Spellthieves rock out with Dispel Magic

[Monarch Dodora]

So I'm playing a Spellthief and I was wondering about a particular interpretation of their ability that could be somewhat rage-inducing for anyone on the receiving end. To whit:

Spellthieves steal spells and then can cast them later on. When they do so, the ability description specifically tells you to "Treat the spell as if it were cast by the original owner of the spell for the purpose of determining caster level, save DC, and so forth."

Dispel Magic's text says that when you cast the targeted version of Dispel, "You automatically succeed on your dispel check against any spell that you cast yourself."

There seems to be no choice in whether or not to succeed with this, because the text only states in the area version of the spell that you get a choice in whether or not to succeed on this check, making no mention of any sort for the targeted version.

So my Spellthief is, say, fighting the Big Bad Wizard. I stab him and steal a Dispel Magic, and cast it. The spell is considered to be his for the purpose of determining what the spell does. Therefore, for all intents and purposes, he has cast the spell on himself, and I automatically succeed on the Dispel checks against every spell he's buffed himself with, wiping out all his defenses in one fell swoop.

Reasonably legal?

[only1doug]

sounds spot on to me.

Unfortunately enemy spellcasters can make themselves immune to spellthieves by simply casting Blur, the concealment miss chance negates sneak attack so no more spells can be stolen.

[Vaz]

Nope. doesn't sound legal at all.

[Boci]

Nope. doesn't sound legal at all.

Wow, what a persuasive argument. In all seriousness, the only problem point I can see is equating "the purpose of determining caster level, save DC, and so forth" with "auto dispelling your own buffs". I'd say it could go either way, and given how situational it is, the DM may very well allow it.

[Firest Kathon]

So my Spellthief is, say, fighting the Big Bad Wizard. I stab him and steal a Dispel Magic, and cast it. The spell is considered to be his for the purpose of determining what the spell does [...] for all intents and purposes, he has cast the spell on himself, ...
The spell description does not say "for all intents and purposes", it contains a list of effects that are determined based on the original "owner" of the spell, albeit an incomplete one. From the given points, it sounds that these are all variables based on the caster's level or attributes, but not on his identity. Following your reasoning, the Spellthief could not cast a stolen spell with range "Personal", because he is not the original "owner", and you cannot cast "Personal" spells on a target other than yourself (or your familiar, if you have one).
I'd say it's the DMs decision, as RAW is unclear about this. I personally would not allow it.

[only1doug]

Wow, what a persuasive argument. In all seriousness, the only problem point I can see is equating "the purpose of determining caster level, save DC, and so forth" with "auto dispelling your own buffs". I'd say it could go either way, and given how situational it is, the DM may very well allow it.

Hmm, I was misremembering that the spell had to be cast as if from the original caster (casting a spell with range: personal would affect the original caster not the spellthief) but that is from steal spell effect and not steal spell.

Just for everyones benefit we can throw up a link to the Spellthief class (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/ex/20050107a) as wizards have posted it.

[Chaosvii7]

I would say no, because it reads as though it only counts for the caster level and its variable numeric effects. If you targeted the wizard who you stole the spell from, it would of course dispel at his caster level, which means that on rolls of 11+ you'll dispel all of the effects on him anyways, being his spell.

[Ashtagon]

I would say no, because it reads as though it only counts for the caster level and its variable numeric effects. If you targeted the wizard who you stole the spell from, it would of course dispel at his caster level, which means that on rolls of 11+ you'll dispel all of the effects on him anyways, being his spell.

That's how I would rule it. You are appropriating the power of the original caster, but not their identity. It's kind of like a scroll spell in that regard.

[Vaz]

Wow, what a persuasive argument. In all seriousness, the only problem point I can see is equating "the purpose of determining caster level, save DC, and so forth" with "auto dispelling your own buffs". I'd say it could go either way, and given how situational it is, the DM may very well allow it.

The problem is;

"You automatically succeed on your dispel check against any spell that you cast yourself."

The enemy doesn't cast Dispel Magic. You do.

"After stealing a spell, a spellthief can cast the spell himself on a subsequent turn. Treat the spell as if it were cast by the original owner of the spell for the purpose of determining caster level, save DC, and so forth. "

The spellthief casts Dispel Magic, not the enemy caster.

"You automatically succeed on your dispel check against any spell that you cast yourself."

[Boci]

The problem is;

Good argument. Shame you didn't open with that.

[Vaz]

The question was "Reasonably Legal?"

My answer was "no". (Paraphrased).

All the information for my answer was held within the first post, and only by selectively ignoring the wording within would the theoretical work.

[Boci]

The question was "Reasonably Legal?"

My answer was "no". (Paraphrased).

All the information for my answer was held within the first post, and only by selectively ignoring the wording within would the theoretical work.

An answer which is fairly meaningless if you do not explain why you think so, yes the information was in the opening post, but I read the it as well and didn't see any immediate problems. So rather than just assume someone is selectivly ignoring what they don't like, why not explain why you disagree with them, as they could just be mistaken?

[Vaz]

You seem to have taken this rather personally.

[Boci]

You seem to have taken this rather personally.

I'm haven't actually. But since you brought up the topic, you seem to be going to great efforts to avoid admitting that you probably could have been more helpful with your first post.

[JoshuaZ]

You seem to have taken this rather personally.

Bystander here: Boci doesn't seem to be taking it personally to me, and has a valid point- simply saying "yes" or "no" to a question while providing no justification isn't helpful. But your followup made a strong argument.

[Talderas]

The text is


After stealing a spell, a spellthief can cast the spell himself on a subsequent turn. Treat the spell as if it were cast by the original owner of the spell for the purpose of determining caster level, save DC, and so forth. A spell thief can cast this spell even if he doesn't have the minimum ability score normally required to cast a spell of that level. The spellthief must supply the same components (including verbal, somatic, material, XP, and any focus) required for the stolen spell.

The problem is with the bold portion. It is not readily defined. At best you can suggest that any derived aspects of the spell are based on the original owner of the spell by virtue of the caster level and save DC statements since caster level always drives range, duration, damage, and area. I just cannot readily think of any examples of a variable effect that isn't derived from caster level. The automatic dispel on dispel magic is the only one that I can think of that is variable in the sense that it's a binary true/false. I would say this, if a stolen dispel magic automatically dispels all effects on a caster then I would be hesitant to suggest that a spell thief could gain any benefit from spells with a target of Personal or You.