Why don't we see everyone with weapons enchanted with anti-magic Field?


Pathfinder First Edition General Discussion

201 to 250 of 385 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | next > last >>

You know, I figure if a city an afford the gold it would take to cover itself in an anti magic field, obviously there's some inflation in effect. So, a 5th level wizard should be able to afford a couple scrolls of Gate, and use them to summon a couple greater Fire Elementals. Someone with the right sourcebook could probably get something even more effective, but merely a fire elemental in a anti-magic field shrouded city would be enough to burn the place to ashes.

Incidentally, with Paris being 30 million square feet, and an antimagic field being 20' radius, that gives a requirement for 23, 885 antimagic fields for full coverage. Does anyone want to calculate the cost?

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Until the Knight-Commander beats it to death with his sword.

Shadow Lodge

It is entirely possible to make 2+2=5 and 2+2=3 and not be incorrect. You just have to know how to make math work in silly, but accurate, ways. :)

Also, I find it interesting that you can remotely trigger a trap in your hands. I always got the impression that remotely meant at a distance. It does in the dictionary.

Quote:
Remotely: 1) from a distance; without physical contact; 2) in the slightest degree

The other argument that might actually punch a hole in Anzyr's argument is defining what constitutes indirect harm. Looking at examples from the spell invisibility:

Actions directed at unattended objects: So manipulating objects, and can be interpreted to include things like sunder and other damaging actions affecting only unattended objects.
Causing harm indirectly: So any action that directly causes harm doesn't qualify here.
Open doors: Self-explanatory, manipulating an object.
Talk: Self-explanatory, may result in location by others.
Eat: Food eaten becomes invisible once entirely contained within the mouth.
Climb Stairs: Manipulation of self.
Summon Monsters: Does not cause harm, merely causes something to exist
--Command them to attack: Does not directly cause harm, because the action here is equivalent to talking. The summoned creatures perform the actions that cause damage.
Cut the ropes holding up a bridge: Does not directly cause harm because the action is only affecting the bridge (an object). Gravity then comes into play and performs an action upon the bridge (namely making it fall) which causes damage.
Remotely trigger traps: Does not directly cause harm depending on how you interpret it. If you interpret it as you remotely (without physical contact, from a distance) cause the trigger of the trap to activate, then this is indirect harm. The only action was on the trigger, and the trigger then caused the trap to do whatever it did. If you directly trigger the trap (not from a distance, or involving physical contact), then you are directly causing harm and the spell breaks. If you interpret that the trigger and the trap are not separate things, then triggering a trap will almost always cause harm and break the spell.
Open a portcullis to release attack dogs: Indirect, because all one is doing is permitting other creatures to act according to their nature. The action is affecting only an object.


Anzyr wrote:
DM Under The Bridge wrote:
andreww wrote:
DM Under The Bridge wrote:
Jiggy wrote:
...You know, a legendary artifact sword that carried its own antimagic field or similar effect could be a fun toy to center a campaign plot around.

I agree.

Maybe a Sarevok like villain beating the bajeezus out of wizard guilds.

Wizards become the princesses in need of saving.

It's a bit ignominious to be killed my a low level flying wizard with a wand of snowballs isn't it?

A wizard flies away and readies his snowballs, meanwhile the villain and his cohort stalk the halls and slaughter all those inside. Their magical experiments and spells going dead just before the killers enter.

If they want to fly out once he is upon them, they will have to throw themselves out of the window. Goodbye Harry and Hermione.

When the villain leaves, maybe he orders his men to shoot the wizard to death, maybe he throws his sword at him (causing the wizard to fall to the earth as fly is negated). How large the anti-magic effect is would be determined by the dm that creates the artifact for the campaign.

Well thats the city's fault for putting up an anti-magic field. I'd say they brought it on themselves and is a good example of why you don't put an anti-magic field over your town. (Because a Wizard might come in and kill you all off effortless since you lack magical defenses).

Really your example is the perfect reason why I'm right. So thanks for that.

You didn't read it properly, wizard flying around isn't invulnerable, and I am not talking about an anti-magic town, but a total badass walking around and into a wizard guild with an anti magic sword.


How does "total badass" deal with a clay golem or summat while in anti-magic?


I would imagine given he is an end boss for a campaign, he beats it to pieces.

