Working on a homebrew class that's anti-corruption: currently the class revolves around using anti-magic to stop corruption, but if some creatures are pure magic and good aligned, then I'm thinking of tweaking some of the ideas.
Which monster types are considered pure magic? A good deal of them are magic in some way, in that they can’t exist in our world, but how would you determine that they are pure magic? Even an elemental is made of natural elements.
Which monster types are considered pure magic? A good deal of them are magic in some way, in that they can’t exist in our world, but how would you determine that they are pure magic? Even an elemental is made of natural elements.
For example, if an anti-magic force passed through them, they would immediately die.
Working on a homebrew class that's ant-corruption: currently the class revolves around using anti-magic to stop corruption, but if some creatures are pure magic and good aligned, then I'm thinking of tweaking some of the ideas.
heh. what's with you and antimagic, my friend?
Technically no, there are no creatures that are good aligned and stopped by antimagic in that way. the closest you'll get is the Animated Objects (such as Flying Swords, Animated Armors, etc)
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Formerly Devan Avalon.
Trying to get your physical content on Beyond is like going to Microsoft and saying "I have a physical Playstation disk, give me a digital Xbox version!"
Working on a homebrew class that's ant-corruption: currently the class revolves around using anti-magic to stop corruption, but if some creatures are pure magic and good aligned, then I'm thinking of tweaking some of the ideas.
There aren't any good-aligned 'pure magic' creatures. There also aren't any evil-aligned 'pure magic' creatures. The main thing an anti-magic class would be good at killing is PCs.
In 5E, you won't find any creatures "made" of magic that I have seen.
In the older editions you could find all sorts of creatures....like Magic Elementals(but they are neutral). Wizshades are wizard that 'somehow' became pure magic shades.
Alkada are weird walking tentacled anti magic creatures magic creatures
The Beholder has an anti magic eye.
There are a bunch of anti magic energy monsters: Nishruu, Aoa, Spellgaunts, Hakeashars, and Larkens.
Which monster types are considered pure magic? A good deal of them are magic in some way, in that they can’t exist in our world, but how would you determine that they are pure magic? Even an elemental is made of natural elements.
For example, if an anti-magic force passed through them, they would immediately die.
There aren't any monsters of any types that are killed by anti-magic fields. There are some, like the previously-mentioned Animated Objects that are temporarily incapacitated by anti-magic fields, but I don't think that there have ever been any monsters that were outright killed by anti-magic.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
Working on a homebrew class that's ant-corruption: currently the class revolves around using anti-magic to stop corruption, but if some creatures are pure magic and good aligned, then I'm thinking of tweaking some of the ideas.
heh. what's with you and antimagic, my friend?
I want a class that can defend themselves against magic: I think it's unfair and broken if you can instantly get banished, thrown into some kind of abyss, have a giant mountain thrown on top of you or be wished to death and not have some opportunity or chance to fight back, or the very least some telegraphed cue to react.
Working on a homebrew class that's ant-corruption: currently the class revolves around using anti-magic to stop corruption, but if some creatures are pure magic and good aligned, then I'm thinking of tweaking some of the ideas.
heh. what's with you and antimagic, my friend?
I want a class that can defend themselves against magic: I think it's unfair and broken if you can instantly get banished, thrown into some kind of abyss, have a giant mountain thrown on top of you or be wished to death and not have some opportunity or chance to fight back, or the very least some telegraphed cue to react.
This is literally what saving throws are. Paladins get CHA to saves, monks eventually become proficient in every saving throw, artificers can get up to +6 on all saves for their capstone. Then you've got other stuff like Flash of Genius or Indomitable that gives further save bonuses, or Oath of the Ancients' magic resistance. These are the kinds of mechanics that 5e uses to represent defending against magic. And they can be quite effective, especially since most of them stack with each other.
The main thing an anti-magic class would be good at killing is PCs.
what makes you say that?
Because PCs generally use a lot more magic than monsters.
What if the monster is a wizard, possesses a wizard or enchanted a wizard? Also not all enemies are monsters, in terms of what creature they are physically; some enemies could be spellcasting non-monsters.
