Casting spells out of an antimagic field?

[Kandor]

One of my players has asked for a ruling on the possibility of casting spells from the center of his antimagic field. While my gut reaction was "No", after reading the spell description I am no longer certain. The player thinks that some spells, such as Charm Person or Ice Storm or Haste, should work if the targets are outside the antimagic field. Specifically, it is the line that only magical affects "used within, brought into, or cast into the" field seem to be suppressed.

Has anyone dealt with this already?

 

[DreamChaser]

One of my players has asked for a ruling on the possibility of casting spells from the center of his antimagic field. While my gut reaction was "No", after reading the spell description I am no longer certain. The player thinks that some spells, such as Charm Person or Ice Storm or Haste, should work if the targets are outside the antimagic field. Specifically, it is the line that only magical affects "used within, brought into, or cast into the" field seem to be suppressed.

Has anyone dealt with this already?

Your gut is right. A spell does not have line of effect through an antimagic field. No spell can be cast into, out from, or through one.

DC

 

[Merlion]

Well I've always thought that despite people going on about it, Antimagic Field is a pretty crappy spell for a wizard since although it protects you from all magic, it also neuters you.

I'd be inclined to allow some...maybe even all...spells to be cast out of it. Certainly direct targeting spells. Maybe not rays and the like that create effects that have to move through the shell.

 

[entr0py]

It'd work perty well as an attack spell to neutralize an enemy wizard -- if it could be a target'd spell that effects another.

hmmm.... time to research a new spell

 

[Merlion]

Well, that idea (neutralizing a spellcaster) is pretty much covered in Feeblemind...not that theres not room for variation.

 

[UltimaGabe]

Well I've always thought that despite people going on about it, Antimagic Field is a pretty crappy spell for a wizard since although it protects you from all magic, it also neuters you.

I'd be inclined to allow some...maybe even all...spells to be cast out of it. Certainly direct targeting spells. Maybe not rays and the like that create effects that have to move through the shell.

The spell would be far, far, far too powerful if that were the case. An enemy wizard could simply stand up on a high platform and cast spell after spell from behind a tower shield with absolutely no worry of retribution. The way it is, it's still quite a powerful spell- but it's got its drawbacks. Maybe you haven't had too many experiences with Antimagic fields, but the way it is, it's FAR too powerful to add in an incredible benefit like that.

One thing that most people don't realize, however, is that you can still cast spells while in the antimagic field, they just don't have line of effect. What this means is that you can still cast spells on yourself while in the Antimagic field, since you don't need line of effect to cast spells on yourself. So while you're chillin' in the middle, safe from enemy spells and magic projectiles, you can be buffing yourself up horribly. They won't take effect until you dismiss the antimagic field, of course (as they're all suppressed for the duration of the AF) but once you do, you'll become uber-wizard.

 

[Merlion]

The spell would be far, far, far too powerful if that were the case. An enemy wizard could simply stand up on a high platform and cast spell after spell from behind a tower shield with absolutely no worry of retribution. The way it is, it's still quite a powerful spell- but it's got its drawbacks. Maybe you haven't had too many experiences with Antimagic fields, but the way it is, it's FAR too powerful to add in an incredible benefit like that.

Be that as it may, as it is to me it still seems near useless for a 6th level spell, since it makes you totally unable to affect enemies. Which means that if some big brutish thing that doesnt depend on spells or magical equipment happens along, your toast.


I'd rather have a Globe of Invulnerability myself.

One thing that most people don't realize, however, is that you can still cast spells while in the antimagic field, they just don't have line of effect. What this means is that you can still cast spells on yourself while in the Antimagic field, since you don't need line of effect to cast spells on yourself. So while you're chillin' in the middle, safe from enemy spells and magic projectiles, you can be buffing yourself up horribly. They won't take effect until you dismiss the antimagic field, of course (as they're all suppressed for the duration of the AF) but once you do, you'll become uber-wizard

See thats totally illogical to me. Its an antimagic field...an area that magic doesnt function within. So...you cant cast spells out of it....into the normal area where magic still functions...but you can cast spells on yourself, inside the area where magic no longer functions. Even if they are immediately supressed...it still seems very, very strange. And like a very minimal overall benefit for a 6th level spell, especially since a wizard's self buffing capabilities are really somewhat limited. using a 6th level spell to raise a very limited defense, so you can raise more defenses? Make yourself immune to the enemy wizard's spells so you can cast...what? Stoneskin? Mage Armor? Spell Turning, ok...but why not just cast that in the first place?

Seems like Sanctuary would be just about as helpful.

 

[UltimaGabe]

See thats totally illogical to me. Its an antimagic field...an area that magic doesnt function within. So...you cant cast spells out of it....into the normal area where magic still functions...but you can cast spells on yourself, inside the area where magic no longer functions. Even if they are immediately supressed...it still seems very, very strange.

I didn't say it was logical, I'm just saying that it's possible.

Anyway, you may not feel that it's that great of a 6th-level spell, but the majority of the other DMs do (or it probably would have come up a bit more often). You can make any rulings you wish, but I advise against them. Just, out of curiosity, how much have you used the antimagic field spell in actual gameplay?

 

[Lord Pendragon]

Be that as it may, as it is to me it still seems near useless for a 6th level spell, since it makes you totally unable to affect enemies. Which means that if some big brutish thing that doesnt depend on spells or magical equipment happens along, your toast.

I've never thought of Antimagic Field as a defensive spell for wizards, but rather as an offensive spell against wizards. You cast it on your fighter buddy, and send him after the enemy mage. If he gets to the mage before the mage can TP away, that mage is in serious trouble. And there's very little the enemy mage can do to stop the fighter at that point. The Antimagic Field protects the fighter against anything the mage can throw at him. So that mage had better start thinking fast.

Seems perfectly reasonable for a 6th-level spell.

 

[Lord Pendragon]

Well, that idea (neutralizing a spellcaster) is pretty much covered in Feeblemind...not that theres not room for variation.

Feeblemind allows both Spell Resistance and a save (albeit at a penalty for arcane casters.) Cast an Antimagic Field on the fighter and send him after the mage, and neither SR nor saving throws apply.