Edit: dat horror realizing that you went through the list of spells searching for the word "enchant" needlessly, because after posting you notice dreicunan already did it* Oh well, I'll leave in my work, maybe it will help hammer the point home?
drewkitty ~..~ wrote:Axelmania wrote:A lot of magic spells 'create' something, "magic net" and "carpet of adhesion" create a carpet/net for example. This doesn't mean the mage cannot cancel what he created and make it vanish. This is magic 101 here.
The spells you used as example do not create enchantments, they create magical effect constructs. And thus you are still stating irrelevant examples to the discussion, because those examples do not create enchantments in objects.
You are creating an arbitrary distinction here.
I can classify a dimensional pocket or dimensional envelope as a "magical effect construct" as well.
I think you should stop throwing around words like "enchantment" outside their actual in-book use and stick to RAW terms if you want to make a specific argument here.
eliakon wrote:You can not use Negate Magic on an enchanted object... such as a dimensional pocket. The spell describes what the spell does in detail
Dimensional Pocket does not say anywhere that it "enchants" an object. It creates a pocket dimension which is anchored to the object. That is different.
PF209 for example says:
This spell creates a portable dimensional pocket inside a sack, purse, satchel, backpack, etc.
The dimensional pocket spell requires a psychological orientation, so without a physical sack, bag, or pocket the power cannot work!
The character will typically select one favorite pocket or bag as his focus of orientation.
Not seeing "enchant" there. A pocket is made "inside" the thing, but the thing itself is not described as being enchanted.
You need to be able to "see dimensional anomalies". I don't even see a mention of something like "Sense Magic" working. It may well not work since the 'magic' is actually in another dimension.
Page 205's "Sense Dimensional Anomaly" spell highlights it, and only allows a 10ft range.
For Sense Magic, neither 171's psi or 190's spell highlight, range is 120ft either way. It tells "whether a person or object is enchanted", but there is no basis for extending that to the pocket/envelope spell (nor carpet/net) because these 4 spells do not mention enchanting any objects.
Spells which do in PF2:
186 left's "magic enchantments, like charm, domination, trance, compulsion, hypnotic suggestions or psychic mind control"
186 right's Fleet Feet ("the enchanted person")
190's Befuddle ("enchantment that temporarily causes its victim")
190's Climb ("spell that enables the enchanted person")
191's Concealment ("the enchanted object")
191's Fear ("the enchantment on an area")
192's Impervious to Poison ("This enchantment makes the person")
194's Blind ("An enchantment that can blind one person")
195 Repel Animals "an enchantment that will make even a hostile, predatory animal stop"
195 Trance "This enchantment places a person"
196 "Domination is another trance-like enchantment"
196 Energy Disruption "Nor can it affect Spells of Legend or magic weapons, potions, circles, scrolls or enchanted items."
197 Fly "The maximum length and width of the enchanted item"
197 Sleep "enchanted food or drink"
198 Compulsion "The enchanted person"
199 Swim as a Fish (Superior) "The enchanted characters"
200 Words of Truth "the enchanted person"
201 Constrain Being "The enchantment forces the being" .. "If it is attacked, the enchantment is broken"
202 Life Drain "the area of enchantment"
204 Luck Curse "Only a "remove curse" invocation can negate the effects of this enchantment."
206 Faeries Dance "Anyone entering the enchanted area"
208 Summon & Control Canines "the duration of the enchantment
209 Control/Enslave Entity "All varieties of entities are susceptible to this enchantment."
217 Transformation "2. Convince the mage who made the transformation to cancel the enchantment"
eliakon wrote:It creates a pocket dimension with a specified opening. That pocket dimension will last a certain amount of time then collapses.
Magic "creating" something does not prevent Negate Magic from dispelling it. Read "Globe of Silence" on PF2p201 for example. "A negate magic spell can dispel/cancel the globe." .. "This spell immediately creates an invisible globe"
This proves that Negate Magic is able to dispel/cancel things created by magic.
So you can most definitely use Negate Magic to dispel/cancel a pocket/envelope.
I understand NM mentions "Negation will not work against possession, exorcism, constrain being, banishment, talisman, amulet, enchanted objects, symbols, wards, circles, summoning magic, zombies, golems, restoration, resurrection,
healing, or faerie food."
This does not necessarily mean that you cannot cancel anything on this list as normal though. Nowhere does it say a caster cannot opt to cancel anything which Negate Magic cannot target.
Nor does it say anywhere that Dimensional Pocket "enchants" an object. Anchoring to an object (like Carpet of Adhesion anchors to a floor, for example) is not the same as enchanting an object. The term does not appear at all, unlike the 23 examples I've given in the list above.
Among those, the only ones which appear to explicitly enchant objects are Fly and Sleep. So it appears that witches' broomsticks and heavy gravy are indeed immune to Negate Magic, but everything else is game.
Another glaring example of the lack of the verb 'enchant' is PF2p206's Time Capsule. It "creates an energy field that takes the container and everything inside it out of the normal time continuum". This is not actually enchanting an object! Much like Dpocket/Denvelope it simply creates dimensional effects tethered to objects.
I would say any instance of the term "magic charm" would apply, such as Witch Bottle (PF2p203) due to the text from PF2p253:
All these items incorporate spell magic-type powers and function exactly as described in the spell magic section except for duration.
The maximum duration time of each enchantment and the number of times it can be activated per day is noted.
This is under the section "Magic Rings, Bracelets, Charms, & Medallions" which I believe supports the idea that all "magic charms" are "enchanted".
