Argh, more Sage trouble

[AGGEMAM]

Unfortunately, he did say that! (FAQ p. 41)

Yes, but since he also said that AMF blocks line of effect it effectively limits the spells you can cast in an AMF to touch or personal spells.

 

[hong]

Unfortunately, he did say that! (FAQ p. 41)

The elided bits in your quote might be enlightening, in this case. Here is the full text of that Q&A:

Does antimagic field actually prevent the casting of a spell
from within the field? That is, does the spell automatically
fail, and is it wasted?

No. An antimagic field suppresses magic used within,
brought into, or cast into its area, but it does not dispel it (see
the second paragraph of the spell description).

In context, it seems clear that the "no" is a response to the second part of the question, namely whether the spell automatically fails. This is not the case, since spells with range touch or personal can still be cast. Hence "no".

 

[Caliban]

But the spells are simply suppressed, right?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but you could cast Bull's Str on your self and as soon as you step out from the AMF you would received the benefit.

g!

You would be able to cast Bull Strength while within the AMF, but it would be instantly suppressed before you could touch yourself to deliver the spell.

You are effectively forced to "hold the charge" until you get outside the AMF and then you could touch yourself and get the bull strength.

Personal spells would be cast normally, and then instantly suppressed.

 

[dcollins]

In context, it seems clear that the "no" is a response to the second part of the question, namely whether the spell automatically fails.

The normal reader would have to conclude that, since there is only one answer given (and not broken up addressing separate parts) that the "no" is applicable to both questions.

You've probably seen this other thread on the issue, where the vast majority of readers took this statement to mean that casting spells out of an AMF was allowed: http://test.cyberstreet.com/showthread.php?threadid=13065

My criticism is that the Sage should have just written "You cannot cast spells out of an antimagic field" if that was the intent. More to the point, it would have been far simpler to just assert that casting was entirely banned than to create another convoluted point of confusion for everyone.

 

[hong]

The normal reader would have to conclude that, since there is only one answer given (and not broken up addressing separate parts) that the "no" is applicable to both questions.

Hmm. I know that when I answer complex questions with multiple clauses, my instinct is to respond to the last clause first. Clarifications go after that. The Sage seems to be doing the same thing here; I didn't have any trouble reconciling his "no" with his other responses.

Obviously at least one of us is not normal.

 

[AGGEMAM]

Obviously at least one of us is not normal.

Take a wild guess who we think that is.

If he said: 'you cannot cast spell out of a AMF' then he would be entirely precise, would he?

Because there could be, I don't know any but there could be, spells that has a personal range and a area of effect that extended beyond the AMF and did not need line of effect.

He is taking into account that future spells could have that property.

 

[hong]

Take a wild guess who we think that is.

I am NOT Abby Normal!

 

[AGGEMAM]

I am NOT Abby Normal

Oh ... I wasn't thinking of you ... blah

Btw, check my reply to you in the PHB 2 thread.

 

[hong]

Btw, check my reply to you in the PHB 2 thread.

Oh, yeah, saw it. Of all the topics to hijack a thread with, beer has to be the best.

There is a microbrewery in Victoria that I went to once. They brew a beer called "Moonshine", which is 12% alcohol. Not exactly the best tasting stuff around, but it had a kick.

Note that this is the weak stuff. They also brew something called "Supershine", which is 15% alcohol.

 

[Magus_Jerel]

You've probably seen this other thread on the issue, where the vast majority of readers took this statement to mean that casting spells out of an AMF was allowed: http://test.cyberstreet.com/showthr...?threadid=13065

My criticism is that the Sage should have just written "You cannot cast spells out of an antimagic field" if that was the intent. More to the point, it would have been far simpler to just assert that casting was entirely banned than to create another convoluted point of confusion for everyone.

The "AMF breaks line of effect" statement within directly contradicts present core rules concerning lines of effect. This becomes particularly important when dealing with another spell as well - wall of force.

Wall of force "blocks line of effect" just like any other solid (albeit invisible and transparent) barrier.

AMF is by NO means solid with respect to magic; as effects can go in and out of it.