Can a Beholder include itself in its Antimagic Cone?

The beholder emits an Antimagic Cone:

The beholder’s central eye creates an area of antimagic, as in the antimagic field spell, in a 150-foot cone. At the start of each of its turns, the beholder decides which way the cone faces and whether the cone is active. The area works against the beholder’s own eye rays.

According to the Basic Rule, Ch. 10, Cone:

A cone extends in a direction you choose from its point of origin. A cone’s width at a given point along its length is equal to that point’s distance from the point of origin. A cone’s area of effect specifies its maximum length.

A cone’s point of origin is not included in the cone’s area of effect, unless you decide otherwise.

Can a beholder chose to include itself in its Antimagic Cone? Would that make it effectively immune to harmful spells like Blindness/Deafness?

Is a creature standing in an Antimagic Field subject to the effects of extreme weather produced by Control Weather?

Say, for example, that a person is standing in an Antimagic Field when a disgruntled Druid decides to create a 5 mile radius freezing hailstorm via Control Weather.

Would that person be subject to the effects of the hailstorm? More specifically:

  • What happens to the hailstones that enter the Antimagic Field?
  • What localized weather effects does the person experience? Is the weather within the Antimagic Field somehow the hypothetical weather conditions that would have existed if Control Weather hadn’t been cast?
  • Is the person subject to the effects of extreme cold like the rest of the people within the hailstorm?

How Can A BBEG Mainpulate Tiles With Anti-Magic On It’s Turn?

My players will be fighting a BBEG tonight that they will have no choice but to face in its lair. Part of the lair design is that each tile in the room is anti-magic and I wanted the BBEG to be able to manipulate which tiles are or are not activated during its turn.

Could the BBEG use item interaction to telepathically control the anti-magic tiles?

Can a creature take turns as normal if they are inside an Antimagic Field while another creature casts Time Stop?

Time stop is a spell that stops time for other creatures, allowing one creature to take multiple turns in a row. It says:

You briefly stop the flow of time for everyone but yourself. No time passes for other creatures, while you take 1d4 + 1 turns in a row, during which you can use actions and move as normal.

Certainly, this is a magical effect. The spell causes the flow of time to stop for other creatures, and while you are taking multiple turns, no time flows for them. I imagine antimagic field can defeat it. The relevant text says:

Spells. Any active spell or other magical effect on a creature or an object in the sphere is suppressed while the creature or object is in it.

So, imagine combat between Annie, Tim, and Charlie. Ordinarily, initiative might look something like this:

Annie → Charlie → Tim

Suppose Annie casts time stop and rolled a 1 on their d4. Thus, they take 2 turns in a row. Initiative would look like this:

Annie → Annie → Charlie → Tim

Now imagine that Tim cast antimagic field, and following their turn, Annie casts time stop. Suppose they rolled a 1 on their d4 so that they can take 2 turns in a row. What would the initiative order look like?

Here are some possible resolutions I can think of, but none satisfy me totally:

  1. Time stop defeats antimagic field. The initiative order is: Annie → Annie → Charlie → Tim. The reason this is unsatisfactory is that time stop shouldn’t seem to prevail because it’s a spell, and antimagic field defeats spells.

  2. Time stop cannot be cast while there is an active antimagic field, because there exists some creatures you can’t stop time for. The reason this is unsatisfactory is there is no rule that prevents these two spells from being active at the same time. Also, since things like beholders exist, it’s not unreasonable to say there is almost always an active area of antimagic somewhere in the world, and that means time stop can almost never be used.

  3. The caster of time stop and antimagic field take their turns as normal while everyone else is frozen in time. Thematically and narratively, this seems the most logical. So we go through the turn order, treating every turn Alice would have taken as one full round. For this scenario, since Alice takes two turns in a row, then we can imagine two rounds going by. Ordinarily, everyone but Alice takes a turn, but now we unfreeze anyone inside an area of antimagic. So initiative would be: Annie (time stop starts) → Charlie (frozen in time) → Tim (unfrozen) → Annie (time stop ends) → Charlie → Tim. The reason this is unsatisfactory is because we’re advancing the “round count” now, which feasibly triggers things like lair actions that activate on a certain initiative count. It does have the side effect of allowing Tim to act normally though, affecting other creatures if he wants, because he isn’t bound by time stop and Annie isn’t the one doing the violations of the rules of the spell.

  4. There is no answer to this question, and this is solidly in the zone of DM adjudication. This is unsatisfactory because, well, all questions answered that way tend to be unsatisfactory.

So which is it? Or is it an option I haven’t listed here? Can Tim take turns as normal while inside an antimagic field if Annie casts time stop?

