Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Greenfield" data-source="post: 5956459" data-attributes="member: 6669384">Did you somehow miss my example of the Lightning Bolt, that the spell description specifically says would continue after the AMF?Look in the spell description itself...Ranged Touch attack roll is called for when targeting through a narrow opening, and unlike just about any other spell, this one can go off in the wrong spot if something intercepts the bead.Well, at least you admit to the circular logic.Tell me, would the written word of all the authors, collectively, qualify?&nbsp; That would, of course, be the rules as written, which specifically state that areas of effect which overlap the AMF aren't blocked or dispelled, but continue normally outside the AMF area.&nbsp; That isn't an interpretation nor any form of &quot;reading between the lines&quot;, it isn't a &quot;This is what they meant to say&quot; thing, it's right there in black and white.&nbsp; I've referred to that about a dozen times in the Lightning Bolt argument, and your only response has been to simply say that it doesn't.&nbsp; Did you know that the topic of Antimagic is discussed in two places?&nbsp; The spell description is one, obviously, but there is a separate section under &quot;Special Abilities&quot;.&nbsp; I have included this previously (I think), but in case I didn't I'll do so again:Perhaps that's why you missed it.&nbsp; And I hope I've provided some.Well, if the closed door were infinitely thin...&nbsp; But no, I never said you could cast through a solid object (except for that odd circumstance I described with an AMF covering a wall).&nbsp; I just said that cone and line effects start at the corner of the caster's square and begin their effect in the next square over.&nbsp; Not exactly controversial, since that's exactly what the rules say.&nbsp; And if that square isn't in the AMF then the spell should work normally.&nbsp; Again, not exactly controversial, since again it's what the rules say.Okay, I think I need to apologize for my demeanor in this conversation.&nbsp; I've been putting you down for disagreeing with me, and that's not right.&nbsp; I'll try to contain my sarcasm.&nbsp; I'm sorry, and I'll try to do better.That being said, being in an AMF is nothing like being on another plane.&nbsp; To start with, the AMF doesn't block line of sight, as you pointed out would happen with Etherealness.&nbsp; Whether or not it blocks LOE is, of course, what we're debating, and isn't a &quot;given&quot; for either side.&nbsp; Agreed, we're both free to run it as we see fit.Hopefully, by pointing out the second section discussing Anitimagic, I've shown you the &quot;written&quot; part of &quot;Rules as written&quot;.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Greenfield, post: 5956459, member: 6669384"] Did you somehow miss my example of the [I]Lightning Bolt[/I], that the spell description specifically says would continue after the AMF? Look in the spell description itself... Ranged Touch attack roll is called for when targeting through a narrow opening, and unlike just about any other spell, this one can go off in the wrong spot if something intercepts the bead. Well, at least you admit to the circular logic. Tell me, would the written word of all the authors, collectively, qualify? That would, of course, be the rules as written, which specifically state that areas of effect which overlap the AMF aren't blocked or dispelled, but continue normally outside the AMF area. That isn't an interpretation nor any form of "reading between the lines", it isn't a "This is what they meant to say" thing, it's right there in black and white. I've referred to that about a dozen times in the [I]Lightning Bolt[/I] argument, and your only response has been to simply say that it doesn't. Did you know that the topic of Antimagic is discussed in two places? The spell description is one, obviously, but there is a separate section under "Special Abilities". I have included this previously (I think), but in case I didn't I'll do so again: Perhaps that's why you missed it. And I hope I've provided some. Well, if the closed door were infinitely thin... But no, I never said you could cast through a solid object (except for that odd circumstance I described with an AMF covering a wall). I just said that cone and line effects start at the corner of the caster's square and begin their effect in the next square over. Not exactly controversial, since that's exactly what the rules say. And if that square isn't in the AMF then the spell should work normally. Again, not exactly controversial, since again it's what the rules say. Okay, I think I need to apologize for my demeanor in this conversation. I've been putting you down for disagreeing with me, and that's not right. I'll try to contain my sarcasm. I'm sorry, and I'll try to do better. That being said, being in an AMF is nothing like being on another plane. To start with, the AMF doesn't block line of sight, as you pointed out would happen with [I]Etherealness[/I]. Whether or not it blocks LOE is, of course, what we're debating, and isn't a "given" for either side. Agreed, we're both free to run it as we see fit. Hopefully, by pointing out the second section discussing Anitimagic, I've shown you the "written" part of "Rules as written". [/QUOTE]

Verification