Cast Spells. You can cast spells as though you were in the illusion’s space, but you must use your own senses.
Moving isn't casting. Again, I am not sure that means that an (any) emanation would move with the duplicate, if they're even a valid origin of an emanation in the first place.
Ok, one question, since the thread is growing fast and it's hard to keep up. Putting aside Invoke Duplicity, let's say you're the caster, so you cast Antimagic Field, and you don't want to be affected by it. Is that what you're going for?
If we completely set aside Invoke Duplicity, then in essence yes. But also cast it at a distance, and move it around. It already works with Spirit Guardians, and I don't see why it wouldn't work with Antimagic Field, especially considering that the description of Antimagic Field seems written in such a way that purposefully avoids affecting existing CD effects.
I will agree that depending on how you read it, some of the things I'm trying to achieve might not be possible, though, depending on the DM.
Ok, one question, since the thread is growing fast and it's hard to keep up. Putting aside Invoke Duplicity, let's say you're the caster, so you cast Antimagic Field, and you don't want to be affected by it. Is that what you're going for?
If we completely set aside Invoke Duplicity, then in essence yes. But also cast it at a distance, and move it around. It already works with Spirit Guardians, and I don't see why it wouldn't work with Antimagic Field, especially considering that the description of Antimagic Field seems written in such a way that purposefully avoids affecting existing CD effects.
I will agree that depending on how you read it, some of the things I'm trying to achieve might not be possible, though, depending on the DM.
Ok, thanks for the clarification. I just wanted to say that, IMO, Antimagic Field is (EDIT: was?) intended to affect the person who cast it.
But, at the same time, this is true:
An Emanation’s origin (creature or object) isn’t included in the area of effect unless its creator decides otherwise.
I'd like to hear other opinions on that.
EDIT: maybe part of my soul is still stuck on the 2014 rules, where Emanation was not a thing.
Cast Spells. You can cast spells as though you were in the illusion’s space, but you must use your own senses.
Moving isn't casting. Again, I am not sure that means that an (any) emanation would move with the duplicate, if they're even a valid origin of an emanation in the first place.
I've been meaning to ask you about something that's been bugging me in your replies: why do you call targets a "source"? Let's say you have a wizard who casts Light on a rock. Can we agree that: - The wizard is the source of the spell - The rock is the target of the spell - If the rock moves, it doesn't move the Light spell, the Light spell moves itself according to its target?
Because in the case I'm trying to figure out, the PC is the source of both the CD duplicate and the Antimagic Field. The CD duplicate is the target of the spell (it's normally self, but the duplicate's "cast spells" introduces an exception to this general rule). But you keep calling the CD duplicate the source of the spell, which is confusing to me, to be honest.
Ok, thanks for the clarification. I just wanted to say that, IMO, Antimagic Field is intended to affect the person who cast it.
But, at the same time, this is true:
An Emanation’s origin (creature or object) isn’t included in the area of effect unless its creator decides otherwise.
I'd like to hear other opinions on that.
EDIT: maybe part of my soul is still stuck on the 2014 rules, where Emanation was not a thing.
I think also it's important to remember that, in Jeremy Crawford’s words, "specific beats general". And Invoke Duplicity, by the way it works, conflicts with many general rules.
Well... specific beats general when it explicitly contradicts it. I don't see anything in the antimagic field description that explicitly contradicts the general rule for emanations. Not to say that there's no room for discussion, but I don't think that's the winning argument.
Antimagic Field doesn't, but Invoke Duplicity: Cast Spells does. Especially the part that says "as though you were in the illusion's space" in the case of self-targeting spells. The target is no longer the caster, but the illusory duplicate, even though the source is still the caster.
Antimagic Field doesn't, but Invoke Duplicity: Cast Spells does. Especially the part that says "as though you were in the illusion's space" in the case of self-targeting spells. The target is no longer the caster, but the illusory duplicate, even though the source is still the caster.
Sorry you lost me on that one.
EDIT: To elaborate, it sounds like we're saying:
Can the duplicate cast antimagic field? Yes.
Will the antimagic field immediately dispel the duplicate? Maybe. I feel like it would, but perhaps not.
Assuming AMF does not dispel the duplicate, can the duplicate cast spells on itself? I don't see why not.