Then he gets back to cutting up wizards.

I tell ya, a good idea for an end boss.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
ericthetolle wrote:

You know, I figure if a city an afford the gold it would take to cover itself in an anti magic field, obviously there's some inflation in effect. So, a 5th level wizard should be able to afford a couple scrolls of Gate, and use them to summon a couple greater Fire Elementals. Someone with the right sourcebook could probably get something even more effective, but merely a fire elemental in a anti-magic field shrouded city would be enough to burn the place to ashes.

Incidentally, with Paris being 30 million square feet, and an antimagic field being 20' radius, that gives a requirement for 23, 885 antimagic fields for full coverage. Does anyone want to calculate the cost?

Antimagic field is only a 10 foot radius. You'd need about 87,000 antimagic fields (the actual area was a bit under 30 million square ft, for the smallest version of walled Paris). At spell level x caster level x 2000 gp x1.5 (10 min/lvl spell) x2 (slotless) x 87k you'd end up at about 34.45 billion gp, which is about 689 million pounds of gold, in turn ~344,520 American tons, which is about twice the entire estimated gold production of the human race up to this time, and over twenty times the entire estimated human gold production up through the medieval era.

;)

(PS, it is enough gold to fund well over a million wish diamonds, so if one really wanted to sink an interplanar king's ransom on the task of securing a walled city against low level spell infiltration, there are likely more cost effective ways).

(PPS: This is actually a somewhat lowball estimate on the area, though, because calculating the increased number of antimagic fields necessary to account for overlap is more math than I can remember how to do. It is also a seriously lowball estimate on the final number of required spheres, because it assumes that the area in question being covered in antimagic to a height of 5-10 ft is sufficient, when a city would almost certainly require several to many times that. That is, this math does not consider height/volume at all, merely area coverage.)

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

The problem with AMF and a fighter in your example is that the wizard is flying.

That's it. As I said repeatedly, the problem there is the flying, not the wizard.

And yes, at the levels you can have an anti-magic do-dad, you can have non-magical means of flight. And lo, your flying mounts are in the AM shell and aren't going to get fireballed out of the air or mind controlled, either. AM Barbarian on his dire bat companion (not the Summoner!) is an example of this.

And, of course, this assumes the wizard is in a position where he can fly and stay out of reach. WHen you employ AMF offensively, that's largely NOT going to be the case.

And yeah, that's 10 cubic feet of lava, which is a bit under a 2' radius sphere. So, basically a small catapult rock of molten goo.

Using your 'I just dropped this' justification, I can THROW something at someone, and not break invis.
I can SHOOT A CROSSBOW at someone, and not break Invis.
IN this instance, dropping the lava balls on someone is simply using gravity to sub for your throwing. That's it. It's an attack in all ways, exactly like throwing or shooting a weapon, and you can't argue around it. there's no degree of separation involved here. You're even AIMING it!
=============
If we have a city-wide dead magic zone, it's not going to be because of AMS and spells. Likely you'd just set up an area, suck the magic from it, and keep it that way.

==Aelryinth


Aelryinth wrote:

The problem with AMF and a fighter in your example is that the wizard is flying.

That's it. As I said repeatedly, the problem there is the flying, not the wizard.

And yes, at the levels you can have an anti-magic do-dad, you can have non-magical means of flight. And lo, your flying mounts are in the AM shell and aren't going to get fireballed out of the air or mind controlled, either. AM Barbarian on his dire bat companion (not the Summoner!) is an example of this.

And, of course, this assumes the wizard is in a position where he can fly and stay out of reach. WHen you employ AMF offensively, that's largely NOT going to be the case.

Except that insant conjuration spells work inside an AMF so your flying mount can be killed by conjurations such as Snowball and Acid Arrow. Enjoy your long plummet to the ground with no constitution boosts for extra HP.

As far as manouverability goes the Wizard will almost certainly have a better Fly skill than you and if you ever get anywhere close dimension door resets the combat distance. Sure you might not be stopped by a level 7 character but as soon as you get much beyond that you are screwed.

My level 10 sorcerer from one of the other threads would cheerfuly take on an AMF using fighter riding a hippogriff or something.

