Does wearing a glove prevent dispelling of rings?

[CyberThread]

Does wearing a glove prevent dispelling of rings? Or even, wearing magical gloves, force the dispel to hit the gloves instead of the rings?

[Totema]

I maaaay be wrong but there oughtn't be any reason for this. I've always fluffed it that you wear the rings over the gloves, in case a player tries to pull shenanigans. (That sounds uncomfortable thinking about it)

[NoACWarrior]

Good point - you block LoE and LoS. Though the LoE block is debatable since dispel magic is a ranged touch.

I'd say that the opposing spell caster would need to KNOW there are rings there before attempting a "blind" dispel of the ring's effects. And even then without LoS the ring has a 50% chance of being targeted. putting your ring under the glove is a great way to save it from dispelling.

[icefractal]

It would seem to prevent LoE.

Even more so, if you have the ability to make custom items, then turning your stuff into pearls and swallowing them (including one of Sustenance, obviously) is a pretty solid way to block LoE. I think everyone would agree that allowing LoE to the inside of someone's body is a very bad precedent.

[Big Fau]

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.

A burst, cone, cylinder, or emanation spell affects only an area, creatures, or objects to which it has line of effect from its origin (a spherical burst’s center point, a cone-shaped burst’s starting point, a cylinder’s circle, or an emanation’s point of origin).

An otherwise solid barrier with a hole of at least 1 square foot through it does not block a spell’s line of effect. Such an opening means that the 5-foot length of wall containing the hole is no longer considered a barrier for purposes of a spell’s line of effect.

Judging by the fact that a hole 1/5th the size of the wall opens LoE, I can safely assume that a mere glove wouldn't be enough to stop Dispel Magic. It would block LoS, but that isn't always necessary since you can just target the person wearing the item (you'd still need to know they were wearing it).

[HammeredWharf]

I'd say everything a creature wears is in the same LoS/LoE "package" as the creature itself. It's a slippery slope. Allow gloves to block LoS and your games will be full of PCs wearing tents for clothing.

[CyberThread]

I'd say everything a creature wears is in the same LoS/LoE "package" as the creature itself. It's a slippery slope. Allow gloves to block LoS and your games will be full of PCs wearing tents for clothing.


We call those " robes" thank you very much.

LOS would block sight, and if the glove is magical, it would be triggered first, so they would be forced to do an area dispel and hope they get lucky.

[Curmudgeon]

Does wearing a glove prevent dispelling of rings?
Pretty much.

Gloves block both line of sight and line of effect. Area dispels would only work on the creature, not its items. This isn't just a ring/glove issue, though. Most body slots would be covered up by robes or armor, which include gauntlets for the heavier armors. And since you're not allowed to sunder armor, all the out-of-sight magic items are protected.

[TuggyNE]

Good point - you block LoE and LoS. Though the LoE block is debatable since dispel magic is a ranged touch.

It isn't. Dispel magic has no attack rolls of any kind.


Judging by the fact that a hole 1/5th the size of the wall opens LoE, I can safely assume that a mere glove wouldn't be enough to stop Dispel Magic.

I'm not sure I understand what you're saying. If there is any hole of one square foot or more, LoE exists; however, if you have a layer that completely covers an object with no holes at all, how can LoE exist? And gloves are far closer to the latter case than the former.

Also, note that a paper wall is enough to stop LoE on its own for nearly all spells; even fireball has to first burn through the paper before it can affect anything beyond.

[NoACWarrior]

It isn't. Dispel magic has no attack rolls of any kind.


Ah my bad! I just took it from memory, didn't think it was an auto targeting spell on a magic item...

[Duke of Urrel]

Can an article of clothing block line of effect?

And if this is true, then can you protect yourself from any spell simply by wearing a full-body veil that allows less than one square foot of your skin to show?

My reasoning is like this. If the magic of a ring can work through a glove, from the inside out, then it's only fair that dispelling magic should be allowed to work through that same glove, from the outside in.

[Peelee]

I'd say everything a creature wears is in the same LoS/LoE "package" as the creature itself. It's a slippery slope. Allow gloves to block LoS and your games will be full of PCs wearing tents for clothing.

So long as I'm not DMing, I would love to see that in actual play. Hilarity incarnate.

[Ravens_cry]

And where Schroedinger's Metal Cap for even more shenanigans.

[icefractal]

Can an article of clothing block line of effect?

And if this is true, then can you protect yourself from any spell simply by wearing a full-body veil that allows less than one square foot of your skin to show?

My reasoning is like this. If the magic of a ring can work through a glove, from the inside out, then it's only fair that dispelling magic should be allowed to work through that same glove, from the outside in.Your clothes count as you, but they don't count as each-other. By which I mean that a full-body veil wouldn't block LoE to you (since it counts as part of you), but it would block LoE to an amulet that you're wearing under it.

And actually, I wouldn't say that the ring can get LoE through the glove either. For many rings, that doesn't matter, because they're just affecting you personally. But for a Ring of Shooting Stars, for example, or Telekinesis, you would have to wear it outside the glove.

[TuggyNE]

My reasoning is like this. If the magic of a ring can work through a glove, from the inside out, then it's only fair that dispelling magic should be allowed to work through that same glove, from the outside in.

Or, conversely, if LoE is blocked from outside in, it is also blocked from inside out; this prevents a few rings (Shielding, perhaps; Ram, certainly, and Shooting Stars) from working, but most rings act not on some other creature or object, but on the wearer, and there is certainly LoE to them.

[Big Fau]

Or, conversely, if LoE is blocked from outside in, it is also blocked from inside out; this prevents a few rings (Shielding, perhaps; Ram, certainly, and Shooting Stars) from working, but most rings act not on some other creature or object, but on the wearer, and there is certainly LoE to them.

It also prevents casting spells out of that clothing since you don't have LoE to anything.

[TuggyNE]

It also prevents casting spells out of that clothing since you don't have LoE to anything.

Except for rays, I'm not sure spells are described as coming out of your body, much less any particular part, so at most, make sure you have enough of your face exposed or something and you're good to go.

[ben-zayb]

By the same token can't you just swallow your unslotted items. It's not like there are no RAW items that are covered by the mouth.

[animewatcha]

Why am I getting the thought of 'Monk wears robe. Monk is now immune to magic.' from this?