So I was making a warlock character when I began to ask myself if a warlock could be completely shut down by an anti-magic field and I was curious about this because I've never been in a situation with anti-magic before. So I was wondering how a warlock's invocations and pact boons would work in an antimagic field? Does it completely deprive them of all their invocations and their boon? And in the case of hexblades does that make them unable to use their Hex Warrior ability to use charisma for weapon attacks?
I think it would depend...the pact familiar would temporarily wink out of existence in the field, and your pact of the tome cantrips couldn’t be cast or target anything in the field. I would rule that a summoned pact weapon would vanish but a normal weapon you made into a pact weapon would just lose its abilities and become normal while in the field. I’m not familiar with the Hexblade so I’m not sure how that impacts that subclass’ abilities
for invocations obviously the ones granting spells would fail, but innate ones like Devils Sight should still work; that’s not really a magical effect, more of an ability granted by your patron
antimagic field is supposed to seriously disrupt spellcasters, so it’s right to think warlocks would be seriously affected, but overall their probably better off than a wizard or sorcerer in the same situation
A 10-foot-radius invisible sphere of antimagic surrounds you. This area is divorced from the magical energy that suffuses the multiverse. Within the sphere, spells can't be cast, summoned creatures disappear, and even magic items become mundane. Until the spell ends, the sphere moves with you, centered on you.
Spells and other magical effects, except those created by an artifact or a deity, are suppressed in the sphere and can't protrude into it. A slot expended to cast a suppressed spell is consumed. While an effect is suppressed, it doesn't function, but the time it spends suppressed counts against its duration.
Targeted Effects. Spells and other magical effects, such as magic missile and charm person, that target a creature or an object in the sphere have no effect on that target.
Areas of Magic. The area of another spell or magical effect, such as fireball, can't extend into the sphere. If the sphere overlaps an area of magic, the part of the area that is covered by the sphere is suppressed. For example, the flames created by a wall of fire are suppressed within the sphere, creating a gap in the wall if the overlap is large enough.
Spells. Any active spell or other magical effect on a creature or an object in the sphere is suppressed while the creature or object is in it.
Magic Items. The properties and powers of magic items are suppressed in the sphere. For example, a longsword, +1 in the sphere functions as a nonmagical longsword.
A magic weapon's properties and powers are suppressed if it is used against a target in the sphere or wielded by an attacker in the sphere. If a magic weapon or a piece of magic ammunition fully leaves the sphere (for example, if you fire a magic arrow or throw a magic spear at a target outside the sphere), the magic of the item ceases to be suppressed as soon as it exits.
Magical Travel. Teleportation and planar travel fail to work in the sphere, whether the sphere is the destination or the departure point for such magical travel. A portal to another location, world, or plane of existence, as well as an opening to an extradimensional space such as that created by the rope trick spell, temporarily closes while in the sphere.
Creatures and Objects. A creature or object summoned or created by magic temporarily winks out of existence in the sphere. Such a creature instantly reappears once the space the creature occupied is no longer within the sphere.
Dispel Magic. Spells and magical effects such as dispel magic have no effect on the sphere. Likewise, the spheres created by different antimagic field spells don't nullify each other.
Eldritch Invocations are called out as magical abilities. Invocations are not granted by your patron, and they are suppressed while you are inside an AMF. That includes invocations that grant you a permanent passive effect like "Beguiling Influence" and "Devil's Sight".
Pact Boons are directly granted by your patron, so they continue to function. Only the Pact Boon itself, not any separate class features that depend on it. As a Hexblade, you probably took the Pact of the Blade. Pact of the Blade still functions, but Improved Pact Weapon (invocation), Thirsting Blade (invocation), and Hex Warrior (class feature) do not. As weapon summoned from the pact does not disappear, and a "real" magic weapon you've bonded with continues to function as allowed by Pact of the Blade. However, any magical properties of the weapon itselfare suppressed. A Longsword, +1 reverts to being a simple Longsword, but it does retain the ability to bypass resistance to non-magical damage as that is a property granted by Pact of the Blade directly.
