| 11 people marked this as FAQ candidate. Answered in the FAQ. 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Slow counters and dispels haste and vice-versa. The "counters" part I understand, but I'm not sure about the "dispels" part. Does it mean that if I cast slow on a hasten creature, that creature will become slowed (on a failed save) or normal (on a successful save)? In other words, does the "dispels" part requires a failed saving throw? Can a hasten creature become slowed with a single casting of slow? Can a slowed creature become hasten with a single casting of haste?
Slow counters and dispels haste and vice-versa. The "counters" part I understand, but I'm not sure about the "dispels" part. Does it mean that if I cast slow on a hasten creature, that creature will become slowed (on a failed save) or normal (on a successful save)? In other words, does the "dispels" part requires a failed saving throw? Can a hasten creature become slowed with a single casting of slow? Can a slowed creature become hasten with a single casting of haste?
No, they cancel each other out. If your buddy is slowed, a single haste spell will return him to normal speed, not hasten him. If you buddy is hasted then a slow will remove the haste effect - but only if he fails his save.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Since it does not say the spell ends after dispelling haste, yes, haste is dispelled and then the creature must save or be slowed.
Edit: Unless that line only refers to counterspelling the casting of a haste spell. Very unclearly worded. Your DM could go with either interpretation.
Since it does not say the spell ends after dispelling haste, yes, haste is dispelled and then the creature must save or be slowed.
Edit: Unless that line only refers to counterspelling the casting of a haste spell. Very unclearly worded. Your DM could go with either interpretation.
A haste or slow spell is ended by casting the opposite regardless of how much time is left is left on the the first spell. And the second spell does not affect the target later.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The spell description for each says that it counters and dispels. Adding +1 to -1 = zero. No effect.
Since it does not say the spell ends after dispelling haste, yes, haste is dispelled and then the creature must save or be slowed.
Edit: Unless that line only refers to counterspelling the casting of a haste spell. Very unclearly worded. Your DM could go with either interpretation.
I am the DM and I honestly don't know which interpretations I should go with. Since there's a haste spamming summoner in the party, the way those two spells interact with each other will have a huge impact on the game.
Also, even if I go with the interpretation that slow can only return a hasten creature to its normal speed, I cannot find evidence that a failed saving throw would be required for that. After all, it's the slow "spell" that dispels the haste "spell", not the slowed "condition", which is acquired only after a failed saving throw, that dispels the hasten "condition".
|
|
I think you're going to have to make your own call on that. The 'Opposing Effects' rule does not clearly describe how they interact. I personally would consider opposing spells as automatic dispel magic effects against their counterparts. However, the caster would have to decide which effect he wanted at the time of casting. Either he dispels the spell and gets no other benefit, or he lays his spell on top of the other and both effect the target equally.
A haste or slow spell is ended by casting the opposite regardless of how much time is left is left on the the first spell. And the second spell does not affect the target later.
Citation needed.
The spell description for each says that it counters and dispels. Adding +1 to -1 = zero. No effect.Counters isn't relevant, because it's not being used as a counterspell.
Dispels is an additional effect that removes an existing effect of the appropriate type. The rules specifically state that all bonuses an penalties apply as normal.
Yes but could an already active haste spell dispel a slow spell that has just been cast on the hasten creature (while the haste spell is also dispelled) as soon as the two spells start interacting with each other?
Like matter and anti-matter!
Only without the earth-shattering kaboom.
So haste (3rd level spell) + slow (3rd level spell) = light (0-level spell)? :)
Yes but could an already active haste spell dispel a slow spell that has just been cast on the hasten creature (while the haste spell is also dispelled) as soon as the two spells start interacting with each other?The spell description for each says that it counters and dispels. Adding +1 to -1 = zero. No effect.Counters isn't relevant, because it's not being used as a counterspell.
Dispels is an additional effect that removes an existing effect of the appropriate type. The rules specifically state that all bonuses an penalties apply as normal.
