D&D 5E "....as if you were concentrating on a spell"

[Flamestrike]

You're not getting my meaning. If the warlock can't summon the magic weapon he converted into his pact weapon, he can't create an alternative one when that extra dimensional connection is suppressed.

I agree. He loses access to the weapon and the class feature (effectively) as long as he remains in the AMF and it is stuck in the extradimensional space.

He leaves the AMF, and can then summon the weapon and re-enter the AMF though.

 

[Charlaquin]

The Pact weapon is not summoned or created by 'magic'.

That’s just silly. If it’s not created or summoned by magic, what’s it created or summoned by?

It would say it in the Pact Weapon class feature if it was.

I think you’re reading too much into prose text. It’s not a spell (and so isn’t affected by dispel magic) but it’s clearly a magical effect.

Its supernatural in nature for sure, but not 'magical' for the purposes of the game rules (it sticks around in an AMF).

I think you’re taking Crawford’s words way too literally here.

 

[billd91]

I think you’re taking Crawford’s words way too literally here.

Honestly, Crawford does kind of ask for it with that particular sage advice. Back in the days before 3e, we'd have probably just considered everything like this magic - spells, innate magical abilities, dragon's breath, etc. Then 3e made distinctions between supernatural, spell-like abilities, and extraordinary abilities. Now those distinctions are, as official definitions, gone yet we've been conditioned to expect that they still exist - and Crawford seems to approach the rules that way too, at least with Sage Advice.

 

[Flamestrike]

That’s just silly. If it’s not created or summoned by magic, what’s it created or summoned by?

The same supernatural stuff that allows dragons to exist, fly and breath lighting bolts, or allows Ghosts to exist and walk through walls, or allows Golems to wander around talking to people - none of which is magical.

Supernatural yes. Bot not magical for game rule purposes.

I think you’re reading too much into prose text. It’s not a spell (and so isn’t affected by dispel magic) but it’s clearly a magical effect.

No it is not a magical effect. The effect would say it if it was.

5E class features, abilities and so forth are only magical if they expressly say they are.

Hurl through Hell for example (literally hurling someone to Hell and back) is not 'magical' either, nor is a 14th level Dragon Sorcerer suddenly growing wings and flying away.

Supernatural yes. But not magical for game rule purposes.

I think you’re taking Crawford’s words way too literally here.

No, the Devs deliberately either include (or omit) the words 'magical, magically or magic' when describing game features. If one of those words is in the feature description (or it uses spell slots, is a spell or mirrors spellcasting) its magical. If the words 'magical, magically or magic' is not included in the feature, its not intended to be 'magical; for rules purposes (supernatural perhaps, but not magical).

You cant summon the weapon for other reasons in an AMF (probation on extradimensional travel). But it isnt magically summoned; the summoning is part of the supernatural background physcis of the game world, and not magical for rules purposes.

 

[Charlaquin]

Honestly, Crawford does kind of ask for it with that particular sage advice. Back in the days before 3e, we'd have probably just considered everything like this magic - spells, innate magical abilities, dragon's breath, etc. Then 3e made distinctions between supernatural, spell-like abilities, and extraordinary abilities. Now those distinctions are, as official definitions, gone yet we've been conditioned to expect that they still exist - and Crawford seems to approach the rules that way too, at least with Sage Advice.

I mean, I get it. A dragon’s breath is a natural phenomenon in the worlds of D&D, even though it would be impossible in real life. Because the worlds of D&D are fantastical places where things that would be impossible in real life are perfectly natural parts of the way these worlds work. The problem is, the guideline he gives for differentiating between what’s impossible-in-real-life-but-natural-in-D&D and what’s magical is “if the prose says its magical.” And that means, even if an effect was intended to be magical, if a writer forgot to include the word “magic” in its description somewhere, this heuristic would lead to an erroneous conclusion about whether or not it was magical, as I believe is the case here.

 

[Charlaquin]

The same supernatural stuff that allows dragons to exist, fly and breath lighting bolts, or allows Ghosts to exist and walk through walls, or allows Golems to wander around talking to people - none of which is magical.

None of that is magical because it’s part of the natural physics of the D&D cosmos. Creating physical objects from nothing or summoning them from other planes of existence, extradimensional spaces, or great physical distances, are not (which is why those things are explicitly prevented by the antimagic field spell.)

Supernatural yes. Bot not magical for game rule purposes.



No it is not a magical effect. The effect would say it if it was.

5E class features, abilities and so forth are only magical if they expressly say they are.

Hurl through Hell for example (literally hurling someone to Hell and back) is not 'magical' either, nor is a 14th level Dragon Sorcerer suddenly growing wings and flying away.

Supernatural yes. But not magical for game rule purposes.

Again, that’s a silly interpretation. A Dragon sorcerer growing wings is a natural (albeit impossible in real life) phenomenon. Teleporting something (or someone) to Baator is not, hence AMF stopping it.

No, the Devs deliberately either include (or omit) the words 'magical, magically or magic' when describing game features. If one of those words is in the feature description (or it uses spell slots, is a spell or mirrors spellcasting) its magical. If the words 'magical, magically or magic' is not included in the feature, its not intended to be 'magical; for rules purposes (supernatural perhaps, but not magical).