An improved familiar from Pact of the Chain does not disappear. Similarly--and I'm ambivalent about it--the spells granted by Pact of the Tome can be cast. Only the 3 specific cantrips granted by that boon work, and only if you actually have the Book of Shadows on your person.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
You don't know what fear is until you've witnessed a drunk bird divebombing you while carrying a screaming Kobold throwing fire anywhere and everywhere.
Eldritch Invocations are called out as magical abilities. Invocations are not granted by your patron, and they are suppressed while you are inside an AMF. That includes invocations that grant you a permanent passive effect like "Beguiling Influence" and "Devil's Sight".
Pact Boons are directly granted by your patron, so they continue to function. Only the Pact Boon itself, not any separate class features that depend on it. As a Hexblade, you probably took the Pact of the Blade. Pact of the Blade still functions, but Improved Pact Weapon (invocation), Thirsting Blade (invocation), and Hex Warrior (class feature) do not. As weapon summoned from the pact does not disappear, and a "real" magic weapon you've bonded with continues to function as allowed by Pact of the Blade. However, any magical properties of the weapon itselfare suppressed. A Longsword, +1 reverts to being a simple Longsword, but it does retain the ability to bypass resistance to non-magical damage as that is a property granted by Pact of the Blade directly.
An improved familiar from Pact of the Chain does not disappear. Similarly--and I'm ambivalent about it--the spells granted by Pact of the Tome can be cast. Only the 3 specific cantrips granted by that boon work, and only if you actually have the Book of Shadows on your person.
I disagree on the chain and tome boons. However they are granted, they are still spells, or summoned by spells. You may be right on the invocations, though, I didn’t read the “magical” description in the main subject for the invocations.
Spells and magical effects granted directly from a deity (of which patrons are included) are specifically called out as exceptions to an Antimagic Field.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
You don't know what fear is until you've witnessed a drunk bird divebombing you while carrying a screaming Kobold throwing fire anywhere and everywhere.
Spells and magical effects granted directly from a deity (of which patrons are included) are specifically called out as exceptions to an Antimagic Field.
Are all patrons considered deities though? I’ve not seen an official ruling on this and the description of the class clearly says that patrons are not gods and options for patrons include clear non-deities such as pit fiends, balors, and ultraloths.
If there is a ruling that they are deities then the mystic arcanum spells would also be “granted” per their description
Sigred, I'm not seeing the source for a lot of what you've said above.
First, patrons are not deities. "A warlock is defined by a pact with an otherworldly being. Sometimes the relationship between warlock and patron is like that of a cleric and a deity, though the beings that serve as patrons for warlocks are not gods."
Elritch Invocations are called: "In your study of occult lore, you have unearthed eldritch invocations, fragments of forbidden knowledge that imbue you with an abiding magical ability." I'm with you on that.
Not sure why Pact Boons would continue to function. Pact of the Blade allows you to summon an object by magic, which is pretty explicitly called out as not functioning as a summoned object. Pact of the Chain is straight up Find Familiar, which is both a spell and also explicitly called out as not functioning as a summoned creature. Pact of the Tome gives you cantrips, which are... spells, and spells are explicitly stopped. What Pact Boons are you talking about?
"Spells created by an artifact or deity" does not equal "spells cast by a divine spellcaster" (which again, Warlocks are not, even Celestial Warlocks).
For this discussion, worth closing by quoting two sections of Sage Advice Compendium:
How do I tell if something in the game is magical?
For an extensive discussion of this topic, see the question “Is the breath weapon of a dragon magical?” in the “Monsters” section below.
Is the breath weapon of a dragon magical?
If you cast antimagic field, don armor of invulnerability, or use another feature of the game that protects against magical or nonmagical effects, you might ask yourself, “Will this protect me against a dragon’s breath?” The breath weapon of a typical dragon isn’t considered magical, so antimagic field won’t help you but armor of invulnerability will.
You might be thinking, “Dragons seem pretty magical to me.” And yes, they are extraordinary! Their description even says they’re magical. But our game makes a distinction between two types of magic:
• the background magic that is part of the D&D multiverse’s physics and the physiology of many D&D creatures
• the concentrated magical energy that is contained in a magic item or channeled to create a spell or other focused magical effect
In D&D, the first type of magic is part of nature. It is no more dispellable than the wind. A monster like a dragon exists because of that magic-enhanced nature. The second type of magic is what the rules are concerned about. When a rule refers to something being magical, it’s referring to that second type. Determining whether a game feature is magical is straightforward. Ask yourself these questions about the feature:
• Is it a magic item?