What if the monster is a wizard, possesses a wizard or enchanted a wizard? Also not all enemies are monsters, in terms of what creature they are physically; some enemies could be spellcasting non-monsters.
I didn't say anti-magic was useless against monsters, just that it's most useful against PCs.
I want a class that can defend themselves against magic: I think it's unfair and broken if you can instantly get banished, thrown into some kind of abyss, have a giant mountain thrown on top of you or be wished to death and not have some opportunity or chance to fight back, or the very least some telegraphed cue to react.
This is literally what saving throws are. Paladins get CHA to saves, monks eventually become proficient in every saving throw, artificers can get up to +6 on all saves for their capstone. Then you've got other stuff like Flash of Genius or Indomitable that gives further save bonuses, or Oath of the Ancients' magic resistance. These are the kinds of mechanics that 5e uses to represent defending against magic. And they can be quite effective, especially since most of them stack with each other.
But the wish spell can undo most of these things: in wish's description the fifth bullet point says "a wish spell could undo an opponent's successful save, a foe's critical hit, or a friend's failed save. You can force the reroll to be made with advantage or disadvantage, and you can choose whether to use the reroll or the original roll." Also I don't know how and if magic resistance can suppress the effects of wish; I suppose it's meant to be interpreted by the DM.
What if the monster is a wizard, possesses a wizard or enchanted a wizard? Also not all enemies are monsters, in terms of what creature they are physically; some enemies could be spellcasting non-monsters.
I didn't say anti-magic was useless against monsters, just that it's most useful against PCs.
What about them? They exist, but most of the time they're best dealt with by just killing them before they can cast a spell, because almost all of them are total glass cannons.
There are no monsters in 5th Edition that are "pure magic" in the sense of getting destroyed by an Antimagic Field. Of any alignment.
You can get some animated armor type things with a "Antimagic Susceptibility" where the worst is that it falls unconscious for 1 minute.
Even things like Living Spells - which are magic spells becoming sentient - are still not "pure magic" in the way you want them to be. They are creatures.
In D&D 5th Edition game terms there's no such thing as "non-Monster NPCs". A monster is any creature of any kind that is not a PC. Even a commoner human is a monster. "NPC" is a monster sub-type to denote a non-generic monster and one that has individual identity within an adventure or a specific type of generic monster such as an Abjurer so adventures can say "You meet Alistair who is an Abjurer". The NPC tag includes mostly humanoids but also constructs, aberrations, dragons, etc. The term "creature" applies to anything living/undead for the general term of PCs and Monsters.
Anyway, what you're asking for does not exist in this edition.
And as for the whole "fighting against magic" thing, several options are available to you. From Paladins with their bonus to all saves for the party, to Monks with all-saves proficiency, to spellcasting classes with access to spells like Protection From Evil and Good, Dispel Magic and Counterspell. Some classes are particularly good at counterspelling like Lore Bards (can add their own bardic die to the check, which also gets a jack-of-all-trades half-prof bonus) or Abjuration Wizards (add prof bonus to check).
You cite "Wish" as your reason because it can be used to negate the party's successful save. However, by the time the party should encounter any of the extremely few monsters that have Wish the party should have reasonable enough measures against it from class features, magic items and their own spellcasters with access to Antimagic Field or even Wish themselves. So, frankly, using Wish as the reason is rather unfounded. Especially since a low-level Counterspell with a good roll can negate it.
--
TL;DR
No, there isn't any.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Click ✨ HERE ✨ For My Youtube Videos featuring Guides, Tips & Tricks for using D&D Beyond. Need help with Homebrew? Check out ✨ thisFAQ/Guide thread ✨ by IamSposta.
I want a class that can defend themselves against magic: I think it's unfair and broken if you can instantly get banished, thrown into some kind of abyss, have a giant mountain thrown on top of you or be wished to death and not have some opportunity or chance to fight back, or the very least some telegraphed cue to react.
