Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Liquid-Water 05-19-05, 05:54 AM	me and my friend were looking over the new orb spell in complete arcane and it looks like you can cast them outside of an anti-magic field and hit people inside one, due to the fact that they are a congeration (creation) spell. Is this the case plese give your oppinion.
Bopple 05-19-05, 07:18 AM	To be precise, it can penetrate AMF, because it's an instantaneous conjuration(creation). Instantaneous creations are considered to have no magical property at all. But, two things itchy - how can an orb of totally mundane fire exist? And how totally mundane fire can daze a foe?
Liquid-Water 05-19-05, 08:51 AM	good so im not by my self wonder what is going on
Kimbal 05-26-05, 07:47 PM	By the letter of the rules it seems that you would be able to attack the foe with the spell
Seeker95 05-26-05, 08:29 PM	Raules-lawyer conclusion: You can do it. Rules-spirit conclusion: You can't do it. (Magical orbs are still magic.)
runestar 05-26-05, 10:40 PM	I believe yes, since the magic is only used to bring the acid into existance, after that, all that exists is a non-magical orb of acid, so it can pass through an AMF without being suppressed since there is no magic left to suppress. Its mechanically the same as using leomund's secret chest outside of an AMF to retrieve a weapon from within, then whacking the foe inside the AMF with it.
primemover003 05-26-05, 11:22 PM	Orb of acid, fire, and maybe electricity I can see... but force, sound, or cold? What happens to the force orb after it hits, how much does it weigh, what's it look like? Can you use it in a catapult? I think the Orb spells need a re-revision. To evocation.
redraven 05-26-05, 11:28 PM	AMF blocks Line of Effect which specifies: You must have a clear line of effect to any target that you cast a spell on or to any space in which you wish to create an effect. You cannot create an effect which enters or moves through an AMF. After all, what is moving that orb of flame at such a speed where it needs only a ranged touch attack, let alone exactly why a "nonmagical" orb of flame retains its orb shape over the distance it needs to travel? There is zero rules base for momentum in D&D, which means momentum (the only possible explanation for why an orb could possibly still hit someone in an AMF) does not exist.
primemover003 05-26-05, 11:35 PM	Does AMF block line of effect vs an arrow? No So it won't bloack LoE against a glob of very real, very potent acid either.
Jaid 05-26-05, 11:36 PM	oh, momentum exists in D&D. they don't have any rules for giving birth, either, but that still happens. in fact, they don't have rules for death, either. they tell you when you have died, but nowhere does it spell out what happens when you die, except you cannot be healed. oh, they tell you what happens while you are in the process of dying too... just once you get there, nothing. doesn't say you can't move, or can't act, or can't speak, or anything. it also doesn't really have rules for a lot of other things. there is no random chance to have nightmares and get a lousy night of sleep for example. if D&D tried to make rules for every conceivable everyday thing, then you would be paying thousands of dollars for the system alone, you would need a computer dedicated to nothing more than managing the system, and you would still not cover everything and it would be full of contradictions everywhere. unless otherwise specified, normal physics apply in D&D. that being said, i would have the AMF block the spells, personally.
redraven 05-26-05, 11:52 PM	unless otherwise specified, normal physics apply in D&D. Oh? Then it would be impossible for the Orbs to maintain their shape over the course of their flight, much less zip through the air at the speed in which only a ranged touch attack is necessary. Have you ever seen an orb of acid 3-inches in diameter traveling through the air? What about wind resistance? Why doesn't the acid spray outwards, or the nonmagical fire dissipate into the air? An explanation that magic maintains their shape and flight path answers these questions - physics do not. Further, how exactly does physics translate into D&D mechanics in the following situations: 1) A wizard under the effects of the fly spell moves at full speed but encounters an AMF effect after 40 feet of movement. At what point does he fall to the ground? 2) An archer fires an arrow at a target on the other side of a reverse gravity effect. Does this translate into an attack penalty? If so, how much? What if the archer shot through 10 feet of the effect? 30? 100? 3) A wizard casts Orb of Fire through an AMF effect that is 50 feet long. Does the wizard have the exact same chance of hitting a target as if there was no AMF?
dragonwolf keny 05-27-05, 12:07 AM	or you could go for the third option and have it penatrate at serious minus efects. plus a a - to to hit die. you guys think too hard. ill point my case by reciting rule 1 of the rpg c.o.c. 1. if the game is not fun its not a game, its a chore. put simply leave it up to the dm and move on dont argue it.