Grand Lodge

andreww wrote:
Except that insant conjuration spells work inside an AMF so your flying mount can be killed by conjurations such as Snowball and Acid Arrow. Enjoy your long plummet to the ground with no constitution boosts for extra HP.

Good luck hitting that skill check DC with your attack roll.


TriOmegaZero wrote:
andreww wrote:
Except that insant conjuration spells work inside an AMF so your flying mount can be killed by conjurations such as Snowball and Acid Arrow. Enjoy your long plummet to the ground with no constitution boosts for extra HP.
Good luck hitting that skill check DC with your attack roll.

I dont think I have ever seen a non cavalier/charger take Mounted Combat or take more than a single skill rank in ride. Even if they do something like Acidic Spray goes through an AMF and doesn't require an attack roll.

Also good luck finding your invisible opponent while sitting in an AMF.

Magic continues to provide all of the answers.


DM Under The Bridge wrote:

I would imagine given he is an end boss for a campaign, he beats it to pieces.

Then he gets back to cutting up wizards.

And how does he do that without his shiny magic gear?


If you really rely on touch attack spells to hit, you can always Quicken a True Strike or two.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Lemmy wrote:
DM Under The Bridge wrote:

I would imagine given he is an end boss for a campaign, he beats it to pieces.

Then he gets back to cutting up wizards.

And how does he do that without his shiny magic gear?

Lol, god forbid they have something like an Iron Golem or (for hilarity's sake) an Adamantine Golem :P.


Aelryinth wrote:

The problem with AMF and a fighter in your example is that the wizard is flying.

That's it. As I said repeatedly, the problem there is the flying, not the wizard.

And yes, at the levels you can have an anti-magic do-dad, you can have non-magical means of flight. And lo, your flying mounts are in the AM shell and aren't going to get fireballed out of the air or mind controlled, either. AM Barbarian on his dire bat companion (not the Summoner!) is an example of this.

And, of course, this assumes the wizard is in a position where he can fly and stay out of reach. WHen you employ AMF offensively, that's largely NOT going to be the case.

And yeah, that's 10 cubic feet of lava, which is a bit under a 2' radius sphere. So, basically a small catapult rock of molten goo.

Using your 'I just dropped this' justification, I can THROW something at someone, and not break invis.
I can SHOOT A CROSSBOW at someone, and not break Invis.
IN this instance, dropping the lava balls on someone is simply using gravity to sub for your throwing. That's it. It's an attack in all ways, exactly like throwing or shooting a weapon, and you can't argue around it. there's no degree of separation involved here. You're even AIMING it!
=============
If we have a city-wide dead magic zone, it's not going to be because of AMS and spells. Likely you'd just set up an area, suck the magic from it, and keep it that way.

==Aelryinth

Let's go over this invisibility thing one more time. Again. With Feeling. And speaking in slow, short sentences.

You can drop the lava on buildings, even if you target said buildings with an attack roll. Objects are *explicitly* permitted to be attacked. Thus you can safely firebomb the town without dropping invisibility.

Do you understand the above point? If not explain why.

Next, as in point 3, provided your action indirectly leads to harm (ie. cutting ropes of a bridge/opening portcullis/remotely triggering traps) you will not break invisible. In my example, opening a box that has lava in it, will not break invisibility. The action "Opening a box" does not directly cause any harm. Its the lava inside that will fall when gravity takes effect (ala the bridge example) that cause the harm.

Do you understand the above point? If not explain why.

Finally in regard to "remotely triggering traps" the distance is not the issue here jlighter. The issue is that you are not attacking the person. You are activating a trap which then attacks a person. The key is "indirectly". Your action is not "Attack that guy". Your action is "Activate a trap." Will that trap then attack that guy? Of course, but that's exactly what indirectly means.

Do you understand the above point? If not explain why.

So no Aelryinth you cannot shoot a crossbow at someone or directly drop lava on them. Those are direct actions. You could however activate an Arrow Trap, which will then shoot at someone, or open the bottom of a box containing something dangerous (which will then fall onto someone). Because those are indirect actions.

Is everyone know clear on the difference between direct and indirect actions and that the former will break invisibility while the latter won't? If not explain why.

Finally, a Fighter in an anti-magic is just the absolutely worse thing you could send against a caster. You've nerfed all their saves, removed all their magical defenses, removed their ability to even locate the enemy, and put them wide open to conjurations spells and animated/called/created minions. A Fighter without all their magical gear is going to have a very rough time against monsters who have higher base stats, are larger, and aren't reliant on magical gear.

