Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Xahn'Tyr" data-source="post: 22836" data-attributes="member: 1525">I agree that I think that is what they meant and I wish that that is what they had written. Unfortunately, they instead wrote &quot;Magic items are not affected by area dispels. &quot; If a magic object has had a spell on it and that object is not affected by area dispels, I don't see anyway short of a house rule that you can justify removing the spell from that object.As for objects with spells on them in the possession of people hit with targetted dispels, I honestly don't know what they meant to happen. Maybe your GMW sword is considered part of you&nbsp; (like for a touch attack) and maybe it is not. Without clarification though, I would have to assume that it is not. If the object was specifically targetted with a spell, then it seems it should have to be specifically targetted with a dispel; and nothing in the rules indicates otherwise. (shrug)PS: Sent an email to The Sage about this.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Xahn'Tyr, post: 22836, member: 1525"] I agree that I think that is what they [i]meant[/i] and I wish that that is what they had written. Unfortunately, they instead wrote "Magic items are not affected by area dispels. " If a magic object has had a spell on it and that object is not affected by area dispels, I don't see anyway short of a house rule that you can justify removing the spell from that object. As for objects with spells on them in the possession of people hit with targetted dispels, I honestly don't know what they meant to happen. Maybe your GMW sword is considered part of you (like for a touch attack) and maybe it is not. Without clarification though, I would have to assume that it is not. If the object was specifically targetted with a spell, then it seems it should have to be specifically targetted with a dispel; and nothing in the rules indicates otherwise. (shrug) PS: Sent an email to The Sage about this. [/QUOTE]

Verification