Dispel Magic and Spell Turning

[Bad Paper]

Wiz A has Spell Turning (among other things) active. Wiz B targets her with a Dispel Magic. What happens?

My theory is that we check to see whether Spell Turning is dispelled. If not, the Dispel bounces back. Yes? And Wiz B wipes out any self-cast buffs? (Or Permanency, for that matter )

Extra Credit: what happens when there aren't enough levels left in the Spell Turning to turn the whole Dispel?

 

[dcollins]

No, I don't see how dispel magic targeted on a person with spell turning is different from any other spell. It is turned like any targeted spell. If part of it gets through, then (like any nondamaging spell) each person involved has the given percent chance to be subject to dispel magic.

Now, a better option is to cast the area-effect burst version of dispel magic, which then entirely avoids the spell turning.

 

[Camarath]

Extra Credit: what happens when there aren't enough levels left in the Spell Turning to turn the whole Dispel?

From Spell Turning
"For nondamaging spells, each of you has a proportional chance to be affected."

 

[wuyanei]

If WizB uses area dispel -- no chance of spell turning.

If WizB targets the dispel magic spell on the 'spell turning' as a continuous effect -- no chance of spell turning.

If WizB targets the dispel magic on WizA -- spell turned, or a proportional chance of being turned.

 

[dcollins]

If WizB targets the dispel magic spell on the 'spell turning' as a continuous effect -- no chance of spell turning.

Hmmm, how do you "see or touch the target" when it's a spell like spell resistance? From the SRD under "Magic Overview":

Target or Targets: Some spells have a target or targets. You cast these spells on creatures or objects, as defined by the spell itself. You must be able to see or touch the target, and you must specifically choose that target. You do not have to select your target until you finish casting the spell.

 

[Bad Paper]

how do you "see or touch the target" when it's a spell like spell resistance?

Yeah, I was wondering that, too. On the other recent Dispel Magic thread (how to dispel a Fear on your buffed-up friend), someone pointed out that you can just kinda pick the spell that you want to dispel and do it. This seems a little simplistic to me, as "one spell" is not in the list of approved targets for Dispel Magic. And again, with a buff or ward, how can you target it? Do you have to have Arcane Sight running?

 

[andargor]

Hmmm, how do you "see or touch the target" when it's a spell like spell resistance? From the SRD under "Magic Overview":

From Spellcraft:

DC 15 + spell level: Identify a spell being cast. (You must see or hear the spell's verbal or somatic components.) No action required. No retry.
...
DC 20 + spell level: Identify a spell that's already in place and in effect. You must be able to see or detect the effects of the spell. No action required. No retry.

Depending on which circumstance predominates (you are present when the spell is cast or you find a spell already in-place), this would allow targetting of the spell by dispel magic. Note that in the second case, the effect must be visible (normally or through divination).

Andargor

 

[dcollins]

Yeah, I was wondering that, too. On the other recent Dispel Magic thread (how to dispel a Fear on your buffed-up friend), someone pointed out that you can just kinda pick the spell that you want to dispel and do it. This seems a little simplistic to me, as "one spell" is not in the list of approved targets for Dispel Magic. And again, with a buff or ward, how can you target it? Do you have to have Arcane Sight running?

Yeah, this is really a running debate that I hadn't engaged in previously. Having read it closely, I think the intent for dispel magic is to able to zap a single wall of fire but not a bless effect, for example. It has to be visible by standard targeting rules.

From Spellcraft... Depending on which circumstance predominates (you are present when the spell is cast or you find a spell already in-place), this would allow targetting of the spell by dispel magic. Note that in the second case, the effect must be visible (normally or through divination).

I think I've got to disagree with that. Being able to "identify a spell" is not the same as being able to "see a spell" (neither necessary nor sufficient) -- in fact, you see the distinction in the requirement that you quoted.

What I will agree with is that it's key that "the effect must be visible (normally or through divination)". But if that's the case, then no Spellcraft check is needed (you just need to see it, not identify it).

 

[Bad Paper]

I think the intent for dispel magic is to able to zap a single wall of fire but not a bless effect, for example. It has to be visible by standard targeting rules.

It seems to me that Greater Arcane Sight would be the only way to be able to target a particular spell that isn't obvious (e.g. Wall of Fire).

 

[andargor]

I think I've got to disagree with that. Being able to "identify a spell" is not the same as being able to "see a spell" (neither necessary nor sufficient) -- in fact, you see the distinction in the requirement that you quoted.

It's just that "spell" isn't listed in the "Target or Area" entry of dispel magic. Since a spell is not an object or creature, I am not sure that the text you quoted applies in this instance.

Of course, I have no other backing that says that targeted dispels against spells is a special case. So from my point of view it is open to interpretation.

Andargor