Monstrous Compendium Vol. 1: Spelljammer Creatures
Frozen Sick
D&D Beyond Basic Rules
Basic Rules (2014)
Sign in to view your library & saved favorites.
Sign in- Marketplace
Monstrous Compendium Vol. 1: Spelljammer CreaturesFrozen SickD&D Beyond Basic RulesBasic Rules (2014)Sign in to view your library & saved favorites.
Sign in
antimagic field says:
But the emanation rules say:
And, while one could argue that "No one can... inside the aura" includes the caster, the definition of emanation specifically excludes the caster, so they're not inside the aura, just completely surrounded by it. (And yes, I'm aware that can be considered to be "inside" the aura in some senses of the word.)
Now, legacy antimagic field definitely includes the caster. This is just a knock-on ambiguity from defining emanations. But I'm curious to see what people think.
Bonus question:
If we accept the idea that the caster is not inside the antimagic field, what does that mean in terms of spells cast by or on them?
I'd say that the rules of Emanation clearly makes it the casters choice if they want to be inside the are or not.
Not in the way that the rules use the word though and that's the one that matters.
It means that the caster isn't affected by the AMF but at the same time is quite restricted by it. Spells with a range of self should still be castable but not much else as he can't extend any magic outside his own form.
I'd argue that even the effects of magic weapons wouldn't operate against anything struck within the field (such as if a Fighter casts the spell via Enspelled Armor). The target is in antimagic.
This may or may not be intended, but based on how this is written, if the spellcaster chooses to not be included in the aura then an ensuing spellcasting battle with an enemy that is located outside of this 3D donut-shaped AoE would pretty much proceed as normal. For example, such an enemy CAN target the spellcaster with Magic Missile and our spellcaster CAN target such an enemy with Magic Missile.
Antimagic includes you. You are by definition in any Aura that emanates from you. Always.Sorry, I play an older edition. For 5.5 e, this is no longer true.
This is incorrect per the actual rules in 5.5e.
Emanation AoEs only include the origin if the caster chooses to. This is explicitly stated in the definition of Emanations, which jl8e and up2ng both quoted above.
pronouns: he/she/they
I can't see why it would be donut- shaped, the emanation extends in all directions so you would be inside a small (5ft) sphere that is inside a bigger (25ft) sphere. There shouldn't be any path from the spellcaster to the outside of the emanation that isn't blocked by the AMF.
But there's the question of "does an antimagic field prevent spells from passing through it?" The description in the spell doesn't say they can't. (It also doesn't say they can.)
It's already an issue with the ability in general, because wanting to shoot through an AMF is the sort of thing that becomes relevant all the time.
Yeah, you're right, that's what I was trying to say. Donut-shaped wasn't a great description. Looking down at a 2D map it would look sort of like a donut but in 3D it's more of a sphere inside of a sphere like you're saying.
The spell description doesn't seem to restrict the "clear path" of the spellcasting process. It only seems to care about where the spellcaster is located and where the spell effect originates, neither of which can be located within the aura.
It probably doesn't make a difference to the above discussion, but I'm also starting to wonder if an emanation that excludes the spellcaster actually does create a 5-foot "inner" sphere / cube or not (which could also affect how large the outer sphere would be). That might be beyond the scope for this thread though.
I would agree with the idea that spells which have to pass through an AMF would fizzle, so a Ray of Frost and Fireball would not pass through. But what about spells which just manifest outside? Like Sacred Flame, Healing Word, and Flame Strike?
Magic's whole thing is manifesting effects which don't have a physical cause. I don't see why spells which manifest at the target wouldn't work. Unless of course there's some sort of magic particle which invisibly travels from caster to destination, and so couldn't pass through the anti-magic field. But I didn't see any rules for "magic particle physics" in the PHB or DMG.
This is a really gray area that it's best not to stray too deep into, especially when you consider how most everyone flavor's their characters spells differently. It's best to say that if the antimagic field is between the caster and the spell's target, it fails.
Seems like the “anything inside it” is the relevant part that would need to be defined. If you’re in a bubble inside a larger bubble, are you inside the larger bubble? Or does the island you’ve carved out of the larger bubble take precedence.
To me, it seems like it would not work, as the effect would need to pass through the antimagic area. It doesn’t make sense to me that the spell would turn off then turn back on again. But then, it’s magic, so maybe it would work?
No. Even if it looks like a big bubble with a little bubble inside of it that isn't how an emanation work. The effect extends from you and outward, it isn't a "fill the sphere" thing. And thus you haven't carved out anything, there's just nothing that effects your position (unless you choose to be included).
Most spells don't actually work like that. The spell effect does not actually exist yet along the "clear path". See below.
The text for the spell description does not actually support this conclusion.
First, the spell description says that AoE effects cannot extend into the field. Ongoing spell effects are suppressed while in the field but that doesn't mean that such spells end. If a spell effect which actually does travel, like, say, Spirit Guardians, passes through the field then it will reactivate upon exiting the field.
However, it's important to note that many spells which might seem like they have effects which travel actually do not. The examples you gave are two such examples of this. In the cases of both Ray of Frost and Fireball, despite the flavor text of what the spell effect looks like, these spell effects actually originate at the target location. If such spell effects actually always originated from the spellcaster then the spell would be defined to have a Range of Self. In both of those cases, there is a distance range defined for the spell. So, the spell effect can originate some distance away from the spellcaster (as per the definition of the Range parameter). Perhaps the flavor portion is affected by the field and you are not able to see the "bright streak" or the "frigid beam of blue-white light" that you would typically see when casting those spells, but the spell effect actually originates in a location that is outside of the field and so, for example, damage to the target creature should be resolved as normal.