Targetted Dispel: what is affected?

[LokiDR]

Situation: I am a buffed up fighter. I have a bull's strength on me, a greater magic weapon on my sword, a deaper darkness cast on a coin contained in a Handy Haversack. I am hit with a targeted dispel.

Question: What spells/items are affected? Is there an FAQ reference? I have found nothing on this in the latest FAQ.

Thanks in advance.

 

[kreynolds]

I haven't had a chance to look through the FAQ (kinda busy right now), but here's a Sage Reply I was able to find.

1) If a fighter is hit by a targeted Dispel Magic and that fighter is holding a flaming sword that has had Greater Magic Weapon cast upon it, is the sword affected?

Yes.

Do we need to make the dispel check to see if the GMW spell is removed from the sword even though the fighter (not the sword) was the target of the dispel?

A creature's equipment is part of the creature.

2) If instead the fighter and sword are caught in an area Dispel Magic, is the Greater Magic Weapon spell cast upon the sword in any danger?

Possibly. The sword is part of the creature, and the greater magic weapon effect goes into the queue of effects that might be dispelled.

For number 1, logically I would think "yes", but the spell description is pretty clear in saying "One object, creature, or spell is the target of the spell. ". Since the sword (not the character) was the target of the Greater Magic Weapon spell, it seems that it would have to be the target of a Dispel trying to get rid of it. Or do you get a bunch of objects for free when you target a creature?

See first answer.

For number 2, again I would think that the sword should be affected, but the spell description says "Magic items are not affected by area dispels. " I assume this meant that (only) the inherent magical properties of magical items are not suppressed, but that is not what is written. Any clarification (either on the rules as written or on the intent) would be much appreciated.

You assume correctly, Also see second answer.

Hope that helps. I'll try and look through the FAQ in a little while, but hopefully someone else will be able to do it in a more timely fashion than I can.

 

[kreynolds]

Loki. Here's another one, but I can't be sure if this came from the Sage or from CS (the Sage rarely has this many typo's in his responses)...

1) I polymorph an evil fighter into a frog, cast geas on him, and then want to turn him back to himself. Can I dispel the polymorph only, using the dispel magic's option of targeting a spell? (some folks think that the polymorph spell is part of the evil fighter at this point, in the same way his equipment is, and that I can only dispel the polymorph by targeting the fighter, thereby risking my geas)

No (Targeted dispels affect all ongoing effects on a creature, some DMs I know allow you to choose which effects you dispel if you can touch the target or study the target with detect magic and make a Spellcraft check to identify the aura you want to remove).

2) An evil wizard casts a deleterious spell (e.g., OA's backbiter) on my bodyguard's weapon. Can I target the weapon with a dispel magic? (some folks think that since the weapon is attended, I'd have to target the bodyguard instead)

Yes, you can use a targeted dispel to remove an effect from an item (though the spell description doesn't address this option directly). It doesn't matter of the item is attended or not.

2a) Can I target the spell on the weapon with a dispel magic?

Yes, see previous answer.

3) An evil druid casts a spell at me, and suddenly I feel extremely weak. I fail my spellcraft check, so I don't know what she cast; can I still dispel it (assuming it's an ongoing effect)?

Yes, you can target yourself. You don't need to know what an effect is to dispel it.

3a) Would it make a difference if it were an area-effect spell (e.g., it created an invisible cloud of poisonous gas)?

No.

I'm not sure if this one will be as helpful to you though.

 

[LokiDR]

Thanks for the quotes, but I was hoping for an FAQ citation. The sage, on his own, can tend to make odd rulings.

Perhaps it would be more useful to ask where in the rules it says that a person's equipment is a part of them. Attended items use the attending character's saves, but that is not quit the same thing.

 

[Dr. Zoom]

Perhaps it would be more useful to ask where in the rules it says that a person's equipment is a part of them. Attended items use the attending character's saves, but that is not quit the same thing.

I think the rules are a bit vague on this. I do it the way the sage describes above (the first quote), but I can see doing it conversely, too. I hope this is made clear in 3.5.

I was thinking of two differant spells. Polymorph Other affects the targets equipment, too. But Disintegrate does not. Hmm.

 

[Hypersmurf]

I was thinking of two differant spells. Polymorph Other affects the targets equipment, too. But Disintegrate does not. Hmm.

