Basically, the question is... Can something like a Counter Spell, Anti-Magic Field, some other restriction or curse prevent the use of or make redundant a Wizard Class Feature?
Take for instance: Portent, Transmuter's Stone, etc ... can these be dispelled, countered or rendered useless?
Also is there something like casting involved in the use of these features?
These are some questions I have been mulling over with my DM, and as possibilities developing for the group I DM as well/
They are not spells so can't be targeted counterspell and dispel magic also only ends spells, but some might be effected by antimagic field depending on the DM.
Any magic item has a spell placed on it to make it magical so dispel magic would take the magic out of the item if the DC is beaten. Counterspell would not work unless you cast it while the item is being made and you can see the spell being cast. All magic items technically have a spell caster associated with it since it was a spell that was cast into the item while it was being made. Antimagic fields will suspend magic on a creature or item because when you then leave the antimagic field the magic returns to the creature or item. In the end the DM decides on whether or not dispel magic or an antimagic field would work on certain items.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Remember this is a game and it's suppose to be fun for everybody. Let's all have fun and kill monsters.
Any magic item has a spell placed on it to make it magical so dispel magic would take the magic out of the item if the DC is beaten. Counterspell would not work unless you cast it while the item is being made and you can see the spell being cast. All magic items technically have a spell caster associated with it since it was a spell that was cast into the item while it was being made. Antimagic fields will suspend magic on a creature or item because when you then leave the antimagic field the magic returns to the creature or item. In the end the DM decides on whether or not dispel magic or an antimagic field would work on certain items.
First of all, you can't dispel magic a magic item.
Second, no body said anything about magic items. Not once.
Third, magic items were not necessarily created by a spellcaster or had a spell cast into them. That only applies to the small percentage of them that can cast spells.
What about effects or curses that would prevent the casting of, or concentration on spells. Would these prevent the use of wizard class features like minor conjuration, hypnotic gaze or minor alchemy? With rules as written ...
Basically, the question is... Can something like a Counter Spell, Anti-Magic Field, some other restriction or curse prevent the use of or make redundant a Wizard Class Feature?
Take for instance: Portent, Transmuter's Stone, etc ... can these be dispelled, countered or rendered useless?
Also is there something like casting involved in the use of these features?
These are some questions I have been mulling over with my DM, and as possibilities developing for the group I DM as well/
Thoughts
If class/subclass ability involves casting a spell, it will state explicitly "you can cast X" or something to that effect, even if that particular casting does not expend a spell slot.
Ok so lets put this to a test, how would you rule in these examples :
A Goblin wizard of the Enchanter school, uses the "Hypnotic Gaze" feature on a eldritch knight who guards the gates to the noble quarter. Can the Eldritch Knight use a reaction to Counterspell or use the Mage Slayer feat to counter this action in any way?
A Human Wizard has hasted the Dragonborn Barbarian ... who has also taken 6 levels in wizardry for the conjuration school (don't ask why, he just did). Can the Barbarian who is Raging use the Minor Conjuration feature as an action to conjure a Shield, and his hasted action while still raging to use Benign Transportation feature to swap places with the Elven Cleric who has been surrounded by Orc's on the battlefield, without breaking Rage?
A Half Elven wizard of the Divination school, has granted herself Greater Comprehension through the Third Eye feature. There in front of her is a wall with writing on it, but the wall is on the opposite side of a Anti-Magic Field spell. Can she read the writing on that wall?
A Kobold wizard of the Necromancy school has been cursed, to be unable concentrate while casting, as if the whispering voices of the fallen start screaming at every attempted cast. This curse does require a WIS saving throw to cast spells, but are they still able to use the Command the Dead feature without rolling a Wisdom Save?
These are just a few examples that have come up in some games I've played. I'd be interested in how others would deal with them.
Ok so lets put this to a test, how would you rule in these examples :
A Goblin wizard of the Enchanter school, uses the "Hypnotic Gaze" feature on a eldritch knight who guards the gates to the noble quarter. Can the Eldritch Knight use a reaction to Counterspell or use the Mage Slayer feat to counter this action in any way?
