Paizo Top Nav Branding
  • Hello, Guest! |
  • Sign In |
  • My Account |
  • Shopping Cart |
  • Help/FAQ
About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game

Starfinder


Pathfinder Society


Pathfinder Adventure Card Game

This is 2 questions in 1...


Rules Questions


Proposed scenario: there is a ghost with an anti magic field.
Would spells like snowball and acid spray work on it against both the amf AND its incorporeality? There was some debate on this.


Also, can reach spell for instant conjuration spells such as corrosive touch or cure light wounds be thrown into the amf?


Let's give this a whirl:

As a bit of setup, a ghost is still incorporeal (Ex) in an antimagic field. Given that:

1. The snowball spell conjures a nonmagical snowball moving at speed. The antimagic field should have no effect if you cast the spell from outside it. However, since the snowball itself is nonmagical, it won't affect the incorporeal ghost at all. (I'm not sure what you meant by acid spray.)

2. If the spell allows spell resistance, it won't work in an antimagic field, reach or otherwise.

All in all, a ghost in an antimagic field is a tough customer, as most means of affecting it are magical. On the other hand, most of its abilities are shut down as well on account of their (Su) nature.


My intent is to have a almost completely invulnerable, but impotent, creature to annoy the pcs in one of my games. A ghost with a permanent amf was the first thing that sprung to mind. I mentioned this in the giant forums, and they came up with instantaneous conjuration damage spells. Because they cease being magical after casting, the thought is that they should affect the ghost normally.
However, my argument is that since they cease being magical, they don't affect the ghost at all since only magic can affect it.


The answer is holy water, but it will take gallons....


Holy water was discussed. It would be extremely difficult to get enough holy water on it, given the whole flying through walls thing. And I don't see rules for gallons (or liters) of holy water.


Sounds like you have a winner. That'll be super-annoying to deal with.


Arrows covered in Ghost Salt would be useful, since it's an Alchemical rather than a Magical effect.

Scarab Sages

Calthropstu wrote:

Proposed scenario: there is a ghost with an anti magic field.

Would spells like snowball and acid spray work on it against both the amf AND its incorporeality? There was some debate on this.

For starters, sounds like a jerk GM move to have a ghost in an antimagic field.

Regarding snowball and acid spray, I'm not sure where others are getting the idea that they'd function in an antimagic field. Seems clear cut that they don't function, but I could be wrong here.

Allowing or denying SR is not something an antimagic field cares about. Just stops/supresses all magic within the area that doesn't specifically list itself as an exception.

As for solutions, the Battle Aspergilum (APG) allows minor holy water damage on melee attack and pushes the duration of holy water. Not super viable, but it can be a useful option for Str based classes.

The best option would be an Alchemist with holy water, as the INT bonus to damage with splash weapons is an EX ability.

The Holy Water Assault feat could also be practical here.

There's also the Grave Warden archetype for the slayer.

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion Subscriber

I am more curious as to why even bother? A ghost in an antimagic field negates all its supernatural abilities (gaze, draining touch, moan, telekinesis etc).

Scarab Sages

DmRrostarr wrote:
I am more curious as to why even bother? A ghost in an antimagic field negates all its supernatural abilities (gaze, draining touch, moan, telekinesis etc).

If I had to guess, I suspect the GM is trying to have an NPC that the party doesn't instantly attack. Especially for an undead NPC, this can be a huge problem for GMs with bloodthirsty parties.


DmRrostarr wrote:
I am more curious as to why even bother? A ghost in an antimagic field negates all its supernatural abilities (gaze, draining touch, moan, telekinesis etc).

Probably to annoy the PCs rather than harm them.

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I think a GM using this for a story purpose is fine, as the Ghost is just as trapped in the field as the characters are in trying to effect it.

Or the GM can simply have a Ghost be like a story element instead, like the ghost children in Black Waters.


Yes, it is a plot device.
As for why people think snowball et al will work is because amf specifically states that the effects of an instantaneous conjuration may be brought into an amf. Since snowball creates a snowball which is then thrown at the enemy and acid spray fires acid from a starting point, you are, in a way, firing conjured materials into the amf.

Scarab Sages

Calthropstu wrote:

Yes, it is a plot device.

As for why people think snowball et al will work is because amf specifically states that the effects of an instantaneous conjuration may be brought into an amf. Since snowball creates a snowball which is then thrown at the enemy and acid spray fires acid from a starting point, you are, in a way, firing conjured materials into the amf.

No, snowball creates the snowball and hurls it as part of the spell. Magic Stone or Bless Water are spells that create something that you can then throw in a non-magical manner.

If the GM is looking to allow the PCs to damage the ghost with specific spells while within an anti-magic field, you could create a new spell for this.