• Is it a spell? Or does it let you create the effects of a spell that’s mentioned in its description?
• Is it a spell attack?
• Is it fueled by the use of spell slots?
• Does its description say it’s magical?
If your answer to any of those questions is yes, the feature is magical.
Let’s look at a white dragon’s Cold Breath and ask ourselves those questions. First, Cold Breath isn’t a magic item. Second, its description mentions no spell. Third, it’s not a spell attack. Fourth, the word “magical” appears nowhere in its description. Our conclusion: Cold Breath is not considered a magical game effect, even though we know that dragons are amazing, supernatural beings.
Gods are deities, but not all deities are gods. Patrons are deities; they fall into the same bucket as it relates to player character interaction. Many patrons are actual named gods (Raven Queen, Cthulu, Oberron, Titania, etc), but they don't have to be. The difference between a Cleric's god & a Warlock's patron is narrative flavor.
Artifacts are exempt from the effects of an AMF as well. Would you argue that an Orb of Dragonkind is closer to a diety than Cthulu? Rhetorical: I don't believe that you would.
I am also not stating that "Spells created by an artifact or deity" equals "spells cast by a divine spellcaster". That is, of course, not correct. What I am stating is that a "Pact Boon" is something directly created/given by a deity to the Warlock; the entry on Pact Boons states it clearly. Whatever that boon grants the Warlock, and only what is explicitly granted by the boon, is exempt from an AMF.
The "Book of Shadows" given by Pact of the Tome is created by your patron. The book enables the user to cast 3 cantrips. Without the book in their physical possession, the character cannot cast those cantrips at all... AMF or not. These cantrips are not the character's power; it is the patron's.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
You don't know what fear is until you've witnessed a drunk bird divebombing you while carrying a screaming Kobold throwing fire anywhere and everywhere.
I'm not sure "deity" is called out as a rule-relevant concept anywhere other than in antimagic field, and I'm also not sure where else it might pop up in the core books. I'm also not sure that a class feature of a cleric would really count as one "created by a... deity," I'm thinking that that language probably just means that the spell is insufficient to prevent a deity from using its powers.
But in the context of the specific question of whether Warlock abilities are granted by deitiies, we at least have language in their class description which in no uncertain terms says "no." There is no basis for calling that mere "narrative flavor," especially in light of the Sage Advice Compendium language which advises that you read descriptions in this situation to determine the magicalness/source of abilities.
Gods are deities, but not all deities are gods. Patrons are deities; they fall into the same bucket as it relates to player character interaction. Many patrons are actual named gods (Raven Queen, Cthulu, Oberron, Titania, etc), but they don't have to be. The difference between a Cleric's god & a Warlock's patron is narrative flavor.
Artifacts are exempt from the effects of an AMF as well. Would you argue that an Orb of Dragonkind is closer to a diety than Cthulu? Rhetorical: I don't believe that you would.
I am also not stating that "Spells created by an artifact or deity" equals "spells cast by a divine spellcaster". That is, of course, not correct. What I am stating is that a "Pact Boon" is something directly created/given by a deity to the Warlock; the entry on Pact Boons states it clearly. Whatever that boon grants the Warlock, and only what is explicitly granted by the boon, is exempt from an AMF.
The "Book of Shadows" given by Pact of the Tome is created by your patron. The book enables the user to cast 3 cantrips. Without the book in their physical possession, the character cannot cast those cantrips at all... AMF or not. These cantrips are not the character's power; it is the patron's.
First:
Just for reference ... the definition of diety:
1a: the rank or essential nature of a god : divinity
2: a god (see godentry 1 sense 2) or goddess the deities of ancient Greece
Warlock patrons are not dieties (except for some specific exceptions), unless you have a source reference in the rule books otherwise?
Second:
"PACT OF THE CHAIN You learn the find familiar spell and can cast it as a ritual. The spell doesn't count against your number of spells known. When you cast the spell, you can choose one of the normal forms for your familiar or one of the following special forms: imp, pseudodragon, quasit, or sprite. Additionally, when you take the Attack action, you can forgo one of your own attacks to allow your familiar to make one attack of its own."