This is literally what saving throws are. Paladins get CHA to saves, monks eventually become proficient in every saving throw, artificers can get up to +6 on all saves for their capstone. Then you've got other stuff like Flash of Genius or Indomitable that gives further save bonuses, or Oath of the Ancients' magic resistance. These are the kinds of mechanics that 5e uses to represent defending against magic. And they can be quite effective, especially since most of them stack with each other.
But the wish spell can undo most of these things: in wish's description the fifth bullet point says "a wish spell could undo an opponent's successful save, a foe's critical hit, or a friend's failed save. You can force the reroll to be made with advantage or disadvantage, and you can choose whether to use the reroll or the original roll." Also I don't know how and if magic resistance can suppress the effects of wish; I suppose it's meant to be interpreted by the DM.
...did you read the fine print that comes with using Wish in that way? 1 in 3 chance of losing the ability to cast Wish permanently and every time the caster casts a spell for the rest of the day, they take damage. Unless there was a a really critical save you made, no one in their right mind is going to use Wish that way when the chances are that it'll either be wasted, they'll lose the spell or both, plus they take damage any time they cast a spell that day.
Don't go for bulletproof perfection. You get diminishing returns the harder you push on something, so you end up having issues elsewhere. Sure, Saves are not infallible. They don't have to be, they just need to solid enough that you stand a chance. If you want to have a good improvement to them, either relay a Paladin or sweet talk one of your party members into it.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Working on a homebrew class that's anti-corruption: currently the class revolves around using anti-magic to stop corruption, but if some creatures are pure magic and good aligned, then I'm thinking of tweaking some of the ideas.
Which monster types are considered pure magic? A good deal of them are magic in some way, in that they can’t exist in our world, but how would you determine that they are pure magic? Even an elemental is made of natural elements.
Only spilt the party if you see something shiny.
Ariendela Sneakerson, Half-elf Rogue (8); Harmony Wolfsbane, Tiefling Bard (10); Agnomally, Gnomish Sorcerer (3); Breeze, Tabaxi Monk (8); Grace, Dragonborn Barbarian (7); DM, Homebrew- The Sequestered Lands/Underwater Explorers; Candlekeep
For example, if an anti-magic force passed through them, they would immediately die.
heh. what's with you and antimagic, my friend?
Technically no, there are no creatures that are good aligned and stopped by antimagic in that way. the closest you'll get is the Animated Objects (such as Flying Swords, Animated Armors, etc)
Formerly Devan Avalon.
Trying to get your physical content on Beyond is like going to Microsoft and saying "I have a physical Playstation disk, give me a digital Xbox version!"
There aren't any good-aligned 'pure magic' creatures. There also aren't any evil-aligned 'pure magic' creatures. The main thing an anti-magic class would be good at killing is PCs.
In 5E, you won't find any creatures "made" of magic that I have seen.
In the older editions you could find all sorts of creatures....like Magic Elementals(but they are neutral). Wizshades are wizard that 'somehow' became pure magic shades.
Alkada are weird walking tentacled anti magic creatures magic creatures
The Beholder has an anti magic eye.
There are a bunch of anti magic energy monsters: Nishruu, Aoa, Spellgaunts, Hakeashars, and Larkens.
There aren't any monsters of any types that are killed by anti-magic fields. There are some, like the previously-mentioned Animated Objects that are temporarily incapacitated by anti-magic fields, but I don't think that there have ever been any monsters that were outright killed by anti-magic.
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
what makes you say that?
I want a class that can defend themselves against magic: I think it's unfair and broken if you can instantly get banished, thrown into some kind of abyss, have a giant mountain thrown on top of you or be wished to death and not have some opportunity or chance to fight back, or the very least some telegraphed cue to react.
Because PCs generally use a lot more magic than monsters.
More people hating on ants...
This is literally what saving throws are. Paladins get CHA to saves, monks eventually become proficient in every saving throw, artificers can get up to +6 on all saves for their capstone. Then you've got other stuff like Flash of Genius or Indomitable that gives further save bonuses, or Oath of the Ancients' magic resistance. These are the kinds of mechanics that 5e uses to represent defending against magic. And they can be quite effective, especially since most of them stack with each other.