This is elaborated further
The item remains enchanted indefinitely
This can be understood by realizing there are 2 tiers of enchantment: the item's ability to cast a spell is an enchantment does not expier, and then the actual effects of the spell are an added tier of enchantment which does expire.
256 "presence of enchantment" refers to effects of a crystal ball, while "desirable enchanted object" refers to a divination ball itself. 258 "enchantment built into the fabric" for Environmental Tent...
I think maybe "Enchanted Bags" also on 258 might be what you're thinking about when it comes to an uncancellable un-negateable "bag of holding" type thing. This is distinctively not Dimensional Pocket, and is much cheaper because of its limited weight allowance / storage space.
E-Bags also have 2 tiers, thus "be free of its enchantment" referring to the actual effects of not being able to see into them, which work entirely discretely from the ability to see dimensional anomalies.
eliakon wrote:you can't cancel enchantments.
They are not spells anymore.
Source? As above, this is present in MANY spells.
I believe the phrase "cancel the enchantment" in Transformation proves you 100% wrong here.
Enchantment is the effect resulting whether you use a spell invocation or a ritual to get there, and mages can cancel enchantments until we are told otherwise.
eliakon wrote:This is why Negate Magic does nothing to them... there is no spell to negate just as there is no spell to cancel.
NM does not explain WHY it doesn't work on certain things, just that it doesn't. You are engaging in speculation here, it doesn't say anywhere that these are no longer spells.
eliakon wrote:They can only cancel spells that exist.
Once the spell is over you can not negate its effect.
Thus a spell that makes a magic item, or causes an object to come into being, or creates a dimension has already ended.
The effect has been cast, there is no continuous spell to detect, track, Negate, nor cancel.
The spell is basically an instant spell.
Your speculative house rule contradicts the canon here.
Magic Net (PF 195) causes an object to come into being. It "creates a net composed of magic fibers". This is not instant, it has a duration of 2 melee rounds per level.
"Fly" (PF 197) explicitly enchants an object. It is not permanent. The enchantment lasts 6 minutes per level
In cases where we aren't told explicitly it's enchantments, it is up to debate. I would support this interpretation of "Animate Object" for example (this isn't just TK moving a table, it's actually making the table legs ambulate to walk), but that doesn't mean I must support your unbacked view on Dimensional Pocket.
eliakon wrote:For clarities sake looking at Negate Magic we quite clearly see what is not a spell anymore and thus has nothing that can be neither negated nor canceled.
Unbacked fancruft.
NM says what it doesn't work against, not what is no longer magic or no longer a spell.
eliakon wrote:Thus a Psi-Hound will not detect a scroll or a magic dagger or a D-Pocket as "as Magic Powers In Use" but as just "Magic Items"
Because they are not active and continuous spells.
For comparison, note that "Circle of Concealment" (PF 200) can last even longer than a D-Pocket, 1 year per level, if you spend a PE and much more PPE. Yet PF200's policy is not modified:
Magic and psionic powers like detect P.P.E., detect magic, and negate magic may pierce the circle of concealment and reveal what's hidden within, but the circle gets to save vs magic or psionics with the bonuses of its creator.
Long-term and indefinite durations do not prevent detection/negation. You need a better argument than this.
The Dog-Boy's "active and continuous" limit you refer to is foreign to me. If you mean their primary ability "Sense Psychic and Magic Energy" I'm seeing this there:
If the energy is being continually expended, like a series of magic or psionic attacks, or a long duration effect, he can track it to the source with ease.
Scrolls and Dimensional Pockets are long duration effects.
If you are referring to the 2 ranges:
Sensitivity to a fellow psychic or magic practitioner not using his powers
Sensitivity to psionic and magic powers being used
If the spell is still active, the magic power is still being used. This is why "long duration effect" was mentioned earlier.
This is the problem when you grasp at memory straws and invent phrases instead of double-checking the RAW, you misinterpret it.
eliakon wrote:Sanctum has to be specifically noted that it CAN be canceled.
Thus, if an enchantment does NOT say it can be cancelled... it can't.
Individual notation is done for convenience, not necessity. PF 184 "Canceling Magic" which dreicunan pointed out applies to everything.
If you think all 23 examples from the list I wrote of spells which specify "enchant" cannot be cancelled unless specified, you come up with a lot of unusual situations.
Apparently we can't cancel the "Fly" spell on a broom, for example?
How could I possibly disprove your assumption when explicit proof you are wrong is taken as proof you are right?
The problem is your argument is proofless to begin with. There is no text out there saying spells cannot be cancelled unless they explicitly say they can be cancelled.
ALL spells can be cancelled, unless they explicitly say they CANNOT. This is how the rules work, read the rules.
drewkitty ~..~ wrote:My advice to you and Axe is to go read the whole of all the magic texts and think about them for a year or three.
Through showing our work, dreicunan and myself have demonstrated more evidence of reading/thinking about these texts than you or eliakon with your unbacked speculation.
You both think you understand everything so well, you're going largely off your vulnerable memories which are prone to deviating from the RAW.
We argue from the RAW which keeps us closer to it.
drewkitty ~..~ wrote:Or to take to heart the well reasoned and insightful comments of people who have read all the magic texts and thought about them for years, and in some cases decades.
I do not view your arguments as well-reasoned (you don't reason from the text, you reason from personal paraphrasing) or insightful.
Regardless of how many decades you have "thought about" what you read, if the last time you went back and actually read them was years ago, you're bound to be misled by how you think things ought to be, compared to what they actually ARE.
Please avoid your effective argument-from-authority and actually present the facts.