Does a dispel aimed at one target of a spell hit all targets?

[TuggyNE]

Suppose a multi-target spell with a duration (prayer, say) is active on several characters, and one of them is targeted by dispel magic and the check against that spell succeeds. Is the entire spell ended for all recipients?

I'd like RAW answers as well as possibly RACSD.

[Namfuak]

Based on the reading of an area dispel, it seems like area spells are considered to be a single spell with a point of origin on the spellcaster (so targeting others affected would not work). Just looking at Mass Cat's Grace, the text is:


This spell functions like cat’s grace, except that it affects multiple creatures.

This points to one spell being in effect rather than a spell casting multiple spells on other people. If it were meant to be like that, it should read "This spell casts Cat's Grace on x creatures."

[El Dorado]

The answer depends on how the caster of dispel magic chose to deploy the spell. If the caster used a targeted dispel against a single character, then the spell ends only for that one character. If the caster implemented an area dispel, then the dispel has the opportunity to affect multiple targets in the area of effect.

[Flickerdart]

A spell that affects multiple targets is just that; it doesn't create a separate instance of the spell for every target.

[TuggyNE]

The answer depends on how the caster of dispel magic chose to deploy the spell. If the caster used a targeted dispel against a single character, then the spell ends only for that one character. If the caster implemented an area dispel, then the dispel has the opportunity to affect multiple targets in the area of effect.

That's what I would think, but I'm not sure that's what the rules say. (Also, I did say it was a targeted dispel, didn't I?)


A spell that affects multiple targets is just that; it doesn't create a separate instance of the spell for every target.

I hate to be picky, but could you break down the reasoning for me in more detail? (One of the reasons this puzzles me is that it indicates that casting let's say mass bear's endurance, and then plane shifting each of those affected to a different plane, and then dispelling one of them, will affect each of them despite being so far apart.)

Fakeedit: And, of course, I undermine my argument by accidentally running across animal shapes, which specifically mentions that the caster may dismiss the entire spell for all affected, or individuals may end their own portion. So, OK, despite having a small area to target allies in, the spell is capable of maintaining the link once established across any distance.

[Flickerdart]

I hate to be picky, but could you break down the reasoning for me in more detail? (One of the reasons this puzzles me is that it indicates that casting let's say mass bear's endurance, and then plane shifting each of those affected to a different plane, and then dispelling one of them, will affect each of them despite being so far apart.)

You can use dispel magic to end ongoing spells that have been cast on a creature or object...
Thus, dispel magic ends spells that have been cast on a creature. But what does that mean?


You must make some choice about whom the spell is to affect or where the effect is to originate, depending on the type of spell...
Thus, casting a spell on a creature means including a creature as a target of the spell. Thus, dispel magic ends a spell that includes the target of the dispel as its target. If it only ended it for that creature, it would use language such as "removes an ongoing effect on the target from a spell etc etc". As written, however, it simply checks whether its target is targeted by a spell, and then axes that spell.

Furthermore, the entry for targeted spells reads:

Some spells have a target or targets. You cast these spells on creatures or objects, as defined by the spell itself.
This further supports that a spell with multiple target is, indeed, a single spell, and not many different spells cast at the same time.

[Deophaun]

I think Flickerdart has RAW correct, as Dispel Magic does seem to be careful about where it uses the term "spell" and where it uses the term "effect." Doesn't mean that I play by RAW in this manner, as it makes certain spells decidedly weaker. Did you include a lot of targets with Haste? Well, that caster just hit your party with an area dispel, so it gets to roll five times against your spell! And if it does dispel, it can then move down to getting rid of the Cleric's bless for the whole party before getting a shot at the Druid's barkskin. To me, RACSD would be much closer to targeting an AoE effect off-center: you end all effects on that character, and only that character.

[Diarmuid]

I've been very intrigued with this question since I saw it posted the other day and am a little sad that the discussion seems to have died out.

I think that strictly RAW speaking, i see the "dispel a spell, all targets of that spell lose its benefits" angle.

That having been said, is that how most people would actually play at their table? I'm pretty sure, even though RAW seems pretty clear, that my group is happy treating each person's individual "spells active" list as it's own individual pool of effects that would need to be dealt with.

So do most people play it RAW or play it more RAI?

