I suppose that the invisible servants created by Mighty Fortress (which are called out as operating as per the Unseen Servant spell), also would not be magical spirits sustained by the magic of the 7-day effect created by the instantaneous duration spell?
Technically, yes.
DM's can rule whatever they want, I'm just here to discuss the actual rules.
Edit: If you're going to rule in your game that they would be dispelled in an AMF because it says "they function as if created by the Unseen Servant spell", then you also have to rule that the servants disappear after 1 hour, not 7 days. That sentence is not in there so that they act exactly like they were created by the Unseen Servant spell; it's in there so they don't have to re-establish what acts an Unseen Servant can do.
None of what I emboldened is true. Familiars are creatures, it specifically says so. Neither goodberry nor heroes' feast state they create anything; neither of them have the Creation tag. The magic is instantaneous; the berries and food themselves are not magical.
A familiar is a creature summoned through an instantaneous effect, and wouldn't be dispelled upon entering an AMF any more than someone who has previously teleported/plane shifted to the plane where the AMF would be.
Now you are just arguing without bothering to understand or double check.
My point was, that even if a DM erroneously classified a familiar as magical, or correctly classified it as a non-magical creature, the wording of Antimagic Field clearly states it gets nullified, because "summoned or created" are past tense.
Goodberry and Heroe's Feast may not be flagged as "Creation", probably because they are not permanent (Feast is 1 hour, Berries are 24 hours). But the spell createsforms/generates/makes/produces/spawns/fabricates/brings into existence something from nothing. That is by definition, 'creation'.
The very first sentence in the description of Goodberry: "Up to ten berries appear in your hand and are infused with magic for the duration."
I don't have to rule any such thing. I have not cast Unseen Servant, a 1st level spell the magic of which is sufficient only to sustain such a creature for 1 hour. There is no Unseen Servant spell to dispel, I have cast my spell and expended my magical energy and moved on. But magical spirits have been created that are the same sort of magical spirit which Unseen Servant creates, and the instantaneous duration spell that cast them has left them with enough lingering magic to sustain themselves for 7 days, and these magically created spirits would indeed wink out if subjected to an Antimagic Field. To pretend otherwise would be to do extreme violence to common sense in service of slavish devotion to a "rule" which isn't printed anywhere in Antimagic Field or in the Duration section of the spellcasting rules.
Many spells are instantaneous. The spell harms, heals, creates, or alters a creature or an object in a way that can't be dispelled, because its magic exists only for an instant.
This could not be more clear. There is no magic to dispel, through Dispel Magic or through an Antimagic Field or anything else.
you will find no language within Antimagic Field suggesting that if a lingering magical effect has been created by an Instantaneous Duration spell, that somehow it is exempt from the ways that the spell effects magical creatures, objects, and effects as described in the spell.
There is no lingering magical effect left by Instantaneous spells. Their magic exists only for an instant. Antimagic Field does not need to call out the magic left by instantaneous spells, because there isn't any.
Heroes' Feast is a bit odd, sure, but it's no different. The food is not magical. The benefits it provides are not magical. There is an instantaneous magical effect that summons (see "brings forth") a great feast. At the end of the hour it disappears, presumably through another instantaneous effect, but it doesn't specify. What the rules do specify is that after an instantaneous spell is cast, there is no ongoing magic. Period.
Just assuming they're magical when the rules explicitly say they are not is faulty logic, that's all there is too it.
An interesting argument would be "If you cast Heroes' Feast and then put it in an Antimagic Field, would it disappear at the end of the hour?"
antimagic field and dispel magic have very different effects, but your argument seems to be predicated on them basically being the same. Dispel Magic permanently ends an active spell. The focal point is a spell, so duration is important. Antimagic Field hits all kinds of magic, and is not limited to spells. This means that spell duration can be irrelevant to a specific application of the Anti Magic Field. The effects on creatures are listed as the effects on creatures, not spells that summon or create creatures, as follows
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.
this effect is not ending the spell, nor the effect, it is, in plain language, causing creatures or objects summoned or created by a spell to temporarily wink out of existence. Familiars wink out because they were created by magic, not because any magic is currently sustaining them. The same applies to good berries, heroes feasts, and anything else created by magic
I don't have to rule any such thing. I have not cast Unseen Servant, a 1st level spell the magic of which is sufficient only to sustain such a creature for 1 hour. There is no Unseen Servant spell to dispel, I have cast my spell and expended my magical energy and moved on. But magical spirits have been created that are the same sort of magical spirit which Unseen Servant creates, and the instantaneous duration spell that cast them has left them with enough lingering magic to sustain themselves for 7 days, and these magically created spirits would indeed wink out if subjected to an Antimagic Field. To pretend otherwise would be to do extreme violence to common sense in service of slavish devotion to a "rule" which isn't printed anywhere in Antimagic Field or in the Duration section of the spellcasting rules.
Spell duration is unimportant and AMF isn’t “dispelling” the creature. They were created (or summoned) by magic, so the plain language of the AMF means they wink out (I’m agreeing with you, see my comment above)
I'm sorry, could you point out exactly where in Mighty Fortress it says that the invisible servants are magical spirits? I'll wait.
IfUnseen Servant was instantaneous, rather than having a duration of 1 hour, they also - RAW - wouldn't disappear in an AMF. They are "an invisible, mindless, shapeless, Medium force." Not a "magical spirit."
I am not at all considering Dispel Magic and Antimagic Field to be the same. I am well aware of the differences and specifics of both.
Familiars are not created by magic; they are creatures that were summoned by it. I don't know in what language "Find" means "Create." You guys are assuming a lot of untrue stuff for these arguments.
A Familiar was summonedby magic, but by the time it enters an AMF, it is not being summoned. It's already there, and now is just a creature same as any other; the only difference is it was previously teleported. Creatures brought forth by spells like Conjure Animals, on the other hand, are actively being summoned. Again, saying that this creature that was previously summoned from another plane would disappear in an AMF is akin to saying someone who has Plane Shifted would disappear. It wouldn't. They wouldn't.
Edit:
The very first sentence in the description of Goodberry: "Up to ten berries appear in your hand and are infused with magic for the duration."
I already debunked this, Kerrec. The duration is instantaneous. They are infused only for the instantaneous casting of the spell.
I'm sorry, could you point out exactly where in Mighty Fortress it says that the invisible servants are magical spirits? I'll wait.
IfUnseen Servant was instantaneous, rather than having a duration of 1 hour, they also - RAW - wouldn't disappear in an AMF. They are "an invisible, mindless, shapeless, Medium force." Not a "magical spirit."
I am not at all considering Dispel Magic and Antimagic Field to be the same. I am well aware of the differences and specifics of both.
Familiars are not created by magic; they are creatures that were summoned by it. I don't know in what language "Find" means "Create." You guys are assuming a lot of untrue stuff for these arguments.
A Familiar was summonedby magic, but by the time it enters an AMF, it is not being summoned. It's already there, and now is just a creature same as any other; the only difference is it was previously teleported. Creatures brought forth by spells like Conjure Animals, on the other hand, are actively being summoned. Again, saying that this creature that was previously summoned from another plane would disappear in an AMF is akin to saying someone who has Plane Shifted would disappear. It wouldn't. They wouldn't.
AMF uses created and summoned in past tense...not present. If it said “a creature or object being created or summoned...” then I would agree with you, but it doesn’t say that. If it was at any point in the past summoned or created by a spell or effect, it winks out, Plain language, end of story
I'm sorry, could you point out exactly where in Mighty Fortress it says that the invisible servants are magical spirits? I'll wait.
IfUnseen Servant was instantaneous, rather than having a duration of 1 hour, they also - RAW - wouldn't disappear in an AMF. They are "an invisible, mindless, shapeless, Medium force." Not a "magical spirit."
I am not at all considering Dispel Magic and Antimagic Field to be the same. I am well aware of the differences and specifics of both.
Familiars are not created by magic; they are creatures that were summoned by it. I don't know in what language "Find" means "Create." You guys are assuming a lot of untrue stuff for these arguments.