Can the knowledge of whether a creature failed their save penetrate the effect of an antimagic field?

Suppose a Paladin casts a Zone of Truth on a space 60ft away.

Then, suppose a Wizard casts Antimagic Field and stands next to the Paladin, including them both in its area, but the Zone of Truth remains because it is outside the area.

Finally, suppose a Rogue then enters the Zone of Truth.

Zone of Truth states that the Paladin knows whether or not the Rogue failed their save, but the Paladin is in an Antimagic Field and thus cannot be affected by spells.

Is this transfer of knowledge blocked by the Antimagic Field?

Does the Paladin know whether or not the Rogue failed their save?

Can Cleric-zilla work without antimagic fields?

For a long time I have been under the impression that, as the Internet says, clerics (and druids) are better fighters than the fighter.

They have a plethora of spells they can use to buff themselves, and on the defensive side they’re pretty good, I must admit, but offensively? I’m now under the impression that there are some feats that are so good despite requiring almost useless prerequisite feats that no spell can make the cleric a better fighter than someone who’s not feat starved.

I am talking about Leap Attack and Shock Trooper mainly, but Combat Brute also seems to be a staple for melee builds I see in my games.

Sure, I can persist or quicken Visage of the Deity, greater, and Divine Power plus Righteous Might and Divine Favor, I can even gain access to Shapechange and turn into an arcane giant or a pouncing leonal, but… without their damage multipliers, how am I better at being a fighter than a raging barbarian with a few fighter levels (only 2 Str below my arcane giant form) or a fighter with a lot of feats?

Sure, they need to have contingent spells of air walk to be able to charge where they otherwise couldn’t and some even use contingent spells of wraith touch to avoid taking Shock Trooper, but that’s just because our characters usually face only a single big encounter each day… which should favour the caster, shouldn’t it?

So I’ve been looking into it and the sources I’ve found (admittedly just a few, seeing how GitP forums are down right now) say that CoDzilla, for the cleric part, is just two persisted spells: divine power and righteous might.

Wait, what?

Well, the only thing that was suggested other than that was a full-fledged Double Betrayer of Mystra (a completely theoretical build where nemy goddesses Shar and Mystra grant the cleric the power to keep their magic buffs in both antimagic fields and dead magic zones), and thinking about it I have seen people in my games build clerics surrounded by a selective1 antimagic field in order to debuff their enemies but not themselves.

I don’t like the idea. It looks like cheese to me so my question is, is it the only real way to make a melee cleric effective, when measured against ubercharger builds? Is it even enough?


1) yes I know they are still vulnerable to a lot of magic attacks with that literal hole in their defenses but both the cleric and the fighter will die to a maximized empowered twinned force orb and its quickened sister, so it’s a moot point.

Can Wish Negate Antimagic Field?

On page 213 of the PHB for Antimagic Field:

Spells. Any active spell or other magical effect on a creature or an object in the sphere is suppressed while the creature or object is in it.

And on page 289 for Wish:

You grant up to ten creatures you can see immunity to a single spell or other magical effect for 8 hours.

This creates a paradox where Antimagic Field shuts down the active spell effect of Wish while Wish makes the caster immune to the effects of Antimagic Field.

Would Wish come out on top due to it being 9th level while Antimagic Field is 8th level?

How do dimensional shackles work in an antimagic field

I’m sorry I have a few questions. As such my very first question is to clarify something I’m unsure about: In stack exchange are we allowed to post multiple questions in one thread? I’m new to stack exchange and don’t know if I should separate my questions over multiple threads. Because I don’t know, I will avoiding asking them all at once and limit it to my main question:

Main question: How do dimensional shackles work in an antimagic field? Will they remain on the bound creature? If so, will they still have a DC 30 strength check to break, or will the be broken by a 20 (mundane manacles)?

In addition to serving as mundane Manacles, the shackles prevent a creature bound by them from using any method of extradimensional Movement, including teleportation or Travel to a different plane of existence. They don’t prevent the creature from passing-through an interdimensional portal.

The bolded sentence suggests they work as mundane manacles, but does that mean they work even when they become mundane? I noticed unlike manacles there is no DC for using thieve’s tools, that led me to noticing that the pictures I have seen of the dimensional shackles don’t seem to have a lock (by the picture it could be a lock of some sort in the middle, but it is unclear), or anything holding them together for that matter. Additionally the one who uses the manacles and anyone he designates when he uses them can just take the shackles off. That is the premise for the question I asked, back to the question: Are they held together by magical means and fall off in an antimagic field, or do they become mundane manacles in the field? If they become mundane manacles are they as hard to break as they were outside (DC 30), or do they have the same difficulty to break as mundane manacles (DC 20)?