Isn't an antimagic field a paradox?

[jolus]

I mean, it is created by magic...

[RMS Oceanic]

It's a magical effect that suppresses the effects of most other magic. I don't see the problem. That's Abjuration's whole shtick.

[Studoku]

So what happens if you antimagic field an antimagic field?

[Caleniel]

So what happens if you antimagic field an antimagic field?

*pulls out a hat and a musical costume, and begins to sing*

"If you antimagic field my antimagic field
I just might pull out my fancy magic shield
and turn the antimagic of your antimagic field
with the antimagic of the shield I wield!"

There. That's what happens. Now that ought to teach you. :smalltongue:

[Myou]

Antimagic Field is one of the spells that isn't affected by Antimagic Field. Convinient, that. xD

[SpacemanSpif]

If one can use matter to create anti-matter (and you can (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Positron)), I don't think it's too far fetched to propose that one could use magic to make anti-magic.

I mean, it's magic. We've made up all of the rules.

Just presume that, instead of using magic to sustain the field, you use magic to set up the reaction that results in the field.

[Kurald Galain]

One way an antimagic field could work is as a localized Niven disk.

Larry Niven wrote numerous stories about magic, using the premise that magic draws upon "mana" from the surroundings to work. The eponymous disk is a device that (magically) draws all mana from the surroundings, so that all other spells nearby fail for lack of mana.

By the way, this is quite lethal to any wizard who uses life-extending spells, which in Niven's world equates to "all of them".

[nybbler]

Fortunately, D&D doesn't seem to have such a limited source of magical energy as Niven's mana. Also, the anti-magic field "suppresses any spell or magical effect used within, brought into, or cast into the area, but does not dispel it. ", whereas Niven's spinning disk would dispel the effect.

[Vectner]

*
"If you antimagic field my antimagic field
I just might pull out my fancy magic shield
and turn the antimagic of your antimagic field
with the antimagic of the shield I wield!"


You win the thread!

[hamishspence]

it could bend the general magic field of the world around it. I think Forgotten Realms Campaign setting describes it this way.

[Optimystik]

That's the only paradox you've noticed? How about Wind Wall? Rain of Fire? Time Stop? Antilife Shell? Darkvision? :smalltongue:


"If you antimagic field my antimagic field
I just might pull out my fancy magic shield
and turn the antimagic of your antimagic field
with the antimagic of the shield I wield!"

Catchy!

[Mina Kobold]

The magic of the spell surpress spells so it's a hell lot simpler: the spell stops others from having an effect wich would use too much power to be realistic, but DnD doesn't have rules for energy usage (wich would be fun if) so it aint a problem.

[David Argall]

The cops use guns to stop people from shooting each other. So what's the paradox of using magic to stop magic?

[Optimystik]

The cops use guns to stop people from shooting each other. So what's the paradox of using magic to stop magic?

Not the best analogy; law enforcement uses prevention but can't actually force people not to shoot each other. Anti-magic uses magic physically makes it impossible to cast spells or use magic items.

I liken it instead to a whirlwind creating a vacuum in the middle. The spell actually pulls magic itself away from the caster then traps it in a spherical rotation centered on him/her. Thus the "anti-magic" isn't a force in and of itself, but rather the absence of magic caused by the vacuum of dweomer that the caster moves about in.

At the end of the spell's duration, entropy causes the spell to collapse in on itself like a spent tornado and magic rushes back in to surround the caster.

[hamishspence]

Pretty fair description.

FRCS: "antimagic rearranges the weave so that magic flows around, rather than through, the area"

[Ozymandias9]

I mean, it is created by magic...

The rules leave the structuring of magical law largely to the design of the setting. I generally take an anti-magic field as a magical structure designed to prevent and disrupt the structuring of magic within. Much like you can use a radio signal to disrupt the structure of radio messages.

I typically view the immunity of existing force effects as an indication that they are too self-contained and self-reenforcing to be subject to the disruption.

[Linkavitch]

It's not a paradox, it's an oxymoron. Like the "little giant." Or the "Jumbo Shrimp."

[hamishspence]

One effect- Wall of force. Doesn't say anything about Ladders of Force, or Spheres, or any of the other force effects.

explaining prismatic wall and sphere's immunity is tricky given none of the other prismatic effects have it.

[Optimystik]

It's not a paradox, it's an oxymoron. Like the "little giant." Or the "Jumbo Shrimp."

No, it's a paradox; An oxymoron requires two opposite or contradictory terms to be juxtaposed, but "anti" isn't the opposite of "magic."

