Familair and spells
- Thread starter kayn99
- Start date
Infiniti2000
First Post
I assume you really mean, "The held spell is immune when the familiar is subject to a targeted dispel magic." or "The held spell is immune to a targeted dispel magic." The familiar itself is certainly not immune. You also do not specific if the touch spell is instantaneous or not.kayn99 said:
The rules do not define what state the spell is in when held, except that it's held. A dispel magic has no effect on an instantaneous spell, so if the spell is instantaneous, then the dispel magic would not affect it because the spell has not been defined as "in effect". If it were ruled "in effect" then the spell effect would be over (it's instantaneous after all). So, I would say that the held spell (instantaneous) is immune to dispel magic in either assumed case above.
If the held spell is not instantaneous, then it's possible the dispel magic could eliminate it.
Either way, darn good question and I don't remember this one ever being asked before.
From Thanee post, I think I understand your thinking. You are saying that just because the spell effect has not come into being, does not mean that the spell is not active. So any spell being held is subject to the dispel magic, does not matter on type or on who is holding it.
Infiniti2000 wrote "The rules do not define what state the spell is in when held, except that it's held. A dispel magic has no effect on an instantaneous spell, so if the spell is instantaneous, then the dispel magic would not affect it because the spell has not been defined as "in effect". If it were ruled "in effect" then the spell effect would be over (it's instantaneous after all). So, I would say that the held spell (instantaneous) is immune to dispel magic in either assumed case above."
See this is exactly where I am having my problem. The instantaneous spell and the Duration spells are in the same state. They should be subject to the same rules. When the Familair is the toucher for a shocking grasp, teleport, or invisibility they all should be ruled on the same way. Although the rules do say that instantaneous spell are not subject to dispel magic. I do not think the rules ever took this into effect.
"Either way, darn good question and I don't remember this one ever being asked before."
Thank you
Kayn
Infiniti2000 wrote "The rules do not define what state the spell is in when held, except that it's held. A dispel magic has no effect on an instantaneous spell, so if the spell is instantaneous, then the dispel magic would not affect it because the spell has not been defined as "in effect". If it were ruled "in effect" then the spell effect would be over (it's instantaneous after all). So, I would say that the held spell (instantaneous) is immune to dispel magic in either assumed case above."
See this is exactly where I am having my problem. The instantaneous spell and the Duration spells are in the same state. They should be subject to the same rules. When the Familair is the toucher for a shocking grasp, teleport, or invisibility they all should be ruled on the same way. Although the rules do say that instantaneous spell are not subject to dispel magic. I do not think the rules ever took this into effect.
"Either way, darn good question and I don't remember this one ever being asked before."
Thank you
Kayn
Infiniti2000
First Post
Unfortunately, when using dispel magic, "You make a dispel check ... against the spell or against each ongoing spell currently in effect on the object or creature." When holding a charge, the spell you cast is in an undefined state. It's cast, but (IMO) not in effect. In effect isn't even clearly defined, but I don't think holding a charge on any spell means that the spell is in effect. For example, if holding the charge on an invisibility spell means that the invisibility is in effect, what happens we you finally touch the recipient? It can't be in the same state, right, so that means it's not in effect and thus it's not dispellable?kayn99 said:
Hmmm. By the logic presented here, would Detect Magic not detect the held spell since it isn't an active spell on the familiar? Would the familiar be able to fly into an anti-magic area and deliver the touch (for example, of a longer-duration spell such as Invisibility, and if so, the effect would be suppressed until the recipient exited the antimagic field)?
I personally would rule that the spell is "in effect" in that it has an effect on the familiar - he's "holding the charge" for the spell to be delivered, and can be considered armed while this is true. So this effect of "holding the charge" should be dispellable.
But I admit that this is my interpretation - I can see how this one could be ruled either way. (REALLY cool question!)
I personally would rule that the spell is "in effect" in that it has an effect on the familiar - he's "holding the charge" for the spell to be delivered, and can be considered armed while this is true. So this effect of "holding the charge" should be dispellable.
But I admit that this is my interpretation - I can see how this one could be ruled either way. (REALLY cool question!)
Ok add a twist to this. If a character has the occular spell feat would the magic stored in his eyes be dispelable? Feat is below...
Kayn
Ocular Spell
Type: Metamagic
Source: Lords of Madness
Your study of the terrible powers of the beholder has given you insight into new ways to prepare and cast spells.
