Dispel Magic

[Surgoshan]

4e *may* have already solved the megabuffage issue (I'm very unconvinced that tons of very short duration buffs is less complicated),

Aren't buffs either a one shot deal (I hit this enemy and also buff an ally) that last a round or otherwise effects that require an action to sustain? Basically, that would mean that you could get at most two buffs per character, with only one of them subject to dispel, right?

 

[Incenjucar]

Another way to look at it is that it dispels independent, self-sustaining, autonomous effects.

 

[Cadfan]

Re: dispelling spells that are "save ends."

The cleric has an at will power that lets him damage an enemy and grant one ally in line of sight a new saving throw. This is available at level 1.

 

[Spatula]

Aren't buffs either a one shot deal (I hit this enemy and also buff an ally) that last a round or otherwise effects that require an action to sustain? Basically, that would mean that you could get at most two buffs per character, with only one of them subject to dispel, right?

As far as we know right now, no buffs are subject to dispelling. And the "max # buffs per character" would be dependant on what classes & races are in the character's group (a 1st level elven cleric can provide 2 bonuses on its own, one from the cleric powers and the other from its racial aura), along with which magic items the character has. And add on whatever self-buffs the character can provide for himself (mirror image, for example).

 

[Shroomy]

Multiple buffs that provide a flat bonus to a specific thing I can handle; multiple buffs that cause me to re-calculate huge swaths of my characters abilities, well, I don't want to bother with that anymore. I especially don't want to re-do it or partially re do-it when those buffs expire or are dispelled during combat.

 

[ve4grm]

3.X dispel was not 120 lines.

You're right. Including the casting information, it was 140.

Text of the spell alone: 129.

Nope, not 120 at all.

 

[Hussar]

You're right. Including the casting information, it was 140.

Text of the spell alone: 129.

Nope, not 120 at all.

Nice.

 

[Celebrim]

This isn't editing.

1) Much of the rules are moved off to an area outside the spell effect (definition of 'conjuration' and 'zone'). Nothing wrong with that, but its the opposite of what they are doing with monsters.

2) The changes to the system give the spell less to do. Additionally, they made the decision to narrow the spells effect. For example, you can't use this to prevent a wizard from flying or turning invisible.

3) The spell has lost much of its versatility. It no longer can be used to area dispel, counterspell, or supress a magic item. So yes, with less than 1/3rd the applications of the original spell, it is much shorter.

4) Some of the text of the 3rd edition version is limitations to reduce the potential for such a powerful and useful spell being abusable. Since the spell has now been nerfed, these limitations are no longer necessary and can be ignored.

So, yes, its shorter, but I'm not necessarily sure that that is something you should be bragging about. It's shorter mainly because it does so much less, and not because the same effect is described more cleanly.

 

[hong]

So, yes, its shorter, but I'm not necessarily sure that that is something you should be bragging about. It's shorter mainly because it does so much less, and not because the same effect is described more cleanly.

And yet it is shorter.

 

[Hussar]

This isn't editing.

1) Much of the rules are moved off to an area outside the spell effect (definition of 'conjuration' and 'zone'). Nothing wrong with that, but its the opposite of what they are doing with monsters.

2) The changes to the system give the spell less to do. Additionally, they made the decision to narrow the spells effect. For example, you can't use this to prevent a wizard from flying or turning invisible.

3) The spell has lost much of its versatility. It no longer can be used to area dispel, counterspell, or supress a magic item. So yes, with less than 1/3rd the applications of the original spell, it is much shorter.

4) Some of the text of the 3rd edition version is limitations to reduce the potential for such a powerful and useful spell being abusable. Since the spell has now been nerfed, these limitations are no longer necessary and can be ignored.

So, yes, its shorter, but I'm not necessarily sure that that is something you should be bragging about. It's shorter mainly because it does so much less, and not because the same effect is described more cleanly.

Wow, talk about splitting hairs. Nit pick much?

They took a spell which caused the game to come to a screaming halt whenever it got used beyond a certain level, and turned it into a spell that can be used to great effect, but doesn't make the rest of the group go outside for a smoke.

I dunno about anyone else, but, I'm no longer all that happy about the 20 minutes of fun packed into 4 hours. Dispel Magic may not have been a prime suspect, but, it certainly was a usual one.