A Familiar was summonedby magic, but by the time it enters an AMF, it is not being summoned. It's already there, and now is just a creature same as any other; the only difference is it was previously teleported. Creatures brought forth by spells like Conjure Animals, on the other hand, are actively being summoned. Again, saying that this creature that was previously summoned from another plane would disappear in an AMF is akin to saying someone who has Plane Shifted would disappear. It wouldn't. They wouldn't.
The find familiar spell has the "summoned" tag right in the spell description. It is summoned.
Antimagic field clearly states, "...creature or object summoned or created by magic temporarily winks out of existence in the sphere."
Are you arguing that the "invisible, mindless, shapeless, Medium force" created by Unseen Servant is not a magical [spirit/creature/force/whatehaveyou]? And if so, follow up, are you arguing that in good faith and because you believe it, or because you think you need to in order to win this argument?
I am arguing it because this is a game with structured rules and langauge (sorta) and it in no way says that it is magical. If it were, it would say so.
I'm not one to care about winning arguments, I just care about the truth of things. If I saw an argument that actually proved my viewpoint wrong, I would be happy to change it. But I'm not seeing any. If I was to decide myself, I would happily agree with you guys, but that's not what the rules add up to. Not in my eyes.
Mm, no. I would say AMF is using "summoned" as a verb participle, not as past tense.
Still “past” participle, with no other language indicating that it means anything other than the past. It’s plain language, and you are twisting yourself in knots trying to justify a point of view that simply doesn’t fit the plain language
Mm, no. I would say AMF is using "summoned" as a verb participle, not as past tense.
Still “past” participle, with no other language indicating that it means anything other than the past. It’s plain language, and you are twisting yourself in knots trying to justify a point of view that simply doesn’t fit the plain language
Maybe. But at least I'm not making up language and rules that don't exist to further my arguments. And what are they going to do, use present participle? "Creatures summoning or creating..." Yeah, makes perfect sense.
Oh come on. You're arguing that Goodberry does not have any magical effect because the casting time is Instantaneous, when the spell clearly says it is magical for the duration, which is the life of the berries, IE: 24 hours, not the casting of the spell. What is the point of writing, "and are infused with magic for the duration" if the duration (as you are arguing it) is 'Instantaneous'?
You're arguing because you don't want to be wrong.
Oh come on. You're arguing that Goodberry does not have any magical effect because the casting time is Instantaneous, when the spell clearly says it is magical for the duration, which is the life of the berries, IE: 24 hours, not the casting of the spell. What is the point of writing, "and are infused with magic for the duration" if the duration (as you are arguing it) is 'Instantaneous'?
You're arguing because you don't want to be wrong.
No it bloody doesn't. Duration means one thing when it comes to spells in DnD 5e, and the Duration of Goodberry is instantaneous. The point of writing it is to explain that the mundane berries that appeared in your hand are - for an instant - infused with magic that makes them incredibly nourishing. There is no magic afterwards. The rules of instantaneous spells literally say that.
I'm not arguing because "I don't want to be wrong" and I would appreciate people not assuming such things about one another. I am arguing because there is an argument to be made, and I find this kind of stuff incredibly interesting. Also I'm at work and it's super dead, so I appreciate you guys keeping me entertained with this.
Oh come on. You're arguing that Goodberry does not have any magical effect because the casting time is Instantaneous, when the spell clearly says it is magical for the duration, which is the life of the berries, IE: 24 hours, not the casting of the spell. What is the point of writing, "and are infused with magic for the duration" if the duration (as you are arguing it) is 'Instantaneous'?
You're arguing because you don't want to be wrong.
No it bloody doesn't. Duration means one thing when it comes to spells in DnD 5e, and the Duration of Goodberry is instantaneous. The point of writing it is to explain that the mundane berries that appeared in your hand are - for an instant - infused with magic that makes them incredibly nourishing. There is no magic afterwards. The rules of instantaneous spells literally say that.
I'm not arguing because "I don't want to be wrong" and I would appreciate people not assuming such things about one another. I am arguing because there is an argument to be made, and I find this kind of stuff incredibly interesting.
