Can I cast AMF as a ranged touch attack and chain it?

[Frosty]

Ok, so let's say I've got a Master Specialist specializing in Abjuration. He's also got levels in Archmage and has the Arcane Reach ability. So something like Wizard 5/M.Spec 10/Archmage X.

Here is Master Specialist's capstone ability for Abjurers:

Major School Esoterica (Ex):
At 10th level, your knowledge of your
chosen school reaches its peak. You gain
an ability from those below based on
your chosen school; each one can be
used three times per day.

Abjuration: When casting an abjuration
spell that normally has a range of personal,
you can instead choose to cast it as a touch
spell that affects a single creature. When
casting an abjuration spell that is an
emanation centered on you, you can instead
choose to cast it as a touch spell that emanates
from the touched creature.

Ok, so you can cast Anti-magic field as a touch attack due to this. Arcane Reach says you can turn touch attacks into ranged touch attacks with a range of 30ft. Does that mean I can point at an enemy wizard, make a ranged touch attack, and now the enemy wizard has an AMF emanating from him? And if I use a metamagic rod of Chain, I can do this to MULTIPLE targets?

[Jack Mann]

The problem is that anti-magic field doesn't have a range of personal. It has a range of 10 feet, centered on you.

It's still a good ability, but it won't let you send forth anti-magic fields of DOOM.

[Sampi]

Ok, so let's say I've got a Master Specialist specializing in Abjuration. He's also got levels in Archmage and has the Arcane Reach ability. So something like Wizard 5/M.Spec 10/Archmage X.

Here is Master Specialist's capstone ability for Abjurers:

Major School Esoterica (Ex):
At 10th level, your knowledge of your
chosen school reaches its peak. You gain
an ability from those below based on
your chosen school; each one can be
used three times per day.

Abjuration: When casting an abjuration
spell that normally has a range of personal,
you can instead choose to cast it as a touch
spell that affects a single creature. When
casting an abjuration spell that is an
emanation centered on you, you can instead
choose to cast it as a touch spell that emanates
from the touched creature.

Ok, so you can cast Anti-magic field as a touch attack due to this. Arcane Reach says you can turn touch attacks into ranged touch attacks with a range of 30ft. Does that mean I can point at an enemy wizard, make a ranged touch attack, and now the enemy wizard has an AMF emanating from him? And if I use a metamagic rod of Chain, I can do this to MULTIPLE targets?

Relevant area bolded. AMF is an emanation centered on you, and therefore can be cast as a touch spell with the major school esoterica. With arcane reach, it could be cast upon a target 30 ft. away. No reason it couldn't be chained, even.

So I'd say yes. Send forth those anti-magic fields of DOOM

[Frosty]

Theproblem is can I PREPARE my AMFs with the Chain metamagic? I know I can cast them as ranged touch attacks, but that's on the fly, and not part of the preparation. Does that mean I am restricted to using metamagic rods?

On another note, M Specialists get two caster level increases for spells of their chosen school. Does that mean if I cast Greater Dispel Magic my Dispel checks get +2 as well?

[Collin152]

I think you are required to use the rods.

Unless its possible to prepare a spell with metamagic that doesn't effect it.
Like preparing a Maximised open/close just for giggles.

[Sir_Elderberry]

I think you are required to use the rods.

Unless its possible to prepare a spell with metamagic that doesn't effect it.
Like preparing a Maximised open/close just for giggles.

Empowered Prestidigitation. Hah! Now I can flavor 1.5 pounds of food.

[Sampi]

Theproblem is can I PREPARE my AMFs with the Chain metamagic? I know I can cast them as ranged touch attacks, but that's on the fly, and not part of the preparation. Does that mean I am restricted to using metamagic rods?

On another note, M Specialists get two caster level increases for spells of their chosen school. Does that mean if I cast Greater Dispel Magic my Dispel checks get +2 as well?

Chain spell only works on a spell that "specifies a single target and has a range greater than touch" so use the rod.

Oh, and sure on the GDM checks, but there's a cap of +20 on the CL check.

[Collin152]

Empowered Prestidigitation. Hah! Now I can flavor 1.5 pounds of food.

Empower does not work that way.
Variable numeric effects only.

[Frosty]

Chain spell only works on a spell that "specifies a single target and has a range greater than touch" so use the rod.

Oh, and sure on the GDM checks, but there's a cap of +20 on the CL check.

Thre's Reaving Dispel, which is max +25. Add in the +5 competence bonus from Minor esoteria, and I get a total of +27 on my dispel checks. Beautiful. Add in Elven Spell Lore for +29.

[Sir_Elderberry]

Empower does not work that way.
Variable numeric effects only.

Dangit, Morbo. I guess you could quicken it, so you could make an an enemy dirty and, presumably, he'd become so disheartened that he'd flee the combat and you could spend the rest of your turn dealing with someone else. (Ideally, by casting more prestidigitation.)

[mikeejimbo]

Oh what I would give for an item of infinite quickened prestidigitations!

[JeminiZero]

I am kinda surprised that it doesn't permit any sort of saving throw to resist the field. Was it ever errata'ed?

Also, if you do get it, expect all divine casters to suddenly become Clerics of Mystra, and all Arcane casters to be gishes with a large set of EX abilities.