The spell descriptions are quite clear. A haste cast on a slowed character dispels the slow. A slow spell cast on a Hasted character dispels the haste. No saving throw is needed. think of the spells as interacting with each other and not the character. A spellcaster with a haste spell memorized (or available for Sorcerers etc) can use that spell to counterspell a slow spell and vice versa. I don't see what the arguement is about the spell descriptions are perfectly clear.
The spell descriptions are quite clear. A haste cast on a slowed character dispels the slow. A slow spell cast on a Hasted character dispels the haste. No saving throw is needed. think of the spells as interacting with each other and not the character. A spellcaster with a haste spell memorized (or available for Sorcerers etc) can use that spell to counterspell a slow spell and vice versa. I don't see what the arguement is about the spell descriptions are perfectly clear.Yes but could an already active haste spell dispel a slow spell that has just been cast on the hasten creature (while the haste spell is also dispelled) as soon as the two spells start interacting with each other?The spell description for each says that it counters and dispels. Adding +1 to -1 = zero. No effect.Counters isn't relevant, because it's not being used as a counterspell.
Dispels is an additional effect that removes an existing effect of the appropriate type. The rules specifically state that all bonuses an penalties apply as normal.
The argument is about if whether or not the effects of the second spell (ex: slow) still apply after dispelling the first spell (ex: haste). Almost everyone who posted on this thread seem to have a different interpretation of how opposite spells interact, so I don't think that the spell descriptions are as "quite" clear as you say. :P
I think that spells that dispel do that instead of the normal effect. So your slow just removes the dude's haste- it dispels, not overrides.
The argument is about if whether or not the effects of the second spell (ex: slow) still apply after dispelling the first spell (ex: haste). Almost everyone who posted on this thread seem to have a different interpretation of how opposite spells interact, so I don't think that the spell descriptions are as "quite" clear as you say. :PThe spell descriptions are quite clear. A haste cast on a slowed character dispels the slow. A slow spell cast on a Hasted character dispels the haste. No saving throw is needed. think of the spells as interacting with each other and not the character. A spellcaster with a haste spell memorized (or available for Sorcerers etc) can use that spell to counterspell a slow spell and vice versa. I don't see what the arguement is about the spell descriptions are perfectly clear.Yes but could an already active haste spell dispel a slow spell that has just been cast on the hasten creature (while the haste spell is also dispelled) as soon as the two spells start interacting with each other?The spell description for each says that it counters and dispels. Adding +1 to -1 = zero. No effect.Counters isn't relevant, because it's not being used as a counterspell.
Dispels is an additional effect that removes an existing effect of the appropriate type. The rules specifically state that all bonuses an penalties apply as normal.
First argument was probably too strong a word to use. That said the spells descriptions are quite clear. "Haste dispels and counters slow." This means the spells dispel each other. There is not later effect. Both spells are ended.
Slow counters and dispels haste and vice-versa. The "counters" part I understand, but I'm not sure about the "dispels" part. Does it mean that if I cast slow on a hasten creature, that creature will become slowed (on a failed save) or normal (on a successful save)? In other words, does the "dispels" part requires a failed saving throw? Can a hasten creature become slowed with a single casting of slow? Can a slowed creature become hasten with a single casting of haste?
For the time they are both active you're normal.
Slow counters and dispels haste and vice-versa. The "counters" part I understand, but I'm not sure about the "dispels" part. Does it mean that if I cast slow on a hasten creature, that creature will become slowed (on a failed save) or normal (on a successful save)? In other words, does the "dispels" part requires a failed saving throw? Can a hasten creature become slowed with a single casting of slow? Can a slowed creature become hasten with a single casting of haste?For the time they are both active you're normal.
I don't see how both haste and slow could be active at the same time, since one dispels the other.
*I marked the OP as a FAQ candidate, but I'm not expecting any response since opposite spells is part of the 3.0/3.5 legacy, and I don't think that the people at paizo know more about them than we do.