As I said earlier, the only thing anti-magic field is good for is a litmus test of system mastery. Anyone who thinks it will help a Fighter against a caster simply does not have the system mastery to know that such an action is a terrible idea, for the reasons stated above.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Anzyr wrote:
Its not condescending. It's how the rules work. 2+2 is going to equal 4 no matter much the other side demands that it equals 3. If you find that condescending I apologize for giving that impression, but the facts are the facts regardless of how they make one feel. I don't have any feelings on this matter one way or the other, if it seems that way it is only because I like making valid arguments, rather than invalid ones.

"So all we need to do is point to the rules and laugh as the other makes a bunch of nonsense" is a condescending, arrogant statement.

It assumes that not only are you in the right by the rules as you know them, but that there are no rules that go against your assumption, and that anyone who has or ever will argue against your claim is just making up "nonsense." That their points are invalid, and come from a position of foolishness or ignorance.

In a game that is as deeply and widely complex as Pathfinder, to be that sure of your own position's validity is somewhat foolish, and to be that dismissive of opposing ideas is absurd.

Grand Lodge

andreww wrote:
Even if they do something like Acidic Spray goes through an AMF and doesn't require an attack roll.

You should save time and say that first rather than change your tune.

Shadow Lodge

Anzyr, I get what you're saying, except for the part where you keep on ignoring the word "indirectly." It's in there, it has a definition. Directly activating a trap and indirectly activating it are two different things. Why do you think the word "remotely" is in there, if it doesn't, apparently from your position, have any meaning?

I do agree that opening a box, by itself, isn't going to trigger invisibility to break, even if said box contains lava. The same logic here applies as cutting the ropes on the bridge. Gravity causes the harm. That said, if you're trying to hit an attended structure/object, then invisibility will break. Attacking structures/objects is only permitted if said things are unattended.


jlighter wrote:

Anzyr, I get what you're saying, except for the part where you keep on ignoring the word "indirectly." It's in there, it has a definition. Directly activating a trap and indirectly activating it are two different things. Why do you think the word "remotely" is in there, if it doesn't, apparently from your position, have any meaning?

I do agree that opening a box, by itself, isn't going to trigger invisibility to break, even if said box contains lava. The same logic here applies as cutting the ropes on the bridge. Gravity causes the harm. That said, if you're trying to hit an attended structure/object, then invisibility will break. Attacking structures/objects is only permitted if said things are unattended.

Maybe your not aiming at the Building? Your just indiscriminately dropping lava with no real target :p


TriOmegaZero wrote:
andreww wrote:
Except that insant conjuration spells work inside an AMF so your flying mount can be killed by conjurations such as Snowball and Acid Arrow. Enjoy your long plummet to the ground with no constitution boosts for extra HP.
Good luck hitting that skill check DC with your attack roll.

If you are being attacked by a wizard, it holds true that the wizard may be flying...but if you are attacking a wizard...normally it's inside...and if they fly they're either still going to be in the field...or they are going to brain themselves without you having to lift a finger.

However, if you are outside...and being attacked...and are the heroes...well...if you haven't done anything to provoke him yet...either your DM is stinky and you need to fire the DM for doing a TPK for no reason (even your own wizards won't have their spells up yet and with an ambush like described...they would be the first ones to die anyways...probably a nova hit on the first round to kill all the wizards)...OR it better be a plot point.

IF you have provoked the wizard...why is it that he catches you napping while he's flying. If he's in striking distance...and he's a bad guy...have 400 1st level archers shoot at him. With a 1/20 chance to hit, that's 20 hits for an AVERAGE with a shortbow of 140 dmg...180 dmg with a longbow.

We're getting absurd in some ways with how much time the wizards going to have to prepare.

Normally in adventures, its the group invading the wizards dungeon or castle. Most encounters if they do occur outside, you will have a way to counter the most ridiculous spells or ideas, such as a wizard flying.

Even then, it's most likely a wizard is NOT going to expect the party suddenly to fly up to him in a bunch of hippogriffs, which is why he's flying in the first place. If we are going to toss in the wizards are always flying and they are always outside, then obviously it's going to be an outside campaign. If the DM has flying wizards as a normal thing, then most likely the ENTIRE PARTY will have flying and will not only have an AMF with the guy who hits the wizard directly, but the rest of the party will pepper that wizard with so many arrows and poisons, and other junk...that I would probably say the wizard would be dead in the first round.

Unless you are REALLY going to munchkin the wizard out...the biggest problem with flying wizards is that the wizard is all alone. This actually is a great time to use AMF as the wizard won't have any other allies...he left them all behind because they can't fly with spells like he can. Hence you have one party member use an AMF and the others simply slaughter him with anything and everything. Monk with grapple probably would be the best usage of this scenario, with a once or three times usage a day item for AMF...and while they fall, wizard goes and gets killed (you may need to raise the Monk depending on how many hits the Monk gets, how far they fall to the ground, and resulting damage).

Inside sure he can conjure, but if he's dealing with a Barbarian and a Rogue (while flanking), and they have an AMF up...they will probably out damage anything he can do with a conjuration typically (but not always). That's BEFORE the other half of the party's damage is taken into consideration as well.

There ARE counters, but typically, it will completely rely upon the wizard winning initiative...and some of those still probably wouldn't stop all that.

I'm not saying AMF is the bestest and only counter, but from what I see, if's effective enough that any party would want to have at least one item to call upon to create an AMF if needed against a caster, especially the martials.

Of course, another question in a similar light, is why any caster over the level of 19 doesn't ALWAYS have a ring of wishes on them. Emergency situations and all...nothing beats a wish in a jam....unless you have a jerk DM who creates flying wizards that ambush you out of nowhere for no reason for a TPK...in which case a wish may be the worst thing you want because you'll wish to be healed of all wounds and instead you'll end up dead but with no wounds on your body (jerk DM's...everyone can live better without them).

Remember also...these are sort of hypothetical questions of...these seem like they'd be great ideas...so why don't we see these happening more often. For example...with RotR...if I were Karzoug...I'd have had several Wish items on me at any time...I'm certain that would have made the fight there a tad more...unique...

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Anzyr wrote:


Let's go over this invisibility thing one more time. Again. With Feeling. And speaking in slow, short sentences.

You can drop the lava on buildings, even if you target said buildings with an attack roll. Objects are *explicitly* permitted to be attacked. Thus you can safely firebomb the town without dropping invisibility.

Do you understand the above point? If not explain why.

Next, as in point 3, provided your action indirectly leads to harm (ie. cutting ropes of a bridge/opening portcullis/remotely triggering traps) you will not break invisible. In my...

Let's try this in even shorter sentences.

You are making an area attack with molten lava against an inhabited city. You are aiming your attacks at buildings and structures with people, and you have no way of knowing whether or not you are going to miss them.

You are not triggering a trap. You are personally dropping bombs, which is no different then personally shooting a bow down at something. Your 'targeting structures' is a completely handwash attempt to sidestep the fact that what you are going to do is directly drop a gob of molten rock and kill someone when it crashes through the ceiling, and say it wasn't your action that did it, you were just aiming at the roof.

That's not going to fly. There's no 'separation of instance' in what your wizard is doing.

A 5th level wizard tossing that conjuration spell instantly becomes visible, might have to hit against a rider who can make a mounted check to totally avoid the attack, likely at +17 or higher (nobody in their right mind who flies an aerial mount has a low Ride skill), and you are using Direct Damage, fer gosh sakes. You don't really think 5d6 damage is going to stop anything, do you? Especially if rider or mount have evasion and can sub ride for the save (which is exactly how the rider is likely set up...he's an elite rider!)

as for tracking him, somehow you're managing to be attacking the city, the rider and stay invisible at 5th level, while all the multiple people below who want to kill their attacker and thought up this scenario years ago have suddenly been reduced to Int 3. Like their own spellcasters with Detect Invisibility, Dispel Magic, invis purge on a familiar granted a spell, blah blah blah.

Exactly how many wizards do you know who actually know conjuration damage spells? Multiples of them to deal with multiple people in AMF's? Boost them to the stratosphere so they actually do appreciable damage?

