Really permament?

[silentspace]

i think hyp's point is that permanency, as written, has a duration of permanent. if it had a duration of instantaneous, then yes, it would work.

 

[the Jester]

This thread is awesome and has made me realize some things about permanency that I had not, previously, realized (such as the two dispel check bit). As I run an epic game, this is relevent awful often. Thank you, guys- even apart from the OP.

As to the question of non-epic things like this, I seem to recall seeing a prestige class that could use a similar ability, but I think it was a homebrew that I saw on the internet somewhere. Other than that, I can't recall a non-epic version of it.

Finally, I'll add- I think a non-epic version of Tenacious Magic would probably be broken. I remember being uneasy about that prc.

 

[Artoomis]

i think hyp's point is that permanency, as written, has a duration of permanent. if it had a duration of instantaneous, then yes, it would work.

But the feat effectively makes it instananeous.

Bottom line: Not covered by the rules, per se. Interpretation required.

Seeking precision here is not the way to go. AS I state in my signature, "...There can be more than one right answer to a rules question! It can be an exercise in futility to attempt to apply a great deal of precision to an imprecise set of rules. "

 

[Hypersmurf]

It's like your example of fly; when you are in the antimagic field you can't fly; your ability to fly is tied to the effectiveness of the spell. But when the spell resumes functioning, your ability to fly comes back. Why should the analogous thing not happen when it is a spell which is tied to the effectiveness of permanency?

Let's say you summon a Celestial Badger, and cast Tenacious Fly on him.

The badger can fly.

Someone casts Dispel Magic on the Tenacious Fly spell, suppressing it for 4 rounds. The badger can't fly.

The duration of Summon Monster expires, and the Celestial Badger vanishes.

The suppression ends, and the Fly spell is no longer suppressed. But its target is gone. What happens to the Fly spell?

-Hyp.

 

[Hypersmurf]

But the feat effectively makes it instananeous.

If it were instantaneous, it couldn't be suppressed...

-Hyp.

 

[silentspace]

If it were instantaneous, it couldn't be suppressed...

-Hyp.

good point. which would render the proposed feat useless

 

[Sledge]

What happens if the fly ISN'T suppressed? Does the badger retain any buffs after returning to whence it came? Tenacious isn't the question in the flying badger situation.

The question here is whether permanency can be dispelled/suppressed separately from what it makes permanent... if it can then dispelling/suppressing permanency would not affect the original spell if so targetted. In this case the duration would then temporarily revert to the original duration. However since the permanency changed the duration the spell would not have run out of time. Only the 2 rounds while casting permanency would have expired. Assuming the spell remains in duration for the remaining 1d4 suppressed rounds then the permanency would kick in again before it disappears.
This possibility is somewhat moot however, because if the spells are separated then the spell made permanent would be the most likely target. This results in that spell actually ending since it isn't Tenacious. Only permanency is tenacious.

The other option is that casting permanency changes the spell into "permanent Read Magic". In this case the permanency itself isn't targetted because it isn't a valid target, and the spell made permanent is not tenacious. So again this is usually pointless. Tenacious permanency is useless.

However if the Fly spell is tenacious and permanency cannot be dispelled separately then dispelling it would result in its returning shortly. If the permanency is a viable target by itself then the tenacious spell would lose its permanency because the permanency itself is no longer tenacious.

 

[kerbarian]

"This spell makes certain other spells permanent."

And Permanency itself has a duration of Permanent; the change to the original spell is not instantaneous, but lasts as long as Permanency is in effect.

If Permanency ceases to be in effect, then the change it made to the original spell (making that spell permanent) no longer applies; that spell is no longer permanent.

I think that if you follow this line of reasoning, an antimagic field will kill all spells made permanent via permanency. In an antimagic field, permanency is suppressed (meaning the other spell reverts to its original duration). Time spent in an antimagic field counts against a spell's duration, so presumably suppressed spells can also expire inside an AMF. The spell made permanent by permanency would (in general) be long past its original duration and thus would expire immediately. I suppose you could argue that a spell that expires inside an AMF doesn't actually "switch off" until it's unsuppressed, but I don't see any support for that in the rules...

Your argument seems pretty reasonable, but it would make permanency significantly more vulnerable than it already is.

 

[Hypersmurf]

What happens if the fly ISN'T suppressed? Does the badger retain any buffs after returning to whence it came? Tenacious isn't the question in the flying badger situation.

Substitute a Shadow Conjuration Celestial Badger or a Mordenkainen's Faithful Hound, if you like, so we avoid the "brought from somewhere else" problem - they're indisputably gone when the duration expires, not just elsewhere

The question here is whether permanency can be dispelled/suppressed separately from what it makes permanent... if it can then dispelling/suppressing permanency would not affect the original spell if so targetted. In this case the duration would then temporarily revert to the original duration. However since the permanency changed the duration the spell would not have run out of time. Only the 2 rounds while casting permanency would have expired. Assuming the spell remains in duration for the remaining 1d4 suppressed rounds then the permanency would kick in again before it disappears.

I don't agree...

Many durations are measured in rounds, minutes, hours, or some other increment. When the time is up, the magic goes away and the spell ends.

What is the duration of the spell? 11 minutes. How long has it been in effect? 1 year. Is the time up? You betcha. The magic goes away and the spell ends.

I think that if you follow this line of reasoning, an antimagic field will kill all spells made permanent via permanency.

Assuming they've been in effect longer than their non-permanencied duration would allow, I agree.

Your argument seems pretty reasonable, but it would make permanency significantly more vulnerable than it already is.

I'd disagree with the 'than it already is' note, though, since as I read it, 'goes away in an AMF' is how it 'already is'

-Hyp.

 

[kerbarian]

I'd disagree with the 'than it already is' note, though, since as I read it, 'goes away in an AMF' is how it 'already is'

True. I'll revise that to "more vulnerable than I already thought it was."