Ridley's Cohort
First Post
The concept of dispelling a single spell aura that happens to be distributed on multiple targets seems reasonable. However it is not a possibility explicitly supported by the wording of Dispel Magic.
We have the concept mentioned here, but actual mechanics speak of a creature or an object.
I would allow it. In most cases, you will need Arcane Sight or True Seeing to perceive a specific aura however.
Pieces of the spell outside the dispel are not affected, of course.
As for the original post, the letter of the law does not indicate auras on an attended object are part of the owner's auras. I think the best strict reading of the rules would be that the area dispel affects attended separately, so #3 is correct. The alternative ruling is reasonable, and can be supported with a very plausible "spirit of the rules" argument. As a matter of more a Balance Nazi myself, I would say making area dispel slightly stronger is probably for the best.
We have the concept mentioned here, but actual mechanics speak of a creature or an object.
I would allow it. In most cases, you will need Arcane Sight or True Seeing to perceive a specific aura however.
Pieces of the spell outside the dispel are not affected, of course.
As for the original post, the letter of the law does not indicate auras on an attended object are part of the owner's auras. I think the best strict reading of the rules would be that the area dispel affects attended separately, so #3 is correct. The alternative ruling is reasonable, and can be supported with a very plausible "spirit of the rules" argument. As a matter of more a Balance Nazi myself, I would say making area dispel slightly stronger is probably for the best.
Last edited:
