I don't like anti-magic shell!

Discussion of OOP 1st & 2nd Edition products and rules, ie TSR AD&D material.

Moderators: Thorn Blackstone, Halaster Blackcloak

Post Reply
User avatar
Halaster Blackcloak
Lord of Undermountain
Lord of Undermountain
Posts: 3955
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2007 12:47 am
Location: Undermountain
Contact:

I don't like anti-magic shell!

Post by Halaster Blackcloak »

I have never been happy with aspects of the anti-magic shell spell. Specifically, the ability to block breath weapons and possibly gaze and voice attacks. The spell says it blocks "magic and magical spell effects". I have never considered the dragon's breath weapon, for example, to be a magical spell effect. It's a natural part of its anatomy. Logically speaking, if the dragon's breath weapon was magical, it would have to consciously lower its innate magic resistance every time it employed its breath weapon! :?

I can see the argument that a medusa's gaze attack mimics a flesh to stone spell, but to me it's not quite the same thing. Can a medusa petrify a dragon with a glance? If so, the medusa is damned powerful! If not, then the gaze is not a magical effect and therefore cannot be prevented by an anti-magic shell. Voice attacks such as a harpy's wail or the gaze of a vampire are also not magical effects - the first is an audio attack, a sound that stuns by the nature of its pitch and therefore not a magical attack. The gaze attack of a vampire, as show in most horror movies, it simply an expression of the will of the vampire, not a magical effect. In the original Dracula, for example, Dr. Van Helsing resists Dracula's charm. Does the good doctor have magic resistance? No. It's just will power.

What do the rest of you think?
The Back In Print Project - Where AD&D Lives Forever!

Image
garhkal
Citizen of Undermountain
Citizen of Undermountain
Posts: 1508
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2007 9:40 pm

Re: I don't like anti-magic shell!

Post by garhkal »

Halaster Blackcloak wrote: Tue Mar 22, 2022 1:41 am I have never been happy with aspects of the anti-magic shell spell. Specifically, the ability to block breath weapons and possibly gaze and voice attacks. The spell says it blocks "magic and magical spell effects". I have never considered the dragon's breath weapon, for example, to be a magical spell effect. It's a natural part of its anatomy. Logically speaking, if the dragon's breath weapon was magical, it would have to consciously lower its innate magic resistance every time it employed its breath weapon! :?

I can see the argument that a medusa's gaze attack mimics a flesh to stone spell, but to me it's not quite the same thing. Can a medusa petrify a dragon with a glance? If so, the medusa is damned powerful! If not, then the gaze is not a magical effect and therefore cannot be prevented by an anti-magic shell. Voice attacks such as a harpy's wail or the gaze of a vampire are also not magical effects - the first is an audio attack, a sound that stuns by the nature of its pitch and therefore not a magical attack. The gaze attack of a vampire, as show in most horror movies, it simply an expression of the will of the vampire, not a magical effect. In the original Dracula, for example, Dr. Van Helsing resists Dracula's charm. Does the good doctor have magic resistance? No. It's just will power.

What do the rest of you think?
It seems that the designers should have really labeled it "ANTI ANYTHING Supernatural or outside of mortal ken), since it blocks psionics, breaths, gaze attacks, sonic attacks AND MAGIC.. And like you, i have often been in arguments about why Should it block breath attacks and such...

So for MY 2e games, i edited thusly;
The area within the barrier, is totally impervious to all Magic, and most magical like effects, such as the songs of a Harpy, the eye rays of beholders, or a vampire’s dominating gaze. IT however does not hinder things like a ghoul’s paralyzation attack,Dragons breath weapons, or any form of psionics. However it cannot be forced against someone to push them back. Doing so causes the bubble to pop.

Creatures that are normal, but enchanted, such as someone under the effects of a Prayer, or Haste spell, merely have that spell ‘put on hold’, while the subject is within the radius of the shell. Also, all magical items worn by those inside the shell, are rendered inert, but they can still function as normal armor/weapons/clothes.
Note: A creature on its HOME PLANE (such as a Salamander on the Elemental plane of fire), are not considered summoned/ conjured creatures, so are not hedged out. Additionally, artifacts, Relics, and creatures of demi-god or higher status, are never affected by a mortal’s Anti-magic shell.

Should the caster be larger than the area of effect, enclosed by the shell, such as a dragon, certain parts of him are exposed (at the dm’s option of what). A Dispel Magic spell, targeted at the AMS does not bring it down, though a Rod of Cancellation, can.

Creatures such as Lich’s, Vampires and other undead, are ‘cut off’ from their ties to the Negative energy plane, andthus lose their level draining powers, while inside the shell, but undead such as Ghouls and Ghasts, retain their paralyzation powers.
They however, do NOT lose their “need +xyz” magic weapons to strike, requirement. Which means that if say a Lich, or vampire puts one up, MOST Of his offensive abilities are neutered, but he still gains his defensive power!
It's not who you kill, but how they die!
User avatar
Halaster Blackcloak
Lord of Undermountain
Lord of Undermountain
Posts: 3955
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2007 12:47 am
Location: Undermountain
Contact:

Re: I don't like anti-magic shell!

Post by Halaster Blackcloak »

Garhkal wrote:
It seems that the designers should have really labeled it "ANTI ANYTHING Supernatural or outside of mortal ken), since it blocks psionics, breaths, gaze attacks, sonic attacks AND MAGIC.. And like you, i have often been in arguments about why Should it block breath attacks and such...
Yeah, they just made it too all-inclusive. I'd agree with your re-write except for the following things...

