* * * Wizards Community Thread * * * -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Thread : Question on Dispel Magic 2nd edition AD&D Started at 06-28-07 06:01 PM by dontheox Visit at http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=876053 -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 1] Author : dontheox Date : 06-28-07 06:01 PM Thread Title : Question on Dispel Magic 2nd edition AD&D I am just curious on other DM’s interpretation on dispel magic. I have always did it by the spell description in the players handbook either you target a specific magic item, try to counter another mages/clerics spell casting, or do an area effect dispelling all current spell effects in the area with just one roll of a die instead of rolling for each spell effect. The reason I am asking this question is I almost quit DMing a group because of two separate arguments in the span of five minutes about dispel magic the argument has been settled and the game will go on but before I make my final decision on my ruling I wanted to have other opinions and ideas about dispel magic. What went down during the first round of combat the mage player (the good mage) cast dispels magic at the evil party (area effect) rolls a natural 20. The evil mage has a Globe of Invulnerability (Which blocks all 1st thru 4th level spells including area effects) in the spell description of GoI it reads a dispel magic will bring it down. I ruled that the dispel magic did indeed bring down the GoI and the current spell effects of the other evil party members, but did not get rid of any other current spell effects on the evil mage because of the GoI. The player gets mad and reads the spell description of dispel magic line by line to me, my response was it’s a third level spell it has limitations and I believe I was being more than fair. Second round evil mage whips out his dispel magic (area effect) rolls a 19. I tell the party anybody who was within 30 feet of the good mage that all current spell effects are dispelled. No problems there. Third round good mage throws a fireball at the evil priest who is wearing a ring of fire resistance I could not recall exactly what the ring did so I was looking it up in the DMG. Good mage player flips out yelling, “No his magic items should not be working! I cast dispel magic two rounds ago!” I get furious because I just got read rules by him line by line, in which the description clearly reads “Will not affect magic items unless cast directly on them, the magic item will cease to function for 1d4 rounds.” I yell that back to him then he yells no you’re wrong. That is when I said “That’s it I’m not DMing any more everybody go home! Well after a few smokes and encouraging words from the other players we got back to the game. Now I know I lost my temper and I should not have yelled but I was very frustrated at the time. Sorry for the long post I just want everybody to have a clear view of what happened. If anybody dose disagree with me which is fine, please tell me why and what you as a DM would have done. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 2] Author : Bolithio Date : 06-28-07 07:56 PM Thread Title : Re: Question on Dispel Magic 2nd edition AD&D This is how I see it: - The AoE version of the spell may effect three things: Spells/effects, casting, and potions. - Or, you can target a specific Item In AoE castings, Roll of ongoing spells or effects first. I.e GoI, darkness, continual light and/or innate abilities such as a drow levitating. Next, roll for any casters in the AoE who may be casting a spell that round. (If they have not gone yet in the round but already declared they are casting) Lastly, roll for all potions in the AoE. I do this in secret and if a potion is dispelled, I will treat it as a potion of Delusion until a PC figures it out on his own - i.e detect magic. Its interesting to note the subtle differences between the Wizard and Priest versions of the spell (never have been clear if that was intended). I think the confusion comes from the statement "Including device effects" which can be interpreted as an ongoing effect from an Item, such as a cloak of invisibility. To take it further, it says "The spell does not effect a specially enchanted item..." So, what does specially mean? For instance, is there a difference in say a stone with continual light cast on it, and a ring of fire resist? I would say yes, and force the continual light stone to Save, but not the Ring. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 3] Author : MikeR7716 Date : 06-29-07 11:18 AM Thread Title : Re: Question on Dispel Magic 2nd edition AD&D As far as the GoI goes, I have never had this come up but I like the "DM takes out the GoI, but affects nothing within the globe" rule. The ring would have to be targeted after the GoI was taken out, which didn't happen. Tensions seemed a bit high, but the DM is right. As far as the AoE on a Cloak of Invisibility, the device effect is the invisibility so I would rule the person becomes visible, but only for round (unless the cloak was somehow limited in uses per day, etc). If the cloak was somehow targeted, it would be temporarily out of commission like any other targeted item. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 4] Author : Bolithio Date : 06-29-07 12:42 PM Thread Title : Re: Question on Dispel Magic 2nd edition AD&D As far as the AoE on a Cloak of Invisibility, the device effect is the invisibility so I would rule the person becomes visible, but only for round (unless the cloak was somehow limited in uses per day, etc). If the cloak was somehow targeted, it would be temporarily out of commission like any other targeted item. So does that mean that all device effects within the AoE must save or be canceled for the rest of the round? In other words any item may be at risk...So if an item fails its save, the effect would not function for the remainder of the round. The next round they work again, but may need to be activated again (cloak of invis). This is a fine line. Because now all of the sudden does a cloak of protection +1 temporarily not provide its protection? Long Sword +1? Etc... -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 5] Author : MikeR7716 Date : 06-29-07 03:41 PM Thread Title : Re: Question on Dispel Magic 2nd edition AD&D I shot from the hip on the last one and hit my foot. My AoE on a cloak of invisibility comments were just plain wrong. Corrected comments: The "including device effects" portion of the AoE would impact any magical spells that were "cast" by a magical item. If a ring allows the wearer to make something invisible, as per the spell, the the invisibility would be dispelled if the check rolls were made. A robe of invisibility allows the wearer to BE invisible instead of allowing them the ability to cast a spell, so it would not fall under the AoE DM. Also immune to AoE would be other "permanent" magic items, such as rings of protection, +1 swords, etc. If the magic sword allowed the weilder to charm an opponent, then the charm could be affected by the AoE, but not the combat bonus on the sword. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 6] Author : SamualT Barronsword Date : 06-29-07 05:58 PM Thread Title : Re: Question on Dispel Magic 2nd edition AD&D Corrected comments: The "including device effects" portion of the AoE would impact any magical spells that were "cast" by a magical item. If a ring allows the wearer to make something invisible, as per the spell, the the invisibility would be dispelled if the check rolls were made. A robe of invisibility allows the wearer to BE invisible instead of allowing them the ability to cast a spell, so it would not fall under the AoE DM. Also immune to AoE would be other "permanent" magic items, such as rings of protection, +1 swords, etc. If the magic sword allowed the weilder to charm an opponent, then the charm could be affected by the AoE, but not the combat bonus on the sword. I agree with MikeR7716's interpretation on this. For what its worth, I would have handled the GoI issue a bit differently. I would have had the caster roll a seperate dice for each spell/item possibly effected by the dispell to see if that spell/item were affected. This of course takes longer to adjuticate the effects, but I find the results more interesting, and less potentially devestating that way. I would have had the first 20 rolled take down the GoI. Then, with that out of the way, decided what other ongoing spells, spell castings, or potions might be affected, and have had the caster roll seperately for each one. If the first roll hadn't taken down the GoI (say the good mage rolled a 1 instead), then I would have ruled nothing else within the GoI's ongoing 5-foot-radius sphere of effect could be affected by Dispel attempt (since it keeps out spells of 4th level or below), but any spells, spell castings or potions outside the GoI's radius, but within the Dispells remaining 30 foot cube of effect, could still potentially be dispelled, and had the good mage roll seperate rolls to see if he were able to dispell any or all of those things. It's the same thing I do when someone fails a save vs. an damage inducing area effect spell or attack, which by the rules can (and in my games does) induces a need to make a saving throw for items carried. For example a fighter is breathed on by a hell hound and fails to save. Well IMC that would be especially bad because in addition to taking full damage, now the player has to make a save for the items the character is carrying. I wouldn't just have the player make one roll though, they would make a seperate item saving throw roll for each seperate item exposed (sword, shield, armor, gauntlets, helmet, cloak, belt, backpack, etc.). If something exposed fails its save, and that something is a container for or otherwise covering something else, then the item or items inside/underneath the ruined item also then has to save or be destroyed. If something exposed makes its save, and that something is a container for or otherwise covering something else, then the item or items inside/underneath the still intact item are considered protected and do not need to make saves. Example: If the fighter had a magic ring under his gauntlets. The gauntlets, being exposed to the hell hounds breath, would have to save as metal vs. magic fire (DMG pg. 39). If the gauntlets saved, no problem the ring is safe. if the guantlets failed, then they are ruined and now the ring, no longer protectd by the gauntlets, also has to save (as metal with a bonus for being magical) against magical fire. Not saying you did it wrong. Just noting I would have done it differently. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 7] Author : shadzar Date : 07-05-07 02:39 AM Thread Title : Re: Question on Dispel Magic 2nd edition AD&D as crude as it may sound i follow 2 rules when playing and DMing. The DM is always right. When the DM is wrong see rule #1 this may sound silly, but you must remember that the DM is the creator of the world in most cases. even with a professionally printed adventure the DM must make changes at times to suit the playstyle or levels of his/her players. this in mind, why couldn't the DM change the way magic itself works on any level. Maybe the GoI was specially made and itself was a minor artefact that had its own strengths. then i can't stand rules lawyering and can't understand "organized play" much for D&D since the game stagnates quickly while trying to follow exactly what is written in the books. when all else fails i simply explain to my players that the books were written as "rules of thumb" and refer them to the passage which i have placed into my signature. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Downloaded from Wizards Community (http://forums.gleemax.com) at 05-10-08 08:16 AM.