I always go by the highest level spell first also, even though it is not in the rules.
I object, because you can target a specific spell if you want to. Letting dispel magic target every spell on a character is a little too strong. But currently, yes it's a crap shoot.
However, if you wanted to institute the rule as highest spell level instead of caster level I would totally be in support of that.
You could even go:
Spell level
Caster level
Random (if two or more spells are same spell level and same caster level)
I object, because you can target a specific spell if you want to. Letting dispel magic target every spell on a character is a little too strong. But currently, yes it's a crap shoot.
However, if you wanted to institute the rule as highest spell level instead of caster level I would totally be in support of that.
You could even go:
Spell level
Caster level
Random (if two or more spells are same spell level and same caster level)
The OP was not using it to target a certain spell. It was just a general targeted dispel magic without a certain spell in mind.
Most spells are going to be at the same level anyway, and dispel magic only stops one spell, unlike greater dispel magic.
If all of the spells are of the same level then I tend to go for the shortest duration since they are normally better than longer duration spells of the same level.
If the duration is the same then alphabetical order then it is random.
I object, because you can target a specific spell if you want to. Letting dispel magic target every spell on a character is a little too strong. But currently, yes it's a crap shoot.
However, if you wanted to institute the rule as highest spell level instead of caster level I would totally be in support of that.
You could even go:
Spell level
Caster level
Random (if two or more spells are same spell level and same caster level)The OP was not using it to target a certain spell. It was just a general targeted dispel magic without a certain spell in mind.
Most spells are going to be at the same level anyway, and dispel magic only stops one spell, unlike greater dispel magic.
If all of the spells are of the same level then I tend to go for the shortest duration since they are normally better than longer duration spells of the same level.
If the duration is the same then alphabetical order then it is random.
Right...I was saying you can use it to target a specific spell. So, if the issue is the guy is hiding behind 9 arcane marks, you can still specifically target his haste effect instead.
In any event, your post does actually offer even better criteria though:
Spell level (likely to be different)
Caster level (likely to be the same if self cast, lower if from items)
Duration - Shorter duration spells first
Random
|
PRD: "You can cast a spell at a lower caster level than normal, but the caster level you choose must be high enough for you to cast the spell in question, and all level-dependent features must be based on the same caster level.".
Often this doesn't make any material difference to the effect other than duration. Therefore it might be useful to cast your must have effects at lower caster level than your Arcane Mark.
If you have access to Heighten it is also worth casting Arcane Mark at a higher caster level.
Aside: I have been looking for good uses for the "can cast lower" rule for some time. I had only found a couple of specific uses before (cast Create Pit at a lower level than Haste; cast Infernal Healing at caster level 1).
PRD: "You can cast a spell at a lower caster level than normal, but the caster level you choose must be high enough for you to cast the spell in question, and all level-dependent features must be based on the same caster level.".
We're aware of the rule. That is what creates the problem.
The fact that you can voluntarily lower the caster level of higher levels spells below that of spells like arcane, to protect them from dispel magic is...quite frankly b!%+~@*@. Mostly because of how the rules for dispel magic are written.
We are proposing that instead of using caster level to determine the order in which spells are dispelled, you use highest spell level, then caster level, then duration to determine the order.
This is because higher level spells are more beneficial, higher caster level spells are more beneficial, and shorter duration spells are usually more beneficial. If a caster wants to protect their best buffs from being dispelled it should cost more than a 0 level at will spell. They should have to sacrifice something else. In this case, you could heighten arcane mark into a 9th level spell to protect your other spells that are less than 9th. But you would be using a 9th level spell to protect them. And that aint cheap.
PRD: "You can cast a spell at a lower caster level than normal, but the caster level you choose must be high enough for you to cast the spell in question, and all level-dependent features must be based on the same caster level.".We're aware of the rule. That is what creates the problem.
The fact that you can voluntarily lower the caster level of higher levels spells below that of spells like arcane, to protect them from dispel magic is...quite frankly b%+@%~*+. Mostly because of how the rules for dispel magic are written.
We are proposing that instead of using caster level to determine the order in which spells are dispelled, you use highest spell level, then caster level, then duration to determine the order.
This is because higher level spells are more beneficial, higher caster level spells are more beneficial, and shorter duration spells are usually more beneficial. If a caster wants to protect their best buffs from being dispelled it should cost more than a 0 level at will spell. They should have to sacrifice something else. In this case, you could heighten arcane mark into a 9th level spell to protect your other spells that are less than 9th. But you would be using a 9th level spell to protect them. And that aint cheap.
It's completely free. Arcane Mark is permanent, you could spend months casting arcane Mark heightened to 9th level on a bag of feathers. You could even have spell specialization arcane Mark to push it 2 CL above your other spells. You just have to accept that smart players can do smart things and sometimes you need to talk to them rather than change a rule.
False, arcane mark fades on a person after a month. And dispel cast on a person doesn't affect their equipment, so a permanent mark on an item wouldn't help.
You are right that they could spend 9th level spell slots casting several 9th level arcane marks, but then they don't have access to those spells on the days they cast them. Sure, it does have a long duration. But if you don't give your players lots of downtime then they wont accumulate such defenses. Or they will be spending spell slots regularly to do so.
And, more importantly something I just noticed...Arcane Mark can't be dispelled. So, dispel magic will completely ignore it. So, it's actually even better if they spend all their time casting Heightened 9th level Arcane Marks, because they wont defend against dispel magic at all.
Now, there might be another spell that would have a suitable long duration to do this with, but still they're going to be spending higher level spell slots to protect their other spells. And that's exactly what I want them to do.
Attended objects count as the creature for targeted effects.
Just put arcane locks on a bag full of zippers.
I'm not sure if you actually meant arcane lock or not. By my reading, you couldn't put arcane lock on zippers. If you meant arcane mark it still doesn't work because AM cannot be dispelled.
Also, according to dispel magic targeted dispel rules creatures and objects are targeted separately. If you perform an area dispel magical items are not affected.