Can the duplicate cast spells on the caster? Not through the AMF, which surrounds the duplicate.
Or if you're asking about something else, then sorry for misunderstanding.
Ok so the general rule for self-targeting spells is that the target is the caster, and so the source and the target of the spell are one and the same.
But Invoke Duplicity: Cast Spells says: "You can cast spells as though you were in the illusion’s space, but you must use your own senses." Which makes it clear that: - the PC is still the caster, and therefore the source of the spell - the target is no longer the caster, but the illusory duplicate thereby creating an exception to the general rule that self-targeting spells target the caster directly.
If you use this ability to cast the Word of Radiance cantrip, the AoE will come from the duplicate, not you. And it's not just self-targeting spells that are affected, but also touch spells as well. You can use True Strike or Inflict Wound through the duplicate like you also can with familiars.
Well, let's say I created my duplicate in the middle of a bunch of assassins. I can cast Word of Radiance through it, damaging all the Assassins, without risking getting killed by them (at least not immediately), and then I could move myself or the duplicate without risking opportunity attacks. This is quite powerful. And in fact, since the target change isn't limited in time, you can also use it to cast Spirit Guardians from a distance, making it work similarly to Conjure Celestial (with less damage). Even better, since it's a duplicate of yourself that seems to be able to cast spells, enemies will target it, and waste at least 1 turn before realizing it's not the real you.
Well, let's say I created my duplicate in the middle of a bunch of assassins. I can cast Word of Radiance through it, damaging all the Assassins, without risking getting killed by them (at least not immediately), and then I could move myself or the duplicate without risking opportunity attacks. This is quite powerful. And in fact, since the target change isn't limited in time, you can also use it to cast Spirit Guardians from a distance, making it work similarly to Conjure Celestial (with less damage). Even better, since it's a duplicate of yourself that seems to be able to cast spells, enemies will target it, and waste at least 1 turn before realizing it's not the real you.
This feels like the intended use of the feature, yes.
Ok so the general rule for self-targeting spells is that the target is the caster, and so the source and the target of the spell are one and the same. [...]
Not always the target is the caster for "Range: Self":
Self. The spell is cast on the spellcaster or emanates from them, as specified in the spell.
You can't tell what the spell targets without reading the Effect of a spell.
I have to admit I hadn't properly read the emanation's rules myself, and I completely missed that part: "An Emanation’s origin (creature or object) isn’t included in the area of effect unless its creator decides otherwise." I think it makes it quite clear then that when I use my Invoke Duplicity: Cast Spells ability to make the Antimagic Field emanate from the duplicate as its origin, I, as the creator of the spell, can decide that it is excluded from its area of effect. To be honest if I had read that part beforehand I wouldn't even have bothered posting about it as it now appears completely unambiguous.
I used source as in the point of origin of the emanation area of effect. Sometimes that might be a target of the spell, sometimes not. Source is not a defined term, so I was using it as a loose term. But target and point of origin have strict definitions.
I have to admit I hadn't properly read the emanation's rules myself, and I completely missed that part: "An Emanation’s origin (creature or object) isn’t included in the area of effect unless its creator decides otherwise." I think it makes it quite clear then that when I use my Invoke Duplicity: Cast Spells ability to make the Antimagic Field emanate from the duplicate as its origin, I, as the creator of the spell, can decide that it is excluded from its area of effect. To be honest if I had read that part beforehand I wouldn't even have bothered posting about it as it now appears completely unambiguous.
I thought this whole time that it was your idea: whether to include the Emanation's origin or not to keep the Duplicity unaffected.
Moving isn't casting. Again, I am not sure that means that an (any) emanation would move with the duplicate, if they're even a valid origin of an emanation in the first place.
Why is everybody using links rather than tooltips?
Extended signature
If we completely set aside Invoke Duplicity, then in essence yes. But also cast it at a distance, and move it around. It already works with Spirit Guardians, and I don't see why it wouldn't work with Antimagic Field, especially considering that the description of Antimagic Field seems written in such a way that purposefully avoids affecting existing CD effects.
I will agree that depending on how you read it, some of the things I'm trying to achieve might not be possible, though, depending on the DM.
Ok, thanks for the clarification. I just wanted to say that, IMO, Antimagic Field is (EDIT: was?) intended to affect the person who cast it.