A paradox is just a combination that defies intuition. Antimagic, like most of the abjuration school, defies logic because it both relies on and nullifies magical power at the same time. Logically, to oppose magic it should rely on a different power source altogether, for the same reason that a flamethrower shouldn't be able to put out a fire.


One effect- Wall of force. Doesn't say anything about Ladders of Force, or Spheres, or any of the other force effects.

explaining prismatic wall and sphere's immunity is tricky given none of the other prismatic effects have it.

The easy explanation here is that the other prismatic effects aren't abjurations like wall and sphere are, but I've rarely ever been satisfied with the easy explanation. :smallsmile:

Wall and Sphere appear to be barriers formed of pure weave, given their "stop everything" nature. If you see the AMF as a balloon, with the disrupted dweomer acting as the rubber skin and the power vacuum itself as the air inside it, pushing a balloon up against a rubber wall will compress it, but the air won't escape to touch anything behind it.

[hamishspence]

Prismatic Aura- 6th level Abjuration, in Complete Mage, no AMF immunity mentioned.

[Evil DM Mark3]

What would be a good analogy here?
Radio jamming.

I want to jam a radio signal so I flood the area with radio signals that make picking out the radio signal being sent. The same thing can be said for the anti-magic field. It floods the area with useless low level magic that makes more powerful magic impossible to use, phasing out and disrupting the magic already there.

[hamishspence]

nice- I'd explain inability to cast as due to the "interference" flooding the mind of the caster.

note that spells fired through the field still function- they are just "invisible" (ineffective) while in the field- a whizzing lightning bolt would vanish as it crosses the field and reappear on the far side, continuing to the target.

[Shadic]

"If you antimagic field my antimagic field
I just might pull out my fancy magic shield
and turn the antimagic of your antimagic field
with the antimagic of the shield I wield!"

That.. Was amazing.

[martyboy74]

Logically, to oppose magic it should rely on a different power source altogether, for the same reason that a flamethrower shouldn't be able to put out a fire.

Note that this is, in fact, essentially done. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firebreak)

[Optimystik]

What would be a good analogy here?
Radio jamming.

I want to jam a radio signal so I flood the area with radio signals that make picking out the radio signal being sent. The same thing can be said for the anti-magic field. It floods the area with useless low level magic that makes more powerful magic impossible to use, phasing out and disrupting the magic already there.

I wonder... How would that work with Detect Magic?


Prismatic Aura- 6th level Abjuration, in Complete Mage, no AMF immunity mentioned.

That's easily explainable also - assuming the prismatic part of the abjuration is immune to the field, part of this spell that the other two don't possess is the effect that makes it mobile with you. AMF cancels that part and the aura is suppressed as a result. Wall and Sphere are not affected similarly because these constructs are anchored in the surrounding dweomer.


Note that this is, in fact, essentially done. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firebreak)

Oh hush, you know what I meant. AMF can stop a spell in progress, but trying to make a firebreak out of something already burning isn't the most effective strategy.

[squidfood]

I wonder... How would that work with Detect Magic?


Say there's a constant level of very low level background magic. An antimagic field would be a black void in the background. So the conspicuous absence of magic would prove the existence of the magic.

[Suicide Junkie]

A better example of fighting fire with fire is using dynamite to extinguish burning oil wells.

[Limos]

It seems like Anti-magic field creates a magic shield that doesn't allow magic through it.

The reason it can suppress Forcecage but not Wall of Force is that Forcecage has holes, so the anti-magic shell can get through it and surround the cage, while a Wall of Force is solid, so it repels the antimagic shell and forms it's own localized bubble of magic.

[shadowfox]

Note that this is, in fact, essentially done. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firebreak)

That's setting up a control fire in order to prevent the uncontrolled fire from spreading. I'd like to see you post a Youtube video where you fire a flamethrower into a fire to put it out.

In any case, magnets can depolarize other magnets, and an electromagnetic pulse (EMP) can shut down electronics. Even in Star Wars, there's a species of lizard that protects itself from force-sensitive predators by using the Force to create an anti-Force bubble.

However, at any rate, I'd like to point out one spell that seems to go unquestioned (Dispel Magic) and one ability that goes unmentioned (Counterspell). Both use magic to cancel out magic, as opposed to suppressing it.

[Optimystik]

Say there's a constant level of very low level background magic. An antimagic field would be a black void in the background. So the conspicuous absence of magic would prove the existence of the magic.