So if you are slowed, does activating your boots of speed for one round completely do away with the slow effect? Or does it negate it just for that round?
Just to add to the choir, i am torn about which of the two arguements is right. Personally i lean torwards the dispel and effect by taste.
Slow dispels haste and usually would still affect the creature with the slow effect but what I am not clear on is wether the already active haste spell would also dispel slow. I am inclined to believe they cancel eachother out, without a roll needed, on the targeted creatures.
FAQ'ed
Counter - To use a slow to counter haste, you'd have to have an action readied to do so. According to the Corerule Book pg 203
spell. Counterspelling works even if one spell is divine and the other arcane.
A spellcaster can use dispel magic to counterspell another spellcaster, but it doesn’t always work.
it would take haste, slow, dispel magic or greater dispel magic to counter haste (or slow).
Confusion arises from this piece:
spells negate or counter each other. This is a special effect that is noted in a spell’s description.
So, what does it mean to negate another spell?
Negate/Dispel - Treat the spell (slow in this example) like dispel magic. Roll a check to dispel the effect (1d20+caster level). If you succeed, your spell removes their spell. If you fail, their spell remains.
Slow dispels haste and usually would still affect the creature with the slow effect but what I am not clear on is wether the already active haste spell would also dispel slow. I am inclined to believe they cancel eachother out, without a roll needed, on the targeted creatures.
FAQ'ed
This is how I imagine it as well.
Slow (-1) + Haste (+1)= 0 (Normal).Whether that's the way the designers intended it to act or not remains to be seen, but I'm strongly inclined if only by years of playing it that way.
"Counters and dispels"
Slow can be used to dispel haste, without the normal caster level check required by a Dispel Magic. That's it, no further effects. If you cast Slow a second time, it is resolved like a normal casting of Slow.
|
|
Casting slow dispels haste. Then slow is in effect, and haste isn't, and thus can't dispel slow. Slow would have to be resolved before haste could act on it, but by that time, haste has already been dispelled.
Where is this order of operations detailed in the rules? Otherwise, this is just your interpretation.
If you're asking if a Slow spell OVERRIDES (I think this is the semantic context you seek) an existing Haste spell, the answer is no. Someone hasted and then slowed returns to normal speed. The spell description says "DISPEL and COUNTER" not override and linger for it's duration.
Since multiple slows and hastes do not stack, it stands to reason that a slow spell dispelling a haste spell would not linger. The description of "Dispel Magic" has an instantaneous effect. Meaning it's one and done. It's dispelling effect uses up the magic of the slow spell to negate the haste spell.
Also, there is a conundrum with the saving throw. You ARE casting Slow on a person or creature, NOT the spell or spell effects. In order to target spell effects, you'd have to cast Dispel Magic or similar.
To clarify, both Haste and Slow have "creature" under the TARGETS: block.
Therefore, their Spell Resistance would apply, AND their saving throw would also apply (Fort for Haste and Will for Slow), no matter if they are already under the opposite spell or not.
Personally I think it's just there so that your buddy spellcaster can cast haste again.
Like if a creature had slow and haste on them at the same time (and if it wasn't stated in the rules, they would both be affecting it), then no one could cast another slow or haste on em, because then it would be stacking like bonuses.
This way, at least that creature can receive another buff.
But it IS stated in the rules. The opposite spell, if it gets through the spell resistance and saving throw, is canceled.
You're not under the effect of both spells, you're under the effect of NO spells.
And, obviously, a second casting of haste or slow would take effect as normal, if it gets through spell resistance and saving throw.
But it IS stated in the rules. The opposite spell, if it gets through the spell resistance and saving throw, is canceled.Actually, the rules say that opposite spells have their full and normal effect.
Core Rulebook, pg. 209, SPELLS WITH OPPOSITE EFFECTS: "Some spells negate or counter each other. This is a special effect that is noted in a spell's description."
