Spellcasters and Antimagic Field's

[Aerlock]

I'm trying to throw together a one-shot for tomorrow night after a field trip out into the real world to see GrindHouse and need a couple of quick questions answered

If a spellcaster is in an AMF when trying to cast a spell, does that attempt use up a prepared spell/spell per day?

Would the spellcaster be aware of the AMF before trying to cast the spell and thus not actually make the attempt?

This one isn't actually related to the one-shot I'm planning (yet), but it popped into my head just now so I figure I'll ask it as well.
Would a successful Mage's Disjunction be able to suppress the AMF of a beholder?

TIA,
Aerlock

[Jasdoif]

If a spellcaster is in an AMF when trying to cast a spell, does that attempt use up a prepared spell/spell per day?

I would say no. They're incapable of using the spell slot.

Would the spellcaster be aware of the AMF before trying to cast the spell and thus not actually make the attempt?

That's debatable, really. If I was to make the call....If they can tell that their magic items stop working (that they stop glowing, or whatever), they would know. And as soon as they started trying to cast, they'd be able to tell that the magic simply isn't there. If the spell takes longer to cast then a standard action, I'd let them know their magic isn't working at that point, and allow them to do something else with the move action in their turn (if they haven't already used it).

If anyone tried to cast a spell into the field, anyone seeing the spell "stop" would be allowed to make a DC 26 Spellcraft check to identify the effect as an AMF.

This one isn't actually related to the one-shot I'm planning (yet), but it popped into my head just now so I figure I'll ask it as well.
Would a successful Mage's Disjunction be able to suppress the AMF of a beholder?

No. Its eye effect is a supernatural ability, and disjunction only affects spells, spell-like abilities and magic items.

And even if you disregard that, the eye continuously produces the effect, it would simply be recreated as soon as it was disjoined (or at the most generous, recreate it on its turn).

[TheOOB]

Well, once you walk into an antimagic field you would be allowed a spellcraft check to identify the spell affecting you as per normal.

If you are trying to cast a spell into a AMF and it fizzles it would be reasonable to allow a similar spellcraft check to indentify the spell as well.

[Tokiko Mima]

I'm trying to throw together a one-shot for tomorrow night after a field trip out into the real world to see GrindHouse and need a couple of quick questions answered

If a spellcaster is in an AMF when trying to cast a spell, does that attempt use up a prepared spell/spell per day?

Would the spellcaster be aware of the AMF before trying to cast the spell and thus not actually make the attempt?

This one isn't actually related to the one-shot I'm planning (yet), but it popped into my head just now so I figure I'll ask it as well.
Would a successful Mage's Disjunction be able to suppress the AMF of a beholder?

TIA,
Aerlock

Antimagic Field just supresses magic in it's area of effect. It doesn't keep you from casting it, or even affecting the target of the spell inside. However, as long as the target remains inside the Antimagic area of effect, magic doesn't have any effect at all. If your target leaves the area of effect and the spell has some duration left, then the spell you cast takes full effect.

So say I cast magic aura vs. evil on Fred the Warrior. Fred and I happen to be in an antimagic field at the time, so even though I cast it on him he doesn't benefit from it immediately. A few minutes later Fred leaves the Antimagic Field. When he leaves, his magic aura buff starts working.