|
Also, do any of you know of any spells that can affect a target without actually touching them? Maybe by seeing or hearing the effect. And if so, could these possibly be ways to bypass anti-magic field.
Tam
Transmute rock to mud on the ceiling above the target, perhaps? Triggering a rockfall on top of people usually cramps their style, anti-magic field or no anti-magic field.
RPG Superstar 2013 Top 32
|
You are correct, d13. Summoned creatures are dispelled if they enter an antimagic field. Permanently animated creatures (like the skeletons and zombies made from animate dead) continue to function normally, however, as they are not innately magical and the spell animating them is said to have already 'run its course.' The duration for animate dead is listed as 'permanent' or 'instantaneous' as I recall.
The transmute rock to mud idea was fairly sound. Personally, though, I'd just counterspell the antimagic field with one of my own. :)
You are correct, d13. Summoned creatures are dispelled if they enter an antimagic field.
IIRC, the summoned creature is not dispelled, but disappears from the plane while within the Antimagic area. If that Antimagic effect ends or moves, the creature will re-appear, in the same location, assuming there is still time remaining. The spell still "counts down" while the creature is gone.
|
RPG Superstar 2013 Top 32
|
Can you counterspell a magic effect that is already in effect? I didn't think you could.
Tam
If it is already in effect, no, you cannot counter it. The idea is to nail it as its coming out. If you don't have that opportunity, then I believe the only way to get rid of the field is with a Mordenkainen's Disjunction because a simple targetted dispel magic won't work... I don't think it will, anyway. Not 100% sure on that.
well, depending on the gm it would vary; psionics would be good unless a gm ruled that psionics are treated as spells and can be stopped with spell effects that cancel spells; an optional rule. Any non gear dependent melee class would still rock in an anti magic field. Probably wouldn't cramp most rouge types or archers either.
I am thinking I will toss a tanglefoot bag at them and then summon an arrow demon to wail on them. I will have purchased adamantine arrows ahead of time to give the demon. What do you think?
TamOf course you would have to summon them first, before you came into contact with the anti-magic field, but this raises a question for me. If you summon a creature and then after it has been summoned it comes into contact with an anti-magic field, is the creature then sent back to the planes? Does an anti-magic field dispel a summoned creature? These spells do have a duration after all, so isn't all of their time spent in the material plane a result of a magic spell?
Cast spell - monster appears - X rounds later the spell ends and monster disappears.
Perhaps this is common knowledge but I have never really thought about it before.
When you summon a monster it actual brings them to the material plane...thats why its a conjuration spell, not an illusion spell.
An illusion spell on the other hand WOULD dispel when it came into contact with the anti-magic field...
The DH
I am thinking I will toss a tanglefoot bag at them and then summon an arrow demon to wail on them. I will have purchased adamantine arrows ahead of time to give the demon. What do you think?
TamOf course you would have to summon them first, before you came into contact with the anti-magic field, but this raises a question for me. If you summon a creature and then after it has been summoned it comes into contact with an anti-magic field, is the creature then sent back to the planes? Does an anti-magic field dispel a summoned creature? These spells do have a duration after all, so isn't all of their time spent in the material plane a result of a magic spell?
Cast spell - monster appears - X rounds later the spell ends and monster disappears.
Perhaps this is common knowledge but I have never really thought about it before.
When you summon a monster it actual brings them to the material plane...thats why its a conjuration spell, not an illusion spell.
An illusion spell on the other hand WOULD dispel when it came into contact with the anti-magic field...
The DH
Oops sorry...don't listen to the above post.
Sorry...I guess thats what these message boards are for...lol
Summoned creatures interact with anti-magic fields as described above. Called creatures are unaffected (provided they are called outside the field; if you attempt it inside 1) it will simply fail, and 2) you have revealed to the DM that you are a bumbling idiot, and if he has any competence in his job, will simply kill your character at once).
|
Probably wouldn't cramp most rouge types or archers either.