Pact of the chain specifically grants the warlock the ability to cast the find familiar spell. That's it. The warlock casts it. Unless you are proposing that the warlocks spellcasting is considered that of a diety then it would work just like any other find familiar spell in an anti-magic field.
"PACT OF THE BLADE You can use your action to create a pact weapon in your empty hand. You can choose the form that this melee weapon takes each time you create it (see chapter 5 for weapon options). You are proficient with it white you wield it. This weapon counts as magical for the purpose of overcoming resistance and immunity to nonmagical attacks and damage."
Pact of the Blade creates a weapon that is only magical for the purposes of overcoming resistance and immunity. I don't think it would wink out of existence in an anti magic field since it doesn't have a limited lifetime. In addition, the text does not indicate that the summoning of a pact weapon is actually magical. Magic isn't mentioned at all in this context. So just like a dragons breath would continue to function in an anti-magic field so would the existence of the blade pact weapon.
"PACT OF THE TOME Your patron gives you a grimoire called a Book of Shadows. When you gain this feature, choose three cantrips from any class's spell list. While the book is on your person, you can cast those cantrips at will. They don't count against your number of cantrips known."
Again, pact of the tome grants the ability for the warlock to CAST spells. Spell casting does not function in an anti magic field so these cantrips like any other magical spell would not work. The warlock is the one trying to cast the spell, not a diety. Identical to a cleric whose spells are provided by their diety but who still can't cast spells in an anti-magic field.
Unfortunately for the warlock, eldritch invocations are specifically referred to as magical abilities and would not function in an anti-magic field. Mystic arcanums also only grant the ability to cast spells and so would also not function in an anti-magic field.
On the other hand, several in not all of the other patron features would continue to function since they are not specifically described as magical - Fey Presence, Misty Escape, Hurl through Hell - RAW, based on the criteria in the sage advice compendium, none of these effects are the type of magical effect suppressed by an anti-magic field.
At 3rd level, your otherworldly patron bestows a gift upon you for your loyal service. You gain one of the following features of your choice.
Directly from the patron, as opposed to literally everything else a Warlock gets. I'm not saying Clerics get anything that works inside an AMF either. I suppose a case could be made for Channel Divinity, but I wouldn't personally take that stance. I just note this particular instance with Pact Boons because they use language indicating that Pact Boons are specifically the patron's power/artifact, and they are simply lending use of their power/artifact to the Warlock.
References to what a deity/god/otherworldy entity is are littered all over the source material, and none of it is really consistent in a way that we can say "No, your patron--'Cymbalta the ****-Bringer'--does not constitute a deity."
Chicken is correct that AMF (to my knowledge, at least) is the only instance of a "deity" being referred to in a manner that has mechanical implications. Considering that there are multiple actual D&D "deities" listed as suggested patrons throughout the Warlock subclasses tells me that patrons (in general) qualify.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
You don't know what fear is until you've witnessed a drunk bird divebombing you while carrying a screaming Kobold throwing fire anywhere and everywhere.
So I feel like I should point out that SAC has made some rulings that weigh in on this topic:
Whenever you wonder whether a spell’s effects can be dispelled or suspended, you need to answer one question: is the spell’s duration instantaneous? If the answer is yes, there is nothing to dispel or suspend. Here’s why: the effects of an instantaneous spell are brought into being by magic, but the effects aren’t sustained by magic.
Determining whether a game feature is magical is straightforward. Ask yourself these questions about the feature:
Is it a magic item?
Is it a spell? Or does it let you create the effects of a spell that’s mentioned in its description?
Is it a spell attack?
Is it fueled by the use of spell slots?
Does its description say it’s magical?
If your answer to any of those questions is yes, the feature is magical.
With these in mind:
Eldritch invocations are explicitly stated to be magical abilities and are all suppressed
Pact of the blade creates a magic weapon, but is not described as using magic to summon the weapon. So it functions normally, but the weapon damage is not considered magical, and looses other magic effects, etc.
