D&D 5E Warlock and Repelling Blast

[seebs]

In reference to the later point. Dispel magic has been confirmed to not be intended to work on non spell but yet magical effects. The difference seems to be whether they are cast/replicate an existing spell or not.

the twitter examples of can/can't be dispelled
Arcane ward and magical items can't http://www.sageadvice.eu/2015/11/25/does-dispell-magic-effect-an-arcane-ward/
Channel divinity can't http://www.sageadvice.eu/2015/10/12/does-dispel-magic-auto-work-vs-channel-divinity-powers/
Shadow monk silence can http://www.sageadvice.eu/2015/10/01/can-monk-shadow-arts-silence-be-dispelled/
Spell Effects from potion/item can but the items themselves can't http://www.sageadvice.eu/2015/03/24/dispel-magic-potions/

Huh, interesting! I wonder why it says "magical effect" in the spell description, then, if it's not supposed to be able to dispel magical effects.

I also thought there was some example previously given of it being used to dispel magical effects that weren't spells, like petrification or something, but I may be confused now.

 

[Zorku]

Huh, interesting! I wonder why it says "magical effect" in the spell description, then, if it's not supposed to be able to dispel magical effects.

I also thought there was some example previously given of it being used to dispel magical effects that weren't spells, like petrification or something, but I may be confused now.

There's two things going on here. Spells are the things we shoot off a bunch of times in a day at varying slot levels and with restrictions like concentration. Dispel Magic is made for those. Enchantments are built into some sort of item, and the rules mostly steer clear of creating or destroying such things other than by depleting them through active use.

When I think of magical effects beyond either of those two categories I think all that's left is stuff without a spell level.

As for why you can target a magical effect, this allows you to remove a circle of power even if, somehow, you can't see any of the people in it. Likewise if you want to be fussy darkness spells are kind of weird to dispel, since most people can't see anything affected by magical darkness to target with their dispel.


If I've interpreted this all correctly I'd be interested to know how dispel can remove a globe of invulnerability, or if it's supposed to be able to at all.

 

[ryan92084]

Dispel works on globe of invulnerability (didn't think it relevant for my last post) www.sageadvice.eu/2015/01/22/dispel-magic-vs-globe-of-invulnerability/
I think magical effects was meant to mean things like globe, illusions, wall of fire, etc. Spells that persist in the world after the cast a spell action is over but aren't on creatures/objects and instead exist as their own "entity". I agree that the second sentence in the dispel description is poorly done if that is the intention.

Darkness is cast on an object and dispel doesn't require sight iirc.

 

[Zorku]

If the darkness was already there are you supposed to walk in until you stumble over a chair, then cast it on the chair? You don't know what's in there to target and you can't directly target the thing you're trying to get rid of.

The globe is centered on the caster, but with the wording of dispel you can just cast it on anything in the globe.
I don't get the logic behind that tweet though. Everything inside the globe isn't affected by spells of 5th level or lower, so does taking magical effects off of a person not count as affecting them?

 

[ryan92084]

I misspoke on darkness it can target a point or an object you are holding. So if you wanted to dispel the object hopefully you would just have seen what it was cast on. Not sure if the darkness itself can always be dispelled directly or if just when not on an object?

While globe of invulnerability springs up around you it is still not actually cast on you. The tweet was having you target the globe itself not a creature inside I believe.

 

[Zorku]

I misspoke on darkness it can target a point or an object you are holding. So if you wanted to dispel the object hopefully you would just have seen what it was cast on. Not sure if the darkness itself can always be dispelled directly or if just when not on an object?

While globe of invulnerability springs up around you it is still not actually cast on you. The tweet was having you target the globe itself not a creature inside I believe.

I thought the globe moved with you. If that had been the case, casting it on yourself and concentrating to maintain it would have made you the clear "thing it's attached to," but yeah, it's just in a space same as a wall of fire. Maybe targeting the space is what's going on with all of these? I feel like I'm going a bit too far in treating coordinates as an object though...

 

[seebs]

There's two things going on here. Spells are the things we shoot off a bunch of times in a day at varying slot levels and with restrictions like concentration. Dispel Magic is made for those. Enchantments are built into some sort of item, and the rules mostly steer clear of creating or destroying such things other than by depleting them through active use.

When I think of magical effects beyond either of those two categories I think all that's left is stuff without a spell level.

As for why you can target a magical effect, this allows you to remove a circle of power even if, somehow, you can't see any of the people in it. Likewise if you want to be fussy darkness spells are kind of weird to dispel, since most people can't see anything affected by magical darkness to target with their dispel.


If I've interpreted this all correctly I'd be interested to know how dispel can remove a globe of invulnerability, or if it's supposed to be able to at all.

I seem to recall some claim that dispel magic could reverse petrification done by magical creatures, which is not a levelled spell.

My point about the "magical effects" thing is that, if you target a "magical effect", the magical effect is not dispelled, RAW. Because the rule is that the magical effects affecting the target are dispelled. Not the target itself. That's what I think is probably an error.

 

[Zorku]

I seem to recall some claim that dispel magic could reverse petrification done by magical creatures, which is not a levelled spell.

My point about the "magical effects" thing is that, if you target a "magical effect", the magical effect is not dispelled, RAW. Because the rule is that the magical effects affecting the target are dispelled. Not the target itself. That's what I think is probably an error.

Is there any benefit to stripping magic off of your target, instead of just targeting the magic itself?

 

[Arial Black]

Since I've never said that you can cast a spell without it's components, I read your question as asking if there's any other relationship that the blindingly obvious, and my answer remains no.

When I posted the RAW about components, and then stated that this means the the components must be completed before the spell effect begins, you disagreed with that.

Or seemed to...

Instead of me trying to guess, why don't you just tell us what you did mean?

If you agree that the components must be completed before the spell effect begins, this means that the spellcasting is over by the time the first beam is shot, therefore counterspell has no target but dispel magic does if it is readied to go off after the first beam.

If you disagree, tell us why.

 

[ryan92084]

I seem to recall some claim that dispel magic could reverse petrification done by magical creatures, which is not a levelled spell.

My point about the "magical effects" thing is that, if you target a "magical effect", the magical effect is not dispelled, RAW. Because the rule is that the magical effects affecting the target are dispelled. Not the target itself. That's what I think is probably an error.

hrm the only dispel tweet I've seen similar to petrification was in regards to flesh to stone. However that's a spell so I don't know if that was what you are thinking of or not.

I agree the first and second sentence don't really jive with regards to magical effects targeting. As I've said I think the intent was to allow it to target persistent free standing magical effects like globe of invulnerability. Being generally cast on a point (not an object) puts them in a weird limbo with the second sentence. I'm not really sure how to logically resolve the text (unless magical effects are on themselves?)so I'll just roll with the RaI example tweets.