[Namfuak]

I've been very intrigued with this question since I saw it posted the other day and am a little sad that the discussion seems to have died out.

I think that strictly RAW speaking, i see the "dispel a spell, all targets of that spell lose its benefits" angle.

That having been said, is that how most people would actually play at their table? I'm pretty sure, even though RAW seems pretty clear, that my group is happy treating each person's individual "spells active" list as it's own individual pool of effects that would need to be dealt with.

So do most people play it RAW or play it more RAI?

Saying your interpretation is "RAI" is a bit misleading, you should probably say "Houseruled." Anyway, using the cat's grace example from before, if we play with your way, a caster can cast cat's grace mass once, and as the enemy dispels it use a second level slot to put it back on the person. Unless your group bunches up for a mass dispel (and that mass dispel even works), you are effectively always in front of the enemy in terms of action economy, and thus the expenditure of resources is probably not justified by the actual effect (even at 5th level against other 3rd level spells like haste, which can literally just be recast every two turns and waste two of your enemy spellcaster's turns). When the dispel dispels everyone with the spell, it becomes much more useful. Although this sounds powerful, having to prepare a third level slot to specifically try (not always exceed, mind you) to dispel other effects seems like a fair tradeoff, and ought to actually be effective.

[Deophaun]

Unless your group bunches up for a mass dispel (and that mass dispel even works), you are effectively always in front of the enemy in terms of action economy, and thus the expenditure of resources is probably not justified by the actual effect
If you're using dispel to undo a single spell, it better be one heck of a spell. Even if you go with RAW, it's still a tremendous waste of your turn, as all you are doing is erasing, at most, one round of enemy progress. In either case, dispel magic is only effective in the action economy if you are looking to get rid of multiple effects, and both the targeted and area "RACSD" versions perform admirably here.

Also arcane turmoil is all sorts of awesome by RAW. You mean that I get a targeted dispel at level 2, AND targeted dispels can take out buffs on a whole party, AND I get to force a will save against a caster? Well, forget dispel magic, then!

[Diarmuid]

I see your points, but I wonder how this example would work in your game.

Player A : Haste, Bull's Strength, Prot Evil, Bless
Player B : Haste, Mirror Image, Resist Energy, Bless
Player C : Haste, Cat's Grace, Shield Other, Bless
Player D : Haste, Entropic Shield, Shield Other, Bless

The Haste and Bless are the same spell effecting all the PC's, the Shield Other is shared between Player C and D.

If they were all hit with an AoE Dispel Magic, what would happen if the first roll vs Player A succeeds, what spell is targeted on Player B?

In theory, the Dispel is instantaneous and should target the highest level spell on all targets simultaneously. Would the first rolls all go against Haste since it's the highest level spell any of them have?

If multiple rolls succeed, are the extras wasted? I dont think resolving A's dispel vs Haste first and removing it as a Dispel target for the others seems fair.

[Psyren]

A successful dispel, whether area or targeted, should only affect creatures caught in the range of that dispel. Dispelling Haste on a fighter should not end it for every other party member even if they weren't in the dispel's area.

[Namfuak]

I see your points, but I wonder how this example would work in your game.

Player A : Haste, Bull's Strength, Prot Evil, Bless
Player B : Haste, Mirror Image, Resist Energy, Bless
Player C : Haste, Cat's Grace, Shield Other, Bless
Player D : Haste, Entropic Shield, Shield Other, Bless

The Haste and Bless are the same spell effecting all the PC's, the Shield Other is shared between Player C and D.

If they were all hit with an AoE Dispel Magic, what would happen if the first roll vs Player A succeeds, what spell is targeted on Player B?

In theory, the Dispel is instantaneous and should target the highest level spell on all targets simultaneously. Would the first rolls all go against Haste since it's the highest level spell any of them have?

If multiple rolls succeed, are the extras wasted? I dont think resolving A's dispel vs Haste first and removing it as a Dispel target for the others seems fair.

