call lightning

[DreamChaser]

on topic:

the "logic" that dictates that call lightning is affects the caster could easily be applied to a huge range of spells that also do not affect the caster. Burning hands is a great example.

The spell does not grant the ability to shoot flames out of your hands; it actually causes flames to shoot out of your hands. This is an important distinction.

Command undead is an even better example (as it has a duration greater than instant). The spell description refers to giving you the ability to command undead creatures, but the commanding is the effect of the spell. In order to be shared, the effect of the spell would need to read "Casting this spell imbues you with a supernatural ability to control undead creatures." Additionally, the spell stats would need to be as follows:

Command Undead
Necromancy
...
...
Range: 0
Target: You
...
Saving Throw: none (or Will negates, see text)
<there would be no Spell Resistance entry because spells that you cast upon yourself ignore your SR>

There is a difference (a critical difference) between a spell that grants you an ability (Detect Magic) and a spell that simply does something (Call Lightning, Burning Hands, Wall of Fire, Etc), no matter how complex that "thing" is.

DC

 

[zeroorez]

I concede that call lightning cannot be shared with the companion

however given the points used aginst me i am forced to beleive that call lightning cannot be dispelled. and can still be used in an antimagic area provided the bolt comes down outside the antimagic area ie your ability to call down a bolt is not supressed by you being in an antimagic area

 

[Nifft]

I concede that call lightning cannot be shared with the companion

however given the points used aginst me i am forced to beleive that call lightning cannot be dispelled.

Agree.

and can still be used in an antimagic area provided the bolt comes down outside the antimagic area ie your ability to call down a bolt is not supressed by you being in an antimagic area

Disagree. You'd need line of sight and line of effect, and antimagic field blocks line of effect.

Cheers, -- N

 

[zeroorez]

Agree.

Disagree. You'd need line of sight and line of effect, and antimagic field blocks line of effect.

Cheers, -- N

its not lightning bolt it dosn't travel from me to my target in a strate line it comes down from some point in the sky thus if my target is not in the antimagic field i can hit them

 

[Nifft]

its not lightning bolt

True.

it dosn't travel from me to my target in a strate line it comes down from some point in the sky thus if my target is not in the antimagic field i can hit them

False. Example: wall of fire is not a lightning bolt, but you need a line of effect to each square you wish to affect. If you think a spell is special in not requiring line of effect, please use some rules quotes to back up your position.

Also, punctuation. Use it. It's there for your own protection.

Cheers, -- N

 

[Infiniti2000]

Disagree. You'd need line of sight and line of effect, and antimagic field blocks line of effect.

While I also personally rule AMF blocks line of effect, this is not, in fact, explicitly stated in the rules anywhere. The key text is really the following:

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. Likewise, it prevents the functioning of any magic items or spells within its confines.

An antimagic field suppresses any spell or magical effect used within, brought into, or cast into the area, but does not dispel it. Time spent within an antimagic field counts against the suppressed spell’s duration.

Note that calling lighting to strike outside the AMF would not conflict with the quoted rules above. Unless you can prove the line of effect rule within the rules (not the FAQ/RotG), call lightning might be possible.

 

[TYPO5478]

I concede that call lightning cannot be shared with the companion

however given the points used aginst me i am forced to beleive that call lightning cannot be dispelled.

Agree.

Sorry, I think I missed something. Why can't call lightning be affected by dispel magic?

 

[zeroorez]

Sorry, I think I missed something. Why can't call lightning be affected by dispel magic?

well it can be dispeled, if you can target it.
like if it is cast on the caster and you dispell on her then it whould be dispelled. but if it is cast on the caster then i say you can share it with you animal companion.
so the idea that its cast on the caster is out.
so where is it so that you can hit it with dispell.

also i cannot find any rules that block line of effect with antimagic, where can they be found?

 

[DreamChaser]

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

This is the key thing. Because any magical effect brought into a AMF is suppressed, there is a logical disconnect to explain how an instantaneous effect that travels in a line would be capable of traveling through one. I might concede (on a very long shot because I believe that "through" is a form of "cast into") that the rules would allow a lightning bolt to travel through an AMF to strike something on the other side (not affecting anything within the AMF) but under no circumstances could anything within the AMF be targeted by call lightning.

One might argue that because the "magic" is off somewhere in the "clouds" (thus the problem dispelling it) that AMF wouldn't affect it because it magic is elsewhere but this doesn't hold up to the spell resistance test. Because spell resistance is a defense against call lightning, it is clear that the intent was that the bolt itself is magical. Thus, it is suppressed by AMF.

DC

 

[DreamChaser]

also i cannot find any rules that block line of effect with antimagic, where can they be found?

as many things, this is a logical inference.

if a area spell reaches a space to which it does not have line of effect, it stops spreading in that direction. (this is obvious, you cannot cast a fireball in a hallway and have the fireball not affect the wall then skip to the parallel hallway and affect things there).

Prop 1: An area effect that reaches an area to which it lacks line of effect stops spreading in that direction.

AMF does not allow any magical effects to exist within it (with rare exceptions), thus a spreading fireball stops when it reaches the border of the effect.

Prop 2: AMF stops area effects from spreading

So combining these, for a area effect to continue on the other side of an AMF seems unlikely and strange because AMF appears to behave like anything else (a wall of glass for example) that blocks line of effect but not line of sight)

Conclusion: It can be inferred that AMF blocks line of effect.

This is inference, not deduction and is not 100% logically sound by nature (we are arguing from the specific to the general rather than the other way around) but within the Core RAW, this is what I found.

Perhaps there is more in Errata and FAQ land.

DC