Casting Through Anti-Magic?

[Henry]

I decided after our last big blowout "how does antimagic field work" thread, that it would stop spells from being cast inside the field. MY reason? By that line of logic, you could have spellcasters snugly inside of an Anti-magic field casting horrid wiltings, implosions, power word kills, and all sorts of nasty spells that don't have a "line of sight" to them - outside of the field - and I was NOT prepared to deal with the implications of that. It would raise the spell to 9th level AT LEAST. It needs to be "all or nothing" inside that field; otherwise.... yeesh.

 

[Henry]

I decided after our last big blowout "how does antimagic field work" thread, that it would stop spells from being cast inside the field. MY reason? By that line of logic, you could have spellcasters snugly inside of an Anti-magic field casting horrid wiltings, implosions, power word kills, and all sorts of nasty spells that don't have a "line of sight" to them - outside of the field - and I was NOT prepared to deal with the implications of that. It would raise the spell to 9th level AT LEAST. It needs to be "nothing" inside that field; otherwise.... yeesh.

 

[Forrester]

I decided after our last big blowout "how does antimagic field work" thread, that it would stop spells from being cast inside the field. MY reason? By that line of logic, you could have spellcasters snugly inside of an Anti-magic field casting horrid wiltings, implosions, power word kills, and all sorts of nasty spells that don't have a "line of sight" to them - outside of the field - and I was NOT prepared to deal with the implications of that. It would raise the spell to 9th level AT LEAST. It needs to be "all or nothing" inside that field; otherwise.... yeesh.

It's "line of effect", not "line of sight" you need . . .
although, actually, for the spells you mention, the caster *does* need to target the opponents, and so "line of sight" is necessary as well.

And if you rule that "line of effect" is blocked by the AM Field, the problem goes away. At least, that problem -- the caster could still cast Haste or Time Stop or Stoneskin or Summon Monster IX or whatever, and have it start up immediately after dropping the AM Field.

 

[twjensen]

Clarification?

Here's what I decided for my group (since they're currently IN this situation):

- If a spell is cast through the Antimagic Field that has no duration (magic missile, fireball, etc) then it fails.

- If the spell does have a duration, that duration starts immediately, but the spell has no effect as long as the field is up. If the field comes down then the spell completes as if it were just cast, but its duration loses any elapsed time.

My group cuts through Beholders like butter, so I need to make things a LITTLE difficult for them

ControlFreak

I think that the caster would have to be outside the field when the spell was cast. Then the field could move in to suppress it, or move away and allow it to come back into effect. I agree with the post that said allowing wizards to cast while in an anti-magic field leads to a host of abuses.

 

[ControlFreak]

Re: Clarification?

I think that the caster would have to be outside the field when the spell was cast. Then the field could move in to suppress it, or move away and allow it to come back into effect. I agree with the post that said allowing wizards to cast while in an anti-magic field leads to a host of abuses.

I realize that it is being discussed here, but I always felt that it goes without saying that while in the field you cannot even begin to cast a spell.

Like I said earlier, the group has NO problem killing beholders. In the case they are in, 2 beholders are using their anti-magic fields to pretty much even the playing field, with 4 hired (not charmed) monsters protecting them with VERY good non-magical ranged attacks. The wizard, who is outside of the anti-magic cone, would like to summon an elemental in an area not covered by the cone, so as to force the beholders to turn the cone and allow the group to get into melee without getting shot up too much. That's the spell that I've now decided to stop.

ControlFreak

 

[The Sigil]

Just because...

Just because I like throwing new quirks at players, have you considered the following (to make them think a little harder about using the same tactics over and over)?

What about a mutant beholder whose AM ray is Enlarged... say to twice or thrice or ten times normal? The party spellflinger may *think* he's out of range, but... *evil grin*

Another fun one is to put the party and beholder(s) in a position where the beholders should have an easy time completely neutralizing all party magic (having the beholders swoop in while the party is on a narrow bridge over a chasm of lava comes to mind). A beholder on each side of the bridge, with AM rays overlapping so as to completely cover the bridge, with orcs/trolls/giants/hired thugs on either end of the bridge with bows, spears, and other goodies - especially fun if you use a Hill Giant with a few levels in Feral Ravager (from Librum Equitis, Hill Giants from the MM qualify as is) with the Lord of his Domain class ability (gained at level 2)... when making a successful AoO triggered by movement in his threatened area, can force his opponent back to the square he just left with a successful Str check (IOW, keeping the PCs on the bridge even if they really want off). And with his reach, the PCs may be in serious trouble.

Just a few thoughts from an admittedly evil DM...
"when a character asks for an even break, ask him 'arm or leg?' "

--The Sigil

 

[Saladrex]

Re: Line of Effect...

IOW: The spell can be surpressed at its launch point (AM at the caster) or its detonation point (AM at the target) but not between as it does not have to actually physically travel the intervening distance... it just appears there (like a good quantum mechanical particle).

Ok, so to clarify my thoughts:

I am a mage, I cast Project Image on 50' away, and then I cast Anti Magic Field. Can I still control my shadow?

 

[Magus_Jerel]

Good question -
Now - I will explain this under the core rules.

AMF does NOT block any "line of effect" - it is not a solid barrier. This means you can "fire through" - but not WITHIN an AMF.

Now - if an effect goes off around - or even "within" the AMF - it cannot affect anything within it, but it can affect anything outside it.

Example - An enemy sorcerer casts fireball directly at an enemy wizard with AMF functioning. The wizard's familiar is 15 feet away.