dantedarkstar 05-27-05, 05:28 AM	IMHO you cannot shoot any orbs into the AMF. Well, you can, but they will vanish as soon as they enter AMF. The orbs ARE MAGICAL. If they weren't, the acid or uhh... sonic thingy ? would not disappear just after the spell's duration ends. They are as magical as summoned creatures are (the only difference is that orbs have far shorter duration, classified as Instantenous in game), i.e. magical. The effects of instantenous conjurations are nonmagical, but the effects that are left when the spell ends. As long as the spell's duration last, you cannot say the effect is nonmagical. So anything left AFTER instantenous duration is over (i.e. AFTER the orb was created, the attack was made and it disappeared) the remains are nonmagical. Yeah... nothing is left...
Liquid-Water 05-27-05, 08:09 AM	Have you ever read the PHB? PHB page 173 about conjuration (creation)... "Creation: A creation spell manipulates matter to create an object or creature in the place the spellcaster designates (subject to the limits noted above). If the spell has a duration other than instantaneous, magic holds the creation together, and when the spell ends, the conjered creature or object vanishes without a trace. If the spell has an instantanous duration, the created object or creature is merely assembled through magic. It lasts indefinitely and does not depend on magic for its existence Now if you dont understand that then ill explain it... you are pulling fire, ice, sonic, whatever from no where and throwing it at an enemy one the magic is pulled the orb is NOT MAGICAL anymore... The real question is how long is it going to take wizards to errata the spell nit if the spell can be cast into an antimagic field
MrkGrismer 05-27-05, 08:10 AM	From what I see, the instaneous conjuration creates a real orb that contains some type of energy in a magnetic 'bottle' (whether that energy be force, acid, fire, electricty or whatever) and sends it hurling towards the target. That is where the magic ends. It simply sets up real-world creation and sends it on the way. When the orb hits (or misses and hits the ground or whatever) the magnetic bottle breaks and the energy does its splash damage (if applicable) and is then generally dissapated (no more magnetic bottle). Just because we cannot (yet) create the equivalent in the modern world doesn't mean it isn't possible. Although I agree that perhaps such spells would have been better chosen to be evocations (and acid arrow too).
dantedarkstar 05-27-05, 10:35 AM	Have you ever read the PHB? Yes I have. I am well aware of the part you emphasized. However, there are no instant conjuration spells in PHB that actually instantly affect somebody or something. All just create objects that last indefinitely. I firmly believe creators of orb spells were just not aware of full implications of what they written in terms of game. Remember that were possibly not the very same people that were writing the rules you cited. I am sure that the Instantenous duration on Orb spells mean that the orb is magical and persist for "instantenous" duration, where "instantenous" is "short enough to classify as instantenous". What did you expect them to write there ? "Duration: Until enemy is damaged" ? "Duration: Until the orb hits anything and a moment after enough to deal specified damage" ? I hope you noticed the "IMHO" at the very beginning of my post, didn't you ? I wasn't citing RAW. I was saying how I think it should work and I dare to say creators thought the same when writing up this spell. Unless you can tell me why the acid from acid orb doesn't do damage in subsequent rounds. After all, if it's trurly instantenous conjuration, as "it creates something real" then the acid will persist indefinitely, dealing damage over time. And then there's orb of force (broken spell BTW)... When you point out how NONMAGICAL ORB OF FORCE can exist or nonmagical orb of sound can persist just like that, I have pretty much back-up arguments why this case should be interpreted more according to common sense than RAW. People that write these RAW also are humans, you know ? They make mistakes too.
redraven 05-27-05, 10:36 AM	Now if you dont understand that then ill explain it... you are pulling fire, ice, sonic, whatever from no where and throwing it at an enemy one the magic is pulled the orb is NOT MAGICAL anymore... So we could fill a vat with Orbs of Acid? How much damage would each bottle of acid do? Full 15d6 damage assuming a 15th-level caster, or only a fraction thereof depending on the bottle? And what exactly about this acid causes it to have noxious fumes, whereas normal acid does not? Or what about the Orb of Force? It's has an instantaneous duration, so we should be able to just have a large number of force orbs lying around as decorations or whatever. Same with crystal shards. Rather, it seems quite clear that the line in the PHB regarding instantaneous conjurations was meant to encompass things such as Create Water, Wall of Iron/Stone, and so on. These things are created and are otherwise real. The Orbs are not stationary and do not last beyond the instant they were created, needing magic to not only sustain their forms but to propel them along. You will never be able to play catch with an orb of sound - if it doesn't smash into something the instant it is created, it is gone. Water created with Create Water is not the same, nor are the walls. They stick around. The only reason the orbs were called conjurations was so that they could have SR: No, since all other damage-dealing evocations require SR.
