Antimagic Field + Extraordinary Spell Aim ? [Archive] - Wizards Community

Antimagic Field + Extraordinary Spell Aim ? [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Navigator
09-05-06, 04:48 AM So... this came up on another thread discussing a "gish" build of mine.

Can you use the Extraordinary Spell Aim feat to hedge yourself out out of an antimagic field?

If you can, are there any limitations on the combination that would render it useless?

Just to be clear, this is a question on RAW, not it's broken-ness (if any such broken-ness exists).
Merestil Haye
09-05-06, 08:56 AM I'd say that by RAW, that would create a situation where the caster would sit in the middle of an amtimagic fieldstill have all his personal buffs running
be able to cast spells that affect his person and have them take effect,
be able to cast touch spells affecting other creatures in the AMF (although ongoing effects would be suppressed and instantaneous effects be neutralised),
not be able to cast spells that would affect targets at range,
and not be affected by spells cast by any other creature.It may be possible for a creature outside the AMF to cast a spell then reach in and touch you (if the creature has sufficient reach) - that is arguable at least, although I'd say no.

This is why I houserule the effect of Extraordinary Spell Aim - to stop this specific combination.
CaoSlayer
09-05-06, 10:04 AM since AMF blocks the line of vision of spells, the only limitation will be that you cant cast spells in anyother else.

It is a terrific combo for a gish.
Rhaynin
09-05-06, 10:29 AM I may be mistaken, but doesn't Extraordinary Spell Aim say you completely ignore the spell (in all respects)? You wouldn't even have your Line of Sight blocked because you act as if the spell isn't even there :)
Merestil Haye
09-05-06, 11:00 AM AMF does not block line of sight. It blocks line of effect - completely different.

ESA excludes the chosen creature from the effect of the spell. It does not suppress the spell completely, and I've always interpreted it as blocking line of effect to spells with a range greater than touch, arguijng that the AMF does not know or care who generated any specific spell effect trying to cross the area it covers.
tarkin
09-05-06, 12:09 PM I'd say that by RAW, that would create a situation where the caster would sit in the middle of an amtimagic fieldstill have all his personal buffs running
be able to cast spells that affect his person and have them take effect,
be able to cast touch spells affecting other creatures in the AMF (although ongoing effects would be suppressed and instantaneous effects be neutralised),
not be able to cast spells that would affect targets at range,
and not be affected by spells cast by any other creature.It may be possible for a creature outside the AMF to cast a spell then reach in and touch you (if the creature has sufficient reach) - that is arguable at least, although I'd say no.

This is why I houserule the effect of Extraordinary Spell Aim - to stop this specific combination.

This is slightly wrong.

By RAW, Anti-magic field stops line of effect.

Line of effect even applies when you cast touch spells. As such you even with Extraordinary Spell Aim, you can NEVER effect anything inside an Anti-Magic field that was not specifically excluded by the Extraorindary spell Aim.

So you can not cast any spell that affects anyone in the Anti-Magic field, even if it is a touch spell'.

In other words, the second the magic leaves your body, it is blocked entirey. (Your equiptment count as part of your body because of your 'aura').

It also ignores the fact that when someoen with a sword of wounding hits you, your aura protects the sword in your flesh from the anti-magic.

Which means that your Extraordinary Spell Aim let you be drained of constition.
Terraneaux
09-05-06, 01:10 PM I use this one a campaign that I play in, but it usually doesn't come up as much as I thought it would.

I may house-rule it so that it excludes you but not your equipment if it becomes a real problem.

And the sword is suppressed while it is in the antimagic field. If you aren't wielding or carrying it, the wounding doesn't work.

ESA+AMF+wraithstrike=dead anything, pretty much.
Navigator
09-05-06, 05:18 PM Let's take this by cases.

Assume character X cast antimagic field with Extraordinary Spell Aim to hedge himself out of the area of effect, and character Y is someone being affected by the same antimagic field.

Can:

Y affect X with any spell, spell-like ability, or supernatural ability?
X attack Y using all of his weapon enhancements from equipment and spells?
Y attack X using any of his weapon enhancements from equipment or spells?
X attack Y and gain the benefit of otherwise supernatural abilities such as a Arcane Strike?
Apply any attack bonus X has from spells on an attack against Y (example: heroism)?
CaoSlayer
09-05-06, 05:31 PM AMF does not block line of sight. It blocks line of effect - completely different.