I would not include the sound attacks of sirens, harpies, banshees, etc. to be blocked by the AMS (anti-magic shell), because those are sounds and, by my reasoning, therefore not magical. This is why you can put wax in your ears and not be affected by them. If they were magical effects, plugging your ears would not block them.

I would also not include the vampire's gaze for the same reason. The MM says:

"Any person who allows the vampire to look into his eyes will be affected as if by a charm person spell."

Note the words "as if". In other words, it mimics the effects of a charm spell, but is not an actual charm spell. In game terms, natural effects often have to be compared to the effects of a magical spell in order to easily explain what that natural effect does. Hence the words "as if". Note that a charm spell has an 80 yard range, which is 240'. I don't know about you, but I cannot possible stare into the eyes of a person 240' away from me. I'm lucky if I can make out his face or even form! That's almost a city block away! So with the spell, it's obviously a magical effect, achieved by the magic of the spell and even at great distances. A vampire must make eye contact, just like in the movies, because he's using his force of will, which then dominates the will of the victim. His superior force of will affects the victim as if affected by a charm spell. It is not, however, a magical spell. It is compared to the charm spell ("as if"), in order to emphasize/explain the effect.

I would also not prevent the life draining or paralyzing effects of undead. If you cut off their link to the Negative Material Plane in order to prevent the drain or paralysis, then by sheer logic they should drop dead (or rather become inert?) because they are disconnected from the power that actually animates them, as well as gives them those powers. If the Negative Material Plane both animates them and gives them their power, and you to cut off that link so they lose that power, then logically speaking they should not be able to exist or move, much less use those powers.

As for hedging out summoned creatures, I'm a bit mixed on that. The rule fails to make a lot of sense here, as written in the PHB. Conjured animals, for example, are magical creations (literally made out of magical energy), and therefore should be dispelled or kept out by the AMS. However, conjured elementals are actual beings from another plane, summoned through a temporary gate. I think that's very different. The spell is not creating an elemental made of magical power, it's opening a gate through which an actual, physical elemental enters. When the spell ends, the elemental must flee back through the gate. I've never given it too much thought until now, but allowing it to hedge out conjured elementals, to me, would mean the AMS should also be able to hedge out all monsters, or at least any monster brought permanently to the PMP (say a demon summoned via a ritual). I'd have think this particular issue over more deeply. But the others (sound attacks, vampire gaze, etc.), those I stand by.
The Back In Print Project - Where AD&D Lives Forever!

Image
garhkal
Citizen of Undermountain
Citizen of Undermountain
Posts: 1508
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2007 9:40 pm

Re: I don't like anti-magic shell!

Post by garhkal »

The sound attacks i include, as they are still to me, magical.. Just like if someone blew on a horn of blasting...
It's not who you kill, but how they die!
User avatar
Halaster Blackcloak
Lord of Undermountain
Lord of Undermountain
Posts: 3955
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2007 12:47 am
Location: Undermountain
Contact:

Re: I don't like anti-magic shell!

Post by Halaster Blackcloak »

I'd differentiate the horn of blasting because it has an actual magic effect, i.e. you can't simply block your ears with wax to overcome it. The magic is the force that is the effect. The way I try to break it down is this...

Is the effect being blocked actually magic (i.e. formed of magic) or is it a physical or mental effect that merely mimics magic?

So going back to the vampire - it's not really a charm spell, which is a truly magical effect (i.e. it uses the energy of magic to cause the effect), it's more a force of will, a powerful hypnotism (in the real world sense, not the spell of the same name). Or just like in real life where a beautiful woman can charm a man into doing something he otherwise would not do, or where a commanding (charismatic) person barks orders so authoritatively that the subordinate listening complies. A vampire must stare into your eyes to "charm" you. If you look away or close your eyes it doesn't work, as opposed to a charm spell where the person casting it can be standing so far away you can barely even see him (if at all) and it affects you even with your eyes closed.

With harpies, sirens, banshees, etc. I would liken that to the old saying: "Music can soothe the savage breast". Everyone misquotes this as "savage beast". No. Shakespeare was talking about how music can soften the emotions, calm an angry person (calm their heart, thus the word "breast"). We also know there are sounds that can cause headaches, make you dizzy, etc. We have sonic weapons that induce nausea. You can be in a bad mood, hear a good song, and it changes your emotions. We can drill holes in stone using sound, and I'm pretty sure that concentration would be lethal used against a person.

With sound effect (like harpies use), you can simply cover your ears or block them with wax and their song has no effect. So to me that's a physical, not magical, effect. Same for how a vampire's gaze is physical/mental, not magical. It's the sound that dominates your mind, just as our less-than-lethal sound machines can emit sounds that make you nauseous. You can still hear sound inside an AMS, so the sound should affect you.

With conjured creatures, as I noted earlier, I see a big difference between a creature created from (out of) magic vs. a creature summoned by magic. The first is made of magic, and should be hedged out. The second isn't and therefore shouldn't be, otherwise we could logically rule that a creature that teleports onto the battlefield or is summoned by succor or word of recall cannot then march over and walk through the barrier. And that of course would make no sense.
The Back In Print Project - Where AD&D Lives Forever!

Image
Post Reply