Suppose my bard casts invisibility on himself to stay behind and help turn the battlefield through support spells. Would casting dispel magic on an enemy that has just buffed themselves with Bull's Strength be considered a hostile action and end my invisibility?
For purposes of this spell, an attack includes any spell targeting a foe or whose area or effect includes a foe.
Suppose my bard casts invisibility on himself to stay behind and help turn the battlefield through support spells. Would casting dispel magic on an enemy that has just buffed themselves with Bull's Strength be considered a hostile action and end my invisibility?
Let's view Invisibility's clause regarding hostile actions:
For purposes of this spell, an attack includes any spell targeting a foe or whose area or effect includes a foe.
Is Dispel Magic a spell? Yes.
Is Dispel Magic targeting a foe? Yes.
Therefore, it breaks Invisibility.
Ah thanks. I sometimes miss some of the other spell descriptions. I just remembered hostile action.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
...
Wow, a politely handled and well explained question, with a straightforward answer, and a person politely accepting the answer.
Are you sure we're on the Internet?
Bump.
Semi-related question: Would it still break Invisibility if you failed the caster level check to actually dispel any effects?
Semi-related question: Would it still break Invisibility if you failed the caster level check to actually dispel any effects?
I believe so. Just because you cast a fireball on a rogue with improved evasion and he takes no damage doesn't mean you didn't target him, it just didn't work.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Semi-related question: Would it still break Invisibility if you failed the caster level check to actually dispel any effects?
For purposes of this spell, an attack includes any spell targeting a foe or whose area or effect includes a foe.
|
Here's a dumb question. Why would it necessarily force your invisibility to go down simply because you cast a spell to affect a general area? I'm not arguing what the rules say. I'm more curious as an "academic" discussion as to how magic might work. I just don't understand what one thing has to do with the other. Logically, I can comprehend a physical attack while invisible would make you visible to an opponent, but just waving your hands around and mumbling some words that happen to be a spell?
|
In the game world, it can be described as a combination of intent, perceived intent on the part of the target, potential effect on the target, and world awareness.
By the rules, if you cast grater dispel magic in a piece of the forest "because reasons" and in that area there is any creature that appears or can appear in the Bestiaries, as an example a squirrel, you lose your invibility spell, even if you had no hostile intention, weren't targeting the creature, weren't even aware of the creature existence, the creature had no active magical effect, and it didn't notice you casting the dispel.
On the other hand, if you summon a fox that will eat the squirrel you don't lose the invisibility, as you aren't targeting the squirrel or casting an area effect spell with the squirrel in it.
Rules wise, it is mostly to avoid the possibility to have a guy become undetectable thanks to a 2nd level spell and piling negative effects or removing positive effects. The developers have decided that doing that is the realm of 4th and above level spells.
Ooops, we are replying to a question asked 6 years ago. I thought that the necro was the question.