A Human Wizard has hasted the Dragonborn Barbarian ... who has also taken 6 levels in wizardry for the conjuration school (don't ask why, he just did). Can the Barbarian who is Raging use the Minor Conjuration feature as an action to conjure a Shield, and his hasted action while still raging to use Benign Transportation feature to swap places with the Elven Cleric who has been surrounded by Orc's on the battlefield, without breaking Rage?
A Half Elven wizard of the Divination school, has granted herself Greater Comprehension through the Third Eye feature. There in front of her is a wall with writing on it, but the wall is on the opposite side of a Anti-Magic Field spell. Can she read the writing on that wall?
A Kobold wizard of the Necromancy school has been cursed, to be unable concentrate while casting, as if the whispering voices of the fallen start screaming at every attempted cast. This curse does require a WIS saving throw to cast spells, but are they still able to use the Command the Dead feature without rolling a Wisdom Save?
These are just a few examples that have come up in some games I've played. I'd be interested in how others would deal with them.
You sure do like to ask a lot of questions. The general answer that applies to all these questions is counterspell and dispel magic only work on spells, not magic abilities, antimagic field only effects things within its radius, and abilities may require concentration, but only if they say they do.
So the specific answers to your questions are:
No.
Almost, the extra action granted by haste has limited options. Besides that, yes. (If he had a third multiclass into fighter to action surge, it would have worked.)
Pretty sure there is a Jeremy Crawford tweet around somewhere (considered official at the time; now semi-official) that said: something is a spell if it requires a spell slot or says "You cast [spell name]". Otherwise it is not a spell (but may still be magic).
Yeah I do ask a lot of questions. I like to ask questions, even after the games and the rulings for them have been made to come to a better understanding of how other DM's approach the situations and reverse engineer their thinking. So I can learn more and grow as a better DM, as well.
For instance ... the First example has happened twice. 1 In which I said No, but another DM in a similar situation has said Yes, Mage Slayer can allow the reaction attack.
The second has been denied by 2 DM's I have talked with in singular use of either Conjuration feat with Barb, who is raging, and 1 who has said yep. Now it has become an even split. The two who denied it, said it seemingly goes against the spirit of the rage mechanic, and that was why they would disallow it.
The third was denied, due to the magic of the third eye not being able to probe the intent/meaning of the words while behind a anti magic field. Yet another allowed it as they perceived that the magic occurs in the mind requiring only perception of the words, not as the first DM did as probing the intent/meaning of the words as if reading the mind while it was being written or carved.
The last one, the DM saw that as a way to bypass the intent of the curse and thus made them roll. This one has not shown up again yet, but it was still an interesting case.
One thing I'm sure of in my mind is that Portent should not be affected by any counter spells, dispel, or non-magical fields. It is, in game/universe/story, the Wizard looking into the future, before you ever got to this point and divining/seeing what will happen at this exact moment. The part where the player chooses to use it is just metagame. In game, it was what was going to happen all along.
I don't think actually think Portent is the best name for it as it means, "something that foreshadows a coming event." A better word might be Prophecy as it means "a prediction of something to come." If Prophecy seems too grand a word for this skill then possibly Foreknowledge or even Prognostication could work, too. None of the three words seem to be in use for spells or abilities at the moment.
(Definitions from Merriam-Webster.com)
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Basically, the question is... Can something like a Counter Spell, Anti-Magic Field, some other restriction or curse prevent the use of or make redundant a Wizard Class Feature?
Take for instance: Portent, Transmuter's Stone, etc ... can these be dispelled, countered or rendered useless?
Also is there something like casting involved in the use of these features?
These are some questions I have been mulling over with my DM, and as possibilities developing for the group I DM as well/
Thoughts
They are not spells so can't be targeted counterspell and dispel magic also only ends spells, but some might be effected by antimagic field depending on the DM.
Any magic item has a spell placed on it to make it magical so dispel magic would take the magic out of the item if the DC is beaten. Counterspell would not work unless you cast it while the item is being made and you can see the spell being cast. All magic items technically have a spell caster associated with it since it was a spell that was cast into the item while it was being made. Antimagic fields will suspend magic on a creature or item because when you then leave the antimagic field the magic returns to the creature or item. In the end the DM decides on whether or not dispel magic or an antimagic field would work on certain items.
