According to Sage Advice, silver fire and spellfire can both function within an Antimagic Field.
Q: Does Laeral's fire work inside Antimagic Fields? A: Wherever the Weave extends, it does. The silver fire, like spellfire, is the raw energy of the world, pouring forth from a Weave anchor (Laeral). Antimagic fields (as opposed to dead magic zones) are themselves magical effects, and so, borne on/part of the Weave.
The Forgotten Realms: Heroes of Faerun sourcebook and related setting lore state: "Spellfire is the raw energy of the Weave". I am uncertain whether this is flavor text or mechanical text. The Magic of Faerun chapter mentions Spellfire Spark, Spellfire Adept, Spellfire Sorcery, and Weave-Affecting Magic, but still does not detail how Spellfire interacts with Antimagic or Dead Magic zones. There are many descriptions suggesting silver fire can even help repair Dead Magic zones. I am unsure, so I seek the community's insight:
Can Spellfire-related abilities function within Antimagic or Dead Magic zones, even if their description explicitly labels them as magical?
If not, is this logically consistent? How should I explain to players why Spellfire cannot function inside an Antimagic Field?
Under the official rules, if it's a magical effect, it does not work inside an Antimagic Field. Whether something is a "magical effect" or not is determined by the definition in the Rules Glossary, which says:
An effect is magical if it is created by a spell, a magic item, or a phenomenon that a rule labels as magical.
This means that according to a strict reading of the rules, some spellfire-related abilities are going to be able to work in an Antimagic Field and some aren't, depending on whether they meet that definition. For instance, the Spellfire Sorcerer's "Spellfire Burst" feature is explicitly described as a "magical effect", so it doesn't work; the damage absorption effect from the Spellfire Spark feat doesn't meet that definition, so it does work.
In practice, doing it this way may lead to weird and inconsistent results, since not everything that seems like it is clearly magical is actually labeled as such in the rules. I think it would not be unreasonable for a DM to rule that everything related to Spellfire counts as magical.
My opinion is similar to wagnarokkr's, in the sense that applying that guideline (or the one from the SAC) leads to understanding some features (EDIT: or in general game elements) as magical but not others.
This ambiguity also occurs for other features (EDIT: or again in general game elements), depending on whether you look only at the feature's description or take the class or subclass description into account as well. For example, in this debate about Wild Shape being magical under the 2024 rules: Would true sight work on a changeling
Some other threads, if they serve as inspiration for this ruling, Argenix:
I am going to say no all counts. Let's look at the features one be one:
Spellfire Burst: No, these are explicitly magical. In addition, you can't take Magic actions in an Antimagic Field but Bonus Actions would otherwise be fine.
Spellfire Spells: No, they're still prepared but you can't cast them.
Honed Spellfire: No, it just improves the effects of Spellfire Burst.
Crown of Spellfire: I am going to say No. It relies on Innate Sorcery in which you 'unleash that magic for 1 minute, during which you gain the following benefits". I am going to say all the effects are magical effects.
Nice analysis, Smite. I've updated my previous answer because when I said "features" I was thinking broadly, not only "class features", since the Spellfire Spark feat was also mentioned.
Nice analysis, Smite. I've updated my previous answer because when I said "features" I was thinking broadly, not only "class features", since the Spellfire Spark feat was also mentioned.
Oh, right. I didn't analyze the other elements other than the subclass.
Spellfire Spark
Magic Absorption: Mostly No and very rarely Yes. This requires that someone else casts a spell or creates a magical effect in an Antimagic Field which can't normally happen. An ongoing effect from an Artifact or Deity is not suppressed and could still allow the ability to trigger.
Spellfire Flame: No, this is casting a spell.
Spellfire Adept
Fueled by Spellfire: No, this relies on casting a spell.
Searing Spellfire: Yes, if you have a way to deal Radiant damage without a spell, a magical effect, or taking the Magic action, it will apply. You will probably be hard pressed to find a way to use it though. Boon of Blazing Dawn would allow it, for example.
Weave Affecting Spells
All of these are spells and cannot be cast within an Antimagic Field.
Detect Magic can't be cast within it, but it's not clear how this interacts when trying to detect into an Antimagic Field. I presume the caster sees an Abjuration aura around the spell's effect and know that it was created by a spell. Ongoing effects created by an Artifact or Deity might also be detectable. Some DM's may rule that detecting the area is a magical effect and the Antimagic Field cannot be detected nor anything inside. The most reliable way to detect a non-Beholder produced Antimagic Field may be an Everbright Lantern or something with Continual Flame cast on it.