Specific always beats general in DnD...that’s even in the rules. The rules of Goodberry, and AMF, override the general spellcasting rules where their descriptions differ
Mm, no. I would say AMF is using "summoned" as a verb participle, not as past tense.
It was summoned, not is summoned.
English is not my first language. It took me 5 minutes of googling to determine what you wrote is completely wrong.
A 'verb participle' turns a verb into an adjective.
An 'adjective' describe, identify, or further define nouns and pronouns.
If 'summoned' is a verb participle, then what noun/pronoun is it defining?
Here are some proper example of a verb participles:
The boiled water (past participle), the boiling water (present participle)
The cooked ham (past participle), the cooking ham (present participle)
In the description of Antimagic Field:
A creature or object summoned or created by magic temporarily winks out of existence in the sphere.
'Summoned' and 'Created' are not further defining any nouns. In fact, if you remove them from the sentence (assuming they are verb participles), then you get:
A creature or object by magic temporarily winks out of existence in the sphere.
Which is a garbage sentence because there is no verb between creature/object and 'by magic'. You would have to remove 'by magic' for that sentence to make sense grammatically, although then it would be seriously overpowered as far as game mechanics are concerned.
Technically, yes.
DM's can rule whatever they want, I'm just here to discuss the actual rules.
Edit: If you're going to rule in your game that they would be dispelled in an AMF because it says "they function as if created by the Unseen Servant spell", then you also have to rule that the servants disappear after 1 hour, not 7 days. That sentence is not in there so that they act exactly like they were created by the Unseen Servant spell; it's in there so they don't have to re-establish what acts an Unseen Servant can do.
Now you are just arguing without bothering to understand or double check.
createsforms/generates/makes/produces/spawns/fabricates/brings into existence something from nothing. That is by definition, 'creation'.I don't have to rule any such thing. I have not cast Unseen Servant, a 1st level spell the magic of which is sufficient only to sustain such a creature for 1 hour. There is no Unseen Servant spell to dispel, I have cast my spell and expended my magical energy and moved on. But magical spirits have been created that are the same sort of magical spirit which Unseen Servant creates, and the instantaneous duration spell that cast them has left them with enough lingering magic to sustain themselves for 7 days, and these magically created spirits would indeed wink out if subjected to an Antimagic Field. To pretend otherwise would be to do extreme violence to common sense in service of slavish devotion to a "rule" which isn't printed anywhere in Antimagic Field or in the Duration section of the spellcasting rules.
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
antimagic field and dispel magic have very different effects, but your argument seems to be predicated on them basically being the same. Dispel Magic permanently ends an active spell. The focal point is a spell, so duration is important. Antimagic Field hits all kinds of magic, and is not limited to spells. This means that spell duration can be irrelevant to a specific application of the Anti Magic Field. The effects on creatures are listed as the effects on creatures, not spells that summon or create creatures, as follows
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.
this effect is not ending the spell, nor the effect, it is, in plain language, causing creatures or objects summoned or created by a spell to temporarily wink out of existence. Familiars wink out because they were created by magic, not because any magic is currently sustaining them. The same applies to good berries, heroes feasts, and anything else created by magic
Spell duration is unimportant and AMF isn’t “dispelling” the creature. They were created (or summoned) by magic, so the plain language of the AMF means they wink out (I’m agreeing with you, see my comment above)
I'm sorry, could you point out exactly where in Mighty Fortress it says that the invisible servants are magical spirits? I'll wait.
If Unseen Servant was instantaneous, rather than having a duration of 1 hour, they also - RAW - wouldn't disappear in an AMF. They are "an invisible, mindless, shapeless, Medium force." Not a "magical spirit."
I am not at all considering Dispel Magic and Antimagic Field to be the same. I am well aware of the differences and specifics of both.
Familiars are not created by magic; they are creatures that were summoned by it. I don't know in what language "Find" means "Create." You guys are assuming a lot of untrue stuff for these arguments.