Pact of the chain can't cast its ritual in the AMF, but the familiar does not wink out because it is not sustained by magic. It is less clear whether you can use any of the other effects of find familiar, but I would expect you can't.
Pact of the tome suffers the most as they can not cast the cantrips gained from the boon. The book of shadows does not vanish if that is worth anything...
Pact magic and Mystic arcanum are casting spells and are obviously suppressed.
You can apply these rules to subclass features too. From a quick glance (very quick) none of them are labeled magical.
Pact of the blade creates a magic weapon, but is not described as using magic to summon the weapon. So it functions normally, but the weapon damage is not considered magical, and looses other magic effects, etc.
Pact of the Blade
You can use your action to create a pact weapon in your empty hand. You can choose the form that this melee weapon takes each time you create it (see the Weapons section for weapon options). You are proficient with it while you wield it. This weapon counts as magical for the purpose of overcoming resistance and immunity to nonmagical attacks and damage.... Your pact weapon disappears if it is more than 5 feet away from you for 1 minute or more.
Creatures and Objects. A creature or object summoned or created by magic temporarily winks out of existence in the sphere. Such a creature instantly reappears once the space the creature occupied is no longer within the sphere.
SA Compendium - Is the breath weapon of a dragon magical?
...Is it a magic item? Is it a spell? Or does it let you create the effects of a spell that’s mentioned in its description?Is it a spell attack?Is it fueled by the use of spell slots?Does its description say it’s magical?...
Pains me to say that that checks out... I had thought that Antimagic Field caused summoned objects to poof, but its only objects summoned by magic. Its absurd to conclude that a Warlock creates a magical sword out of thin air with anything other than magic, but the feature doesn't call it magic, and none of the "is it magic?" tests in SA pan out. Guess it's not magic.
Quote from DxJxC »
Pact of the chain can't cast its ritual in the AMF, but the familiar does not wink out because it is not sustained by magic. It is less clear whether you can use any of the other effects of find familiar, but I would expect you can't."
Pact of the Chain
You learn the find familiar spell and can cast it as a ritual. The spell doesn’t count against your number of spells known.
When you cast the spell, you can choose one of the normal forms for your familiar or one of the following special forms: imp, pseudodragon, quasit, or sprite.
You gain the service of a familiar, a spirit that takes an animal form you choose: bat, cat, crab, frog (toad), hawk, lizard, octopus, owl, poisonous snake, fish (quipper), rat, raven, sea horse, spider, or weasel. Appearingin an unoccupied space within range, the familiar has the statistics of the chosen form, though it is a celestial, fey, or fiend (your choice) instead of a beast....
When the familiar drops to 0 hit points, it disappears, leaving behind no physical form. It reappears after you cast this spell again....
As an action, you can temporarily dismiss your familiar. It disappears into a pocket dimension where it awaits your summons. Alternatively, you can dismiss it forever. As an action while it is temporarily dismissed, you can cause it to reappearin any unoccupied space within 30 feet of you.
Creatures and Objects. A creature or object summoned or created by magic temporarily winks out of existence in the sphere. Such a creature instantly reappears once the space the creature occupied is no longer within the sphere.
But that's a miss on that one. Antimagic Field very specifically causes creatures summoned by magic to wink out of existence, and Find Familiar very plainly summons a creature, and Pact of the Chain very plainly only does what Find Familiar does in the same way that it normally does it (except + more forms, and + more commands). The familiar is gone.
Whenever you wonder whether a spell’s effects can be dispelled or suspended, you need to answer one question: is the spell’s duration instantaneous? If the answer is yes, there is nothing to dispel or suspend. Here’s why: the effects of an instantaneous spell are brought into being by magic, but the effects aren’t sustained by magic.
That's why a familiar doesn't disappear in an antimagic field.
We're not talking about dispelling or suspending in general terms. We're talking about Antimagic Field. And Antimagic Field very specifically says that creatures "summoned by magic" wink out. And a Familiar is summoned by magic. So whatever the rules may be in general, in the specific context we're discussing, they're gone.
But that's a miss on that one. Antimagic Field very specifically causes creatures summoned by magic to wink out of existence, and Find Familiar very plainly summons a creature, and Pact of the Chain very plainly only does what Find Familiar does in the same way that it normally does it (except + more forms, and + more commands). The familiar is gone.
