permanency vs Dispel Magic

[True believer]

Can a spell with Duration: permanent be dispelled ????


For example can a wizard dispel my wizard's arcane sight earned by the spell permanency ???


ty

[Douglas]

By the book, yes. It sucks to be a high level wizard targeted by Dispel Magic.

Personally, I house rule that Permanency spells are treated like magic items for dispelling - they get suppressed for a few rounds and then come back. But that's a house rule.

[Biffoniacus_Furiou]

Yes. As long as it's an ongoing spell effect, it can be dispelled. If the duration was Instantaneous, for example Flesh to Stone or a Wish used to increase an ability score, there would not be an ongoing spell any more and it could not be dispelled.

[Necroticplague]

Yes. In fact, permanency is a spell on its own with a permanent duration, so you could dispel either the permanency or the arcane sight to get rid of the effect.

[Shalist]

Marginally related:

An antimagic field suppresses any spell or magical effect used within, brought into, or cast into the area, but does not dispel it.So an AMF will suppress the permanency...


Time spent within an antimagic field counts against the suppressed spell’s duration.

...allowing the associated spell to potentially expire normally. Just something to think about the next time you're preparing to spend the night in AMF shackles. I suppose even a few rounds here and there could add up to an expired spell, eventually rendering even the most stringent anti-dispel measures somewhat moot.

[Curmudgeon]

So an AMF will suppress the permanency...

...allowing the associated spell to potentially expire normally.
Almost always, the associated spell has long since expired. Permanency makes the associated spell permanent for Permanency's duration, but doesn't otherwise change the original expiration.

[Rijan_Sai]

Almost always, the associated spell has long since expired. Permanency makes the associated spell permanent for Permanency's duration, but doesn't otherwise change the original expiration.
This is true. Permanency is basically Duration: Yes, but the original spell's "timer" still runs it's course.
"This clock, the clock in San Dimas, is always ticking. ~Rufus

That said:

Personally, I house rule that Permanency spells are treated like magic items for dispelling - they get suppressed for a few rounds and then come back. But that's a house rule.

I, (and my group) fully support and use this houserule. (Or will when we get to the point that Permanency becomes a thing...)

[jiriku]

The best uses for permanency are in builds that can achieve caster level 30+ at middle levels (to resist dispelling) and/or can cast it with no xp cost (so that replacing it after a dispel is cheap). Red wizard, halruaan elder, hathran, dweomerkeeper, shadowcraft mage, and runesmith are all good prestige classes for creating that sort of build.

In a normal campaign, permanency is chiefly DM plot magic: something you can point to that explains why dungeons are full of so many gee-whiz magical effects. I think it's purposely designed to be impractically expensive for PC use.

[Zaq]

By the book, yes. It sucks to be a high level wizard targeted by Dispel Magic.

Personally, I house rule that Permanency spells are treated like magic items for dispelling - they get suppressed for a few rounds and then come back. But that's a house rule.

I am also in favor of this houserule.

[Psyren]

I, (and my group) fully support and use this houserule. (Or will when we get to the point that Permanency becomes a thing...)


I am also in favor of this houserule.

I'm not. I understand the reasoning behind it, but dispellability is intended to be one of the weaknesses of permanent spells. If you want to truly make your permanent spells permanent, invest in increasing your caster level when you cast them such that you can beat the dispel magic cap (or your buffs simply have good odds to survive, in the case of Pathfinder), and hope they don't have disjunction. But I would fully expect replacing unluckily dispelled permanent buffs to be a use of my players' resources in high-level play, as well as the added challenge of continuing an adventuring day without said buffs until such time as they prepared the spell again. It teaches them that a few backup scrolls or prepped slots for a given utility spell, even if they previously had it made permanent, are a good thing to have.

TL;DR wizards don't need the help, at least imo. Dispels are supposed to be something dangerous they need to worry about and plan for.

[Psychoalpha]

TL;DR wizards don't need the help, at least imo. Dispels are supposed to be something dangerous they need to worry about and plan for.

In my experience, this is rarely a real problem for people playing spellcasters with access to Permanency. Most of the things they get made permanent are more a matter of convenience to them than anything else. Rare is the caster who doesn't have some other way of doing whatever it is Permanency was helping them not have to fiddle with. If my Cleric loses his permanent See Invisibility, he'll just fall back on an Invisibility Purge until he can get it replaced.

The same often can't be said for non-casters, who frequently have more gear related wealth requirements just to fill their roles and survive than casters do, and can't afford or won't often have backups of backups to muddle through.

I like the suppression house rule idea, but agree that casters don't need more nice things. I might suggest to the other DMs in my group that it work like item suppression unless you're capable of casting spells higher than 4th level (thus not leaving Paladins/Rangers/Inquisitors/etc in the dark), with appropriate handwavium applied. Something about access to higher level spellcasting causing a blah blah blah feedback blah blah whatever. Martials and mini-casters don't feel like they're flushing money down the toilet by getting Permanency, especially by hiring NPC spellcasters who probably aren't playing CL tricks to absurd levels, 6/9 casters don't get an extra bump from it, the end.

[Peelee]

The Mod on the Silver Mountain: Unfortunately, Permanency was not used on this thread.