Prerequisite: Knowledge (dungeoneering) 4 ranks, two or more eyes.
Benefit: You can cast a spell with a casting time of 1 full round or less as an ocular spell. An ocular spell does not take effect immediately, but is instead held in one of your eyes for up to 8 hours. You can store only two ocular spells in this fashion, even if you have more than two eyes. Only ray spells and spells with a target other than personal can be cast as ocular spells.
When you choose, you can then cast both of the ocular spells as a full-round action; the spells become brilliant blasts that shoot out from your eyes. You can choose different targets for the two ocular spells.
When you release an ocular spell, its effect changes to a ray with a range of up to 60 feet. If the spell previously would have affected multiple creatures, it now affects only the creature struck by the ray. You must succeed on a ranged touch attack to strike your target with an ocular spell, and the target is still permitted any saving throw allowed by the spell.
Example: Ferno, an 11th-level wizard with the Ocular Spell feat, could prepare two scorching ray spells as ocular spells, casting them at the beginning of the day. In combat, he can take a full-round action to fire off both scorching ray spells. He can fire each spell at a different target, and he gets all three rays from each spell.
An ocular spell uses up a spell slot two levels higher than the spell's actual level.
Kayn
Ocular Spell
Type: Metamagic
Source: Lords of Madness
Your study of the terrible powers of the beholder has given you insight into new ways to prepare and cast spells.
Prerequisite: Knowledge (dungeoneering) 4 ranks, two or more eyes.
Benefit: You can cast a spell with a casting time of 1 full round or less as an ocular spell. An ocular spell does not take effect immediately, but is instead held in one of your eyes for up to 8 hours. You can store only two ocular spells in this fashion, even if you have more than two eyes. Only ray spells and spells with a target other than personal can be cast as ocular spells.
When you choose, you can then cast both of the ocular spells as a full-round action; the spells become brilliant blasts that shoot out from your eyes. You can choose different targets for the two ocular spells.
When you release an ocular spell, its effect changes to a ray with a range of up to 60 feet. If the spell previously would have affected multiple creatures, it now affects only the creature struck by the ray. You must succeed on a ranged touch attack to strike your target with an ocular spell, and the target is still permitted any saving throw allowed by the spell.
Example: Ferno, an 11th-level wizard with the Ocular Spell feat, could prepare two scorching ray spells as ocular spells, casting them at the beginning of the day. In combat, he can take a full-round action to fire off both scorching ray spells. He can fire each spell at a different target, and he gets all three rays from each spell.
An ocular spell uses up a spell slot two levels higher than the spell's actual level.
I would treat it like a counterspell, meaning that the caster of dispel magic would have to target the held spell rather than targetting the holder of the spell.
If Muffy the familiar had mage armor active and were chasing Bad Paper around with a held touch of idiocy, Bad Paper could either target Muffy (to take care of mage armor and anything else she had on her) or the casting of touch of idiocy. Perhaps the RAW do not spell it out that way, but come on, is there any other way to handle this?
{I would target Muffy, because hey, touch of idiocy is temporary, while killing a familiar is forever
}
If Muffy the familiar had mage armor active and were chasing Bad Paper around with a held touch of idiocy, Bad Paper could either target Muffy (to take care of mage armor and anything else she had on her) or the casting of touch of idiocy. Perhaps the RAW do not spell it out that way, but come on, is there any other way to handle this?
{I would target Muffy, because hey, touch of idiocy is temporary, while killing a familiar is forever
}
Last edited:
Infiniti2000
First Post
If you do treat it like counterspell, does that mean I could 'dispel' your held invisibility, but casting invisibility on you? No, right?Bad Paper said:
I agree, but what does 'in effect' mean? Does it have two definitions? If I cast invisibility and touch you, it's obviously in effect on you. You become invisible. If I cast it again and hold the charge, I don't turn invisible, right? That is, it can't be in effect on me unless 'in effect' has a second definition.irdeggman said:
Maybe holding the charge is an 'effect' of casting the spell, but not necessarily the specific spell? In other words (and I may be reaching here), holding the charge is considered 'in effect' for any touch spell prior to discharging the spell. The spell itself is not in effect, but the casting is and is waiting discharge on a suitable target.
For the record, I'm still not sure which way to rule it or how I would rule it, so I'm open to discussion. The above might be the best route because I think a majority of people would agree that the charge is dispellable.
Similar Threads