What happens?

The familiar is affected by the fireball - the wizard is not.


Why?

AMF suppresses all effects that come within the AMF - it does NOT dispel them. Remember this little fact. The sage has stated this repeatedly. AMF therefore "supresses" the "center" of the fireball - but not the edge of the blast. The familiar is 15 feet away - not inside the AMF. He is inside the burst area of the fireball spell. Like any other target that is less than 10 ft - but more than 20 feet away from the wizard/fireball point - the poor familiar is affected by the fireball.

AMF can only affect magic attempting to operate WITHIN its confines - not outside the confines of the field. This is NOT true of a "dead magic area" - if you are in the FRCS. If you attempt to cast thru such a field - your spell fails. It is GONE the moment it enters such an area - magic ceases to exist at the barrier.

Now - there is nothing that stops a spell or ability from coming into effect while the "target" is inside an AMF - but it does prevent it's functioning.

example:
A Vampire uses it's dominate ability against a character inside an AMF. What happens?

The ability takes effect, but is supressed - the "control" cannot be exercised until the AMF is gone - and the spell is unsupressed.


There is nothing which prevents you from concentrating on a spell either - but it would be highly problematic (if you take the AMF prevents spellcasting opinion) to actually cast a spell with AMF in place. Now, you are confronted with a potential paradox if you move into an AMF while concentrating - as you are forced to answer wether or not concentration is a "function" of that spell or not.


------------------ The Problem
Now - what IS ambiguous is what happens if a spell attempts to start inside an AMF.

To rule for it being cast - do the following:

A spell that is "supressed" at the moment of casting is not countered.
Precedent: Minor Globe of Invulnerability and globe of invulnerability.
As the magical effect is merely supressed - not dispelled or countered - then it works normally if and when it, or any part of it, leaves the area.

To rule against - read AMF as follows:
Likewise, it (AMF) prevents the functioning of any magic items or spells within it's confines.

It is a function of a spell to "be cast", in the same respect a magic item is activated. Therefore spells cannot be cast within AMF whatsoever. If a player attempts this - it simply "doesn't work". Use of any and all SLA's presently existing would be prevented by this wording. Supernatural abilities would require a "case by case" ruling.


I personally am inclined to rule FOR this - as ruling against it creates certain paradoxical situations.

1. What happens if I attempt to use a spell that is unaffected by AMF - such as wall of force - with this spell up?

2. Can I continue concentrating on a spell if I move into an AMF?

3. Can I exercise control over a spell already "in place" - such as a dominate spell placed on an opponent?

4. Can I exercise magical control granted to me by supernatural power - ie continue to command and control undead?

5. Can I concentrate on a spell with AMF in place upon myself?

....
Too many logic problems.

Is it abuseable in certain situations? probably. But - the wizard is without all his buff spells - and his toys... meaning that he makes nice archer bait if he uses this spell. Nice to let the fighter do something every now and then at high levels... yes?

Of course - there IS a a real "screw" that an abusive GM can use. Just pick up a monster with Damage reduction X/+1 or higher - and give it the ability to cast this spell. Supernatural abilities aren't necessarily supressed by AMF - gee... I guess DR is one of those that isn't...

For My own campaign - I have changed those abilities that would not be shut off by AMF tjhat ARE Supernatural to Extraordiary - and stated that Supernatural abilities are universally denied. Basically - a Su ability requires magic - an Ex one does not.

 

[Forrester]

Of course - there IS a a real "screw" that an abusive GM can use. Just pick up a monster with Damage reduction X/+1 or higher - and give it the ability to cast this spell. Supernatural abilities aren't necessarily supressed by AMF - gee... I guess DR is one of those that isn't...

For My own campaign - I have changed those abilities that would not be shut off by AMF tjhat ARE Supernatural to Extraordiary - and stated that Supernatural abilities are universally denied. Basically - a Su ability requires magic - an Ex one does not.

I vote "against", as I don't like the idea of a mage standing inside an AM Field blasting everything outside of it with fireballs. Way too powerful.

And why aren't ALL Supernatural abilities suppressed by AMF? What suggests that DR could *ever* work in an AMF?

 

[Magus_Jerel]

AMF description - sixth paragraph - last sentence.

These creatures' (undead, constructs) spell like or supernatural abilities may be temporarily be nullified by the field.

as in - some Su or SLA's might be, some might not be...

And - fine - he is standing inside a AMF field - great. That just means I can't use MAGIC to strike back. Who said I can't shoot him with a conventional bow? Remember - I don't have anything except my non-magical/non-supernatural/non SLA defenses.

In the case of the wizard - this is usually nothing but his agility. I am not wearing armor or using a shield - no magic at all. I am not likely to have taken the dodge feat either...

hmmm... 10+dex bonus for an ac? - at this high a level?

My odds of getting shot by the typical fighter type with level equal to mine are fairly high - like around 95%. The "perfect" defence always has an achilles heel. Now - I ask you, is there a wizard who doesn't keep a conventional projectile weapon on his person when adventuring? Is there a fighter who doesn't? Fine, I am immune to 99% of all spells - but am likely to get hit by 95% of arrows fired at me.

And this is too powerful... when just about every creature has access to conventional projectile weapons...

The wicked use of this spell is to center it on your familiar - and put your familiar on the shoulder of the party fighter - who then gets into melee with the spell slinging bad guy. Not only can the spell slinger not affect the guy charging him, but when the guy does get into melee - uh oh... no magic wards... SMACK - dead bad guy.