If it works like DMMK3 theorizes, then it will either not detect the field over the background "noise," or it will pick up on the field as a very large area of magic static rather than being a "hole."

@ Limos: The problem there is that a WoF will continue to function even if completely surrounded by an AMF.

I think the key lies somewhere in the difficulty of dispellability of all the spells AMF doesn't affect.

[Optimystik]

However, at any rate, I'd like to point out one spell that seems to go unquestioned (Dispel Magic) and one ability that goes unmentioned (Counterspell). Both use magic to cancel out magic, as opposed to suppressing it.

Those are both one-shot effects, which make perfect sense. A counterspell stops a spell as it is being cast by using either its polar magical opposite or a blast of abjurative energy. Dispel Magic works like resetting your computer, it cuts off programs that may be running but doesn't turn off the computer itself.

AMF's paradox comes from running on magic to keep going, yet being able to turn the magic off (as V's wonderfully draconic assailant puts it.)

[Admiral_Kelly]

While actual logic tells us AMFs are paradoxes which should not exist (even in a magical world) gaming logic says otherwise. In other words, an AMF works because the rules of the game say so.

[EvilJames]

While actual logic tells us AMFs are paradoxes which should not exist (even in a magical world) gaming logic says otherwise. In other words, an AMF works because the rules of the game say so.

I think we've been given enough examples on how it's not a paradox with real world logic and been given enough real world examples to be say otherwise on the first part of your statement. However the second part of your statement still stands As I can find no flaw within it.

[chibibar]

I found two obscure references that "may work" in this case

http://jamesmishler.blogspot.com/2009/01/bx-d-anti-paladin-class.html

written by James Mishler
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Mishler

he worked at Wizard of the Coast.

The anti-paladin anti-magic ability can dispel magic with a sword. The comic show dispel of the dragon via the claw. So if you look up http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/SRD:Greater_Dispel_Magic (greater dispel magic) which I'm sure the Ancient Dragon can do.... pretty much combine an aura with touch dispel.

So I would say it is a stretch of the rule, but still possible.

[Evil DM Mark3]

The reason it can suppress Forcecage but not Wall of Force1st, I was under the impression that anti-magic field doesn't suppress it, although the wording is vague as it ways it resist spells like dispell magic like wall of force does.
2nd, not all force cages have gaps, it is infact a choice, small and gapless or larger with bars.

[Word.Smuggler]

As many have already said, it depends on how you interpret the "anti-" prefix.

Antimagic is definitely not the equivalent of antimatter produced using matter (spells in an antimagic field just fizzle/cease to work, they don't mutually annihilate with the AM field producing massive amounts of energy) nor of an anti-aircraft gun used by an aircraft (see answer Re: cops).

Radio jamming is IMHO an excellent analogy. Another that comes to mind is a limited-range, self-contained EMP - using an electromagnetic device to put out of order all electromagnetic devices in the area.

[JaxGaret]

D&D doesn't seem to have such a limited source of magical energy as Niven's mana.

The Weave.

[hamishspence]

thats more Faerun, its less clear whether core D&D has it.

Though Dead Magic zones are a bit like niven mana thing- its not that magic has been artificially diverted (as AMF) its that magic is, simply, gone from the region.

[chibibar]

thats more Faerun, its less clear whether core D&D has it.

Though Dead Magic zones are a bit like niven mana thing- its not that magic has been artificially diverted (as AMF) its that magic is, simply, gone from the region.

hmm interesting. Yea the Magic Dead zone would definitely be more of a "mana drain" type area. I know there are such zones in many adventures that WotC puts out.

But that is totally different from Wild and Anti Magic.

[hamishspence]

yes- the whirlpool analogy was an interesting one.

Imagine magic as the sea, the antimagic zone as like in movies where the whirlpool pulls the water away, all the way down to the sea bed. So, no water present in a big zone.

alternatively, there is describing it as "force lines" and the antimagic as taking a firm grip on the force lines, and pulling them "away"

The tricky bit is explaining how you can throw a fireball, lightning bolt, or similar effect through the field with no detrimental effect on the spell when it reaches the far side.

Maybe said spell consists of "strange stuff" that can be thrown around, but can only manifest on the plane, where it contacts the force lines. Absence of the force lines does not actually effect the stuff, it simply means nothing can perceive it in any way while its in the zone of no lines.

[Optimystik]

thats more Faerun, its less clear whether core D&D has it.