If you honestly believe that the writers both have such a rule in their style guides, and never forget to apply it, then you and I are never going to be able to agree about this matter.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Thanks for your reply.

Is an effect which lasts until you lose concentration by definition an effect that requires concentration?

Yes.

You have to concentrate, as if on a spell. That means the effect is the same as a spell for the purposes of concentration.

 

[Charlaquin]

So, after further investigation, I’ve revised my opinion. I still think creating or summoning your pact weapon is a magical effect, but it doesn’t actually matter, because it works in an antimagic field either way. From the text of Antimagic Field:

Spells and other magical effects, except those created by an artifact or a deity, are suppressed in the sphere and can't protrude into it.

The Pact Boon feature explicitly states that it is a gift from your patron, and therefore can reasonably be said to be a magical effect created by a deity, making it an exception to the effect of Antimagic Field.

This interpretation would mean chainlocks can summon their Familiars in an Antimagic Field, and the new Talisman pact boon functions in an Antimagic Field. An interesting question this reading raises is if the three cantrips contained in a Tomelock’s book of shadows are also considered “granted by their patron,” and if so, could they be cast in an Antimagic Field?

 

[Flamestrike]

None of that is magical because it’s part of the natural physics of the D&D cosmos. Creating physical objects from nothing or summoning them from other planes of existence, extradimensional spaces, or great physical distances, are not (which is why those things are explicitly prevented by the antimagic field spell.)

I have no problem with extradimensional summoning being prohibited in an AMF. Thats what the spell does.

But the extradimensional summoning of a Pact Weapon is not magical. It would say it if it were.

Supernatural for sure. But not magical.

Again, that’s a silly interpretation. A Dragon sorcerer growing wings is a natural (albeit impossible in real life) phenomenon. Teleporting something (or someone) to Baator is not, hence AMF stopping it.

No, Hurl through Hell (Fiend lock 14) is not blocked by an AMF on account of being magical because its not magical.

It's blocked by an AMF because its extradimensional travel, and the AMF blocks that as well as magic.

Its perfectly possible to travel to other planes not using magic. Ghosts for example do it all the time:

​

Etherealness: The ghost enters the Ethereal Plane from The Material Plane, or vice versa. It is visible on The Material Plane while it is in the Border Ethereal, and vice versa, yet it can't affect or be affected by anything on the other plane.​

​

The Ghost in travelling from the Material plane to the Ethereal plane (and back) does not register as magical to a Detect Magic spell. An effect that blocks magic would not block the Ghost from travelling to a different plane of existence using this ability because the ability is (expressly, by omission of the words 'magic, magically or magical') not magical.

Such travel would however be blocked by an AMF because that ALSO blocks even non magical dimensional travel or extradimensional spaces (like a Pact weapon being summoned, or a Ghost entering the ethereal plane from the material or vice versa).

If you honestly believe that the writers both have such a rule in their style guides, and never forget to apply it, then you and I are never going to be able to agree about this matter.

It is clearly in their style guides because its how rules language is expressed in 5E, as they clearly explain in Sage Advice.

I cant speak to whether they simply forgot to include it (and its thus a typo) in the Ghosts planar travel, or the Warlocks pact weapon class feature.

See also language like 'target you can see' which (among other things) has an interplay with invisibility, or the distinction between an 'attack with a melee weapon' and a 'melee weapon attack' (which are different things and have different rules implications, or even just what is an 'attack' and what isnt when that word is used.

The rule is unless the ability, item or effect expressly uses the words 'magical, magically, or magic' or uses spell slots to function, or mirrors a spell or spellcasting, it is not magical.

Supernatural, bizarre and extraordinary, but not magical for game rule purposes.

 

[Flamestrike]

So, after further investigation, I’ve revised my opinion. I still think creating or summoning your pact weapon is a magical effect, but it doesn’t actually matter, because it works in an antimagic field either way. From the text of Antimagic Field:

Summoning a Pact weapon is not magical. It doesn't say it is in its description, and by that omission (by RAW) it is not magical.

Spells and other magical effects, except those created by an artifact or a deity, are suppressed in the sphere and can't protrude into it.

The Pact Boon feature explicitly states that it is a gift from your patron, and therefore can reasonably be said to be a magical effect created by a deity, making it an exception to the effect of Antimagic Field.

By that reasoning all Warlock (and Cleric) class features are granted by a Deity (or other equivalent power), including Pact magic and Spellcasting.

Clerics and Warlocks rejoice!

This interpretation would mean chainlocks can summon their Familiars in an Antimagic Field, and the new Talisman pact boon functions in an Antimagic Field. An interesting question this reading raises is if the three cantrips contained in a Tomelock’s book of shadows are also considered “granted by their patron,” and if so, could they be cast in an Antimagic Field?

Your interpretation is wrong.

Familiars cant be summoned in an AMF because nothing can be (magical or otherwise).

Even a Deity cant permit a Ghost to materialise from the Ethereal plane to the Material plane in an AMF because the Ghost isn't using a 'Spell or other Magical effect' to appear in one, so the effect cant be overridden by the God.