And the fact remains, when he reaches you, you're dead, because you just lost your con booster, false life, mage armor, and you're a squishy 4 hp/level wizard who he can likely Power Attack and kill in one round, especially with help from his mount. You're somehow assuming that he can't reach your mighty level 5 wizard, when he's equally convinced he can. He may require outside help, but that's what a party is for if they are trying to locate you.

Eesh. Get off your Schroedinger's Wizard. It just ain't that easy. And the fact remains that you're leaving scry droppings all over the place, and you're going to be tracked down and killed in short order...probably at home where you can't fly, the AMF expands to fill every place you can flee to, and the fighter there has more then enough HP to survive your snow ball.

I mean, seriously, resorting to conjuration direct damage as the be-all solution to a flight of mounted warriors coming in? Really?

==Aelryinth

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

K177Y C47 wrote:
jlighter wrote:

Anzyr, I get what you're saying, except for the part where you keep on ignoring the word "indirectly." It's in there, it has a definition. Directly activating a trap and indirectly activating it are two different things. Why do you think the word "remotely" is in there, if it doesn't, apparently from your position, have any meaning?

I do agree that opening a box, by itself, isn't going to trigger invisibility to break, even if said box contains lava. The same logic here applies as cutting the ropes on the bridge. Gravity causes the harm. That said, if you're trying to hit an attended structure/object, then invisibility will break. Attacking structures/objects is only permitted if said things are unattended.

Maybe your not aiming at the Building? Your just indiscriminately dropping lava with no real target :p

I'm just indiscriminately going to drop a nuke on the city. I've got no real target, sure it's not an attack. The fact I aimed it at the city is just happenstance.

The 'attended' rule above is a nice catch. Just like a captain can make a save for his ship as an attended object, inhabited buildings would likely qualify for this sort of thing.

==Aelryinth


LOL! A Wizard having spells to deal with flying opponents is "Schrodinger", but a Fighter with a Gryphon mount and a sword of AMF is a perfectly normal thing...

Man, this threads spawns the most hilarious logic.


I find it all rather amusing. The goalposts move about, but that can be entertaining.

For the big bad, got to say being flanked by a horde of giant evil owls would be pleasantly terrifying. Maybe he wears a very freaky owl mask, lol.

For dealing with golems, he passes the sword to his sword boy, or maybe sheathing it lowers the effect? Anything is possible.


jlighter wrote:

Anzyr, I get what you're saying, except for the part where you keep on ignoring the word "indirectly." It's in there, it has a definition. Directly activating a trap and indirectly activating it are two different things. Why do you think the word "remotely" is in there, if it doesn't, apparently from your position, have any meaning?

I do agree that opening a box, by itself, isn't going to trigger invisibility to break, even if said box contains lava. The same logic here applies as cutting the ropes on the bridge. Gravity causes the harm. That said, if you're trying to hit an attended structure/object, then invisibility will break. Attacking structures/objects is only permitted if said things are unattended.

Indirectly does have a definition. Here lets look at it:

1. not in a direct course or path; deviating from a straight line; roundabout: an indirect course in sailing.

2. coming or resulting otherwise than directly or immediately, as effects or consequences: an indirect advantage.

3. not direct in action or procedure: His methods are indirect but not dishonest.

4. not straightforward; devious; deceitful: He is known as a shady, indirect fellow.

5. not direct in bearing, application, force, etc.: indirect
evidence.

So.. triggering the trap and having the trap deliver the harm qualifies... for literally of those. Its a roundabout, indirect, is not a direct or immediate attack, is not direct in action or procedure (activate trap to attack instead of just attack), its definetly not straightforward, and the bearing, application, and force are not directly from the caster, but from the trap. The same is true of opening a box that contains lava, even if you point it in the right direction.

That's just good clean English.

As to houses counting as attended objects I will gladly concede this point if you can show me some rule that says so, similar to a captain attending a ship, which you'll note I haven't suggesting dropping lava on. Otherwise kindly concede your point.

Next Aelryinth the level 5 Wizard was an example of how badly an antimagic field screws a cities defenses. AS I pointed out earlier, a higher level wizard can cause even more severe damage, and you keep adding factors other then an antimagic city to attempt to prove your point. Do not try to add facts to the argument as it makes your position look weak.

Also *ALL* the wizards I know all know conjuration damage spells, explicitly for this scenario. Meanwhile, I know exactly 0 Fighters who have Flying mounts (that the Wizard hasn't summoned).