Items Surviving after a Saving Throw: Unless the descriptive text for the spell specifies otherwise, all items carried and worn are assumed to survive a magical attack. If a character rolls a natural 1 on his saving throw, however, an exposed item is harmed (if the attack can harm objects).

1. Disintegrate harms; Polymorph doesn't. I had an idea for an offensive Dimension Door spell - teleport someone 5', Will Negates - the idea being that if they failed their save but didn't roll a 1, they'd be teleported one square away, but their armor/weapon/equipment would not. However, since a teleport effect does not threaten the survival of the item, the whole saving throw thing doesn't kick in.

2. Polymorph (and Flesh to Stone) specify that possessions of a creature are affected. Disintegrate does not.

-Hyp.

 

[Saeviomagy]

I think that one of those occasions where the sage has made a bad call would have to be the ones given above - first the object IS part of the creature, then it's not... first the spell is affecting the character, then it's only affecting the equipment. He also says the spell description doesn't cover targeting objects, something it clearly does. He also says that a targeted dispel affects all spells on a creature, which is true for a dispel targeted against a creature. But what of a dispel targeted against a spell (first line of the description of targetted dispelling)?

Then he says that dispelling yourself would end the ongoing effect of a spell who's area isn't the target of the dispel - ie if you got hit by a stinking cloud, you could dispel yourself to make yourself immune to the effects. At least that's how it reads.

I'd really, really suggest sticking with the spell as written, which makes no mention of affecting every item the character owns when you target him with a dispel.

Why?
1. It's simpler. You're already rolling dispel checks against all his active spells. Do you really want to roll dispel checks against every single magical item he has? Let alone keeping track of all the dispelled durations on magical items.

2. It makes the game more fun. Imagine the dismal performance of a high-level fighter who loses all of his stuff to a dispel magic. He's basically going to be screwed. IMHO, this would skew the power balance even further towards spellcasters, which is a bad thing.

3. It's consistent, unlike the sages rulings.

 

[Hypersmurf]

I'd really, really suggest sticking with the spell as written, which makes no mention of affecting every item the character owns when you target him with a dispel.

Note that there's a big difference between suppressing a permanent magic item, which requires a targetted dispel on the item, and dispelling a spell effect cast on a piece of a character's equipment.

Say we have a cleric with Bless and Bull's Strength, and GMW on his +1 Mace of Disruption, and MV on his shield and armor.

If equipment counts as part of the character:
An area dispel takes out one of the 5 spells.
A targetted dispel on the cleric could take out all 5 spells.
A targetted dispel on the mace could knock off the GMW, and suppress the +1 and Disruption qualities.

If equipment is separate:
An area dispel takes out either Bull's Strength or Bless, and gets all three other spells.
A targetted dispel on the cleric gets Bull's Strength and Bless, but not the others.
A targetted dispel on the mace could knock off the GMW, and suppress the +1 and Disruption qualities.

The Sage's reply states that the first case holds, which makes targetted dispels more powerful. If you take the other view, area dispels become more nasty.

-Hyp.

 

[LokiDR]

First off, the sage is not a definative source. I have been told that the FAQ is revied by R&D before it is put out, so I will consider that a definative source. If the sage can be backed up with rules, I can accept it. I haven't seen this ruling be backed up by a specific rule. I also haven't seen it in the FAQ. Those are the elements that would sway me.

As for what makes sense for the spell, I would go by a literal reading of the spell. You remove magic from the thing you target with a targeted dispel. Area dispel gets one spell for each creature, item, or indepent spell effect (like a flaming spear) in the area.

Because most buff spells affect characters, a buffed character will lose roughly a similar amount of spells from area or targeted. One version shouldn't be able to render a buffed character useless.

 

[dcollins]

This is a ruling by the Sage that I'm comfortable with. The fact that a targetted dispel takes out weapon-buffs seems balanced and justified -- there won't really be anything but GMW on a sword, and no one would use a dispel just to (possibly) get this one spell. Thus, it's reasonable to capture GMW within the scope of a targetted dispel.

Moreover, it make permanent items properly more desirable, and not make them so easily cheesed away by GMW. Buffs should be a temporary, "fragile" magic compared to permanent items. It's straightforward and simpler than alternatives: every spell currently buffing a character is up for dispelling. I have no problem with this particular Sage ruling.