In my reading, it doesn't work like that. Let's pretend player D cast everything but Bless, and player A cast bless (just trying to figure what classes each player is most likely by their buffs, could be wrong). Now, note where it says "For each area spell whose point of origin is within the dispel...". The point of origin of haste and bless are the spellcasters, NOT those affected by the spell. By strict reading it would seem this means you get to make a check against the spell based on those who are affected as well, but I would probably rule you only get one dispel attempt against that spell since I dislike effects that "double-dip" (there is an argument to be made that this is RAW, due to the fact that this rule comes after the general rule of spells that affect creatures and specific trumps general, but for now I'll concede it is a contested issue). If the spellcaster was not in range of the dispel, but one person who was affected was, that rule is covered in the next section of the spell pretty clearly.

This means that this situation would resolve as such:

Player A: Dispel check is rolled first against bull's strength, and then prot evil
Player B: Dispel check is rolled first against Mirror image, then resist energy
Player C: Dispel check is rolled against Cat's Grace or Shield Other (however you adjudicate dispelling two spells of the same strength), and then the other.
Player D: Dispel check is rolled against Entropic Shield
Misc: Separate checks are made against Bless and Haste.




A successful dispel, whether area or targeted, should only affect creatures caught in the range of that dispel. Dispelling Haste on a fighter should not end it for every other party member even if they weren't in the dispel's area.



For each ongoing spell whose area overlaps that of the dispel magic spell, you can make a dispel check to end the effect, but only within the overlapping area.

[Talderas]

Saying your interpretation is "RAI" is a bit misleading, you should probably say "Houseruled."

Doubtful. That dispel magic dispels effects and not spells is hardly a houserule. It requires a strict reading of portions of dispel magic to arrive at that conclusion. Once you expand out to other lines, it's quite clear that RAI is that dispel magic affects effects only on targets that it affects.

From the PHB glossary.

"dispel check: A roll of 1d20 + caster level of the character making the attempt to dispel (usually used with dispel magic). The DC is 11 plus the level of the spellcaster who initiated the effect being dispelled." While Dispel Magic may use the terminology spell, the definition of a dispel check explicitly states that it is made against an effect.

"spell: A one time magical effect." A spell is a magic effect and a magical effect is a spell.

Looking at the example text in dispel magic for a targeted effect. "Mialee makes a dispel check (1d20 + 5 against DC 18) three times, once each for the haste, mage armor, and bull's strength effects."

Looking at the text for an area dispel magic. "For each ongoing area or effect spell whose point of origin is within the area of the dispel magic, you can make a dispel check to dispel the spell." Multi-target spells do not have a point of origin. "For each ongoing spell whose area overlaps that of the dispel magic spell, you can make a dispel check to end the effect, but only within the overlapping area." So if I have a 20ft radius effect and you cast dispel magic with its point of origin 15ft away from my point of origin (center of the effect), only the parts of the spell that overlap are dispelled. In essence, you carve out a portion of the effect.

Looking at the text of Mordekainen's Disjunction and one sees that "All magic effects and magical items within the radius of the spell, except for those that you carry or touch, are disjoined. That is, spells and spell-like effects are separated into their individual components (ending the effect as a dispel magic spell does)" it implies that dispel magic removes effects and not the spells themselves.

Looking at the text for Dispel Magic, Greater. "Additionally, greater dispel magic has a chance to dispel any effect that remove curse can remove, even if dispel magic can't dispel that effect." Another reference to dispel magic removing effects.

There is two ways to consider this. Either a spell with multiple targets creates a copy of itself on each creature or the spell itself is omnipresent and continually affects all its targets.

Dispel magic has 4 valid targets. One creature. One spell. One object. 20ft radius. If two creatures with the benefit of haste are 50ft apart, there is no way to cast dispel magic that will affect both creatures. If targeting the first creature with dispel magic successfully dispels haste and causes the second creature to lose the benefits then you have created a bit of a paradox where an ineligible target received the effects.

On the other hand, if a spell is omnipresent and affects multiple creatures then targeting a creature is not targeting the spell since only the effect is present on the targeted creature and consequently the spell itself is not an eligible target for the dispel check unless you declare that the target is the spell itself. In that case, the dispel check would end the effect on all creatures targeted by that spell.

[Deophaun]

INow, note where it says "For each area spell whose point of origin is within the dispel...".
Now note where it says "For each area spell whose point of origin is within the dispel..." Haste has targets, not an area. And the origin is dictated in the area entry, so haste has no point of origin. Bless is, well, a mess in this regard, but it does trip the area requirement.

