• The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!

D&D 5E Does Dispel Magic work on Banishment?

S'mon

Legend
I think I'd allow dispel magic cast on the banishment point to work. A PC imc got banished last session, this would have been a good way to bring her back.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

jaelis

Oh this is where the title goes?
But at some point the DM is always correct.
When the DM says "This is how we are going to play it," they are always correct.
When the DM says "This is what the game rules say," they might be correct, they might not.
 


For the purpose of this thread, can we simply focus on how the rules work, rather than the DM's ruling? In game, the DM made a ruling and we proceeded. That was fine, but I think both of us would like to know what the RAW-correct answer would be.

Also, there's been some really good analysis here - most of which supports my interpretation :)
 

jaelis

Oh this is where the title goes?
RAW correct answer is certainly that you'd have to target the banished creature with dispel magic for it to work.

Banishment clearly targets the creature, and dispel magic ends spells on it's own target. So the target of DM has to be the creature.
 


I think I'd allow dispel magic cast on the banishment point to work. A PC imc got banished last session, this would have been a good way to bring her back.

Yeah so would I. At least during the 1 minute concentration duration, there's clearly some ongoing magic at work. There ought to be something to dispel there or on the spell's caster.
 

Second paragraph is for creatures banished from their home plane to a demiplane. It doesn't apply to creatures banished to their home plane, as described in the 3rd paragraph.

How do you know the third paragraph doesn't simply list exceptions to the rules in the second? The description is actually somewhat ambiguous; they should have explicitly specified that the creature isn't incapacitated.
 


How do you know the third paragraph doesn't simply list exceptions to the rules in the second? The description is actually somewhat ambiguous; they should have explicitly specified that the creature isn't incapacitated.
The meaning of the text seems clear to me. There's not really any ambigiuity there unless you really want to find some.
 

Remove ads

Top