I know, It slipped my mind.
Navigator
09-06-06, 04:59 PM :bump:

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Navigator 09-05-06, 04:48 AM	So... this came up on another thread discussing a "gish" build of mine. Can you use the Extraordinary Spell Aim feat to hedge yourself out out of an antimagic field? If you can, are there any limitations on the combination that would render it useless? Just to be clear, this is a question on RAW, not it's broken-ness (if any such broken-ness exists).
Merestil Haye 09-05-06, 08:56 AM	I'd say that by RAW, that would create a situation where the caster would sit in the middle of an amtimagic fieldstill have all his personal buffs running be able to cast spells that affect his person and have them take effect, be able to cast touch spells affecting other creatures in the AMF (although ongoing effects would be suppressed and instantaneous effects be neutralised), not be able to cast spells that would affect targets at range, and not be affected by spells cast by any other creature.It may be possible for a creature outside the AMF to cast a spell then reach in and touch you (if the creature has sufficient reach) - that is arguable at least, although I'd say no. This is why I houserule the effect of Extraordinary Spell Aim - to stop this specific combination.
CaoSlayer 09-05-06, 10:04 AM	since AMF blocks the line of vision of spells, the only limitation will be that you cant cast spells in anyother else. It is a terrific combo for a gish.
Rhaynin 09-05-06, 10:29 AM	I may be mistaken, but doesn't Extraordinary Spell Aim say you completely ignore the spell (in all respects)? You wouldn't even have your Line of Sight blocked because you act as if the spell isn't even there :)
Merestil Haye 09-05-06, 11:00 AM	AMF does not block line of sight. It blocks line of effect - completely different. ESA excludes the chosen creature from the effect of the spell. It does not suppress the spell completely, and I've always interpreted it as blocking line of effect to spells with a range greater than touch, arguijng that the AMF does not know or care who generated any specific spell effect trying to cross the area it covers.
tarkin 09-05-06, 12:09 PM	I'd say that by RAW, that would create a situation where the caster would sit in the middle of an amtimagic fieldstill have all his personal buffs running be able to cast spells that affect his person and have them take effect, be able to cast touch spells affecting other creatures in the AMF (although ongoing effects would be suppressed and instantaneous effects be neutralised), not be able to cast spells that would affect targets at range, and not be affected by spells cast by any other creature.It may be possible for a creature outside the AMF to cast a spell then reach in and touch you (if the creature has sufficient reach) - that is arguable at least, although I'd say no. This is why I houserule the effect of Extraordinary Spell Aim - to stop this specific combination. This is slightly wrong. By RAW, Anti-magic field stops line of effect. Line of effect even applies when you cast touch spells. As such you even with Extraordinary Spell Aim, you can NEVER effect anything inside an Anti-Magic field that was not specifically excluded by the Extraorindary spell Aim. So you can not cast any spell that affects anyone in the Anti-Magic field, even if it is a touch spell'. In other words, the second the magic leaves your body, it is blocked entirey. (Your equiptment count as part of your body because of your 'aura'). It also ignores the fact that when someoen with a sword of wounding hits you, your aura protects the sword in your flesh from the anti-magic. Which means that your Extraordinary Spell Aim let you be drained of constition.
Terraneaux 09-05-06, 01:10 PM	I use this one a campaign that I play in, but it usually doesn't come up as much as I thought it would. I may house-rule it so that it excludes you but not your equipment if it becomes a real problem. And the sword is suppressed while it is in the antimagic field. If you aren't wielding or carrying it, the wounding doesn't work. ESA+AMF+wraithstrike=dead anything, pretty much.
Navigator 09-05-06, 05:18 PM	Let's take this by cases. Assume character X cast antimagic field with Extraordinary Spell Aim to hedge himself out of the area of effect, and character Y is someone being affected by the same antimagic field. Can: Y affect X with any spell, spell-like ability, or supernatural ability? X attack Y using all of his weapon enhancements from equipment and spells? Y attack X using any of his weapon enhancements from equipment or spells? X attack Y and gain the benefit of otherwise supernatural abilities such as a Arcane Strike? Apply any attack bonus X has from spells on an attack against Y (example: heroism)?
CaoSlayer 09-05-06, 05:31 PM	AMF does not block line of sight. It blocks line of effect - completely different. I know, It slipped my mind.
Navigator 09-06-06, 04:59 PM	:bump: