Get pedantic on Feeblemind

[glass]

For starters:

Lets check the SRD:

Antmagic Field

No.

Prismatic Wall

No.

Globe of Invulnerability, Lesser

No.

Sysmbol of Death

No.

Geas, Lesser

No.

Wall of Force

No.

Forcecage

No.

Geas/Quest

No.

None of those spells have anything even resembling exculsive language on both lists.


glass.

 

[PallidPatience]

Spells that apparently cannot be removed by Dispel Magic:

Sepia Snake Sigil (after triggered)

"If the target fails its save, it is engulfed in a shimmering amber field of force and immobilized until released, either at your command or when 1d4 days + one day per caster level have elapsed."

This is the secondary effect of the spell. Later, there is a line that states "A dispel magic can remove the sigil". Still, I would contend that Dispel Magic would free the victim as though 1d4+1 day/caster level had elapsed. As mentioned, "a dispelled spell ends as if its duration had expired". Also, "Dispel magic can dispel (but not counter) spell-like effects just as it does spells." So if you want to take the paralyzation caused by sepia snake sigil as a spell-like effect, it's covered, too.

Protection From Energy (with resist energy as well)

"If a character is warded by protection from energy and resist energy, the protection spell absorbs damage until its power is exhausted."

If the spell is successfully dispelled, is the character still "warded by protection from energy and resist energy"? If so, then was the spell successfully dispelled at all? If not, then this line is entirely irrelevant. Before it has been dispelled, however, this line defines how the spell behaves. Until the power is exhausted, it absorbs damage.

Animal Shapes

"Recipients remain in the animal form until the spell expires or until you dismiss it for all recipients. In addition, an individual subject may choose to resume its normal form as a full-round action; doing so ends the spell for that subject alone."

Dispel Magic ends a spell as though it had expired. Therefore, a successfully dispelled Animal Shapes has the characters on which the effect was ended returning to their original forms, just as it says in the spell.

Control Winds

"The new wind direction and strength persist until the spell ends or until you choose to alter your handiwork, which requires concentration."

See my reply to Animal Shapes.

Glitterdust (mentioned in edit above)

"All within the area are covered by the dust, which cannot be removed and continues to sparkle until it fades."

I agree with you, on this one. Except that I believe that the end of the line means that when the spell ends, the dust fades. Otherwise, it would make no sense to me. However, I think this is just a matter of interpretation. Therefore, according to my interpretation of the spell, Dispel Magic would cause the blindness to end and the outlining to end, at least, and the sparklies to go away at most. Probably all of the above.

Now, many of these are silly. But I remind you, the wording in them is substantially the same as feeblemind.

Feeblemind

"The subject remains in this state until a heal, limited wish, miracle, or wish spell is used to cancel the effect of the feeblemind."

I contend that "until the spell ends due to the end of its duration" is very different than "until these four, specific spells are used". After all, Dispel Magic specifically states that it causes a spell to end as though its duration was over, which fits within the "until" clause used in those spells. Actually, it fits in the same way that Mass Heal being allowed on Feeblemind does.

The point of all of this is to say that I believe the "until" construction is not intended to be strictly read. It is simply a way of stating means of removing the effect, not an exhaustive way. If you read it strictly in one spell, you have to read it strictly in many spells, and the game becomes less playable.

--
gnfnrf

Using my above interpretations, which are often just due to careful readings of the spells and to which I can only see easy variation within the RAW under Glitterdust, and not even then, it's easy to strictly read the "until" clauses in every spell and play the game using the RAW.

 

[sirwmholder]

If you allow Unholy Blight to be reversed, than at least that's one instantaneous effect that can be reversed by BE.

I don't hold that Unholy Blight could be reversed by Break Enchantment either.

Thanks for your time,
Wm. Holder

 

[gnfnrf]

I contend that "until the spell ends due to the end of its duration" is very different than "until these four, specific spells are used". After all, Dispel Magic specifically states that it causes a spell to end as though its duration was over, which fits within the "until" clause used in those spells. Actually, it fits in the same way that Mass Heal being allowed on Feeblemind does.

