This most recent session, I had a character hit a bar-lgura demon with blindness. The spell actually got past the demon's spell resistance and it failed its Will save, so I figured, sure, give them a small break.
Of course, the demon has dispel magic at will, so the next round I had it roll to try to dispel the blindness. You've never heard such an outcry from the player side of the table.
My reasoning goes like this: yes, it's a permanent effect, but unlike [ibestow curse[/i] or feeblemind or other such spells, there's nothing in the text that says it can't be affected by dispel magic. Therefore, it can. (Also, despite it being cast by a cleric, it's only a 2nd level sorcerer/wizard spell, and if a dispel can't pop it there's something awry.)
Nonetheless, I'd like the opinions of the boards to use in the disagreement.
Not entirely sure how to put this...
You are 100% correct.
The demon is using targeted dispel against an ongoing spell effect that it can specifically name (since it's blind). The Blindness/Deafness spell does not explicitly state that Dispel Magic doesn't work on it, so it is a completely valid use.
If Blindness/Deafness were instantaneous in duration your players would be right to cry out.
The text of Dispel Magic supports you.
You can also use a targeted dispel to specifically end one spell
affecting the target or one spell affecting an area (such as a wall of
fire). You must name the specific spell effect to be targeted in this
way. If your caster level check is equal to or higher than the DC of
that spell, it ends.
The demon targeted a specific spell. I understand why the players were upset, but what else would the demon do when he can dispel magic at will.
Actually, the full course of action is:
1. Creature rolls for Spellcraft (if it has at least 1 rank on it) as the enemy spell is being cast, then gets hit by it.
1 A. It recognizes it and thus knows how and if the problem can be solved. Or, in other words, if the effect can be dispelled.
1 B. It fails Spellcraft, or can't roll it at all for whatever reason: it has no means to know what it is for sure, but can try to dispel it anyway, especially if the spell limited it so much that trying to dispel is the best option, despite the risk that it is something that can't be dispelled normally.
2. If the spell's duration is anything different from instantaneous AND the spell doesn't specify that it can be removed only via Break Enchantment or other spells, AND, of course, the dispel roll is high enough, it's dispelled.
End of story. Players have nothing to rant about, that's an absolutely normal behavior.
Interesting. I'd never noticed the duration of blindness/deafness is "Permanent (D)". That means it's an ongoing spell, not an instantaneous effect. Even the original caster can dismiss it as a standard action any time they want to. I don't see any reason why it couldn't be dispelled.
Is Bar-Lgura one of those WotC ip monsters that they can't put in Pathfinder?
Is Bar-Lgura one of those WotC ip monsters that they can't put in Pathfinder?
Yup. It's from the Savage Tide adventure path.
Do remember, though, that the blind demon needs to make a check, because of being blind, to actually successfully use the spell-like effect.
Hmmm. That's a new one on me.
http://www.d20pfsrd.com/gamemastering/conditions#TOC-Blinded
Blinded:
The creature cannot see. It takes a –2 penalty to Armor Class, loses its Dexterity bonus to AC (if any), and takes a –4 penalty on most Strength- and Dexterity-based skill checks and on opposed Perception skill checks. All checks and activities that rely on vision (such as reading and Perception checks based on sight) automatically fail. All opponents are considered to have total concealment (50% miss chance) against the blinded character. Blind creatures must make a DC 10 Acrobatics skill check to move faster than half speed. Creatures that fail this check fall prone. Characters who remain blinded for a long time grow accustomed to these drawbacks and can overcome some of them.
And nothing under Spell-Like Abilities seems to say anything similar. Do you have a reference to support that?
|
You did the right thing for your demon. The players unfortunately cast a spell on a creature who had the means and will to counter them. This is a fantastic turn of events. How did the battle turn out? I hope it was an epic battle of spells and sword with the players barely eeking out a victory against the evil of the world.
This most recent session, I had a character hit a bar-lgura demon with blindness. The spell actually got past the demon's spell resistance and it failed its Will save, so I figured, sure, give them a small break.
Of course, the demon has dispel magic at will, so the next round I had it roll to try to dispel the blindness. You've never heard such an outcry from the player side of the table.
My reasoning goes like this: yes, it's a permanent effect, but unlike [ibestow curse[/i] or feeblemind or other such spells, there's nothing in the text that says it can't be affected by dispel magic. Therefore, it can. (Also, despite it being cast by a cleric, it's only a 2nd level sorcerer/wizard spell, and if a dispel can't pop it there's something awry.)
Nonetheless, I'd like the opinions of the boards to use in the disagreement.
I don't know if dispel magic can end permanent effects. If it could then why would people use the greater restoration spell instead of dispel magic once they became permanent?
edit:Restoration and great restoration both cost money, and have a long casting time. It is cheaper, and faster to spam dispel magic, so there would really be no reason to use those spells.
|
|
This most recent session, I had a character hit a bar-lgura demon with blindness. The spell actually got past the demon's spell resistance and it failed its Will save, so I figured, sure, give them a small break.
Of course, the demon has dispel magic at will, so the next round I had it roll to try to dispel the blindness. You've never heard such an outcry from the player side of the table.
My reasoning goes like this: yes, it's a permanent effect, but unlike [ibestow curse[/i] or feeblemind or other such spells, there's nothing in the text that says it can't be affected by dispel magic. Therefore, it can. (Also, despite it being cast by a cleric, it's only a 2nd level sorcerer/wizard spell, and if a dispel can't pop it there's something awry.)
Nonetheless, I'd like the opinions of the boards to use in the disagreement.
I don't know if dispel magic can end permanent effects. If it could then why would people use the greater restoration spell instead of dispel magic once they became permanent?
