Magic or not?

[funmasta]

Where is stated, what is beeing considered magic or not? There is no more description like "spell", "spell-like ability", "supernatural", "extraordinary", ... (in general)

And in this special case it is about "Horrifying Visage" from the Ghost vs "Undying Nature" from the Warlock special ability which he gets, when his otherworldly patron is "The Undying" from "the Sword Coast Adventuring Guide".

Horrifying Visage. Each non-undead creature within 60 feet of the ghost that can see it must succeed on a DC 13 Wisdom saving throw or be frightened for 1 minute. If the save fails by 5 or more, the target also ages 1d4 x 10 years. A frightened target can repeat the saving throw at the end of each of its turns, ending the frightened condition on itself on a success. If a target's saving throw is successful or the effect ends for it, the target is immune to this ghost's Horrifying Visage for the next 24 hours. The aging effect can be reversed with a greater restoration spell, but only within 24 hours of it occurring.

UNDYING NATURE
Beginning at 10th level, you can hold your breath indefinitely, and you don't require food, water, or sleep, although you still require rest to reduce exhaustion and still benefit from finishing short and long rests. In addition, you age at a slower rate. For every 10 years that pass, your body ages only 1 year, and you are immune to being magically aged.

Is the Horrifying Visage magic? And is the Warlock immune to this ageing in case he fails the save by 5 or more?

[Sir cryosin]

Now this is just my opinion I cant point you to a page or a raw or ect... but I would say it's a spell like ability so things like the gnome's gnomes cunning would work on it but a wizard can cast counterspell.

[Gastronomie]

As a DM, I will consider anything supernatural as "magic". Not because I'm exactly certain of the precise mechanics of how a ghost can make people grow wrinkles and long ear hair by just scaring them, but rather because if I ruled otherwise, the "immune to being magically aged" part of the Warlock's ability will become really, really insignificant to the point where printing it in the guidebook itself was a complete waste of ink (and it already is insignificant enough).

I generally like it when players get excited at how their really niche, normally worthless abilities actually get chances to be used effectively. This is one such great example.

I also rule that, since dragons are specifically stated as being magical creatures (and because it makes no sense for any living creature to be able to breathe fire), dragon breath attacks are also magical, as are various other non-physical abilities such as the Succubus's "Charm". This makes Chainlocks pretty darn good, but I think it's okay.

[Millstone85]

I am starting to think "psionics" should really have been confined to settings where science fiction meets fantasy. There shouldn't be matter to question whether or not the sudden gain of several decades is magic.

[TheFlyingCleric]

By and large there are no distinctions like that*. The DM needs to rule based on what makes sense.
For example, Ghosts are incorporeal beings that move through objects, mostly ignore (non-magical) weapons and can go ethereal at will. Very much magical creatures. Next, their horrifying Visage ability imposes a very unnatural penalty on the target; significant ageing in an instant; something that looks a lot like magic. This is reflected in the fact it can be removed by Greater Restoration.
A second reason to translate it that way is that it makes sense for your feature to work against an effect caused by an undead creature.
Third, you're class feature is intended to make you live longer. If non-spell effects can circumvent that (and most ageing effects are non-spells) then there's not really much point.

Therefore, it makes sense to consider it magical. That's my take on this anyway. Your mileage may vary.


*There is a sort-of distinction between 'spells' and 'spell-like abilities', but this mainly relates to whether the aforesaid are affected by Dispel Magic or Counterspell​.

[Gastronomie]

I am starting to think "psionics" should really have been confined to settings where science fiction meets fantasy. There shouldn't be matter to question whether or not the sudden gain of several decades is magic.Since I came in from 5e and don't know how Psionics work (as well as WHY they're not considered magical when they obviously are), I also consider a Mind Flayer's magical abilities to be stoppable with Counterspell and other means.

I really do have no clue on what "Psionics" even are.

[Millstone85]

This makes Chainlocks pretty darn goodOnly if you decide to combine the familiar rules from the PHB and the MM. Otherwise, I don't think a chainlock is supposed to gain magic resistance from their familiar.


I really do have no clue on what "Psionics" even are.Honestly, me neither. My best understanding is that psionics are like magic except they don't rely on the Weave and thus can ignore antimagic fields and the like. If the X-Men came to Toril, they might be considered psions.

http://www.giantitp.com/Images/CafePress2013/Psionics.png

[funmasta]

What exactly is a chainlock? A Warlock with a pseudodragon as familiar?

[Millstone85]

What exactly is a chainlock? A Warlock with a pseudodragon as familiar?A warlock with Pact of the Chain, pseudodragon optional.

[Gastronomie]

I actually haven't played in a game where the Chainlock didn't use the variant rule that gives it Magical Resistence (in fact I completely forgot it was a variant rule 'cause it's so popular). Imps, Quasits and Pseudodragons can give their master Magical Resistance while they're within 10ft. of each other, but only if the DM permits it. Most do, but some may not.

Depending on the setting, I sometimes actually have a different understand on how magic works that has nothing to do with the Weave, so I really don't understand still. Let's just say that I'm glad Psionics aren't a real thing in 5e yet, 'cause I don't think it fits the theme of the world either, unless it's Dark Sun or stuff like that.

[pwykersotz]

I don't know where I got this interpretation from, some combination of sage advice and the forums and the like, but for me all that stuff counts as magic but none of it counts as spells.