But, at the same time, this is true:
I'd like to hear other opinions on that.
EDIT: maybe part of my soul is still stuck on the 2014 rules, where Emanation was not a thing.
I've been meaning to ask you about something that's been bugging me in your replies: why do you call targets a "source"?
Let's say you have a wizard who casts Light on a rock. Can we agree that:
- The wizard is the source of the spell
- The rock is the target of the spell
- If the rock moves, it doesn't move the Light spell, the Light spell moves itself according to its target?
Because in the case I'm trying to figure out, the PC is the source of both the CD duplicate and the Antimagic Field.
The CD duplicate is the target of the spell (it's normally self, but the duplicate's "cast spells" introduces an exception to this general rule).
But you keep calling the CD duplicate the source of the spell, which is confusing to me, to be honest.
I think also it's important to remember that, in Jeremy Crawford’s words, "specific beats general".
And Invoke Duplicity, by the way it works, conflicts with many general rules.
Well... specific beats general when it explicitly contradicts it. I don't see anything in the antimagic field description that explicitly contradicts the general rule for emanations. Not to say that there's no room for discussion, but I don't think that's the winning argument.
"Not all those who wander are lost"
Antimagic Field doesn't, but Invoke Duplicity: Cast Spells does.
Especially the part that says "as though you were in the illusion's space" in the case of self-targeting spells.
The target is no longer the caster, but the illusory duplicate, even though the source is still the caster.
Sorry you lost me on that one.
EDIT: To elaborate, it sounds like we're saying:
Or if you're asking about something else, then sorry for misunderstanding.
"Not all those who wander are lost"
Ok so the general rule for self-targeting spells is that the target is the caster, and so the source and the target of the spell are one and the same.
But Invoke Duplicity: Cast Spells says: "You can cast spells as though you were in the illusion’s space, but you must use your own senses."
Which makes it clear that:
- the PC is still the caster, and therefore the source of the spell
- the target is no longer the caster, but the illusory duplicate
thereby creating an exception to the general rule that self-targeting spells target the caster directly.
If you use this ability to cast the Word of Radiance cantrip, the AoE will come from the duplicate, not you.
And it's not just self-targeting spells that are affected, but also touch spells as well. You can use True Strike or Inflict Wound through the duplicate like you also can with familiars.
So... if the caster is casting a spell on the caster, why would they do it by way of the duplicate? Why not just cast it on yourself to begin with?
"Not all those who wander are lost"
Well, let's say I created my duplicate in the middle of a bunch of assassins. I can cast Word of Radiance through it, damaging all the Assassins, without risking getting killed by them (at least not immediately), and then I could move myself or the duplicate without risking opportunity attacks. This is quite powerful. And in fact, since the target change isn't limited in time, you can also use it to cast Spirit Guardians from a distance, making it work similarly to Conjure Celestial (with less damage).
Even better, since it's a duplicate of yourself that seems to be able to cast spells, enemies will target it, and waste at least 1 turn before realizing it's not the real you.
This feels like the intended use of the feature, yes.
"Not all those who wander are lost"
Not always the target is the caster for "Range: Self":
You can't tell what the spell targets without reading the Effect of a spell.
Thank you for the precision :)
No problem at all, mate!
I have to admit I hadn't properly read the emanation's rules myself, and I completely missed that part:
"An Emanation’s origin (creature or object) isn’t included in the area of effect unless its creator decides otherwise."
I think it makes it quite clear then that when I use my Invoke Duplicity: Cast Spells ability to make the Antimagic Field emanate from the duplicate as its origin, I, as the creator of the spell, can decide that it is excluded from its area of effect.
To be honest if I had read that part beforehand I wouldn't even have bothered posting about it as it now appears completely unambiguous.
I used source as in the point of origin of the emanation area of effect. Sometimes that might be a target of the spell, sometimes not. Source is not a defined term, so I was using it as a loose term. But target and point of origin have strict definitions.
I thought this whole time that it was your idea: whether to include the Emanation's origin or not to keep the Duplicity unaffected.
About my reply, after rethinking it, I believe for now it's RAW you can decide not to be affected by your own Antimagic Field.
The same for other Emanation spells, unless the spell says explicitly you are included.
But also in my opinion, it feels odd, at least for some spells.