# Is a ring of anti-magic field possible?



## Wippit Guud (Jan 26, 2003)

I don't know if the mechanics of it work...

Activate ring, field comes on, but that makes the ring's magic not work, and the field shuts off.

Or is then an exception to the rules, and the ring would still work?


----------



## hong (Jan 26, 2003)

I believe it was said somewhere that you can't have items of antimagic, possibly to avoid the paradox you mention. In any case, I wouldn't allow it. It seems far too easy to abuse.


----------



## Hawkeye (Jan 26, 2003)

What about from a Ring of Spell Storing?  I could ee that working, but not a ring that allows an Anti-Magic field X times a day.

Hawkeye


----------



## Koldrag (Jan 26, 2003)

The Spell itself is paradox too, you use magic to create an antimagic field "and" you can dismiss it.


----------



## Aust Diamondew (Jan 26, 2003)

I'd allow rings of Antimagic.  THey'd cost alot but why not?  when the spell itself contradicts itself.


----------



## dcollins (Jan 26, 2003)

Wippit Guud said:
			
		

> *Is a ring of anti-magic field possible? *




By the core rules, no.


----------



## tleilaxu (Jan 26, 2003)

i believe green ronin's "societies of magic" has stuff on this topic


----------



## Tagnik (Jan 26, 2003)

*I'd like to hear more on this...*

My friend has a character with an Anti-Magic Gem and tends to abuse it a lot.  He keeps it in like... a led box that doesn't let the field open and then takes it out to turn off all magic around him for 30 ft. I believe.

Is this even possible?


----------



## candidus_cogitens (Jan 26, 2003)

As long as it is a ring that does not operate perpetually, it should work fine.  Basically, you trigger the ring to activate, it releases the spell-effect.  At that point, the ring itself no longer needs to operate, since it has already activated the dweomer.  There's no paradox.

(We are talking about an effect that's based on the Antimagic Field spell, right?  If there's anything paradoxical, it would be that spell!)


----------



## bret (Jan 26, 2003)

I wouldn't allow it.

I would allow someone to try and use a Ring of Spell Storing for that though.

The reason I wouldn't allow it is simple: what mage is going to hand such a ring over to anyone. Most mages wish the spell was never created, it makes them so helpless. Now you want one to create a ring that would allow any country bumpkin with a sword to shut down their magic?

Not likely to happen.


----------



## Sixchan (Jan 26, 2003)

bret said:
			
		

> *I wouldn't allow it.
> 
> I would allow someone to try and use a Ring of Spell Storing for that though.
> 
> ...




A mage could always make it for himself.  Or his Party.


----------



## bret (Jan 27, 2003)

Sixchan said:
			
		

> *
> 
> A mage could always make it for himself.  Or his Party. *




Think about it a moment.

If he needs the spell, he can put in on a scroll. Much easier and cheaper. It isn't like he is going to want to be in an Anti-Magic Field that often.

As for his party, items have a way of getting lost or traded. If he makes the item, eventually someone that he doesn't necessarily agree with is going to find it and use it.

Look at most adventurer's magical equipment. Quite a bit of it is from trading or capturing off opponents. Why shouldn't the same apply to that ring that the wizard is trying to forge?

Start thinking about how much people would hate if a Giant or something got a ring like that. Only takes one mistake, and all those items that the party is carrying are suddenly in someone else's possession.


----------



## Deset Gled (Jan 27, 2003)

> The reason I wouldn't allow it is simple: what mage is going to hand such a ring over to anyone. Most mages wish the spell was never created, it makes them so helpless.




Just out of curiosity, can you quote anything in the core rules that states that the spell is hated by mages?

Also, adding a RP limitation to justify why something is impossible just never works.  What if you find a caster who is in so much debt that he's willing to create anything for you if you pay him enough?  There are just too many loopholes for your reasoning to work.


----------



## The Fifth Elephant (Jan 27, 2003)

Or, take a casters loved ones hostage... you make a very specific ransom offer, and walla! Ring of Antimagic.  I would say it's perfect for a Forsaker, except that it's a magic item...    Now, a monk could be really evil with one of them, though.


----------



## Taren Seeker (Jan 27, 2003)

Clerics can cast the spell too you know. Since they aren't as helpless in an AM as your average mage, yeah, I could see one of these rings being created...especially if there's a history of Arcane abuse (Mages Gone Wild!) in the region.


----------



## Painfully (Jan 27, 2003)

One of my characters actually uses an ioun stone (the one that can store up to six levels of spells) and has found it handy to store an anti-magic field spell in it.  I see no reason why a ring of spell storing couldn't do the same.