Remember this is a game and it's suppose to be fun for everybody. Let's all have fun and kill monsters.
First of all, you can't dispel magic a magic item.
Second, no body said anything about magic items. Not once.
Third, magic items were not necessarily created by a spellcaster or had a spell cast into them. That only applies to the small percentage of them that can cast spells.
The bit about antimagic fields is correct.
And yeah, DMs can change rules to fit narrative.
Ok that sounds usable.
What about effects or curses that would prevent the casting of, or concentration on spells. Would these prevent the use of wizard class features like minor conjuration, hypnotic gaze or minor alchemy? With rules as written ...
If class/subclass ability involves casting a spell, it will state explicitly "you can cast X" or something to that effect, even if that particular casting does not expend a spell slot.
Ok so lets put this to a test, how would you rule in these examples :
A Goblin wizard of the Enchanter school, uses the "Hypnotic Gaze" feature on a eldritch knight who guards the gates to the noble quarter. Can the Eldritch Knight use a reaction to Counterspell or use the Mage Slayer feat to counter this action in any way?
A Human Wizard has hasted the Dragonborn Barbarian ... who has also taken 6 levels in wizardry for the conjuration school (don't ask why, he just did). Can the Barbarian who is Raging use the Minor Conjuration feature as an action to conjure a Shield, and his hasted action while still raging to use Benign Transportation feature to swap places with the Elven Cleric who has been surrounded by Orc's on the battlefield, without breaking Rage?
A Half Elven wizard of the Divination school, has granted herself Greater Comprehension through the Third Eye feature. There in front of her is a wall with writing on it, but the wall is on the opposite side of a Anti-Magic Field spell. Can she read the writing on that wall?
A Kobold wizard of the Necromancy school has been cursed, to be unable concentrate while casting, as if the whispering voices of the fallen start screaming at every attempted cast. This curse does require a WIS saving throw to cast spells, but are they still able to use the Command the Dead feature without rolling a Wisdom Save?
These are just a few examples that have come up in some games I've played. I'd be interested in how others would deal with them.
You sure do like to ask a lot of questions. The general answer that applies to all these questions is counterspell and dispel magic only work on spells, not magic abilities, antimagic field only effects things within its radius, and abilities may require concentration, but only if they say they do.
So the specific answers to your questions are:
Pretty sure there is a Jeremy Crawford tweet around somewhere (considered official at the time; now semi-official) that said: something is a spell if it requires a spell slot or says "You cast [spell name]". Otherwise it is not a spell (but may still be magic).
Yeah I do ask a lot of questions. I like to ask questions, even after the games and the rulings for them have been made to come to a better understanding of how other DM's approach the situations and reverse engineer their thinking. So I can learn more and grow as a better DM, as well.
For instance ... the First example has happened twice. 1 In which I said No, but another DM in a similar situation has said Yes, Mage Slayer can allow the reaction attack.
The second has been denied by 2 DM's I have talked with in singular use of either Conjuration feat with Barb, who is raging, and 1 who has said yep. Now it has become an even split. The two who denied it, said it seemingly goes against the spirit of the rage mechanic, and that was why they would disallow it.
The third was denied, due to the magic of the third eye not being able to probe the intent/meaning of the words while behind a anti magic field. Yet another allowed it as they perceived that the magic occurs in the mind requiring only perception of the words, not as the first DM did as probing the intent/meaning of the words as if reading the mind while it was being written or carved.
The last one, the DM saw that as a way to bypass the intent of the curse and thus made them roll. This one has not shown up again yet, but it was still an interesting case.
One thing I'm sure of in my mind is that Portent should not be affected by any counter spells, dispel, or non-magical fields. It is, in game/universe/story, the Wizard looking into the future, before you ever got to this point and divining/seeing what will happen at this exact moment. The part where the player chooses to use it is just metagame. In game, it was what was going to happen all along.
I don't think actually think Portent is the best name for it as it means, "something that foreshadows a coming event." A better word might be Prophecy as it means "a prediction of something to come." If Prophecy seems too grand a word for this skill then possibly Foreknowledge or even Prognostication could work, too. None of the three words seem to be in use for spells or abilities at the moment.
(Definitions from Merriam-Webster.com)