[Talderas]

Now note where it says "For each area spell whose point of origin is within the dispel..." Haste has targets, not an area. And the origin is dictated in the area entry, so haste has no point of origin. Bless is, well, a mess in this regard, but it does trip the area requirement.

It's a burst spell so the point of origin is the position of the caster when it is cast. To actually area dispel it entirely would require you to drop dispel magic as an AoE that cover the square the caster cast from. However, if that were how it actually functioned, then any ally that moved more than 50ft from the point of origin would cease to receive its benefits since they are no longer within the area of effect. However, if ally's retain the benefit when they move more than 50ft away then the spell does not have an active area of effect and an AoE dispel would not end the effect since there is no longer a point of origin.

[Namfuak]

Sorry, I made a mistake when I quoted the area spell part. The full quote is:


For each ongoing area or effect spell whose point of origin is within the area of the dispel magic spell, you can make a dispel check to dispel the spell.

This seems to me to mean that something like haste is still dispelled along the lines that I set in my post, since no one is arguing that it doesn't cause an effect. The word "or" is the same in the PHB, so it probably isn't a typo (IE, supposed to be "of"). Based on Point of Origin's definition in the PHB glossary, it would seem that it is based on where the spell is originally cast. Thus, unless the original point haste was cast from is in range of the dispel, haste is not a valid target for said dispel (assuming we are talking about an area dispel rather than a targeted one).

[Talderas]

This seems to me to mean that something like haste is still dispelled along the lines that I set in my post, since no one is arguing that it doesn't cause an effect. The word "or" is the same in the PHB, so it probably isn't a typo (IE, supposed to be "of"). Based on Point of Origin's definition in the PHB glossary, it would seem that it is based on where the spell is originally cast. Thus, unless the original point haste was cast from is in range of the dispel, haste is not a valid target for said dispel (assuming we are talking about an area dispel rather than a targeted one).

To have a point of origin the spell must be an area affect spell and not a direct target spell. All area spells have a point of origin. A spell which affects targets which need to be within X ft of each other is not an area spell. A spell which affects up to X targets within 50ft is an area spell with a point of origin.

Haste can only be affected by dispel magic in an area if it's the highest level spell on an eligible target within the AoE of dispel magic.

[Curmudgeon]

I think that strictly RAW speaking, i see the "dispel a spell, all targets of that spell lose its benefits" angle.

That having been said, is that how most people would actually play at their table?
Sure. What's the problem? Magic is already too powerful in the game, and maintaining most of the benefits of a spell after it's supposedly been knocked down certainly exacerbates that issue. Deviating from the rules here is a really bad idea.

[Deophaun]

It's a burst spell so the point of origin is the position of the caster when it is cast. To actually area dispel it entirely would require you to drop dispel magic as an AoE that cover the square the caster cast from. However, if that were how it actually functioned, then any ally that moved more than 50ft from the point of origin would cease to receive its benefits since they are no longer within the area of effect. However, if ally's retain the benefit when they move more than 50ft away then the spell does not have an active area of effect and an AoE dispel would not end the effect since there is no longer a point of origin.
And now you see why I said bless was a mess :smallbiggrin: I cannot fathom why they made that spell that way.

This seems to me to mean that something like haste is still dispelled along the lines that I set in my post, since no one is arguing that it doesn't cause an effect.
I am arguing that it does not have a point of origin. It has targets, that's it. Fog cloud has a point of origin. Dominate monster does not. Darkness has a point of origin. Resist Energy does not (single or mass version).

[Namfuak]

I am arguing that it does not have a point of origin. It has targets, that's it. Fog cloud has a point of origin. Dominate monster does not. Darkness has a point of origin. Resist Energy does not (single or mass version).



...effect spell whose point of origin...

If you want to call that dysfunctional I'm right behind you, since I think logically you are right. Unfortunately dispel magic seems to disagree.

[Deophaun]

If you want to call that dysfunctional I'm right behind you, since I think logically you are right. Unfortunately dispel magic seems to disagree.
But haste doesn't have an area or an effect. It has targets only. Antiplant shell has an area. Leomund's secure shelter has an effect. Gaseous form has a target. Hallow has an area. Flaming Sphere has an effect. Invisibility has a target.

