[3.P] How do you feel about the concept of antimagic?

[Endarire]

"Antimagic" in this case is not counterspelling. Instead, it's a means of removing all or almost all magic from you briefly (antimagic field) or permanently (disjunction on a creature with an artifact).

I greatly dislike it. It's a binary switch that says, "Casters get benched" or "Things work as normal."

[Crow]

I love it. It's the great equalizer, though a significantly prepared caster *can* overcome it.

That said, as a DM I use it very sparingly, if at all. I think in all my years DMing, I've never used AM Field or Disjunction on the players. I've seen the players use it quite a few times though, but never on a whim. Each time, the trade-offs were weighed very carefully before they pulled the trigger.

[Psyren]

I see it as a necessary evil. Without it, incarcerating spellcasters becomes nearly impossible, which would mandate their summary execution instead for even middling infractions.

[randomhero00]

disjunction needs to be painfully tortured and die. AMF is OK. That affects the user too often enough.

The thing is, when a caster can cast epic spells and timestop sheninigans and such you need something that can at least slow them down.

*grumble grumble* is in epic game atm and is annoyed at the lack of good options for non casters.

[John Campbell]

Antimagic field once enabled me to take out a balor by throwing an unconscious cleric at it, so I'm good with it.

[randomhero00]

PS disjunction should die in fire.

Seriously, what were they thinking with this? I would really like to know. Has anyone officially asked WotC about it?

[Tvtyrant]

"Antimagic" in this case is not counterspelling. Instead, it's a means of removing all or almost all magic from you briefly (antimagic field) or permanently (disjunction on a creature with an artifact).

I greatly dislike it. It's a binary switch that says, "Casters get benched" or "Things work as normal."

I think it should be a monk ability, actually. If you think of magic as breaking natural laws, then AMF's should be about forcing nature to ignore the breaks in the laws. So a monk could concentrate on making things remain the way they are (in a meditative state) and it would counter the magic in use.

It would make monks useful without having to throw harder punches or other crazy stuff.

[Marnath]

disjunction needs to be painfully tortured and die. AMF is OK. That affects the user too often enough.

The thing is, when a caster can cast epic spells and timestop sheninigans and such you need something that can at least slow them down.

*grumble grumble* is in epic game atm and is annoyed at the lack of good options for non casters.

Obviously the answer is to craft Epic Antimagic Field: this spell is effective against even epic spells. I'm sure it could be done.

[randomhero00]

Obviously the answer is to craft Epic Antimagic Field: this spell is effective against even epic spells. I'm sure it could be done.

err how? I suck at crafting rules. I find em boring so I've never tried.

[AstralFire]

It depends on how well the metaphysics are constructed. In D&D, which is the subject at hand, antimagic covers such diverse fields that it makes as much sense as "ANTIPHYSICS!" Seriously.

Ysalamiri in Star Wars, on the other hand, are actually kinda interesting.

[Psyren]

err how? I suck at crafting rules. I find em boring so I've never tried.

I think he means you can make an epic antimagic field that could suppress even epic spells. Of course, one could respond by crafting an epic dispel that can work in your super antimagic field. And so on until the DCs become impossible to hit.

[Marnath]

I think he means you can make an epic antimagic field that could suppress even epic spells. Of course, one could respond by crafting an epic dispel that can work in your super antimagic field. And so on until the DCs become impossible to hit.

Yeah, thats what I meant. Except the other guy doesn't get to research epic dispel because you waited to attack the first time until you were sure you could get him.

[Safety Sword]

I see it as a necessary evil. Without it, incarcerating spellcasters becomes nearly impossible, which would mandate their summary execution instead for even middling infractions.

I have always used a set of bracers that negate magic coming from the person wearing them. It allows the "law" to still use magic on offenders to control them.

The rationale on how the bracers work can also be nice fluff.

[Psyren]

I have always used a set of bracers that negate magic coming from the person wearing them. It allows the "law" to still use magic on offenders to control them.

The rationale on how the bracers work can also be nice fluff.

Sounds like Antimagic Shackles from BoED - and indeed, this is the entire point behind them, allowing you to imprison dangerous casters without being forced to execute them or let them continue rampaging.

[randomhero00]

I have always used a set of bracers that negate magic coming from the person wearing them. It allows the "law" to still use magic on offenders to control them.

The rationale on how the bracers work can also be nice fluff.

Wait, what? I'm really curious because I'm looking to take down an epic (and extremely powerful) caster.

[oxybe]

do you like seeing players whip out a gameboy mid session?

do you like seeing players leave the table and start channel surfing?

do you like players taking naps after saying "call me when i become relevant again"?

if you answered yes to any of these questions, please don't ever ask me to join your game. you will be laughed at. there might be a stream of pop coming from my nose.

mechanics that totally turn off a PC is bad design. period. i mean, it's not like the guys came over to play a game with their friends, right?

[Psyren]

Wait, what? I'm really curious because I'm looking to take down an epic (and extremely powerful) caster.

*points at his post*

mechanics that totally turn off a PC is bad design.

Relax, it's only a 10' radius...
It just requires some modified tactics is all.

[Marnath]

do you like seeing players whip out a gameboy mid session?

do you like seeing players leave the table and start channel surfing?

do you like players taking naps after saying "call me when i become relevant again"?

if you answered yes to any of these questions, please don't ever ask me to join your game. you will be laughed at. there might be a stream of pop coming from my nose.

mechanics that totally turn off a PC is bad design. period. i mean, it's not like the guys came over to play a game with their friends, right?

Obviously you've never seen a battle sorceror crush the anti-magic user's head with a masterwork mace.
But more seriously, I think that's overly dramatic. There are other things you can do, you know like move out of the area effect and cast more?