If not, is this logically consistent? How should I explain to players why Spellfire cannot function inside an Antimagic Field?
Ed Greenwood's comment is unofficial. What else is not logically consistent? A possible take is that Laeral is a Weave Anchor. She is infused with the essence of Mystra to prevent the Weave from collapsing if anything happens to Mystra (this apparently explains it). Antimagic Fields and Dead Magic fail or fade around her, so Laeral can break some rules around magic that PCs can't.
If you feel that it suits your story for Spellfire effects to function in an Antimagic Field, change it. If you want an explanation for Laeral, she has Mystra hacks.
Nice analysis, Smite. I've updated my previous answer because when I said "features" I was thinking broadly, not only "class features", since the Spellfire Spark feat was also mentioned.
[...] Weave Affecting Spells
Detect Magic can't be cast within it, but it's not clear how this interacts when trying to detect into an Antimagic Field. I presume the caster sees an Abjuration aura around the spell's effect and know that it was created by a spell. Ongoing effects created by an Artifact or Deity might also be detectable. Some DM's may rule that detecting the area is a magical effect and the Antimagic Field cannot be detected nor anything inside. The most reliable way to detect a non-Beholder produced Antimagic Field may be an Everbright Lantern or something with Continual Flame cast on it.
In my case, I rule that detecting the area is a magical effect and the Antimagic Field cannot be detected nor anything inside, based on this:
[...] No one can cast spells, take Magic actions, or create other magical effects inside the aura, and those things can’t target or otherwise affect anything inside it. Magical properties of magic items don’t work inside the aura or on anything inside it.
Areas of effect created by spells or other magic can’t extend into the aura, [...]
According to Sage Advice, silver fire and spellfire can both function within an Antimagic Field.
Q: Does Laeral's fire work inside Antimagic Fields? A: Wherever the Weave extends, it does. The silver fire, like spellfire, is the raw energy of the world, pouring forth from a Weave anchor (Laeral). Antimagic fields (as opposed to dead magic zones) are themselves magical effects, and so, borne on/part of the Weave.
While I agree with most all of the advise already posted I'll also add that you need to be a lot more careful when taking advice from that site. It can offer some insight at times but nothing on it is official advice and it is not curated for correctness. Quite a lot is just personal opinions or table rulings, admittedly from persons involved in writing the rule books or adventures but still.
The particular advice you linked to is a 5 year old answer from a writer about a novel he wrote 25 year ago set in the D&D universe of the time. It has no bearing at all on a newly published sourcebook that the writer wasn't involved with.
Yeah, it's worth pointing out that when people say "Sage Advice" around here, they're usually talking about this compilation of official rulings on various rules questions (or the 2014 version) and not an external website like that.
The particular advice you linked to is a 5 year old answer from a writer about a novel he wrote 25 year ago set in the D&D universe of the time. It has no bearing at all on a newly published sourcebook that the writer wasn't involved with.
Oh. I didn't realize it was related to a specific novel. Then we have a question of whether it is even the same Weave. Was this before or after Midnight taking over the role of Mystra? Or was the transition from Mystryl to Mystra that the Weave failed and was rebuilt?
Nice analysis, Smite. I've updated my previous answer because when I said "features" I was thinking broadly, not only "class features", since the Spellfire Spark feat was also mentioned.
[...] Weave Affecting Spells
Detect Magic can't be cast within it, but it's not clear how this interacts when trying to detect into an Antimagic Field. I presume the caster sees an Abjuration aura around the spell's effect and know that it was created by a spell. Ongoing effects created by an Artifact or Deity might also be detectable. Some DM's may rule that detecting the area is a magical effect and the Antimagic Field cannot be detected nor anything inside. The most reliable way to detect a non-Beholder produced Antimagic Field may be an Everbright Lantern or something with Continual Flame cast on it.
In my case, I rule that detecting the area is a magical effect and the Antimagic Field cannot be detected nor anything inside, based on this:
[...] No one can cast spells, take Magic actions, or create other magical effects inside the aura, and those things can’t target or otherwise affect anything inside it. Magical properties of magic items don’t work inside the aura or on anything inside it.
Areas of effect created by spells or other magic can’t extend into the aura, [...]
Exactly. However, Detect Magic does not create an area of effect. Also, it can be argued that the magic effect is upon the caster only and therefore is not limited by the Antimagic Field as long as the caster is outside the area.