I'm inclined to agree with you, but SAC says otherwise.
We're not talking about dispelling or suspending in general terms. We're talking about Antimagic Field. And Antimagic Field very specifically says that creatures "summoned by magic" wink out. And a Familiar is summoned by magic. So whatever the rules may be in general, in the specific context we're discussing, they're gone.
The SAC actually uses animate dead and antimagic field (and dispel magic) in the example when saying creatures summoned by a spell with a duration of instantaneous cant be suppressed. They used conjure woodland beings as an example of a summoning spell that can be suppressed.
That's it. I quit. Words are meaningless and nothing means anything in 5E, if a non-rulebook can make the plain language "a creature or object summoned or created by magic" mean something other than what it says. Who the hell thought that was a helpful ruling? I quittttttt.
So I was making a warlock character when I began to ask myself if a warlock could be completely shut down by an anti-magic field and I was curious about this because I've never been in a situation with anti-magic before. So I was wondering how a warlock's invocations and pact boons would work in an antimagic field? Does it completely deprive them of all their invocations and their boon? And in the case of hexblades does that make them unable to use their Hex Warrior ability to use charisma for weapon attacks?
I think it would depend...the pact familiar would temporarily wink out of existence in the field, and your pact of the tome cantrips couldn’t be cast or target anything in the field. I would rule that a summoned pact weapon would vanish but a normal weapon you made into a pact weapon would just lose its abilities and become normal while in the field. I’m not familiar with the Hexblade so I’m not sure how that impacts that subclass’ abilities
for invocations obviously the ones granting spells would fail, but innate ones like Devils Sight should still work; that’s not really a magical effect, more of an ability granted by your patron
antimagic field is supposed to seriously disrupt spellcasters, so it’s right to think warlocks would be seriously affected, but overall their probably better off than a wizard or sorcerer in the same situation
Eldritch Invocations are called out as magical abilities. Invocations are not granted by your patron, and they are suppressed while you are inside an AMF. That includes invocations that grant you a permanent passive effect like "Beguiling Influence" and "Devil's Sight".
Pact Boons are directly granted by your patron, so they continue to function. Only the Pact Boon itself, not any separate class features that depend on it. As a Hexblade, you probably took the Pact of the Blade. Pact of the Blade still functions, but Improved Pact Weapon (invocation), Thirsting Blade (invocation), and Hex Warrior (class feature) do not. As weapon summoned from the pact does not disappear, and a "real" magic weapon you've bonded with continues to function as allowed by Pact of the Blade. However, any magical properties of the weapon itself are suppressed. A Longsword, +1 reverts to being a simple Longsword, but it does retain the ability to bypass resistance to non-magical damage as that is a property granted by Pact of the Blade directly.
An improved familiar from Pact of the Chain does not disappear. Similarly--and I'm ambivalent about it--the spells granted by Pact of the Tome can be cast. Only the 3 specific cantrips granted by that boon work, and only if you actually have the Book of Shadows on your person.
You don't know what fear is until you've witnessed a drunk bird divebombing you while carrying a screaming Kobold throwing fire anywhere and everywhere.
I disagree on the chain and tome boons. However they are granted, they are still spells, or summoned by spells. You may be right on the invocations, though, I didn’t read the “magical” description in the main subject for the invocations.
Spells and magical effects granted directly from a deity (of which patrons are included) are specifically called out as exceptions to an Antimagic Field.
You don't know what fear is until you've witnessed a drunk bird divebombing you while carrying a screaming Kobold throwing fire anywhere and everywhere.
Are all patrons considered deities though? I’ve not seen an official ruling on this and the description of the class clearly says that patrons are not gods and options for patrons include clear non-deities such as pit fiends, balors, and ultraloths.
If there is a ruling that they are deities then the mystic arcanum spells would also be “granted” per their description
Sigred, I'm not seeing the source for a lot of what you've said above.
First, patrons are not deities. "A warlock is defined by a pact with an otherworldly being. Sometimes the relationship between warlock and patron is like that of a cleric and a deity, though the beings that serve as patrons for warlocks are not gods."