Sorry Valegrim, you know the drill. Rouge is a color. Rogue is a nimble, core-class. I know you probably just "transposed" the letters while typing and all that but lets try to give the core-classes a bit of respect. I'm sure Heathy-boy will give me good healthy ribbing over this (he always does) but I AM the Cold Sore on the Lip of Core-class Misspellings.
FH
IIRC, the summoned creature is not dispelled, but disappears from the plane while within the Antimagic area. If that Antimagic effect ends or moves, the creature will re-appear, in the same location, assuming there is still time remaining. The spell still "counts down" while the creature is gone.
I was correct. From the description of the Antimagic Field spell in the SRD:
"Summoned creatures of any type and incorporeal undead wink out if they enter an antimagic field. They reappear in the same spot once the field goes away. Time spent winked out counts normally against the duration of the conjuration that is maintaining the creature."
|
Yes summoned creatures will wink out. That is why the creature I intend to summon will be an Arrow Demon. Once the antimagic guy's mobility is hampered by a tanglefoot bag I would give the demon some adamantium arrows I purchased specifically for this purpose and let him wail away. From a respectful distance of course.
Tam
Beat them with a sack of doorknobs. Then again, that's how I surmount almost any challenge.
Seconding the sack of doorknobs.
I usually put a lot of distance in between me and the target and hammer them with lesser orb spells.
Lesser orbs are not subject to spell resistance and thus are not affected by an antimagic field. They are "real" once the spell is cast.
Another, slightly less effective though a lot more amusing, tactic is to just cast shrink object on big rocks and lob them into the antimagic field.
Sorry, but no. There's firm precedent against that argument. Supernatural abilities are not subject to Spell Resistance, but are negated by an Antimagic Field. It's actually really simple, figuring out what does and doesn't work with an Antimagic Field: Magic is nullified by an Antimagic Field. Funny, that. The damage caused by summoned creatures isn't subject to spell resistance -- They're "real" in every way, but they cease to exist within the confines of an Antimagic Field.
Now, if you got yourself a narrow pipe, lodged a doorknob in the end of it, and used a very focused Gust of Wind to propel the doorknob at your enemies like some sort of demented anti-tank round, the Antimagic Field probably wouldn't slow down the doorknob. Your DM would likely smite your for anachronism, but the antimagic field would cease to be a problem.
Barring a successful spellcraft check to identify the Antimagic Field once it's cast, how would you describe the effect to your players? It's an invisible sphere, about 10 ft. in diameter around the subject. Beyond everburning torches and glowing crazy magic items suddenly falling silent, there aren't a lot of visual hints that can be used to place just whether or not one is in range of the effect. Unless the DM clearly just says,"Okay, here's where the Antimagic Field is", you're going to have to either notice that your magic weapons and armor aren't having the same effect while in melee or send a spell in to test it out.
An effect like this raises an interesting DMing question: is it better to announce what's going on and marking it out in the interest of speeding up play or is it better to go with flavor and keep the PCs guessing? I would imagine that the first time an adventurer encounters an Antimagic Field (or Antilife Shell, etc.) it must be very disconcerting unless they know the spell themselves. The question is also whether you want to make spellcraft all but useless in a combat situation by announcing where you're putting the Antimagic Field or make it just about essential for higher level adventurers because you can only give hints and description rather than coming right out and announcing an NPC spellcaster's actions.
from the SRD:
Creation
A creation spell manipulates matter to create an object or creature in the place the spellcaster designates (subject to the limits noted above). 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.
***
It's silly, but the orb spells shoot nommagical bits of stuff at people. Try to think of them more as fragments of the pure substance of the inner planes. It may help you out.
You can also use telekinesis to throw rocks at people inside of an AMF.
I will apologise in advance for slightly derailing this topic, but I have a question about AMF, and a google search brought me here.
