wall of force can block line of effect because the wall of force does so "just like any other solid Barrier. The sage was quite clear on this.

2. AMF is MANIFESTLY not solid because you can - read the spell description - bring effects into or out of the barrier.

If "AMF blocks lines of effect just as a wall of force".

"A wall of force blocks blocks line of effect just like any other solid barrier"

Then - "AMF blocks lines of effect just like any other solid barrier".

is the logical conclusion.

"AMF blocks lines of effect just like any other solid barrier." is MANIFETSTLY impossible - due to the fact that AMF EXPLICITLY states that effects CAN AND DO enter and leave the field. The "as is" you are stating is QUITE impossible for that reason.

 

[AGGEMAM]

I agree with Caliban, now! I have lost the last respect I reserve for newbies with you. Goodbye.

 

[IceBear]

Yeah, I thought it was amazing that he makes that post after what Caliban said about his logic

IceBear