As for additional ways to harm ghosts, I believe that attacks which merely count as magic are able to harm ghosts and should still count as magic in an anti-magic field. I believe this was FAQed recently, that weapons which count as magic for DR also count as magic for incorporeal. Could be wrong. Eldritch Claws and Arcane Strike should work in an anti-magic field with a strict RAW reading.


Snowball does indeed create a snowball and hurls it as part of the spell. The snowball, however, is not magical--note the lack of spell resistnce--so it does indeed work if cast from outside the antimagic field, just as casting expeditious construction, breaking off a clod of earth, and chucking it through the antimagic field would work.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
blahpers wrote:
Snowball does indeed create a snowball and hurls it as part of the spell. The snowball, however, is not magical--note the lack of spell resistnce--so it does indeed work if cast from outside the antimagic field, just as casting expeditious construction, breaking off a clod of earth, and chucking it through the antimagic field would work.

A spell allowing spell resistance or not is not a valid criteria for whether the final effects are magical.

Scarab Sages

blahpers wrote:
Snowball does indeed create a snowball and hurls it as part of the spell. The snowball, however, is not magical--note the lack of spell resistnce--so it does indeed work if cast from outside the antimagic field, just as casting expeditious construction, breaking off a clod of earth, and chucking it through the antimagic field would work.

Where are you getting the idea that not allowing SR has anything to do with an antimagic field?

Certainly not found in the description for antimagic field...

Scarab Sages

I'm pretty sure you can't even use Telekinetic Projectile to hurl a non-magical object at something within an antimagic field.

Scarab Sages

Murdock Mudeater wrote:
Eldritch Claws and Arcane Strike should work in an anti-magic field with a strict RAW reading.

Rereading Arcane Strike. Prerequisite is the "ability to cast arcane spells." Kinda thinking you won't meet the prerequisites of that feat while within an anti-magic field. I think I was wrong on this one. Eldritch Claws should still work.


bbangerter wrote:
blahpers wrote:
Snowball does indeed create a snowball and hurls it as part of the spell. The snowball, however, is not magical--note the lack of spell resistnce--so it does indeed work if cast from outside the antimagic field, just as casting expeditious construction, breaking off a clod of earth, and chucking it through the antimagic field would work.
A spell allowing spell resistance or not is not a valid criteria for whether the final effects are magical.

Fair enough; it is not sufficient in and of itself.

Snowball is a conjuration (creation) spell with an instantaneous duration.

PRD -> Magic -> Conjuration wrote:
Creation: A creation spell manipulates matter to create an object or creature in the place the spellcaster designates. If the spell has a duration other than instantaneous, magic holds the creation together, and when the spell ends, the conjured creature or object vanishes without a trace. If the spell has an instantaneous duration, the created object or creature is merely assembled through magic. It lasts indefinitely and does not depend on magic for its existence.

According to the emphasized sentence, in an antimagic field, the conjured snowball still exists. Unless you want to move the goalposts to have the antimagic field affect its momentum or coldness or something, snowball works fine when cast into an antimagic field.

Scarab Sages

blahpers wrote:

Snowball is a conjuration (creation) spell with an instantaneous duration.

PRD -> Magic -> Conjuration wrote:
Creation: A creation spell manipulates matter to create an object or creature in the place the spellcaster designates. If the spell has a duration other than instantaneous, magic holds the creation together, and when the spell ends, the conjured creature or object vanishes without a trace. If the spell has an instantaneous duration, the created object or creature is merely assembled through magic. It lasts indefinitely and does not depend on magic for its existence.
According to the emphasized sentence, in an antimagic field, the conjured snowball still exists. Unless you want to move the goalposts to have the antimagic field affect its momentum or coldness or something, snowball works fine when cast into an antimagic field.

In reading the spell, I kinda see your point, but it's very poorly worded.

What you are saying is that the spell creates a snowball as one step, and then as a seperate step, you throw the snowball with your own physical ability and that is what hits the target.

I suppose if throwing the snowball and creating the snowball are two independent actions (Standard to create the snowball and standard to throw it), then I agree.

I've always seen this spell used where the attack roll is done as part of casting the spell, which would make it a magical attack and not allow it to function in an antimagic field.

The key here is that if throwing it is part of the spell, then it doesn't work because spells don't work in an antimagic field. If you are creating an object with the spell, and that object has an effect when thrown (like holy water created via Bless Water), then it should function in an antimagic field.

Paizo / Messageboards / Paizo / Pathfinder® / Pathfinder RPG / Rules Questions / This is 2 questions in 1... All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.

©2002-2017 Paizo Inc.® | Privacy Policy | Contact Us
Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours, Monday through Friday, 10:00 AM to 5:00 PM Pacific time.

Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, Starfinder, the Starfinder logo, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc. The Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Legends, Pathfinder Online, Starfinder Adventure Path, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.