Given that 3.5 is primarily set in Faerun we can assume the names they use don't divert far enough from the rules to be an issue. If an AMF has exactly the same effect on both Faerun and Greyhawk then logically it's because it's doing the same thing in the same way in both worlds.


Radio jamming is IMHO an excellent analogy. Another that comes to mind is a limited-range, self-contained EMP - using an electromagnetic device to put out of order all electromagnetic devices in the area.

The key question is, can Detect Magic spot an AMF field, and what does it see? If AMF is indeed an area of magical static, it should still be visible.

An EMP isn't a good analogy because, like counterspells and dispel magic, an EMP is a one-shot burst effect. A continuous EMP is an oxymoron.


The tricky bit is explaining how you can throw a fireball, lightning bolt, or similar effect through the field with no detrimental effect on the spell when it reaches the far side.

That's easy - the spells that fly "through" the AMF are simply conducted around the threads of weave at the boundaries and reconstituted at the far side.

[hamishspence]

FRCS: detect magic reveals dead magic zones. Which are similar in rules function to antimagic fields (there are one or two slight differences)

So, one could make the case that everything glows very faintly because there is really magic everywhere, actual spells/items glow brightly, and dead/magic/antimagic can be spotted by the caster because the faint blue cone, visible only to him, starts to foreshorten as he approaches the dead magic/antimagic zone.

Or, theres a bright plane marking the edge (detect magic detects emanations, and this is an emanation) and nothing at all inside the spherical surface.

[Optimystik]

So, one could make the case that everything glows very faintly because there is really magic everywhere, actual spells/items glow brightly, and dead/magic/antimagic can be spotted by the caster because the faint blue cone, visible only to him, starts to foreshorten as he approaches the dead magic/antimagic zone.

Or, theres a bright plane marking the edge (detect magic detects emanations, and this is an emanation) and nothing at all inside the spherical surface.

My point exactly: if Detect Magic spots "nothing at all" inside, or any similarly distinctive absence, then it can't be static in there, because static is something (and something magical to boot). It might serve no purpose but disruption, yet is still magic and should show up in entirety.

Another question: If you Detect Magic on an AMF with a Force Wall inside, can you detect the wall's presence?

[Admiral_Kelly]

I think we've been given enough examples on how it's not a paradox with real world logic and been given enough real world examples to be say otherwise on the first part of your statement. However the second part of your statement still stands As I can find no flaw within it.Yes, because magic works just like radio waves. How well do you think this analogy holds up in other cases?

[hamishspence]

i'd be inclined to say, just as a Cone of Cold would have a big chunk missing in the middle where the field is, so a Detect spell, if being done that way, would have a big chunk missing as well.

That is, if you walk in with the Detect spell up, aside from knowing the AMF is present, you'd get no warning of the wall.

thats just my guess though.

[Optimystik]

Yes, because magic works just like radio waves. How well do you think this analogy holds up in other cases?

Magic is not "just like" radio waves, or water, or threads in a weave, or any of the other analogies people have come up with to try and describe how it works over the years. That's the whole point of an analogy, it applies only to select specific cases.

And "it works because the rules say it does" is really an intellectual cop-out. With sufficient creativity and intuition, analogues can be found for every known phenomenon, both as an aid to understanding them and as a way to inject our dice with real-world flavor.


i'd be inclined to say, just as a Cone of Cold would have a big chunk missing in the middle where the field is, so a Detect spell, if being done that way, would have a big chunk missing as well.

That is, if you walk in with the Detect spell up, aside from knowing the AMF is present, you'd get no warning of the wall.

thats just my guess though.

If so, that explanation also tends to fly in the face of the radio static theory, since you should be able to spot all the low-level magic signals being diverted and flexed around a solid wall of working magic inside. I'm leaning towards the vacuum/whirlpool analogy for now.

(No, it's NOT just because I came up with it! :smalltongue:)

[hamishspence]

if we consider the effect of revealing auras by Detect Magic as also suppressed in the field because these glows, visible only to the caster, are themselves magical, then Wall should not show up.

a trickier question would be if a Shaped antimagic field (archmages can do this), with a cube in the middle where the magic works properly, would have magic inside the normally functioning cube, show up.

Say, a powerful archmage wearing lots of powerful items, or with mighty Contingent Spells sitting quiscient on him.

[SteveMB]

The spell components have to be contained in the special bottles used to hold Universal Solvent.

[Naleh]

That's setting up a control fire in order to prevent the uncontrolled fire from spreading. I'd like to see you post a Youtube video where you fire a flamethrower into a fire to put it out.