I disagree with your assertion here. Dispel Magic's function (as if the duration expired) explains what happens after you dispel, it doesn't determine what you can dispel. Otherwise, you couldn't dispel any permanent effects. However, I'm not going to stress this point, because it strikes me as inarguable one way or the other.

Instead, I will present another case from the SRD of potentially exclusive until clauses. The last batch was by no means complete.

Imbue With Spell Ability

"Once you cast imbue with spell ability, you cannot prepare a new 4th-level spell to replace it until the recipient uses the imbued spells or is slain, or until you dismiss the imbue with spell ability spell."

This isn't a dispelling problem, the problem here is if the spell is dispelled, you can never use that 4th level slot again.

--
gnfnrf

 

[PallidPatience]

While troublesome, I don't believe that this clause is at all relevant to the Feeblemind debate. It has nothing to do with ending conditions of the spell, but instead has to do with the return of a "component" of the spell. Whether or not Imbue with Spell Ability is dispellable isn't called into question by that statement. However, I'd rule that Dispel would cause Imbue to end as though discharged, since the duration is "Permanent until discharged".

I disagree with your assertion here. Dispel Magic's function (as if the duration expired) explains what happens after you dispel, it doesn't determine what you can dispel. Otherwise, you couldn't dispel any permanent effects. However, I'm not going to stress this point, because it strikes me as inarguable one way or the other.

I believe it's arguable.

Dispel Magic reads that Instantaneous effects cannot be dispelled. Nor, it says, does it defeat some spells, as detailed in their descriptions.

Permanent spells are, by definition, not instantaneous. Nor does Imbue with Spell Ability state that it cannot be dispelled, or list a specific, exclusive set of ways to end the spell's effect. Therefore, it is defeatable by Dispel Magic.

What happens when a duration of Permanent expires? The same thing that happens when any duration expires: the spell ends. Without specific wording otherwise, this merely means that the effects of the spell poof out of existence with no warning. Whether or not the duration could expire on its own is no factor. Dispel Magic causes the duration to expire. "Ends as if its duration has expired" is different from "ends as though its duration has expired normally". The second is problematic, since permanent durations DON'T expire normally. If the spell said that, I'd agree with you.

 

[Artoomis]

While troublesome, I don't believe that this clause is at all relevant to the Feeblemind debate. ...

Of course it is relevant. It demonstrates the fallacy of applying absolute precision to the word "until."

It is clear from the above examples that WotC editors did not intend the word "until" to be taken as a absolute qualifier. It many cases the rules break down if you do so.

 

[Artoomis]

I don't hold that Unholy Blight could be reversed by Break Enchantment either.

Thanks for your time,
Wm. Holder

Leaving exactly zero instantaneous effects that can be reversed by Break Enchantment.

And you are okay with that, right?

 

[sirwmholder]

Leaving exactly zero instantaneous effects that can be reversed by Break Enchantment.

And you are okay with that, right?

I'm perfectly fine with that... I think the line... Break enchantment can reverse even an instantaneous effect... is an error. Just remove it and everything works fine. Break Enchantment was never meant to reverse Feeblemind or Unholy Blight the only two instantaneous effects that it could arguably 'cure'.

Thank you for your time,
Wm. Holder

 

[gnfnrf]

Whether or not Imbue with Spell Ability is dispellable isn't called into question by that statement. However, I'd rule that Dispel would cause Imbue to end as though discharged, since the duration is "Permanent until discharged".

Maybe I didn't make it clear. Imbue with Spell Ability is clearly dispellable. The question is, what happens to the spell slot? The spell text gives an exclusive list of conditions when it comes back, and the spell being dispelled is not on it. So therefore, if Imbue with Spell Ability is dispelled, the slot does not become available for use again until the creature is killed.

--
gnfnrf

 

[Artoomis]

Maybe I didn't make it clear. Imbue with Spell Ability is clearly dispellable. The question is, what happens to the spell slot? The spell text gives an exclusive list of conditions when it comes back, and the spell being dispelled is not on it. So therefore, if Imbue with Spell Ability is dispelled, the slot does not become available for use again until the creature is killed.

--
gnfnrf

Right. This is exactly what happens when you try and put too much precision into what is obviously imprecise use of the language.

Which is also what is happenig when one disallows Feeblemind to be reversed with Break Enchantment