Elritch Invocations are called: "In your study of occult lore, you have unearthed eldritch invocations, fragments of forbidden knowledge that imbue you with an abiding magical ability." I'm with you on that.
Not sure why Pact Boons would continue to function. Pact of the Blade allows you to summon an object by magic, which is pretty explicitly called out as not functioning as a summoned object. Pact of the Chain is straight up Find Familiar, which is both a spell and also explicitly called out as not functioning as a summoned creature. Pact of the Tome gives you cantrips, which are... spells, and spells are explicitly stopped. What Pact Boons are you talking about?
"Spells created by an artifact or deity" does not equal "spells cast by a divine spellcaster" (which again, Warlocks are not, even Celestial Warlocks).
For this discussion, worth closing by quoting two sections of Sage Advice Compendium:
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
This formatting is getting out of hand, dndbeyond :(
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
Gods are deities, but not all deities are gods. Patrons are deities; they fall into the same bucket as it relates to player character interaction. Many patrons are actual named gods (Raven Queen, Cthulu, Oberron, Titania, etc), but they don't have to be. The difference between a Cleric's god & a Warlock's patron is narrative flavor.
Artifacts are exempt from the effects of an AMF as well. Would you argue that an Orb of Dragonkind is closer to a diety than Cthulu? Rhetorical: I don't believe that you would.
I am also not stating that "Spells created by an artifact or deity" equals "spells cast by a divine spellcaster". That is, of course, not correct. What I am stating is that a "Pact Boon" is something directly created/given by a deity to the Warlock; the entry on Pact Boons states it clearly. Whatever that boon grants the Warlock, and only what is explicitly granted by the boon, is exempt from an AMF.
The "Book of Shadows" given by Pact of the Tome is created by your patron. The book enables the user to cast 3 cantrips. Without the book in their physical possession, the character cannot cast those cantrips at all... AMF or not. These cantrips are not the character's power; it is the patron's.
You don't know what fear is until you've witnessed a drunk bird divebombing you while carrying a screaming Kobold throwing fire anywhere and everywhere.
Can you cite a reference? Whatever definition of “deity” you’re operating under is not in common use by anyone. Deity and god are synonyms.
I'm not sure "deity" is called out as a rule-relevant concept anywhere other than in antimagic field, and I'm also not sure where else it might pop up in the core books. I'm also not sure that a class feature of a cleric would really count as one "created by a... deity," I'm thinking that that language probably just means that the spell is insufficient to prevent a deity from using its powers.
But in the context of the specific question of whether Warlock abilities are granted by deitiies, we at least have language in their class description which in no uncertain terms says "no." There is no basis for calling that mere "narrative flavor," especially in light of the Sage Advice Compendium language which advises that you read descriptions in this situation to determine the magicalness/source of abilities.
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
First:
Just for reference ... the definition of diety:
1a : the rank or essential nature of a god : divinity
b capitalized : god sense 1, supreme being
Warlock patrons are not dieties (except for some specific exceptions), unless you have a source reference in the rule books otherwise?
Second:
"PACT OF THE CHAIN
You learn the find familiar spell and can cast it as a ritual. The spell doesn't count against your number of spells known. When you cast the spell, you can choose one of the normal forms for your familiar or one of the following special forms: imp, pseudodragon, quasit, or sprite. Additionally, when you take the Attack action, you can forgo one of your own attacks to allow your familiar to make one attack of its own."
Pact of the chain specifically grants the warlock the ability to cast the find familiar spell. That's it. The warlock casts it. Unless you are proposing that the warlocks spellcasting is considered that of a diety then it would work just like any other find familiar spell in an anti-magic field.
"PACT OF THE BLADE
You can use your action to create a pact weapon in your empty hand. You can choose the form that this melee weapon takes each time you create it (see chapter 5 for weapon options). You are proficient with it white you wield it. This weapon counts as magical for the purpose of overcoming resistance and immunity to nonmagical attacks and damage."
Pact of the Blade creates a weapon that is only magical for the purposes of overcoming resistance and immunity. I don't think it would wink out of existence in an anti magic field since it doesn't have a limited lifetime. In addition, the text does not indicate that the summoning of a pact weapon is actually magical. Magic isn't mentioned at all in this context. So just like a dragons breath would continue to function in an anti-magic field so would the existence of the blade pact weapon.
