Author Topic: Artificer, Initiate of Mystra [Initiate]?  (Read 6783 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

LargePrime

  • Curious George
  • ****
  • Posts: 322
Re: Artificer, Initiate of Mystra [Initiate]?
« Reply #20 on: October 21, 2009, 05:08:56 PM »
Can an IoM cast continual flame in the AMF?  And create a torch of continual flame?  Does the item work in the AMF?

BowenSilverclaw

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 5337
  • Walking that fine line between genius and insanity
    • Email
Re: Artificer, Initiate of Mystra [Initiate]?
« Reply #21 on: October 21, 2009, 05:11:47 PM »
Can an IoM cast continual flame in the AMF?  And create a torch of continual flame?  Does the item work in the AMF?

Yes/Yes/No
"Weakness? Come test thy mettle against me, hairless ape, and we shall know who is weak!"

Quote from: J0lt
You caught a fish.  It was awesome.   :lol

LargePrime

  • Curious George
  • ****
  • Posts: 322
Re: Artificer, Initiate of Mystra [Initiate]?
« Reply #22 on: October 21, 2009, 05:15:07 PM »
Can an IoM cast continual flame in the AMF?  And create a torch of continual flame?  Does the item work in the AMF?
Yes/Yes/No
because you say so?  Got a reason in there somewhere?

BowenSilverclaw

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 5337
  • Walking that fine line between genius and insanity
    • Email
Re: Artificer, Initiate of Mystra [Initiate]?
« Reply #23 on: October 21, 2009, 05:19:44 PM »
Can an IoM cast continual flame in the AMF?  And create a torch of continual flame?  Does the item work in the AMF?
Yes/Yes/No
because you say so?  Got a reason in there somewhere?
Because the feat allows you to cast spells in an AMF, it doesn't say anything about magic items.

People already told you this, no?
"Weakness? Come test thy mettle against me, hairless ape, and we shall know who is weak!"

Quote from: J0lt
You caught a fish.  It was awesome.   :lol

bearsarebrown

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 2616
Re: Artificer, Initiate of Mystra [Initiate]?
« Reply #24 on: October 21, 2009, 05:46:20 PM »
The feat lets you cast spells in AMFs. It doesn't let you make items that work in AMFs. Some DMs might see it as a logical extension, I personally don't, it makes that feat even more powerful.

LargePrime

  • Curious George
  • ****
  • Posts: 322
Re: Artificer, Initiate of Mystra [Initiate]?
« Reply #25 on: October 21, 2009, 05:50:51 PM »
Because the feat allows you to cast spells in an AMF, it doesn't say anything about magic items.  People already told you this, no?
Did they tell me this?  Were you reading along?  Then what happened?

Remember I said "If I can cast Continual Flame in an AMF", and the casting of Continual flame CREATES a magic item, and thus the magic item works in an AMF?  And Tonymitsu pointed out scrolls work!  And I would follow up with wands and staffs work the same way "similar to spell completion"

And your thoughtful and well reasoned and supported response is, ... wait for it ... no.

At this point you should be mocked, but I am new here and don't want trouble so...

Why don't you reply with a source, or fact, or something?

bearsarebrown

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 2616
Re: Artificer, Initiate of Mystra [Initiate]?
« Reply #26 on: October 21, 2009, 07:13:35 PM »
There is no need to be an ass. His response is well reasoned, you just don't agree with his interpretation.

Continual Flame doesn't create a magic item. It creates a permanent spell effect. IoM doesn't let you ignore AMFs, just "...cast spells... function normally..."

TT30

  • Ring-Tailed Lemur
  • **
  • Posts: 18
    • Email
Re: Artificer, Initiate of Mystra [Initiate]?
« Reply #27 on: October 21, 2009, 08:10:02 PM »
Feat let you cast spells in antimagic field. It says if check is succesful, your spell functions normally.

What that actually mean? It can be read that they fwork normally so that they work in antimagic field after they are cast. Or it can be read that you can cast them and after casting they work normally and are suppressed by antimagic field as magical effects normally are.

I tkink feat just let you cast your spells in antimagic field. Even if only spells with instant duratiion really works it is still very powerfull feat. Maybe the most powerfull. If it also let your buffs work in antimagic field it is totally broken instantly when caster gets antimagic field. Luckily it says spells function normally and antimagic fields description tells how spells normally work in antimagic field. Instant effect are not suppressed because they are allready done. Of course caster can still buff in antimagic field, but buffs help only after he move out.

