|
Line of Effect
A line of effect is a straight, unblocked path that indicates what a spell can affect. A line of effect is canceled by a solid barrier. It's like line of sight for ranged weapons, except that it's not blocked by fog, darkness, and other factors that limit normal sight.
You must have a clear line of effect to any target that you cast a spell on or to any space in which you wish to create an effect. You must have a clear line of effect to the point of origin of any spell you cast.
Emphasis is mine.
Range medium (100 ft. + 10 ft./level)
Target or Area: one spellcaster, creature, or objectYou 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.
.
I'm a caster, and I just saw another caster cast invisiblity, and I recongized the spell through the check. They may, or may not have moved after casting of the spell, but I can safely presume they did not get outside of dispel magic's range, 100ft+.
Is there anything, by RAW, preventing me from naming "invisibility" and "the caster" as my targets, and then attempting to dispel the invisibility?
By RAW, I do not need a line of sight to my target, only line of effect. Line of effect is not blocked by anything affecting vision, only by solid barriers. If the caster did not get behind an solid object, there should not be, by RAW, anything preventing me from dispelling the invisibility.
In effect: I have chosen my target, which by raw I do not need to see, and I have chosen the target spell by naming it, which I do not need to see either.
I don't think it would work. You still have to be able to somehow recognize your target at the time of casting. Either by scent or tremorsense or something else.
Otherwise what's to prevent you from doing this in a room where you only think there might be invisible critters around?
By RAW, I do not need a line of sight to my target, only line of effect.
That simply is untrue.
Dispel Magic would not work since you have to "target" the spellcaster. It seems like you are misunderstanding the rules behind the differences in line of sight and line of effect.Per RAW, Aiming a Spell:
Target or Targets: Some spells have a target or targets. You cast these spells on creatures or objects, as defined by the spell itself. You must be able to see or touch the target, and you must specifically choose that target. You do not have to select your target until you finish casting the spell.
Per RAW the Dispel Magic spell: You choose to use dispel magic in one of two ways: a targeted dispel or a counterspell. Targeted Dispel: One object, creature, or spell is the target of the dispel magic spell...
----
So, I don't know where you were getting that you didn't need line of sight. Simply put, unless you could use Dispel Magic as a counterspell at the time the Invisibility spell is being cast by the opponent on their turn, once they are invisible, it is too late for you, which given the example, is true since they are invisbile by the time you get your turn to cast Dispel Magic (unless you can detect them in some other fashion, like see invisibility, etc...)
In this scenario, what you would need to do is use a spell like Greater Dispel Magic. That allows you to use an additonal option to dispel...the area dispel option with the Greater Dispel Magic spell's 20-foot burst. Assuming the invisible opponent is in the area, you would possibly be able to dispel his invisibility effect since the Greater Dispel Magic is an area of effect in this case, not a targeted effect.
Of course, there may be other options too, like invisibility purge, see invisibility, true seeing, etc...
With your incorrect interpretation of simply being able to target the caster after the fact (even after he is invisible), it makes such other spell options as I mentioned above useless...and since they are in the game, logically, that cannot obviously be true. :)
Yes, you would need something like See Invisibility to see them, then you can target and dispel them easily for the rest of the group.
Detect Magic might work too, however it would take you 3 rounds to get a location and if he moves out of your cone, you have to start over. So might not be perfect.
If you have a rough idea where they are, catching them in a Glitterdust is easier than dispel. (And once that happened you should be able to target them for dispel too)
You could always ready an action to cast a targeted Dispel Magic on the first invisible creature that casts a spell. Casting requires the caster to be clear and audible with the verbal casting component, which is normally a DC 0 perception check. If you can pinpoint the invisible caster's square with a DC 0 perception, you'd have a 50% miss chance with an attack roll, which luckily Dispel Magic does not require.
Your DM might not like it, but per RAW I believe this would work.
EDIT: And Quatar is right, Glitterdust is generally the way to go, there's no Spell Resistance, no saving throw to outline the invisible guy, and if you find out about where the invis'ed guy is via him casting a verbal spell, it's a 20' diameter effect. It's a horseshoes & handgrenades argument, you only need to be close =)
Actually I think pinpointing a creature by sound only gives you the direction they're in, unless you're within 5 ft.
That's how I remember it anyway, can't find the rule on it right now though.
You could be right, but I don't think it's unreasonable that the guy boldly chanting magic garbly-goo words can't at least be narrowed down to a 10' radius. It would be different if he was 200' away, but within 60' I think it's a reasonable call.
Like I said I haven't looked at the RAW for perception on it, but it's not an unreasonable request to a GM.
But even a 10' radius doesn't mean being able to perceive your target for line-of-sight. You need a way to actually target unless, as pointed out above, you're using the AoE Greater Dispel Magic.
Glitterdust. It's good for what ails you. :)
|
|
Ah, my mistake, I was wrong as pointed out by Thrall of Orcus:
Target or Targets
Some spells have a target or targets. You cast these spells on creatures or objects, as defined by the spell itself. You must be able to see or touch the target, and you must specifically choose that target. You do not have to select your target until you finish casting the spell.
I had missed that part of the magic section. Reading only the entry of line of effect makes it seem like you wouldn't need a line of sight for the target, but that Target or Targets section makes it quite clear, imo.
Thanks for the answers!