Liquid-Water 05-27-05, 11:15 AM	Hence my comment that this thread was started to tell wizards or whoever that it NEEDS to be errated
Seeker95 05-27-05, 08:50 PM	Hence my comment that this thread was started to tell wizards or whoever that it NEEDS to be erratedNo it doesn't. Errata is for blatant errors. All it "needs" is for a DM to make a ruling. Nothing more.
Ryll 05-27-05, 10:15 PM	Raules-lawyer conclusion: You can do it. Rules-spirit conclusion: You can't do it. (Magical orbs are still magic.) Rules-lawyer conclusion: You can do it. Rules-spirit conclusion: You can do it. The people that made this conjuration/creation(instant) did this for a reason. If they just wanted to make a damage spell that conjurers without evocation can use, they would have made it conjuration/creation(something OTHER than instant), or some other conjuration compatible type. They wanted a spell that does some OK damage to not be limited by SR, AMF. Something that can be used on the AMF melee type, and the golem. This is not too powerful, nor game stopping, and was (I believe) an intended effect of making this spell a conjuration/Creation with instant duration. Just because you think something is one way, it is fairly presumptuous to think you know exaclty what the spirit if the rules is for a particular spell/effect. Especially when your ruling is in direct contradiction to the rules As to whether this spell (whose description mentions only the immediate damage/effects on the target itself) will let the orb itself last indefinitely? for that I would (and this is just my opinion) think it: Rules-lawyer conclusion: It will last. Rules-spirit conclusion: It will be gone after it's use Just as the wall of iron is a permanent wall of iron, it will still decay at the normal rate of a wall of Iron. It will corrode over time unless cared for, and will last no longer (nor shorter) than a mundanely created wall of iron under the identical circumstances. The Orbs are created with the life span of "when it hits or misses its target" - then it is gone. Nothing unbalancing about it, nothing too hard to conceive, nothing to open to abuse.
runestar 05-27-05, 11:12 PM	Just curious, with all this talk of spirit of the rules, who goes about deciding what this spirit thingy is anyways? It seems all too subjective, and too dependant on the whim of the interpreter. Two different people can have 2 different interpretations of what the "spirit of the rules" should be, which effectively brings them back to square 1. Who is to say who is right or wrong? They may argue that the way the feat was worded was contrary to the way it was intended to work by the designers, but how would they know any better anyways? It seems this concept was created by people who discovering they were unable to win arguments or sway people to their cause using their conventional knowledge of exisiting dnd rules, so they created some esoteric term to help fight their case for them. Or is there some darker, far more sinister force at work here? :confused:
IceFractal 05-28-05, 05:13 AM	The entire Orb series seems odd to me. Ok, nonmagical fire, acid, electricity, and even cold I can see, although I don't see how a small sphere would be that potent without magical reinforcement. With Sonic, I have no idea how its supposed to maintain a sphere form when there's no physical substance. And force! Force is the worst. How the heck can you have non-magical force?! It isn't a naturally occuring substance. And furthermore, a spell that gives no save, no SR, and is of an unresistable energy type seems a bit off. I would say that as soon as the orbs hit the AM field, they start dispersing, and that 5'/5 CLs into the field they break apart, dealing 1/4 of their normal damage in a 5' radius. If they hit before breaking apart then they work as normal, although they're at -2 to hit per 5' through the AMF travelled, due to lack of magical steering. That's purely a houserule though.
vivijen 05-28-05, 06:44 AM	I would say no since Anti=magic field basically supresses magic of any kind! Even if it doesnt need magical means to still exist, that doesnt mean that it isnt magic! yes you brought it into existence but you still need magical means to have it hit someone! you arent using the force to move it! any spell cast is magic blah !
MrkGrismer 05-28-05, 10:46 AM	I would say no since Anti=magic field basically supresses magic of any kind! Even if it doesnt need magical means to still exist, that doesnt mean that it isnt magic! yes you brought it into existence but you still need magical means to have it hit someone! you arent using the force to move it! any spell cast is magic blah ! ... except the FAQ (among other things) specifically states that telekenisis can be used to hit things within an anti-magic field.