call lightning

[Nifft]

you have not proved that the line of effect is magic

^ Read what DreamChaser wrote above, it's good sense. The line of effect for a spell must be a path that the spell can travel. If your Blindsense were a (Su)pernatural ability, it likewise would be blocked by an AMF. If your Blindsense relies on sound, it would be blocked by anything that blocks sound.

so if any thing we might be able to say that the line of effect needed for call lightning is for targeting and should then be blocked like line of sight. but that could alos be reading to much in to the spell because a caster who was blind should still be able to call bolts down within the range of the spell.

The section on spell targeting & line of effect should clear this up for you.

Targeted spells need line of sight and line of effect -- you can't cast dominate person on a 5 ft. square and hope there's a person there. Area effect spells only need line of effect. You can cast a fireball at a point in space, even if you can't see it.

"using a spell in antimagic field."
if the spell is contained by the field then you cant use it.
but call lightning "the spell" is out side the field so it can still be used.
and the effect that it creates is outside the field thus it can still happen.

That's half right. You cannot use a spell if either:
- the spell is in the AMF; or
- you are in the AMF.

Since AMF says nothing about preventing the casting of spells (only about "using" them), your interpretation would allow someone inside an AMF to cast spells outside it. This cannot be a good thing.

on a side question
control winds would you say that the wind speed in the antimagic field would be normal and not be the force specified by the caster? for this question i am just courious and it has nothing to do with the call lightning topic in fact we can say that the caster is not in an antimagic field.

Sure, AMF would cancel wind speed change, but the caster could do that anyway -- see the bit about creating an area of calm in the center of the spell. However, AMF would then restrict the caster from using control winds to further alter wind speeds.

It's a bit silly if you think about it at all... but at the end of the day, it's a fantasy game mechanic, not a fluid dynamics simulation.

Cheers, -- N

 

[IanB]

"The antiplant shell spell creates an invisible, mobile barrier that keeps all creatures within the shell protected from attacks by plant creatures or animated plants. As with many abjuration spells, forcing the barrier against creatures that the spell keeps at bay strains and collapses the field. "

Does antiplant shell block LOE?

 

[Nifft]

Does antiplant shell block LOE?

Is your effect a plant?

-- N

 

[IanB]

Is your effect a plant?

-- N

(Note I don't actually have a horse in this race, I'm just tossing out things to think about, hopefully helpfully.)

If you are in an AMF, can you direct the actions of a summoned creature?

 

[Nifft]

(Note I don't actually have a horse in this race, I'm just tossing out things to think about, hopefully helpfully.)

If you are in an AMF, can you direct the actions of a summoned creature?

Do read DreamChaser's post (previous page) about LoE.

Sure, so long as you're directing it without using any spell. Some summoning spells give you a telepathic connection to your critter -- you can't use that part. You can verbally communicate as usual, assuming you have a language in common.

One question I can't answer solidly: critter A has tongues cast on it; critter B is in an AMF. Critter B starts talking in a language A doesn't normally speak. Can A understand B? I think yes, but it's vexing.

Cheers, -- N

 

[IanB]

Do read DreamChaser's post (previous page) about LoE.

Sure, so long as you're directing it without using any spell. Some summoning spells give you a telepathic connection to your critter -- you can't use that part. You can verbally communicate as usual, assuming you have a language in common.

One question I can't answer solidly: critter A has tongues cast on it; critter B is in an AMF. Critter B starts talking in a language A doesn't normally speak. Can A understand B? I think yes, but it's vexing.

Cheers, -- N

Hm. Final question then - we know that calling down a lightning bolt with call lightning requires the typical "concentrate on a spell" standard action. Does an AMF prevent a caster from maintaining a concentration spell? If not, the call lightning action would seem to have a potential loophole, since the only action it requires is the 'concentrate on a spell' action (assuming I'm reading it right from the SRD.)