With RAW anything is possible (including my ruling) and i am certain that at least my ruling is most balanced.

LargePrime

  • Curious George
  • ****
  • Posts: 322
Re: Artificer, Initiate of Mystra [Initiate]?
« Reply #28 on: October 21, 2009, 09:14:33 PM »
His response is well reasoned, you just don't agree with his interpretation.
Actually BowenSilverclaw just posted terse statements.  The only reasoning was unsupported self referencial statements that had no respect for the posts that went before.  And did not add to the discussion., But hey if you liked it...
Continual Flame doesn't create a magic item. It creates a permanent spell effect.
A permanent spell effect on an object?  What do we now call that object?  Anyone? Bueller?
IoM doesn't let you ignore AMFs, just "...cast spells... function normally..."
Which Is why I thought it would be great for spell trigger and completion items.  Like what an artificer makes...
Luckily it says spells function normally and antimagic fields description tells how spells normally work in antimagic field. Instant effect are not suppressed because they are allready done. Of course caster can still buff in antimagic field, but buffs help only after he move out.
Very nice.  See this is a post that actually engages the topic and idea.

The text of the feat is in the first post.

Clearly after you make the check the spell functions as if the AMF is not there.  Not as you are suggesting TT30.  Also it is inconsistent to suggest that everything but instants are suppressed.  Instants should be suppressed too under your interpretation.
« Last Edit: October 21, 2009, 09:16:46 PM by LargePrime »

bearsarebrown

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 2616
Re: Artificer, Initiate of Mystra [Initiate]?
« Reply #29 on: October 21, 2009, 09:37:52 PM »
If you want to argue 'real life' logic the game changes. but RAW, an item with Continual Flame cast on it is not a magic item, tt's magic on an item.

"Which Is why I thought it would be great for spell trigger and completion items.  Like what an artificer makes..." -except that's not casting a spell, it's only similar. It's a logical way to interpret it, but that's not what it says. This is RAW vs RAI.

(Please tone the sarcasm down. We're being respectful to you)

EDIT: Scrolls are also an easy call. Answer the questions, are scrolls magical?
If scrolls are magical then the magic inherent to the item is requred for the spell. And the scroll would lose that magic in an AMF
If scrolls are just paper with words, then you are casting a spell, and it would work.

Spell trigger items act like spells in combat. But you don't cast them, you trigger them. It's a different verb.
« Last Edit: October 21, 2009, 09:43:07 PM by bearsarebrown »

Anklebite

  • Man in Gorilla Suit
  • *****
  • Posts: 2009
  • I shall play you the song of my people.
Re: Artificer, Initiate of Mystra [Initiate]?
« Reply #30 on: October 21, 2009, 10:46:34 PM »
scrolls specifically say that they work like casting a spell.

also, the exact wording of the feat is, as pointed out earlier, "your spells work normally.  It does not say that your items work too.

'round here, RAW is LAW(at least for the purpose of theoretical debates, cause no "Sane DM" would allow half the shit we come up with).  and RAW here only references spells. items are not spells, with the exception of scrolls which state they function exactly like casting the spell.

I would say that it would be a logical house rule, but any DM you showed it to would make this(  :twitch ) face and then chuck the DMG at you, followed by a curbstomping.
I do not suffer from paranoia; I enjoy every second of it.
Pioneer of the Ultimate Magus + Sublime Chord + Ultimate Magus combo

LargePrime

  • Curious George
  • ****
  • Posts: 322
Re: Artificer, Initiate of Mystra [Initiate]?
« Reply #31 on: October 22, 2009, 09:45:38 AM »
I would say that it would be a logical house rule, but any DM you showed it to would make this(  :twitch ) face and then chuck the DMG at you, followed by a curbstomping.
My DM likes it.  Honestly how often does an AMF come up?  full caster blowing 3 levels to get one feat?

Should note here the DMG says trigger items are "similar to spell completion".  The difference being no AoO.  So one could make a raw argument for triggers too.

TT30

  • Ring-Tailed Lemur
  • **
  • Posts: 18
    • Email
Re: Artificer, Initiate of Mystra [Initiate]?
« Reply #32 on: October 22, 2009, 11:49:10 AM »
Clearly after you make the check the spell functions as if the AMF is not there.  Not as you are suggesting TT30.  Also it is inconsistent to suggest that everything but instants are suppressed.  Instants should be suppressed too under your interpretation.

