0
\$\begingroup\$

Certain creatures have abilities listed as being melee or ranged spell attacks, e.g. the Efreeti's Hurl Flame action.

Are these considered magic that an antimagic field will block? Or are they considered to be innate powers that AMF can't block?

\$\endgroup\$
12
\$\begingroup\$

Spell attacks are blocked by AMF

Per the Sage Advice Compendium linked by Gandalfmeansme in his comment:

  • Is it a magic item?

  • Is it a spell? Or does it let you create the effects of a spell that’s mentioned in its description?

  • Is it a spell attack?

  • Is it fueled by the use of spell slots?

  • Does its description say it’s magical?

If your answer to any of those questions is yes, the feature is magical [and therefore Antimagic Field would protect against it].

\$\endgroup\$
0
\$\begingroup\$

If it is magical in nature, then yes, the anti-magic field does block it.

According to the description of antimagic field:

This area is divorced from the magical energy that suffuses the multiverse. Within the sphere, spells can't be cast, summoned creatures disappear, and even magic items become mundane.

Though a spell attack is not technically a spell, it is magical, and thus it fails within the sphere. There is a way to ignore that though.

Spells and other magical effects, except those created by an artifact or a deity [emphasis mine], are suppressed in the sphere and can't protrude into it.

Otherwise, anything magical just doesn't happen.

This doesn't stop anything non-magical from taking effect, so if you rule that an effect is not at all magical in nature, then it should work just fine! That said, I would find it incredibly difficult to justify a Hurl Flame ability not being magical, and I would not allow it to occur within an antimagic field.

Rykara's answer shows the relevant Sage Advice on whether something is magical or not. Anything that falls under that criteria is indeed magical, and can be blocked by the anti-magic field.

\$\endgroup\$
  • 7
    \$\begingroup\$ Since the title asked one question and the body of the question asked the opposite, I edited the title to bring it in line with the body. You may want to clarify which of those your header was responding to. ...Also, "a spell attack is still a spell" is not true. Can you cite anything in the rules that supports your argument? \$\endgroup\$ – V2Blast Jan 10 at 23:23
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ This answer might benefit from the sage advice compendium's discussion of how you know whether or not something is magical. (which can be found by clicking on the link in this comment, and finding the question labeled "is the breath weapon of a dragon magical?") \$\endgroup\$ – Gandalfmeansme Jan 11 at 0:33
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ @Gandalfmeansme: Good point. Though spell attacks don't necessarily originate from spells (see also: the Sun Soul monk), they are still magical by the game's definition, and affected by AMF. \$\endgroup\$ – V2Blast Jan 11 at 0:35
  • \$\begingroup\$ @V2Blast Oh, I didn't even realize that was one of the criteria to make something magical! I only meant that MrSpudtastic's (already good) answer could benefit from mentioning the criteria for what is and isn't magical. \$\endgroup\$ – Gandalfmeansme Jan 11 at 2:13
  • \$\begingroup\$ Thank you for the feedback! I have updated the answer, and hopefully it is more useful now! \$\endgroup\$ – MrSpudtastic Jan 11 at 14:01

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.