Quote Originally Posted by brian 333 View Post
It is indeed relevant. If a character is in whole or in part inside an AMF, all magical effects are turned off for that character. Assume a character bound by chains to a wall who is partially within an AMF, who wears a ring of Escape Artist Skill Bonus on a hand outside that AMF. Does he gain the bonus to escape or not?
Right. But that's not what was asked. The sword is not part of the dragon. Roy's ability to PWOK! the Sword has zero relevance to which parts of the dragon are inside or outside of the AMF. Only whether the sword is inside our outside the AMF matters (well, and Roy, of course).

Roy is not trying to affect the dragon with his ability to retreive his sword. He's only affecting the sword.

Quote Originally Posted by brian 333 View Post
As in the specific example I cited, if Calder has magic which improves his attack or damage rolls, even though his tail tip is not in the AMF, a tail attack would not gain the bonuses that magic offers.

On the other hand, an AoE spell might affect the parts of the body outside the AMF, and magical protections against that attack would not apply, (though Cover Rules might be an issue.)
Which is all great information about how an AMF works, but not the actual question which was asked, and to which you replied:

Quote Originally Posted by bunson_h
If we assume that Roy could, ordinarily, recover it while another person was holding it by its blade (as Calder is doing), would that work if Calder was holding it outside the AMF while his body was still centred within the AMF? In other words, does the effect of the AMF extend beyond the limits of that delineated cone because parts of Calder himself do?
He's literally asking if, when someone is only partially within an AMF, that area is considered to be "extended" to cover the entirety of that someone (in this case a dragon), or not.

The answer is: Not.

Ergo, as long as the sword is outside of the AMF, Roy can PWOK! it, even if Calder is holding it, while most of the rest of him is inside the AMF. Bunsen clearly wasn't sure if, when a creature is partially inside an AMF, whether the effect of the AMF basically stretched around the entire creature (which might affect Roy's ability to retrieve his sword). It was a legitimate question to ask, since some game systems might just say something like "if any part of you is inside the effect, you are treated as if all of you is inside it", in which case an argument could be made that this includes any objects worn or held by you as well.

D&D rules on AMF do not allow the creature inside the AMF to be targetted by spells, but can be affected by AE spell effects on the parts of the creature that are outside the AMF (usually damage effects). Which gives us a strong clue as to the correct answer in this case.