It doesn't really say so. It says just that it functions normally and before that you can attempt to cast....

It doesn't say anyting about duration. Just that it functions normally. And normally well what is normal in AMF, it doens't say it functions normally like there is no AMF around.

Instants are not suppressed because they are allready done when casting ends and effect of feat ends. Same with invoke magic spell 9lvl wizard spell with costy material componen, it lets you cast one spell in antimagic field and spell ends when that one spell is cast so if effects is still around it will get suppressed.

I don't know what RAI was, but if it was that spell effects are not suppressed by AMF, then i hope that game desingner got drugs he did need. But i doubt it because, well even with my ruling that feat is still overpowered and with optimist ruling... if it is allowed you can as well allow pun pun.
« Last Edit: October 22, 2009, 12:06:01 PM by TT30 »

LargePrime

  • Curious George
  • ****
  • Posts: 322
Re: Artificer, Initiate of Mystra [Initiate]?
« Reply #33 on: October 24, 2009, 09:08:24 AM »
Actually that is rather dishonest.  Read the first sentence in the feat.  Now remember what the first sentence in a paragraph does from grade school.

Now say sorry...

TT30

  • Ring-Tailed Lemur
  • **
  • Posts: 18
    • Email
Re: Artificer, Initiate of Mystra [Initiate]?
« Reply #34 on: October 24, 2009, 10:33:28 AM »
"You can attempt to cast....." So if you pass that check you can cast if you fail you can't cast.

So you can cast spell in AMF, normally you can't casts spells at all in AMF. That is what that feat does. And does it lot better that lvl9 spell with costy material componen. But even if you can cast your spell in AMF it doesn't make that spell immune to AMF. Feat does only what it says nothing more and it doesn't say that after casting your spell works in AMF, it says your spell functions normally.

"If this check is succesful, your spell functions normally"
So with feat you can attempt to cast.. if your check fails you can't cast so spell doesn't work. If check is succesfull you can cast and your spell works normally=exactly how spells normally would.

It doesn't say that if your check is succesfull you can cast and your spell is immune to AMF. If spells would be immune to AMF afterwards it would be mentioned in feat description but it isn't.

It all comes to how you read "normally". I can understant why some people read it differently. But if it is read so that spells are not suppressed. Well it doesn't take any effort to brake it because it is allready broken. Someone can win D&D with it, but what is the point. Use it and prepare to face pun-pun.

bkdubs123

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 2724
    • Email
Re: Artificer, Initiate of Mystra [Initiate]?
« Reply #35 on: October 24, 2009, 10:51:51 AM »
Actually that is rather dishonest.  Read the first sentence in the feat.  Now remember what the first sentence in a paragraph does from grade school.

Now say sorry...

Wow. Snark, snark, snark.

Continual Flame, or other permanency spells work, because they don't create magic items, they simply create magic on items. Scrolls, because they can interpreted with rules to support, as casting spells will work with the feat. Activating any other spell trigger item, or attempting to use any other magical device WILL NOT WORK. The only way you could try to argue that they would is to find text somewhere that says that activating a Wand or a Staff is the same as casting a spell. Until then, since the feat says spells, and only says spells, nothing but actually casting spells is going to work with the feat. Not with a Wizard, not with a Cleric, and not with an Artificer.

I'm just repeating what has already been said. If your DM is fine with it, why is this poll even here? Why do you care?

DocRoc

  • Ring-Tailed Lemur
  • **
  • Posts: 12
Re: Artificer, Initiate of Mystra [Initiate]?
« Reply #36 on: October 25, 2009, 09:30:17 PM »
So I vote no:
You aren't casting spells.
Spell trigger items are not explicitly covered by the rules as written, and IoM is ban-worthy without expanding its purview.  Further, it doesn't give you access to your magic items, and finally, infusions are very explicitly not spells.  +1 fail pail.

LargePrime

  • Curious George
  • ****
  • Posts: 322
Re: Artificer, Initiate of Mystra [Initiate]?
« Reply #37 on: October 26, 2009, 03:43:24 PM »
Bored... 
http://bb.bbboy.net/thegamingden-print?forum=1&thread=120
Same argument different year.

LargePrime

  • Curious George
  • ****
  • Posts: 322
Re: Artificer, Initiate of Mystra [Initiate]?
« Reply #38 on: October 29, 2009, 12:49:45 PM »
If scrolls work then schema should too right?