According to Sage Advice, silver fire and spellfire can both function within an Antimagic Field.
The Forgotten Realms: Heroes of Faerun sourcebook and related setting lore state: "Spellfire is the raw energy of the Weave". I am uncertain whether this is flavor text or mechanical text. The Magic of Faerun chapter mentions Spellfire Spark, Spellfire Adept, Spellfire Sorcery, and Weave-Affecting Magic, but still does not detail how Spellfire interacts with Antimagic or Dead Magic zones. There are many descriptions suggesting silver fire can even help repair Dead Magic zones. I am unsure, so I seek the community's insight:
Under the official rules, if it's a magical effect, it does not work inside an Antimagic Field. Whether something is a "magical effect" or not is determined by the definition in the Rules Glossary, which says:
This means that according to a strict reading of the rules, some spellfire-related abilities are going to be able to work in an Antimagic Field and some aren't, depending on whether they meet that definition. For instance, the Spellfire Sorcerer's "Spellfire Burst" feature is explicitly described as a "magical effect", so it doesn't work; the damage absorption effect from the Spellfire Spark feat doesn't meet that definition, so it does work.
In practice, doing it this way may lead to weird and inconsistent results, since not everything that seems like it is clearly magical is actually labeled as such in the rules. I think it would not be unreasonable for a DM to rule that everything related to Spellfire counts as magical.
pronouns: he/she/they
My opinion is similar to wagnarokkr's, in the sense that applying that guideline (or the one from the SAC) leads to understanding some features (EDIT: or in general game elements) as magical but not others.
This ambiguity also occurs for other features (EDIT: or again in general game elements), depending on whether you look only at the feature's description or take the class or subclass description into account as well. For example, in this debate about Wild Shape being magical under the 2024 rules: Would true sight work on a changeling
Some other threads, if they serve as inspiration for this ruling, Argenix:
- Are Armorer Special Weapons magical weapons?
- Does the Freedom of Movement Spell negate a Lich's paralyzing touch?
- Crackling Wave (Arch-Hag)
- Are attacks (melee/effects) from magically summoned creatures mitigated by monsters’ magic resistance?
- MM25 - Monster Attack when Magic, Clarification
- Pact of the Blade (and Shadow Blade/Flame Blade) vs. Antimagic Field in 2024 rules (thread created by you)
I am going to say no all counts. Let's look at the features one be one:
Edit: Added color coding
How to add Tooltips.
My houserulings.
Nice analysis, Smite. I've updated my previous answer because when I said "features" I was thinking broadly, not only "class features", since the Spellfire Spark feat was also mentioned.
Oh, right. I didn't analyze the other elements other than the subclass.
Ed Greenwood's comment is unofficial. What else is not logically consistent? A possible take is that Laeral is a Weave Anchor. She is infused with the essence of Mystra to prevent the Weave from collapsing if anything happens to Mystra (this apparently explains it). Antimagic Fields and Dead Magic fail or fade around her, so Laeral can break some rules around magic that PCs can't.
If you feel that it suits your story for Spellfire effects to function in an Antimagic Field, change it. If you want an explanation for Laeral, she has Mystra hacks.
How to add Tooltips.
My houserulings.
In my case, I rule that detecting the area is a magical effect and the Antimagic Field cannot be detected nor anything inside, based on this:
While I agree with most all of the advise already posted I'll also add that you need to be a lot more careful when taking advice from that site. It can offer some insight at times but nothing on it is official advice and it is not curated for correctness. Quite a lot is just personal opinions or table rulings, admittedly from persons involved in writing the rule books or adventures but still.
The particular advice you linked to is a 5 year old answer from a writer about a novel he wrote 25 year ago set in the D&D universe of the time. It has no bearing at all on a newly published sourcebook that the writer wasn't involved with.
Yeah, it's worth pointing out that when people say "Sage Advice" around here, they're usually talking about this compilation of official rulings on various rules questions (or the 2014 version) and not an external website like that.
pronouns: he/she/they
Oh. I didn't realize it was related to a specific novel. Then we have a question of whether it is even the same Weave. Was this before or after Midnight taking over the role of Mystra? Or was the transition from Mystryl to Mystra that the Weave failed and was rebuilt?
Exactly. However, Detect Magic does not create an area of effect. Also, it can be argued that the magic effect is upon the caster only and therefore is not limited by the Antimagic Field as long as the caster is outside the area.
How to add Tooltips.
My houserulings.