A permanent item though would be tricky.  By activating the spell, it immediately negates all magic within it's radius of effect.  A spell storing item simply releases the spell, but a permanent item is negated within the effect of the spell.  So, yes, you can activate such a permenently enchanted item, but it would immediately shut itself off if you tried to "turn it on."  You are effectively short circuiting your own magic item. 

This could make a good infomercial 
Say, would you like to buy this ring of anti-magic field?  It turns itself off whenever you activate it.  Only 500gp!  Buy one and get the second one free!

I have a wand of elephant warding for sale too...what?  No elephants around these parts, eh?  Well, that just proves it works!


----------



## bret (Jan 27, 2003)

Deset Gled said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Just out of curiosity, can you quote anything in the core rules that states that the spell is hated by mages?
> 
> Also, adding a RP limitation to justify why something is impossible just never works.  What if you find a caster who is in so much debt that he's willing to create anything for you if you pay him enough?  There are just too many loopholes for your reasoning to work. *




I'm sorry. I should have stated that in my experience mages don't like spells that shut off all magic. Of course I can't point to anything in the rules that say mages like or dislike any particular spell. I can only go by my experiences.

As for a 12th level mage being in debt (need that level to forge a ring), although it is possible for this to happen there are so many other ways to make money that I have my doubts someone crafty enough to make it to that level would get into such a situation.

I'll stand by my original statement, that I would never allow it.

As for if it is legal, that depends on if you are the GM or not. If you are the GM, then you can create any magical item you wish. You've got lots of stuff in the DMG and Tome & Blood that will help you judge how much such an item should cost and what feats would be required. It should certainly make mages and sorcerers rare in your campaign, as it now becomes much easier to hunt them down and kill them all.


----------



## Sixchan (Jan 27, 2003)

bret said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Think about it a moment.
> 
> ...




Well, yeah, but just because the Wizard is smart doesn't mean the player is.


----------



## AuraSeer (Jan 27, 2003)

Painfully said:
			
		

> *One of my characters actually uses an ioun stone (the one that can store up to six levels of spells) and has found it handy to store an anti-magic field spell in it.*



Heh. That's a funny mental picture, since ioun stones are held in place by magic. When the field comes up, do you need a Dex check to catch the stone as it falls out of the air?


----------



## Endur (Jan 28, 2003)

*Paradox and Anti-magic*

The spell itself has an implicit paradox, use magic to create an anti-magic field.

Once you accept that the spell can do that, there is no reason why you couldn't create a permanent magic item to generate the field (ring of anti-magic, stone of anti-magic, etc.).

I would think there would be lots of Barbarians, Fighters, Rogues, etc. lining up to buy these items.  So I have no problem whatsoever rationalizing the idea of Clerics or Wizards making the items.  Spellcasters may not want to make it, but as long as they have a boss, they really don't have a choice.  

I have no idea what the price would be, but I'm guessing more than 100,000 GP.  Possibly requiring artifact or epic level spellcasting to create.

Tom


----------



## Zerovoid (Jan 28, 2003)

I don't see why you can't have this item.  Since the Antimagic Field spell doesn't instantly negate itself when cast, why do you think a ring would work that way?  I don't think such a ring's Antimagic effect would dispel itself.

Is it balanced?  Probably not, but that's why the item creation rules in the DMG need DM adjudication.


----------



## Destil (Jan 28, 2003)

Two antimagic fields have no effect on each other. An antimagic ring could be powered by 'antimagic' rather than magic, it would be an antimagical item, and this not affected by magic, sort of like psionics (thought not the core psionics, the variant rules).

That's one way it would be plasuable, at least.


----------



## Steverooo (Jan 28, 2003)

*FTL*

Anyone else remember the recent ado about one of Beetoven's symphonies being transmitted faster than light?

When a photon travels, its path is highly mobile, and it doesn't even remain a photon over the whole course.  It changes into other particles, moving randomly.

The experimenters "speeded up light", transmitting the signal (IIRC) 4.5x C by passing the signal between two metal plates which were so close together that an electron could not be formed between them.  By disallowing the photon to become electrons, the transmission of the information was made at greater than light speed!

So what?

So maybe magic (which we know is supposed to come from the Positive and Negative Material Planes) can be blocked by interposing some sort of whatsits (plates, needles, super-sub-micro-spheres, whatever) in a tiny, regular pattern too small to affect matter, but just big enough to prevent "mana particles" from forming...

Or then again, perhaps magic works by forming micro-wormholes to the Positive/Negative Material Plane, whereas an Anti-Magic Shell creates a field (anchored only at the edges) which prevents the formation of micro-wormholes...

I love to have PCs overhear Clerics, Mages, and Druids debating the current magical theories on such things!  I do the same thing with scientists, in Sci-Fi games!   