"PACT OF THE TOME
Your patron gives you a grimoire called a Book of Shadows. When you gain this feature, choose three cantrips from any class's spell list. While the book is on your person, you can cast those cantrips at will. They don't count against your number of cantrips known."
Again, pact of the tome grants the ability for the warlock to CAST spells. Spell casting does not function in an anti magic field so these cantrips like any other magical spell would not work. The warlock is the one trying to cast the spell, not a diety. Identical to a cleric whose spells are provided by their diety but who still can't cast spells in an anti-magic field.
Unfortunately for the warlock, eldritch invocations are specifically referred to as magical abilities and would not function in an anti-magic field. Mystic arcanums also only grant the ability to cast spells and so would also not function in an anti-magic field.
On the other hand, several in not all of the other patron features would continue to function since they are not specifically described as magical - Fey Presence, Misty Escape, Hurl through Hell - RAW, based on the criteria in the sage advice compendium, none of these effects are the type of magical effect suppressed by an anti-magic field.
The pact boon spells are not created by directly the diety itself, so I would rule it does not function.
Site Info: Wizard's ToS | Fan Content Policy | Forum Rules | Physical Books | Content Not Working | Contact Support
How To: Homebrew Rules | Create Homebrew | Snippet Codes | Tool Tips (Custom) | Rollables (Generator)
My Homebrew: Races | Subclasses | Backgrounds | Feats | Spells | Magic Items
Other: Beyond20 | Page References | Other Guides | Entitlements | Dice Randomization | Images Fix | FAQ
Directly from the patron, as opposed to literally everything else a Warlock gets. I'm not saying Clerics get anything that works inside an AMF either. I suppose a case could be made for Channel Divinity, but I wouldn't personally take that stance. I just note this particular instance with Pact Boons because they use language indicating that Pact Boons are specifically the patron's power/artifact, and they are simply lending use of their power/artifact to the Warlock.
References to what a deity/god/otherworldy entity is are littered all over the source material, and none of it is really consistent in a way that we can say "No, your patron--'Cymbalta the ****-Bringer'--does not constitute a deity."
Chicken is correct that AMF (to my knowledge, at least) is the only instance of a "deity" being referred to in a manner that has mechanical implications. Considering that there are multiple actual D&D "deities" listed as suggested patrons throughout the Warlock subclasses tells me that patrons (in general) qualify.
You don't know what fear is until you've witnessed a drunk bird divebombing you while carrying a screaming Kobold throwing fire anywhere and everywhere.
So I feel like I should point out that SAC has made some rulings that weigh in on this topic:
With these in mind:
You can apply these rules to subclass features too. From a quick glance (very quick) none of them are labeled magical.
Pains me to say that that checks out... I had thought that Antimagic Field caused summoned objects to poof, but its only objects summoned by magic. Its absurd to conclude that a Warlock creates a magical sword out of thin air with anything other than magic, but the feature doesn't call it magic, and none of the "is it magic?" tests in SA pan out. Guess it's not magic.
But that's a miss on that one. Antimagic Field very specifically causes creatures summoned by magic to wink out of existence, and Find Familiar very plainly summons a creature, and Pact of the Chain very plainly only does what Find Familiar does in the same way that it normally does it (except + more forms, and + more commands). The familiar is gone.
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
You're missing something very important:
That's why a familiar doesn't disappear in an antimagic field.
We're not talking about dispelling or suspending in general terms. We're talking about Antimagic Field. And Antimagic Field very specifically says that creatures "summoned by magic" wink out. And a Familiar is summoned by magic. So whatever the rules may be in general, in the specific context we're discussing, they're gone.
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
I'm inclined to agree with you, but SAC says otherwise.
The SAC actually uses animate dead and antimagic field (and dispel magic) in the example when saying creatures summoned by a spell with a duration of instantaneous cant be suppressed. They used conjure woodland beings as an example of a summoning spell that can be suppressed.
>_<
That's it. I quit. Words are meaningless and nothing means anything in 5E, if a non-rulebook can make the plain language "a creature or object summoned or created by magic" mean something other than what it says. Who the hell thought that was a helpful ruling? I quittttttt.
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.