[Safety Sword]

Sounds like Antimagic Shackles from BoED - and indeed, this is the entire point behind them, allowing you to imprison dangerous casters without being forced to execute them or let them continue rampaging.

Sounds like it. Although I have never read and don't have BoED..

It's actually a straight copy of something I read in a Maggie Furey book.. maybe "Aurian"... definitely in that series though.

Yes, it turns off a PC spellcaster... just long enough that they have to do something else until they find the "key" to unshackle themselves. Then they can continue to win D&D with ease.

[Marnath]

Yes, it turns off a PC spellcaster... just long enough that they have to do something else until they find the "key" to unshackle themselves. Then they can continue to win D&D with ease.

And the skinny bookworm is going to escape the cell whose wall he's chained to how? It's a lot harder to get out of a place like that than you think.

[Hironomus]

Realistically in a world where magic is so dangerous, and certainly the greatest threat to anyone (magic user or not) it is ludicrous to believe that such a thing as antimagic would not be used alot.
Any sufficiently powerful force that is expecting to be troubled by magic users should use antimagic. the fact is, in any civilised environment, massively powerful things do not exist without some means to control them.

[Safety Sword]

And the skinny bookworm is going to escape the cell whose wall he's chained to how? It's a lot harder to get out of a place like that than you think.

That's what melee characters are for.

If nothing bad ever happens to your character and you're never challenged to do anything differently, RPGs get boring.

Yes, I'm a DM. Yes, I will screw with your character. Yes, it will be satisfying when you overcome the challenge and "regain" what was taken from you.

Casters can be more than a spell book with legs.

[Tvtyrant]

That's what melee characters are for.

If nothing bad ever happens to your character and you're never challenged to do anything differently, RPGs get boring.

Yes, I'm a DM. Yes, I will screw with your character. Yes, it will be satisfying when you overcome the challenge and "regain" what was taken from you.

Casters can be more than a spell book with legs.

Unless they are a MT, where the need to have two maxed stats makes them essentially a man with a book in each hand feebly staring at the shackles.

[Safety Sword]

Unless they are a MT, where the need to have two maxed stats makes them essentially a man with a book in each hand feebly staring at the shackles.

Mystic Theurge... Oh God, I almost wet myself. Clearly, you should get penalties for TWF if you have a book in both hands.

And before this thread derails (I mean... more) it isn't something I'd put onto a PC long term. It would be a condition that lasted as long as it takes to press home the inconvenience and hence the reason not to be caught again.

[Marnath]

That's what melee characters are for.

If nothing bad ever happens to your character and you're never challenged to do anything differently, RPGs get boring.

Yes, I'm a DM. Yes, I will screw with your character. Yes, it will be satisfying when you overcome the challenge and "regain" what was taken from you.

Casters can be more than a spell book with legs.

Make it more interesting then, curse the bracers to not come off unless certain conditions are met. Or change it up and have the spellbook stolen, if you want to see how creative the wizard gets when he's limited to what he had memorized that day until he finds his book again.

[Safety Sword]

Make it more interesting then, curse the bracers to not come off unless certain conditions are met.

That would be the "key".

Or change it up and have the spellbook stolen, if you want to see how creative the wizard gets when he's limited to what he had memorized that day until he finds his book again.

I prefer to torture my players. Leave the spellbook there and taunt him with the fact that he can't use it.

[John Campbell]

mechanics that totally turn off a PC is bad design. period. i mean, it's not like the guys came over to play a game with their friends, right?

Antimagic field doesn't do that. Not even to the extent that, say, hold person against any character with a poor Will save (almost any melee type) or Evard's black tentacles against anyone who isn't a dedicated grapple specialist (almost everyone) does.

There's absolutely nothing preventing a caster from walking out of the field's radius and regaining his godlike powers. There are even spells that you can cast into an antimagic field.

And if we're talking about a cell with antimagic on it so that the casters have to stay in the cell like the mundane riffraff classes do... hang on, let me make a Perform (world's tiniest violin) check here...

[Safety Sword]

And if we're talking about a cell with antimagic on it so that the casters have to stay in the cell like the mundane riffraff classes do... hang on, let me make a Perform (world's tiniest violin) check here...

I giggled.

[maysarahs]

As a Player:
AMF is ok, and a legitimate challenge to circumvent, plus, I play casters a lot, and when I am not god-tripping, I recognize that it's a good chance for noncasters to shine. I might even (if I was in a buffing mood that day) cast it myself to bring them into the limelight for a bit (for the fun of the group). Disjunction on the other hand sucks. If I use it, thats part of my treasure I just destroyed, (and everyone else is mad).

As a DM:
AMF is great! Stick it in a room where the other options are to stand in a pit of acid or in the way of enemy beatsticks, and it makes making a challenge a lot easier (I don't have to expect the wizard to pull out JUST the right spell to make everyone else feel useless, and the god-tripping wizard gets knocked down a couple notches and has to sweat his way through at least one of the encounters for the day)
Disjunction from a DM's standpoint is even worse. If I use it on a PC, they just lost something they worked really hard to earn. Saying "oh ok here's a replacement item, sorry" negates the use of the spell (why use it in the first place?) and for a little bit there, Mr. Fighter was looking at his now masterwork longsword, and staring at the Wizard magicking his way through the battle.

tl;dr:
AMF temporarily suppresses all that is unbalanced about D&D (and temporarily makes melee players feel important)
Disjunction doesn't stop a wizard from casting, but can stop a fighter from fighting (effectively, at his level)

[Tvtyrant]

The only reason I would use disjunction is as a way to destroy an AMF. Low chance, but better then nothing.