A Familiar was summoned by magic, but by the time it enters an AMF, it is not being summoned. It's already there, and now is just a creature same as any other; the only difference is it was previously teleported. Creatures brought forth by spells like Conjure Animals, on the other hand, are actively being summoned. Again, saying that this creature that was previously summoned from another plane would disappear in an AMF is akin to saying someone who has Plane Shifted would disappear. It wouldn't. They wouldn't.
Edit:
I already debunked this, Kerrec. The duration is instantaneous. They are infused only for the instantaneous casting of the spell.
AMF uses created and summoned in past tense...not present. If it said “a creature or object being created or summoned...” then I would agree with you, but it doesn’t say that. If it was at any point in the past summoned or created by a spell or effect, it winks out, Plain language, end of story
The find familiar spell has the "summoned" tag right in the spell description. It is summoned.
Antimagic field clearly states, "...creature or object summoned or created by magic temporarily winks out of existence in the sphere."
Are you arguing that the "invisible, mindless, shapeless, Medium force" created by Unseen Servant is not a magical [spirit/creature/force/whatehaveyou]? And if so, follow up, are you arguing that in good faith and because you believe it, or because you think you need to in order to win this argument?
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
Mm, no. I would say AMF is using "summoned" as a verb participle, not as past tense.
It was summoned, not is summoned.
Oh good lord.
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
I am arguing it because this is a game with structured rules and langauge (sorta) and it in no way says that it is magical. If it were, it would say so.
I'm not one to care about winning arguments, I just care about the truth of things. If I saw an argument that actually proved my viewpoint wrong, I would be happy to change it. But I'm not seeing any. If I was to decide myself, I would happily agree with you guys, but that's not what the rules add up to. Not in my eyes.
Still “past” participle, with no other language indicating that it means anything other than the past. It’s plain language, and you are twisting yourself in knots trying to justify a point of view that simply doesn’t fit the plain language
What? It's true.
AFM says "A creature or object summoned or created by magic temporarily."
Summoned is acting as an adjective in this sentence. That makes it a verb participle, not verb tense.
Maybe. But at least I'm not making up language and rules that don't exist to further my arguments. And what are they going to do, use present participle? "Creatures summoning or creating..." Yeah, makes perfect sense.
Oh come on. You're arguing that Goodberry does not have any magical effect because the casting time is Instantaneous, when the spell clearly says it is magical for the duration, which is the life of the berries, IE: 24 hours, not the casting of the spell. What is the point of writing, "and are infused with magic for the duration" if the duration (as you are arguing it) is 'Instantaneous'?
You're arguing because you don't want to be wrong.
No it bloody doesn't. Duration means one thing when it comes to spells in DnD 5e, and the Duration of Goodberry is instantaneous. The point of writing it is to explain that the mundane berries that appeared in your hand are - for an instant - infused with magic that makes them incredibly nourishing. There is no magic afterwards. The rules of instantaneous spells literally say that.
I'm not arguing because "I don't want to be wrong" and I would appreciate people not assuming such things about one another. I am arguing because there is an argument to be made, and I find this kind of stuff incredibly interesting. Also I'm at work and it's super dead, so I appreciate you guys keeping me entertained with this.
Specific always beats general in DnD...that’s even in the rules. The rules of Goodberry, and AMF, override the general spellcasting rules where their descriptions differ
What exactly in those two spells are you saying differ from the general spellcasting rules? Particularly goodberry.
English is not my first language. It took me 5 minutes of googling to determine what you wrote is completely wrong.
A 'verb participle' turns a verb into an adjective.
An 'adjective' describe, identify, or further define nouns and pronouns.
If 'summoned' is a verb participle, then what noun/pronoun is it defining?
Here are some proper example of a verb participles:
In the description of Antimagic Field:
A creature or object summoned or created by magic temporarily winks out of existence in the sphere.
'Summoned' and 'Created' are not further defining any nouns. In fact, if you remove them from the sentence (assuming they are verb participles), then you get:
A creature or object by magic temporarily winks out of existence in the sphere.
Which is a garbage sentence because there is no verb between creature/object and 'by magic'. You would have to remove 'by magic' for that sentence to make sense grammatically, although then it would be seriously overpowered as far as game mechanics are concerned.