Directing a flaming sphere isn't even that specific - it is just a move action. Do we have any basis for assuming that directing a flaming sphere isn't simply a matter of pointing and saying "hey flaming sphere, roll over there now"? Kind of like giving an order to a summoned creature with a shared language?

 

[Nifft]

Hm. Final question then - we know that calling down a lightning bolt with call lightning requires the typical "concentrate on a spell" standard action. Does an AMF prevent a caster from maintaining a concentration spell? If not, the call lightning action would seem to have a potential loophole, since the only action it requires is the 'concentrate on a spell' action (assuming I'm reading it right from the SRD.)

Directing a flaming sphere isn't even that specific - it is just a move action. Do we have any basis for assuming that directing a flaming sphere isn't simply a matter of pointing and saying "hey flaming sphere, roll over there now"? Kind of like giving an order to a summoned creature with a shared language?

Concentrating? Of course you can do that in an AMF.

Using a spell (in any way)? No. You cannot do that.

So you cannot direct a flaming sphere -- it's not a creature able to take action on its own, it's purely the effect of a spell. You cannot maintain concentration on a spell, because you can concentrate, but not in any way that uses a spell. (You could make a Concentration check to avoid an AoO, for example, if you wanted to use a skill that would normally provoke an AoO.)

If I recall correctly, Hypersmurf's rule-of-thumb for things that are part of the spell is: if it's described in the spell text, it's part of the spell. So you could Empower the damage from a flaming sphere, but not the damage of an attack from a summoned Lantern Archon.

Similarly, a summoned Lantern Archon could act as directed despite its summoner retreating into an AMF, so long as your form of communication isn't part of the spell; but the only way to direct a flaming sphere is as described in the spell text, and thus you lose access to it while in an AMF.

Does that make sense?

Cheers, -- N

 

[zeroorez]

i still can agree with the line of effect silence dosnt suppress sound it states that no noise whatsoever issues from, enters, or passes through the area.

antimagic dosnt say anything like that only that in the area magic is suppressed. so line of effect assuming it is magical is not blocked, not stopped, not prevented from entering, not slowed, not disspelled, not negated only suppressed until it exits.




again on the side i think you did not understand what i was doing but you did answer the question still. i ment that the druid controled winds and some where in the large AOE was a mage in an AMF for protection not that a druid would use AMF to protect themselves
but agian thats all on control winds

 

[Nifft]

i still can agree with the line of effect silence dosnt suppress sound it states that no noise whatsoever issues from, enters, or passes through the area.

"An invisible barrier surrounds you and moves with you. The space within this barrier is impervious to most magical effects, including spells, spell-like abilities, and supernatural abilities."

My reading is that an impervious barrier against X prevents X from passing inside it. If you can't pass inside, you can't travel through. The use of the word "barrier" in the LoE description makes this more evident.

antimagic dosnt say anything like that only that in the area magic is suppressed. so line of effect assuming it is magical is not blocked, not stopped, not prevented from entering, not slowed, not disspelled, not negated only suppressed until it exits.

Suppressed only applies to spells and magical effects "used within, brought into, or cast into the area".

Since it's already an "impervious barrier" in the first paragraph, why does the second paragraph go on to describe a weaker effect? Because the AMF is mobile.

If the AMF's caster moves such that the AMF covers the origin point of a silence spell, for example, the entire silence spell is suppressed.

again on the side i think you did not understand what i was doing but you did answer the question still. i ment that the druid controled winds and some where in the large AOE was a mage in an AMF for protection not that a druid would use AMF to protect themselves but agian thats all on control winds[/I]

Ah, gotcha. Yeah, the area around the mage would be excluded from the area of the control winds spell, so the wind speed would be whatever it would normally be.

Cheers, -- N

 

[Falling Icicle]

I think you guys are making this argument alot more complicated than it needs to be.

"An antimagic field suppresses any spell or magical effect used within, brought into, or cast into the area, but does not dispel it."

Directing a call lightning spell to zap someone should certainly count as "using" it.