Self-Blocking Otiluke's Suppressing Field?

[weckar]

Does someone casting Otiluke's Suppressing Field and designating Abjuration have to make a caster level check against themselves for the spell to work?

I realized this question may be a little too complex for the simple Q&A, so I'm taking it to its own thread. Are there even RAW solutions to this?

[flappeercraft]

Well according to the description of Otiluke's Suppressing Field, "Abilities and feats that improve the ability to defeat spell resistance such as Spell penetration, apply here as well", the thing is that casters have the ability to automatically bypass their own Spell resistance so since this is their spell effect therefore they can bypass it as per Spell resistance rules.

That is what I interpret it as but I might be wrong

[weckar]

Their own spell resistance, but does that extend to the effects they produce? Because if it does the OSF would never be a hindrance to the caster at all.

[flappeercraft]

True, maybe the spell can bypass its own spell resistance then? Maybe thats how it works instead

[weckar]

is their precedence for any effect that has that property? I can't really even argue for either outcome being more logical, is the thing.

[flappeercraft]

is their precedence for any effect that has that property? I can't really even argue for either outcome being more logical, is the thing.

Well as for a spell that ignores its own effect not really but according to the SRD "A creature’s spell resistance never interferes with its own spells, items, or abilities." which could possibly apply to this.

[ben-zayb]

Well, I mean does an AMF wink itself out? Then it winks back in, winks out, winks in...

[eggynack]

The text, " Spells of that type are suppressed within the area of your spell," has its meaning elaborated on later, so we can more or less ignore it as rules text. From there, we just look at each possible thing suppressing field does, and ask whether that thing would suit an interaction between the field and itself. You're not casting a spell in or into the area, because the area didn't exist when the spell was cast. Neither item provision fits, obviously, cause this isn't an item. The only other possibility would be the one related to precast effects, but the field clearly isn't a precast effect relative to itself, because it was cast simultaneous to itself. If we instead consider precast effects as referring to spell objects that are brought from outside the field to inside the field, without care for when the precast effect was actually cast (meaning you can cast field, and then the other person can cast their buff, and the field will still work), then this text still doesn't apply, because the field was never outside of itself such that it can be brought into itself.

Thus, it seems to me that there is no section of the text that would cause the field to apply to itself, which means it doesn't. I don't think there's a reasonable reading of any section that would accommodate this kinda impact. Even if I'm wrong, and we do consider the field a precast effect relative to itself somehow, it doesn't matter. Your caster level in the moment you cast the field is the same as your caster level in the moment you cast the field, so you have a 50% chance of winning against yourself (relevant factor here is that it's not zero). If the field suppresses itself, then said field vanishes, and then the field, no longer inhibited, would spring back to life, and this would keep happening until you roll well, at which time it would begin its period of being unaffected. Because an eventual roll over ten is inevitable over sufficient attempts, and the attempts all happen instantaneously, the field will always work fine immediately after being cast. It could technically get super annoying if you actually have to make the rolls, but I'd have to think any reasonable DM would let you skip them. So, my reading is that the field works fine, but if my reading is wrong then it still works fine, but is stupid.