So you can't counterspell a Banshee's wail, but it is a magical effect. Likewise, that Warlock is immune to being magically aged, so that monster effect doesn't work. It's a pretty simple distinction that has served me very well in games.

[Millstone85]

I actually haven't played in a game where the Chainlock didn't use the variant rule that gives it Magical Resistence (in fact I completely forgot it was a variant rule 'cause it's so popular). Imps, Quasits and Pseudodragons can give their master Magical Resistance while they're within 10ft. of each other, but only if the DM permits it. Most do, but some may not.Do these people follow the complete variant rule, including the part where the familiar is not actually bound to its "master" and can abandon them? Although I suppose most warlock familiars actually serve the otherworldly patron to begin with.


Depending on the setting, I sometimes actually have a different understand on how magic works that has nothing to do with the Weave, so I really don't understand still. Let's just say that I'm glad Psionics aren't a real thing in 5e yet, 'cause I don't think it fits the theme of the world either, unless it's Dark Sun or stuff like that.Well, the MM does mention them on page 10, but the only real effect so far is that some monsters do not require components to cast their spells.


I don't know where I got this interpretation from, some combination of sage advice and the forums and the like, but for me all that stuff counts as magic but none of it counts as spells.

So you can't counterspell a Banshee's wail, but it is a magical effect. Likewise, that Warlock is immune to being magically aged, so that monster effect doesn't work. It's a pretty simple distinction that has served me very well in games.I think that's the correct interpretation.

[Dalebert]

The ghost aging effect is the only way I know of off the top of my head for someone to age unnaturally and quickly and it's caused by undead, the Undying warlock's specialty. I've always just assumed that's the primary intended purpose of it so I would assume it's considered magical.

I thought Sage Advice had clarified that the MR of special familiars didn't apply for chainlocks but I'm going from memory and not certain. I haven't actually seen any DM that allows it yet. I was under the impression that was the case if you found one and convinced it to be your familiar as opposed to gaining it through chain and Find Familiar.

[Millstone85]

The ghost aging effect is the only way I know of off the top of my head for someone to age unnaturally and quickly and it's caused by undead, the Undying warlock's specialty. I've always just assumed that's the primary intended purpose of it so I would assume it's considered magical.That's true too. The RAI is strong with this one.


I thought Sage Advice had clarified that the MR of special familiars didn't apply for chainlocks but I'm going from memory and not certain. I haven't actually seen any DM that allows it yet. I was under the impression that was the case if you found one and convinced it to be your familiar as opposed to gaining it through chain and Find Familiar.I do not see anything in the compendium but that's how I understood it too. I have also seen the argument that the spirit summoned with find familiar can take on the form of a tiny beast or, with Pact of the Chain, of more magical creatures yet is not actually any of them. The MM rules are for when you meet the genuine article.

I will open a thread about this.
Edit: here (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?489777-PHB-and-MM-familiars).

[Slipperychicken]

There shouldn't be matter to question whether or not the sudden gain of several decades is magic.

I'm seconding this. There are some ambiguous cases, but I think this one is quite clear.

[Regitnui]

I say yes, within reason. A gaze attack is magic, but a cockatrice's petrifying spittle is more akin to a poison.


Since I came in from 5e and don't know how Psionics work (as well as WHY they're not considered magical when they obviously are), I also consider a Mind Flayer's magical abilities to be stoppable with Counterspell and other means.

I really do have no clue on what "Psionics" even are.

Side Note Here: Ignore If You Want

Eberron is one of the few worlds of D&D to feature magic and psionics in equal measure. The official stance as of 3.5 is that they affect the other. Antimagic fields prevent use of psionics and psionically dead zones prevent the use of magic within. The implication seems to be that divine, arcane and psionics are all different ways of interacting with the same thing. Divine through faith, arcane through ritual, and psionics through willpower.

[Slipperychicken]

Eberron is pone of the few worlds of D&D to feature magic and psionics in equal measure. The official stance as of 3.5 is that they affect the other. Antimagic fields prevent use of psionics and psionically dead zones prevent the use of magic within. The implication seems to be that divine, arcane and psionics are all different ways of interacting with the same thing. Divine through faith, arcane through ritual, and psionics through willpower.

I still feel like magic/psionics transparency was just because they initially wanted to make psionics a totally different animal (i.e. "we use MP instead of spell slots, so we get to be immune to your dispel powers!"), but then realized how much that would mess with the lore and the game mechanics.

[Knaight]

Honestly, me neither. My best understanding is that psionics are like magic except they don't rely on the Weave and thus can ignore antimagic fields and the like. If the X-Men came to Toril, they might be considered psions.

It's magic. There are some stylistic differences in the attached nomenclature, and the set of powers that are considered classical to psionics are a bit different than the set of powers considered classical to magic, but it's magic. In D&D, it also tends to blur pretty heavily, as the set of classical psionic powers are pretty much all doable with magic, and a whole bunch of classically magic stuff gets duplicated in psionics. There are some mechanical differences, but it's not like a spell point system is somehow inimical to magic.

As for the main topic - how, exactly, other than magic is someone supposed to age years in the course of seconds? On top of that, the creature that does that is one that doesn't even have a physical form. It's a pretty clear case of magic.