I have a "Ring of Ultimate Mundanity" in my games, though.  It doesn't negate magic, it just creates a thin "film" around the wearer, disallowing magic to pass through it.  Thus, the wearer can use his magic items, potions, cast spells on himself, and even be affected by weapons which penetrate the field, but can't cast spells at others, nor be affected by theirs.

Almost always, the first time a PC uses one, they forget to take it off before the Cleric heals them...  This usually leads to consternation, but occassionally to confusion: "Huh?  What do you mean the spell does nothing?"  Sooner or later, they figure out that the ring has to be taken off!  

As for the "Ring of Anti-Magic Field", there is no good reason why it cannot exist as a permanent magic item, if you like...  It continuously casts Anti-Magic Field, WHEN IT OPERATES.  Naturally, it suspends operation inside such a field, but upon leaving, casts another one...

Interestingly enough, tracking someone wearing one of these would be pretty easy, with a Detect Magic spell, as even "background radiation" of magic would be missing, for the duration of the Field spell!   

If you want one in your games, go for it!


----------



## Bastoche (Jan 28, 2003)

bret said:
			
		

> *I wouldn't allow it.
> 
> I would allow someone to try and use a Ring of Spell Storing for that though.
> 
> ...




Any wizard with a 8 wisdom ability score would be "wise" enough to make one.


----------



## Bastoche (Jan 28, 2003)

*Re: FTL*



			
				Steverooo said:
			
		

> *Anyone else remember the recent ado about one of Beetoven's symphonies being transmitted faster than light?
> 
> When a photon travels, its path is highly mobile, and it doesn't even remain a photon over the whole course.  It changes into other particles, moving randomly.
> 
> ...




As a physicist myself I say "?!?!!?!?!?". Where did you get that "credible" information ? Photon turning into random particles?!?! WTF? I haven't heard of that experiment. This looks bogus in the best cases. You gotta love those reporters


----------



## Victim (Jan 28, 2003)

A wizard might build some with a secret "off switch" that the he could activate.  Then the wizard equips his elite minion and sends him off to kill the wizard's rivals.

A wizard might create one if they fear attacks from more powerful spellcasters.  They might not be able to have the spell ready all the time, so they put it in an item for easy access.

A cleric might create one.  He can still take out many enemies with just his combat skills, and the AMF is high enough level that he might not always want to prepare it.  Similarly, a fighter mage type might create such a ring.  Against pure spellcasters, they activate the field and start hacking, but against more mundane enemies, they can probably gain the advantage with their own magic abilities.

It looks like the by the book cost is 132k.  While the ring is powerful, Antimagic has inherent drawbacks.  The cost is probably pretty close.


----------



## Sixchan (Jan 28, 2003)

*Re: Re: FTL*



			
				Bastoche said:
			
		

> *
> 
> As a physicist myself I say "?!?!!?!?!?". Where did you get that "credible" information ? Photon turning into random particles?!?! WTF? I haven't heard of that experiment. This looks bogus in the best cases. You gotta love those reporters  *




Maybe it was a misinterpretaion of the thing sbout Photons and other particles being both a wave and a particle, so a Photon particle sort of doesn't stay a particle, since it's a wave at the same time.


----------



## Bastoche (Jan 28, 2003)

*Re: Re: Re: FTL*



			
				Sixchan said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Maybe it was a misinterpretaion of the thing sbout Photons and other particles being both a wave and a particle, so a Photon particle sort of doesn't stay a particle, since it's a wave at the same time. *




Sorry for making the thread slip off topic but:

We can't measure an electron's size so small it is. Therefore it's more or less impossible to place two metal plate closer than an electron size. Without saying that it doesn't makes sense at all (since you would have to take many "metal particles" closer to one another than an electron diameter). An electron could not be formed ? Formed from what ? Photon to become an electron ??? Highly mobile path ? It's more than just a wave-particle duality misinterpretation... The whole paragraph didn't make any sense...

It's not magic, it's physics


----------



## Galfridus (Jan 28, 2003)

Heh, this reminds of the old "Ring of Gaseous Form"...putting on the ring turns you gaseous until you remove it. With Model 1, the ring immediately falls off (since you are gasous, remember?). With Model 2, the ring has been "upgraded" to turn gaseous with you...making it rather hard to take it off.


----------



## Cygnus (Jan 29, 2003)

There is no paradox for the spell. The spell is cast and a sphere is formed. The sphere is a barrier that prevents the operation of magic within. This isn't the only nonparadox answer, but it works well enough. The barrier can only last for a bit, so at the end of the spell duration, it goes away. I don't really know why an antimagic ring wouldn't work under the same concept. Perhaps for the field to stay in place, using "an Antimagic Ring" rather than a ring of spell storing, there must be a conduit from the ring to the functioning area of the effect, which would be impossible from within the antimagic field.


----------