My wizard is pretty standard. It's your city that keeps adding things to it that is Schroedinger's. Seriously, the hypocrisy of your statement is palpable.

Finally, DM Under The Bridge please feel free to make a level 20 Fighter with an antimagic Sword, and I'll show you how easily you will lose to a level 15 caster.

Grand Lodge

Anzyr wrote:
Indirectly does have a definition. Here lets look at it:

This is the point where both sides have lost the argument.


Nah I won the argument back when the game was 3.5 and made antimagic field a terrible counter to casters. The rest is just an amusing sideshow.

Shadow Lodge

Even in your victory, you find defeat.

Shadow Lodge

Scott Wilhelm wrote:

Lava flows can be stopped in the Real World, but it takes more than basic organizational skills. The last I heard of a volcano eruption on Tristan de Cuhna the response was to evacuate the island.

In Hawaii, pretty much what you do when a lava flow is coming to your house is clear out all belongings you have time to grab and then watch house get consumed by the Earth and the Fire.

The only people I know with the power to stop lava flows are Icelanders.

Just saying.

People on this forum think that Lava is Boiling Kool-Aid.


TOZ wrote:
Even in your victory, you find defeat.

Nah in defeat I come back more powerful than you can possibly imagine.

Also, this isn't a victory thing to me in the first place. Its simply explaining how the rules work and trying to improve the system mastery of everyone in the thread. I can only show them the path, its up to them to walk and it won't bother me one or the other if they do or do not choose to learn how useless antimagic field is from this thread. If they do that knowledge may help them one day. If they don't it may come back to haunt them. Or nothing may come of it at all.


Kthulhu wrote:
Scott Wilhelm wrote:

Lava flows can be stopped in the Real World, but it takes more than basic organizational skills. The last I heard of a volcano eruption on Tristan de Cuhna the response was to evacuate the island.

In Hawaii, pretty much what you do when a lava flow is coming to your house is clear out all belongings you have time to grab and then watch house get consumed by the Earth and the Fire.

The only people I know with the power to stop lava flows are Icelanders.

Just saying.

People on this forum think that Lava is Boiling Kool-Aid.

That's how my uncle died... He was just so thirsty...

Grand Lodge

Kthulhu wrote:
People on this forum think that Lava is Boiling Kool-Aid.

To be fair, both of them use the exact same rules to resolve.


TriOmegaZero wrote:
Kthulhu wrote:
People on this forum think that Lava is Boiling Kool-Aid.
To be fair, both of them use the exact same rules to resolve.

Okay, I had to chuckle on that one....


Anzyr wrote:
Nah I won the argument back when the game was 3.5 and made antimagic field a terrible counter to casters. The rest is just an amusing sideshow.

You think you are the prophet of system mastery?

Do you even realise "Summoned creatures of any type and incorporeal undead wink out if they enter an antimagic field."

So... summoning foes to rip the fighter to shreds while he stalks towards the wizard is going to get very funny. The monsters appear, go too close, disappear, or wink out when the fighter walks up.

If you try to use summons as a barrier for the wiz, they can literally walk through them. Wink wink, hello caster. Can I interest you in rip and tear?

If the summons are really fat they can avoid being winked out, but you simply check the 10ft radius.

Other amusing things! Pay attention Anzyr, or your lack of system mastery will "haunt you".

The prismatic spells are good to go. I do love those spells. Wall of force still holds *William Wallace shouts "hold!"* So not all options are off the table.

And the real hilarious kicker:

"Artifacts and deities are unaffected by mortal magic such as this."

That's right Anzy, if it was an artifact with an antimagic field effect, the artifacts magical properties would be entirely unaffected. It can still be a +5 vorpal weapon. It can still be dancing or have the throwing magic enchantment. Lolz.

You should have checked the rules in the system.

Reference

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/antimagicField.htm


You are intentionally misreading my post or didn't bother reading it. I didn't say summons. I said animated/called/created minions. All of which will *not* wink in an AMF. So your first point demonstrates that you are not following the discussion or are deeply misunderstanding it.

Second, you'll note that what I said above was "You've nerfed all their saves, removed all their magical defenses, removed their ability to even locate the enemy, and put them wide open to conjurations spells and animated/called/created minions." And that remains true even if your +5 Vorpal Sword is an artifact. (Seriously reading is tech bro.)

