D&D 5E Dispel Magic vs buffs - does the caster know what target has active?

[HawaiiSteveO]

How do you observe an attacker take disadvantage? The character does not roll 2 dice, the player does. All the observer would see is the the attacker hitting or missing, or the defender getting out of the way or not.

Continue with Strahd as example. I'm suggesting that he should know his victim is being magically protected somehow.

The graveyards of Barovia & his castle are filled with the bones of previous adventurers who tried to mess with him. Strahd's brilliant and it could be fairly said he's seen it all before. You don't think he'd recognize a 1st level spell effect on a PC? Not even vs a melee attack but vs. his charm effect etc. Or it just fails and he doesn't know why? I don't buy it.

Maybe a skeleton or zombie wouldn't know / care, but a highly intelligent undead boss sure would.

I really like what Tormyr said, I guess it falls into the category of fluff with the DM describing effect.

 

[AaronOfBarbaria]

I'm a big fan of helping players not feel like they wasted a resource.

Because of that, I interpret the rules as favorably as possible so that the player knows - even if their character would have to be guessing - whether there is anything a dispel magic could affect or not, what the result would be (i.e. "Dispelling magic on this guy would reduce his AC by 2" or "Yes, the blur effect on this monster can be dispelled"), and what the odds are so that they are making an informed choice about how to spend their limited resources and won't do so if they would feel it wasn't worth it.

 

[jaelis]

How do you observe an attacker take disadvantage? The character does not roll 2 dice, the player does. All the observer would see is the the attacker hitting or missing, or the defender getting out of the way or not.

"You see Strahd lunge at the creature, but the blow seems to be deflected (or is nearly deflected) by some magical effect."

Of if you are Strahd: "You lunge at your target, but you encounter some type of magical resistance."

 

[jaelis]

I'm a big fan of helping players not feel like they wasted a resource.

Because of that, I interpret the rules as favorably as possible so that the player knows - even if their character would have to be guessing - whether there is anything a dispel magic could affect or not, what the result would be (i.e. "Dispelling magic on this guy would reduce his AC by 2" or "Yes, the blur effect on this monster can be dispelled"), and what the odds are so that they are making an informed choice about how to spend their limited resources and won't do so if they would feel it wasn't worth it.

Surely there are some limits, you wouldn't simply tell your players if they encountered a creature under the effect of a disguise self or polymorph spell? What about charm person?

 

[AaronOfBarbaria]

Sure there are some limits, you wouldn't simply tell your players if they encountered a creature under the effect of a disguise self or polymorph spell? What about charm person?

It's all dependent upon circumstances. So while I might not always have to mention effects like those in order for the player to feel like they know the odds that spending a spell slot on dispel magic is going to actually do something besides spend that spell slot, there also might be circumstances in which I do need to mention at least something - like if a player were suspicious that an NPC's attitude were being influenced by magic and wanted to cast dispel magic to get rid of it, I'd at least mention that they're up against an 8th-level spell if it were dominate monster rather than charm person affecting the NPC so the player could make an informed choice about what level of spell slot to spend, if any at all.

 

[Leatherhead]

I feel as if this is the reason why the Arcana skill exists.

 

[Ashrym]

No sensible creature is going to stand there for a minute and let the caster use identify on them. No caster is going to use this in combat.

Let's look at protection from evil - great spell! What flavor (if any) would a DM use to illustrate it?

Strahd von Zarovich would not need identify to recognize this spell on a PC after attacking once? It doesn't make sense to me that people would be oblivious to buffs.

Identify can be used as a precursor to the fight that starts in social settings. For example, requiring a check before entering the premises as a guest when the encounter starts as RP and ends as an encounter.

The better spell to use over identify (which is precise but long casting) would be detect magic. Detect magic lets a person know if magic is present so dispel magic won't be wasted and on whom the magic is present. After determining that magic is present, it's possible to spend an action to determine the school of magic for the spells present for an indicator of what spells might be present in the event there's no visible effect.

If you sense magic in this way, you can use your action to see a faint aura around any visible creature or object in the area that bears magic, and you learn its school of magic, if any.

It's also possible to simply use glyph of warding with dispel magic in a preparation tactic, such as place a glyph on each section of floor that will trigger on anyone who is not the caster of the glyph and them manipulating movement during combat to trigger them. That gives a reason for the big bad to flee to a prepared location initially and prolong the combat over multiple areas.

I feel as if this is the reason why the Arcana skill exists.

Arcana doesn't give the ability to see magic.

Your Intelligence (Arcana) check measures your ability to recall lore about spells, magic items, eldritch symbols, magical traditions, the planes of existence, and the inhabitants of those planes.

It's primarily a lore based ability with additional applications dealing with magical traps. It might be used after having cast detect magic and then also checking the magical auras but it's not a replacement to detect magic.

EDIT: The other time arcana might be used is in seeing the spell being cast and determining what is being seen with a check. I was thinking of individuals who were not actually seen casting the spells per the comments above.

 

[Tormyr]

It's also possible to simply use glyph of warding with dispel magic in a preparation tactic, such as place a glyph on each section of floor that will trigger on anyone who is not the caster of the glyph and them manipulating movement during combat to trigger them. That gives a reason for the big bad to flee to a prepared location initially and prolong the combat over multiple areas.

Nice write up. For the glyph of warding in particular, the last couple weeks my party infiltrated a cavern of an ulgurstata sorcerer. He had placed dual glyphs in several areas as traps. The first glyph would fire a dispel magic, and the second would fire finger of death at the same target.

 

[Horwath]

How do you observe an attacker take disadvantage? The character does not roll 2 dice, the player does. All the observer would see is the the attacker hitting or missing, or the defender getting out of the way or not.

That depends on your group immagination and description of a DM.

I.E. protection from evil: player rolls 2d20, now if both are below AC the attack misses normaly, but if higher one would have been a hit you can describe it as sword bounced of the skin like it was a rock or that a sword suddenly changed direction and went half a in wide.