My homebrew subclasses (full list here)
(Artificer) Swordmage | Glasswright | (Barbarian) Path of the Savage Embrace
(Bard) College of Dance | (Fighter) Warlord | Cannoneer
(Monk) Way of the Elements | (Ranger) Blade Dancer
(Rogue) DaggerMaster | Inquisitor | (Sorcerer) Riftwalker | Spellfist
(Warlock) The Swarm
What if the monster is a wizard, possesses a wizard or enchanted a wizard? Also not all enemies are monsters, in terms of what creature they are physically; some enemies could be spellcasting non-monsters.
caught the mistake thanks
I didn't say anti-magic was useless against monsters, just that it's most useful against PCs.
But the wish spell can undo most of these things: in wish's description the fifth bullet point says "a wish spell could undo an opponent's successful save, a foe's critical hit, or a friend's failed save. You can force the reroll to be made with advantage or disadvantage, and you can choose whether to use the reroll or the original roll." Also I don't know how and if magic resistance can suppress the effects of wish; I suppose it's meant to be interpreted by the DM.
What about non-monster NPCs that use magic?
What about them? They exist, but most of the time they're best dealt with by just killing them before they can cast a spell, because almost all of them are total glass cannons.
There are no monsters in 5th Edition that are "pure magic" in the sense of getting destroyed by an Antimagic Field. Of any alignment.
You can get some animated armor type things with a "Antimagic Susceptibility" where the worst is that it falls unconscious for 1 minute.
Even things like Living Spells - which are magic spells becoming sentient - are still not "pure magic" in the way you want them to be. They are creatures.
In D&D 5th Edition game terms there's no such thing as "non-Monster NPCs". A monster is any creature of any kind that is not a PC. Even a commoner human is a monster. "NPC" is a monster sub-type to denote a non-generic monster and one that has individual identity within an adventure or a specific type of generic monster such as an Abjurer so adventures can say "You meet Alistair who is an Abjurer". The NPC tag includes mostly humanoids but also constructs, aberrations, dragons, etc. The term "creature" applies to anything living/undead for the general term of PCs and Monsters.
Anyway, what you're asking for does not exist in this edition.
And as for the whole "fighting against magic" thing, several options are available to you. From Paladins with their bonus to all saves for the party, to Monks with all-saves proficiency, to spellcasting classes with access to spells like Protection From Evil and Good, Dispel Magic and Counterspell. Some classes are particularly good at counterspelling like Lore Bards (can add their own bardic die to the check, which also gets a jack-of-all-trades half-prof bonus) or Abjuration Wizards (add prof bonus to check).
You cite "Wish" as your reason because it can be used to negate the party's successful save. However, by the time the party should encounter any of the extremely few monsters that have Wish the party should have reasonable enough measures against it from class features, magic items and their own spellcasters with access to Antimagic Field or even Wish themselves. So, frankly, using Wish as the reason is rather unfounded. Especially since a low-level Counterspell with a good roll can negate it.
--
TL;DR
No, there isn't any.
Click ✨ HERE ✨ For My Youtube Videos featuring Guides, Tips & Tricks for using D&D Beyond.
Need help with Homebrew? Check out ✨ this FAQ/Guide thread ✨ by IamSposta.
...did you read the fine print that comes with using Wish in that way? 1 in 3 chance of losing the ability to cast Wish permanently and every time the caster casts a spell for the rest of the day, they take damage. Unless there was a a really critical save you made, no one in their right mind is going to use Wish that way when the chances are that it'll either be wasted, they'll lose the spell or both, plus they take damage any time they cast a spell that day.
Don't go for bulletproof perfection. You get diminishing returns the harder you push on something, so you end up having issues elsewhere. Sure, Saves are not infallible. They don't have to be, they just need to solid enough that you stand a chance. If you want to have a good improvement to them, either relay a Paladin or sweet talk one of your party members into it.
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.