Edit: I also don't think all effect spells have a point of origin. Stinking cloud clearly does, but a wall of force?

[TuggyNE]

I think Flickerdart has RAW correct, as Dispel Magic does seem to be careful about where it uses the term "spell" and where it uses the term "effect." Doesn't mean that I play by RAW in this manner, as it makes certain spells decidedly weaker. Did you include a lot of targets with Haste? Well, that caster just hit your party with an area dispel, so it gets to roll five times against your spell! And if it does dispel, it can then move down to getting rid of the Cleric's bless for the whole party before getting a shot at the Druid's barkskin. To me, RACSD would be much closer to targeting an AoE effect off-center: you end all effects on that character, and only that character.


I think that strictly RAW speaking, i see the "dispel a spell, all targets of that spell lose its benefits" angle.

That having been said, is that how most people would actually play at their table? I'm pretty sure, even though RAW seems pretty clear, that my group is happy treating each person's individual "spells active" list as it's own individual pool of effects that would need to be dealt with.


A successful dispel, whether area or targeted, should only affect creatures caught in the range of that dispel. Dispelling Haste on a fighter should not end it for every other party member even if they weren't in the dispel's area.

These two posts mostly summarize what I'm starting to lean towards, despite the apparent argument against it by RAW.


Anyway, using the cat's grace example from before, if we play with your way, a caster can cast cat's grace mass once, and as the enemy dispels it use a second level slot to put it back on the person. Unless your group bunches up for a mass dispel (and that mass dispel even works), you are effectively always in front of the enemy in terms of action economy, and thus the expenditure of resources is probably not justified by the actual effect (even at 5th level against other 3rd level spells like haste, which can literally just be recast every two turns and waste two of your enemy spellcaster's turns). When the dispel dispels everyone with the spell, it becomes much more useful. Although this sounds powerful, having to prepare a third level slot to specifically try (not always exceed, mind you) to dispel other effects seems like a fair tradeoff, and ought to actually be effective.

On the other hand, being able to dispel half a dozen or more mass buffs on all their targets with a single targeted dispel puts the advantage pretty far the other way.

Let's summarize the different situations:
{table=head]Interpretation|Spell Affected|Targeted|Area
Spell|Mass|All targets, up to all spells|Up to all targets, up to all spells
Effect|Mass|Target, up to all spells|Up to all targets, one spell
Spell|Single|Target, up to all spells|Up to all targets, one spell
Effect|Single|Target, up to all spells|Up to all targets, one spell[/table]


Also arcane turmoil is all sorts of awesome by RAW. You mean that I get a targeted dispel at level 2, AND targeted dispels can take out buffs on a whole party, AND I get to force a will save against a caster? Well, forget dispel magic, then!

You do have to wonder why area dispel would be a thing in that case, since it's strictly inferior (hits fewer total spells).


On the other hand, if a spell is omnipresent and affects multiple creatures then targeting a creature is not targeting the spell since only the effect is present on the targeted creature and consequently the spell itself is not an eligible target for the dispel check unless you declare that the target is the spell itself. In that case, the dispel check would end the effect on all creatures targeted by that spell.

Not sure I understand this bit at all.


It's a burst spell so the point of origin is the position of the caster when it is cast. To actually area dispel it entirely would require you to drop dispel magic as an AoE that cover the square the caster cast from. However, if that were how it actually functioned, then any ally that moved more than 50ft from the point of origin would cease to receive its benefits since they are no longer within the area of effect. However, if ally's retain the benefit when they move more than 50ft away then the spell does not have an active area of effect and an AoE dispel would not end the effect since there is no longer a point of origin.

An interesting argument.


Sure. What's the problem? Magic is already too powerful in the game, and maintaining most of the benefits of a spell after it's supposedly been knocked down certainly exacerbates that issue. Deviating from the rules here is a really bad idea.

Mostly I'm having trouble understanding why all multi-target spells of necessity carry some sort of similar magical directive that shares the spell energy with all targets at any distance and across planes, despite having a very limited range initially and despite the known difficulty of maintaining spell connections across planes — as opposed to the seemingly far simpler interpretation that a multi-target spell copies its effect onto every selected target at the time of casting and then no longer maintains any connection.