Sadly, I don't have a video camera or a flamethrower, but that would work. It would consume the fire's fuel faster, causing it to burn out sooner.

[Optimystik]

Sadly, I don't have a video camera or a flamethrower, but that would work. It would consume the fire's fuel faster, causing it to burn out sooner.

You're making the assumption that there's no combustible fuel nearby for your flamethrower to ignite, in which case the fire would burn out on its own anyway and you wouldn't have to do anything.

But we've digressed quite a bit :smallsmile: How about I just replace my "putting a fire out with a flamethrower" analogy with something else, like trying to silence a loud noise by drowning it out with the same sound?


if we consider the effect of revealing auras by Detect Magic as also suppressed in the field because these glows, visible only to the caster, are themselves magical, then Wall should not show up.

a trickier question would be if a Shaped antimagic field (archmages can do this), with a cube in the middle where the magic works properly, would have magic inside the normally functioning cube, show up.

Say, a powerful archmage wearing lots of powerful items, or with mighty Contingent Spells sitting quiscient on him.

I think he would remain undetectable (at least to magical senses), which further casts doubt on the static theory - a signal as powerful as his would be bound to penetrate random low level magic signals.

The vacuum theory is strengthened however - you can't see him because there simply are no threads in the AMF portion of the spell to carry his strong signals to your detection.

[hamishspence]

and if the zone of functional magic extends above and below the mage, making it more of an Antimagic Doughnut than Antimagic Sphere shape?

I'd say if you did it that way (or even as a sphere with a "core" where magic functions) you have to cope with area spells. A lightning bolt or similar flung at said mage would damage him just fine. Even though he's surrounded by antimagic. For the same reason as spells work fine when flung through it- one spot where magic works means damaging magic manifests in the spot.

so a large area sphere, set to detonate right next to the field, would have a big cut out, a patch outside the field where the sphere of damaging magic works, and a patch inside the field where magic works normally as well.

[Optimystik]

so a large area sphere, set to detonate right next to the field, would have a big cut out, a patch outside the field where the sphere of damaging magic works, and a patch inside the field where magic works normally as well.

I agree, because the shape he has formed allows threads of dweomer to somehow reach him (else his "live" zone would be disempowered like the rest of the field). The multitude of eddies and spirals he'd have to set up to create that donut-shaped vacuum would also form a path by which an area spell or bolt could reach his powered section.

I'm really fond of the air/water analogy, not sure why.

But if a bolt can reach him, can his magic be Detected? why bother with an AMF at all if your enemies have to be in the "donut" to be affected?

[hamishspence]

I think the idea is that, even in an aerial fight, with a carefully shaped field centred on the caster, with a space in the middle for the caster to cast out of, he's not completely invulnerable. The right area spell will still hit him, even if you haven't got Orbs.

In other words, no matter what, you can't use it to be both protected, and avoid being inconvenienced by it.

If you want to keep magic from hitting you completely, you have to stay in the field.

I can just imagine- evil but not very sensible archmage master of shaping- "Ha ha! I can fire magic at you but you can't hit me with magic!"
Wiser mage: "Actually, I can."

[Optimystik]

Silly me, not thinking in 3 dimensions. I can see how a donut shape could be useful in that case. And of course you're right, the only way for an AMF field to benefit you totally should be if you are also subjected to its effects, else be forced to sacrifice safety for utility.

Nevertheless, everything you've said supports the "vacuum" theory. Whether I set up one big whirlpool that draws all the dweomer away from me (classic sphere) or multiple small ones in a dual ring that pull it away and leave a 'donut' of vacuum leaving a magic region in the center, the analogy still applies.

Goodness, I think we've monopolized the thread at some point :smallsmile:

[hamishspence]

true :smallsmile: still, its an interesting topic.

Main differences from vacuum- using this analogy- normal magical world is "air" and air can get used up. But by the rules, magic can't. Even if you sealed away a chunk of the magical world by putting permanent antimagic fields around it with no gaps, then started casting spells in the isolated area, no matter how long you cast, you would never run out of magic.

Maybe magic gets into the world via an "extra dimension" a bit like Faerun's Weave, and while you can isolate an area in three dimensions, that doesn't stop magic getting to it.

Except, of course, inside the zone of the field itself, where its fully isolated.

Having most normal items/spells be "kept running" by the flow from the magical plane, and interrupting the flow cause the thing to cease working, but not be destroyed, would fit.