It seems you should actually bother to read the post of the people you are trying to argue with. Otherwise you will look ill-informed and in possession of a poor argument as is the case now. Please do be more careful in the future. Feel free to create a level 20 Fighter with an Artifact Sword though. And I'll show you how inferior it is to a level 15 Wizard.


"you'll note I You've nerfed all their saves"

You or I?


copypasta error correcting it above, but you could try reading the original.

"You've nerfed all their saves, removed all their magical defenses, removed their ability to even locate the enemy, and put them wide open to conjurations spells and animated/called/created minions."

So.. as you can see your argument above has 0 legs to stand on.

When creating your level 20 Fighter please feel free to use the regular price of your antimagic artifact as though it were merely +5 Vorpal for example.


Wide open to conjuration spells, except actual summons of any kind, which wink out when inside the radius. This actually includes summoned golems (not of course created).

All their defences and magical locating of enemies lowered, only when in the area and the artifact sword, which can still have the throwing magical ability on top of the other enchantments.

As for saves, yeaaaah, good luck forcing saves over and over with spells that don't work inside the field. Of course what you have refused to acknowledge is that if that fighter gets up close or the wizard is inside the 10 radius, all the wizards enchantments and buffs are also negated. The desperately clinged to cloak of resistance is now a useless rag.

You missed quite a lot in the expression of your opinion that the wizards would have it easy. Try acknowledging the shortcomings in your argument, especially when you claimed to be teaching system mastery.


There are no shortcomings. You can't even locate the Wizard while you have you sword out and the second you sheath I am confident I'll win. I have not said summons once this thread, only animated/called/created. Also the throwing capability is not nearly as helpful as you'd like, but feel free to make your weapon however you want when making your level 20 Fighter. I can assure you it will make no difference.

Also... you'll never get within 10 ft. of a Wizard. Seriously, I think you need make a Fighter and see how badly this will go for you, because its very obvious.


Anzyr wrote:

copypasta error correcting it above, but you could try reading the original.

"You've nerfed all their saves, removed all their magical defenses, removed their ability to even locate the enemy, and put them wide open to conjurations spells and animated/called/created minions."

So.. as you can see your argument above has 0 legs to stand on.

When creating your level 20 Fighter please feel free to use the regular price of your antimagic artifact as though it were merely +5 Vorpal for example.

Create a level 20 fighter? No, I do not work for you. I am looking at creating a quarterstaff rogue next.

It was a boss idea, as an idea it isn't yet created into a character. If it was created, I also wouldn't make it a level 20 (best to make it a recurring villain that levels with the party). If I run such a campaign it will be created then (got two others in the works though, so don't hold your breath).


So basically, you don't want to see how easily an antimagic field strategy will get a level 20 Fighter killed by a Wizard 5 levels lower. Fair enough. I can respect people who know when to bow out of a discussion.


Is this a build thread? No it isn't.

And as a simple question, how good is it for your wizard to be in that antimagic field?

It isn't is it? So if a fighter was rushing through a townhouse or guild of wizards getting up close and personal to wizards, which do not know with metagaming knowledge that the field is coming and that they should be countering it this or that way, it wouldn't be great for them would it? No caster likes being unable to cast spells. Likewise if a wizard is hit by a thrown magic sword with antimagic around it, that can ruin their day; and now they have to move the sword or move away from the field.

This wielder of the artifact might make an interesting opponent. Especially if they start to get a following and cause even more havoc. Could set up the start of a magic crackdown game. There is complexity that can be worked in there (why are people attacking the wizards?).

You want a build, this is just in the ideas phase at this stage.

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Anzyr wrote:
So basically, you don't want to see how easily an antimagic field strategy will get a level 20 Fighter killed by a Wizard 5 levels lower. Fair enough. I can respect people who know when to bow out of a discussion.

Why is it that all "WIZURDZ IZ SUPERIOR!!!!" discussions seem to begin with the wizard just happening to have ALREADY cast JUST the right spells, have EXACTLY the right equipment, the encounter takes place in an environment that's EXACTLY suited to favor the wizard, etc?

201 to 250 of 385 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / General Discussion / Why don't we see everyone with weapons enchanted with anti-magic Field? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.