[Jack Mann]

Relevant area bolded. AMF is an emanation centered on you, and therefore can be cast as a touch spell with the major school esoterica. With arcane reach, it could be cast upon a target 30 ft. away. No reason it couldn't be chained, even.

So I'd say yes. Send forth those anti-magic fields of DOOM

Huh. Missed that part. Let the doom commence then, by all means.

[Collin152]

Course, then they got a shield agaisnt all a` your spells.

[Chronos]

Course, then they got a shield agaisnt all a` your spells.

Even aside from all the things like orbs, you can still disintegrate the floor they're standing on, or cause a cave-in above them, or throw things at them with Telekinesis, or buff your friends with ranged weapons, or put a wall of stone around them, or a bunch of other things that don't care about the AMF.

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

Even aside from all the things like orbs, you can still disintegrate the floor they're standing on, or cause a cave-in above them, or throw things at them with Telekinesis, or buff your friends with ranged weapons, or put a wall of stone around them, or a bunch of other things that don't care about the AMF.

So for your efforts you remove their buffs, continuous magic items, but offer them a limited protection against your spells without preventing them from casting spells at you...

[Jack_Simth]

So for your efforts you remove their buffs, continuous magic items, but offer them a limited protection against your spells without preventing them from casting spells at you...

For your efforts, they suddenly have negligible defenses against the Rogue and Fighter in the party, who aren't nearly so reliant on magic for disabling/damaging foes.

[Chronicled]

So for your efforts you remove their buffs, continuous magic items, but offer them a limited protection against your spells without preventing them from casting spells at you...

For your efforts, their Headband of Intellect is no longer helpful. Depending on their starting Int, their highest spells might not be usable. Either way, lower DC and fewer slots.

[KillianHawkeye]

So for your efforts you remove their buffs, continuous magic items, but offer them a limited protection against your spells without preventing them from casting spells at you...

An antimagic field suppresses any spell or magical effect used within, brought into, or cast into the area, but does not dispel it.

Does that not prevent the casting of spells within the AMF???

[Collin152]

No.
Well, not nesecarily.
If the effect is without the AMF, there is nothing sayign it cannot be cast from within it.

[JeminiZero]

It says it suppresses all magical effects. It doesn't say that the magical effect must be subject to SR (i.e. it is not Magic Immunity). Which means that it may block out *any* magic effect including the Orb line.

Also a 10 foot emation goes downwards, so the ground he is directly standing on is protected by the AMF so you can't disintegrate it.

[Collin152]

It says it suppresses all magical effects. It doesn't say that the magical effect must be subject to SR (i.e. it is not Magic Immunity). Which means that it may block out *any* magic effect including the Orb line.

Also a 10 foot emation goes downwards, so the ground he is directly standing on is protected by the AMF so you can't disintegrate it.

SR: Irrelevant.
The Orb spells are isntantaneous conjurations; not magical effects as soon as you cast them.

[Frosty]

Just to clarify. Without being a cheater ofmystra, if I am standing i n an AMF, I can't cast ANY spells at all right?

And also, AMF does NOT block line of effect right? So I can still cast aspell at a mage who has a sculpted AMF on him right?

[Collin152]

Just to clarify. Without being a cheater ofmystra, if I am standing i n an AMF, I can't cast ANY spells at all right?

And also, AMF does NOT block line of effect right? So I can still cast aspell at a mage who has a sculpted AMF on him right?

Strictly speaking, you can cast any spell inside the AMF, as long as the effect is outside of it.
Which it usually would be for attacking spells.

And no, it dos not, so yes, you can.

[JeminiZero]

SR: Irrelevant.
The Orb spells are isntantaneous conjurations; not magical effects as soon as you cast them.

Although it is a conjuration, that does not mean it is NOT a magical effect. Other conjurations are also nulled:

Summoned creatures of any type and incorporeal undead wink out if they enter an antimagic field. They reappear in the same spot once the field goes away. Time spent winked out counts normally against the duration of the conjuration that is maintaining the creature.

So unless the Orb line specifically states that AMFs have no effect on it, they would be stopped by an AMF. (I say this because I don't know the descriptions for the Orb line).

[Collin152]

Although it is a conjuration, that does not mean it is NOT a magical effect. Other conjurations are also nulled:



So unless the Orb line specifically states that AMFs have no effect on it, they would be stopped by an AMF. (I say this because I don't know the descriptions for the Orb line).

I repeat.
Instantaneous conjuration.

It's not a magic effect anymore.
Don't make me look up the rules for it, it's a widely aknowledged fact here.

They aren't stopped by AMF.

[Sstoopidtallkid]

I repeat.
Instantaneous conjuration.

It's not a magic effect anymore.
Don't make me look up the rules for it, it's a widely aknowledged fact here.

They aren't stopped by AMF.

To define it better, it's like creating a ball of fire in your hand and then throwing it at someone. The only magic used is that needed to create it, after that it's just really deadly fire.

[shadow_archmagi]

magic used is that needed to create it, after that it's just really deadly fire.

Yes, but it PREVENTS that creation. Just how were you planning on creating it without magic?

[Sstoopidtallkid]

Yes, but it PREVENTS that creation.

Which is why you make sure to cast it from outside the AMF.

[Collin152]

Yes, but it PREVENTS that creation. Just how were you planning on creating it without magic?

Was anyone arguing that you could cast these spells from within?