Wraithstrike, the spell is dismissible. Does this not mean you can dispel it too? It would be good to know if it ever happens in my game.
I could be confusing blind with deaf, I know that one of them imposes a check to cast a spell when under its affects.
Being deaf imposes a chance to fail. I think it is 20%.
Permanent: The energy remains as long as the effect does. This means the spell is vulnerable to dispel magic.
Wraithstrike, the spell is dismissible. Does this not mean you can dispel it too? It would be good to know if it ever happens in my game.This most recent session, I had a character hit a bar-lgura demon with blindness. The spell actually got past the demon's spell resistance and it failed its Will save, so I figured, sure, give them a small break.
Of course, the demon has dispel magic at will, so the next round I had it roll to try to dispel the blindness. You've never heard such an outcry from the player side of the table.
My reasoning goes like this: yes, it's a permanent effect, but unlike [ibestow curse[/i] or feeblemind or other such spells, there's nothing in the text that says it can't be affected by dispel magic. Therefore, it can. (Also, despite it being cast by a cleric, it's only a 2nd level sorcerer/wizard spell, and if a dispel can't pop it there's something awry.)
Nonetheless, I'd like the opinions of the boards to use in the disagreement.
I don't know if dispel magic can end permanent effects. If it could then why would people use the greater restoration spell instead of dispel magic once they became permanent?
Being dismissable has nothing to do with being dispelled. Being dismissable just means the caster can end the spell if he wishes. Able to be dispelled means another caster can use his magical power to overcome the spell.
Permanent: The energy remains as long as the effect does. This means the spell is vulnerable to dispel magic.
Nice find. I think restoration just took a back seat to dispel magic then. :)
That is 1000 or 5000 gp I won't be spending, and it comes at a great time since I am about to be making a cleric soon.
Question and I hope this isn't silly but. Dispelled magic has a target of one target creature etc. It isn't a touch spell. Is there a reason let that says it can always target itself even if blind? Otherwise the demon cannot target something it cannot see.
You must be able to see or touch the target...
I'm pretty sure it can touch itself.
Ahem.
Permanent: The energy remains as long as the effect does. This means the spell is vulnerable to dispel magic.Nice find. I think restoration just took a back seat to dispel magic then. :)
That is 1000 or 5000 gp I won't be spending, and it comes at a great time since I am about to be making a cleric soon.
Well, restoration usually gets used in my campaign to counteract things like disease (mummy rot FTW!) or a shadow's STR drain. Both of those are supernatural abilities, rather than spell-like abilities, and so can't be dispelled. Restoration is definitely the cure for things like that.
I know it can do other things, but its most expensive use is removing negative levels. Even if trying to dispel a higher level caster, which might take more than one attempt, I find that to be better than dropping 1000 or 5000 gp if someone fails a save.
PS:For anyone reading this negative levels from things like vampires can not be dispelled so you still need the spell for that.
Is Bar-Lgura one of those WotC ip monsters that they can't put in Pathfinder?Yup. It's from the Savage Tide adventure path.
That sucks. I <3 Barlgura.
I can live without mind flayers and beholders easier then this ape.
I know it can do other things, but its most expensive use is removing negative levels. Even if trying to dispel a higher level caster, which might take more than one attempt, I find that to be better than dropping 1000 or 5000 gp if someone fails a save.
PS:For anyone reading this negative levels from things like vampires can not be dispelled so you still need the spell for that.
Enervate and Energy Drain have a duration of instantaneous, so they can't be targeted by dispel magic. What other negative level effects were you thinking of Wraithstrike?
Enervate and Energy Drain have a duration of instantaneous, so they can't be targeted by dispel magic. What other negative level effects were you thinking of Wraithstrike?I know it can do other things, but its most expensive use is removing negative levels. Even if trying to dispel a higher level caster, which might take more than one attempt, I find that to be better than dropping 1000 or 5000 gp if someone fails a save.
PS:For anyone reading this negative levels from things like vampires can not be dispelled so you still need the spell for that.
The spell text has a duration, and I skipped over the duration section. I guess they did it that way to block dispel magic. They did the same thing with Flesh to Stone also. I guess I am back to paying for restoration.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So are there blind and/or deaf effects that dispel magic doesn't cover?
The spell Blindness/Deafness is removable by Dispel magic. so is Power Word Blind.
Then you have something like the Shining Child (from BS2) which says:
Blinding Light (Ex) A shining child can radiate a 60-foot-radius aura of blinding light as a free action. Creatures within the affected area must succeed on a DC 25 Fortitude save or be permanently blinded. A creature that successfully saves cannot be affected again by the same shining child's aura for 24 hours. The save is Constitution-based.
Would that make it instantaneous?- and thus require the specific spell or woudl that make it merely "permament" requiring nothing but a dispel magic? (presumably vs CL 12 since thats what the rest of its abilities are based on).
-S
|
|
So are there blind and/or deaf effects that dispel magic doesn't cover?
The spell Blindness/Deafness is removable by Dispel magic. so is Power Word Blind.
Then you have something like the Shining Child (from BS2) which says:
Blinding Light (Ex) A shining child can radiate a 60-foot-radius aura of blinding light as a free action. Creatures within the affected area must succeed on a DC 25 Fortitude save or be permanently blinded. A creature that successfully saves cannot be affected again by the same shining child's aura for 24 hours. The save is Constitution-based.Would that make it instantaneous?- and thus require the specific spell or woudl that make it merely "permament" requiring nothing but a dispel magic? (presumably vs CL 12 since thats what the rest of its abilities are based on).
-S
It's Extraordinary, so not a spell or even magical.