Core Rulebook, pg. 294, Last line of HASTE: "Haste dispels and counters Slow."
Core Rulebook, pg. 344, Last line of SLOW: "Slow counters and dispels Haste."
I believe these count as "noted in a spell's description" and therefore does not apply to the rest of the "Opposite Effects" paragraph RAW, yes?
"Spells with opposite effects apply normally..." and then "SOME spells negate or counter each other".
I can see your logic in that it doesn't specifically state that the negate/counter is IN PLACE OF the normal effects, but by your same logic, it also does not state that it's IN ADDITION TO.
The definition and context of negate or counter would imply that instead of applying their normal effects, they either NEGATE or COUNTER the effects of the opposite, relying on the specific spell description for more detail. So perhaps it's less RAW than RAI, and I amend my previous post.
|
Specifically when it says a a certain spell dispels another, shouldn't there be a dispel (caster level) check as per the dispel magic rules?
Otherwise, the effects stack in order.
There doesn't seem to be any rules prompting for effect suppression for duration (which seems like an interesting, if non-existent, interpretation).
I think the biggest issue here is defining our terms.
Where does page 209 say "instead of applying their normal effects"?
So in that case, if I ready an action to cast Dispel Magic to dispel a spell cast by an enemy caster, it ALSO acts as an area/targeted dispel?
Specifically when it says a a certain spell dispels another, shouldn't there be a dispel (caster level) check as per the dispel magic rules?.
No, dispel magic is a special case (although it's a case where the exception is more common than te rule). The "normal" case is that the dispel or counterspell just works. You dont need to make a caster level check to outer a spell with the same spell, for instance. Dispel magic is an exception to the normal rules in that you can use it to dispel anything (not just he same spell or a spell f the same school of equal or higher level), but you have to use a caster level check to get it to work.
Specifically when it says a a certain spell dispels another, shouldn't there be a dispel (caster level) check as per the dispel magic rules?
Otherwise, the effects stack in order.
There doesn't seem to be any rules prompting for effect suppression for duration (which seems like an interesting, if non-existent, interpretation).
I think the biggest issue here is defining our terms.
If a spell dispels another spell, no caster level check is required, because the spell description specifically states that the spell is dispelled. Dispel Magic, on the other hand, needs a caster level check to dispel an active spell on the target.
Where does page 209 say "instead of applying their normal effects"?So in that case, if I ready an action to cast Dispel Magic to dispel a spell cast by an enemy caster, it ALSO acts as an area/targeted dispel?
No because you use the spell to make a counterspell, which works in a different way.
No because you use the spell to make a counterspell, which works in a different way.Where does page 209 say "instead of applying their normal effects"?So in that case, if I ready an action to cast Dispel Magic to dispel a spell cast by an enemy caster, it ALSO acts as an area/targeted dispel?
Right. And what I'm saying is that using Haste to dispel Slow is using it in a different way from Slowing the opponent-it's dispelling the Haste.
Right. And what I'm saying is that using Haste to dispel Slow is using it in a different way from Slowing the opponent-it's dispelling the Haste.No because you use the spell to make a counterspell, which works in a different way.Where does page 209 say "instead of applying their normal effects"?So in that case, if I ready an action to cast Dispel Magic to dispel a spell cast by an enemy caster, it ALSO acts as an area/targeted dispel?
Let's say you are right. In this case, would a failed saving throw would be required for the "dispels" part to occur?
|
|
Specifically when it says a a certain spell dispels another, shouldn't there be a dispel (caster level) check as per the dispel magic rules?.No, dispel magic is a special case (although it's a case where the exception is more common than te rule). The "normal" case is that the dispel or counterspell just works.
I think you're right, but I'm having trouble finding the rules to prove otherwise. I may just have to rest the case on the semantics.
But I do think this makes for a compelling interpretation. Diseases, poison, and curses all need a caster level check to remove. Why not short term harmful spells? Shouldn't the more powerful caster's magical ability take precedence?