Anyways, the question goes: can a spellcaster cast a spell from within an AMF, if the manifestation is outside the AMF? The SRD says:
"An antimagic field suppresses any spell or magical effect used within, brought into, or cast into the area, but does not dispel it. Time spent within an antimagic field counts against the suppressed spell’s duration."
As said above, "used within, brought into, or cast into the area." But what about casting flame strike, for example, from within the AMF? It is not "brought into" or "cast into" for sure. Is it "used within"? I understand a wand of flame strike wouldn't work, but can you cast flame strike as long as the target is outside the AMF? If not, why was "cast into" only specified, and not "cast from within"?
Last night, an AMF was successfully used to defeat a beholder based on the idea that casting was allowed within and AMF, as long as the spell didn't "pass through" the AMF.
Was this the right call?
Thanks,
Greg
I will apologise in advance for slightly derailing this topic, but I have a question about AMF, and a google search brought me here.
Anyways, the question goes: can a spellcaster cast a spell from within an AMF, if the manifestation is outside the AMF? The SRD says:
"An antimagic field suppresses any spell or magical effect used within, brought into, or cast into the area, but does not dispel it. Time spent within an antimagic field counts against the suppressed spell’s duration."
As said above, "used within, brought into, or cast into the area." But what about casting flame strike, for example, from within the AMF? It is not "brought into" or "cast into" for sure. Is it "used within"? I understand a wand of flame strike wouldn't work, but can you cast flame strike as long as the target is outside the AMF? If not, why was "cast into" only specified, and not "cast from within"?
Last night, an AMF was successfully used to defeat a beholder based on the idea that casting was allowed within and AMF, as long as the spell didn't "pass through" the AMF.
Was this the right call?
Thanks,
Greg
While the rules are open to your own interpretation, I wouldn't have allowed this. The spirit of the anti-magic field is that there is no magic allowed within it's boundaries. Period. I would have said that no spell cast within it would take effect, and if it were a spell with more than a single turn of duration it would take effect after the field dissolved, as per the rules explicitly stated.
|
How would you as a sorcerer, do it better?
Depends on the situation and my spell selection:
1. If I just need to bypass him/delay him while he's in the AMF, slap a forcecage around him. If he's the one who cast it and its that important to him, then he can wait there till his spell expires (can't teleport out while in AMF and may not be able to affect me at all depending on which version of forcecage I used). If he didn't cast the spell to begin with, and thus can't dismiss it then wave at him while you walk away...
The problem is the forcecage would either be created in the AMF or overlap it closely (20 ft. diamter sphere and a 20 ft. cube) and it would be reasonable to say you couldn't create a forcecage in the AMF. From the SRD (not near my books at the moment):
AMF: "Certain spells, such as wall of force, prismatic sphere, and prismatic wall, remain unaffected by antimagic field (see the individual spell descriptions)."
WoF: "The wall [of force] cannot move, it is immune to damage of all kinds, and it is unaffected by most spells, including dispel magic."
FC: "Like a wall of force spell, a forcecage resists dispel magic..."
2. If I really needed to drop the guy, I seem to recall a spell (8th, 7th?) that allows you to ignore AMF and similar spells/effects for one round and only when casting a spell of lower level (somewhere around 4th?). Does this sound familiar to anyone? But as a sorcerer, I don't know if I would have bothered to learn such a spell...
But I think dropping walls of iron and flinging doornobs sound like they're so much more fun!
While the rules are open to your own interpretation, I wouldn't have allowed this. The spirit of the anti-magic field is that there is no magic allowed within it's boundaries. Period. I would have said that no spell cast within it would take effect, and if it were a spell with more than a single turn of duration it would take effect after the field dissolved, as per the rules explicitly stated.
Well, it turns out that it isn't open to interpretation, but you are right. On the WOTC "Rules of the Game" site it clearly says that:
When a spellcaster is inside an antimagic area, any spells she casts are suppressed.
So I screwed up. :-P Oh well one more lesson learned.
Thanks for the input.
Greg