One More Rope Trick and Magnificent Mansion Thread

[ShaneMRoth]

A problem with allowing Dispel Magic to work on Rope Trick or Mage's Magnificent Mansion.

Short Version

In order to cast Dispel Magic on something, you need line of effect.

Total cover blocks line of effect.

Occupying extradimensional space offers total cover, and by that virtue, blocks line of effect.

So, allowing Dispel Magic to work on Rope Trick or Mage's Magnificent Mansion appears to conflict with fundamental game mechanics in the SRD.


TL; DR Version

The heartache that these two spells cause on this forum seems based on a firmly held belief that Player Characters having any safe places, even temporarily, is tantamount to heresy.

These spells allow characters to rest in absolute safety, for a few hours, between encounters. A game-breaking outrage, if ever their was one.


In terms of how Rope Trick and Mage's Magnificent Mansion work in your campaign, it boils down to this:

In your campaign, how much cover do these spells offer occupants?

Seriously. Forget everything else.

The occupants of Rope Trick and Magnificent Mansion either have total cover from the outside, or they don't.

And if they don't have total cover, then you have to figure out how much cover these spells provide.

For comparison, remember that a Tower Shield offers total cover and blocks Line of Effect.

So, how does the cover provided by Rope Trick and Magnificent Mansion compare to that offered by a tower shield?

Do these spells (that remove occupants from their plane of existence, mind you) offer:

A- better cover than a tower shield;

B- worse cover than a tower shield; or

C- cover that is every bit as good as a tower shield.


One of the most fundamental mechanics of the SRD magic system is Line of Effect. And it is one of the simplest and most elegant mechanics in this game system.

Line of Effect is all or nothing.

A caster has it, or she doesn't.

There appears to be a school of thought that if a caster can affect the RT window or the MMM portal, then there is somehow a partial line of effect for those spells.

"...Maybe I can't Dispel the Rope Trick, but I can dispel the window made by the rope trick. Maybe I can't dispel the Mansion, but I can dispel the portal..."

Line of effect doesn't work like that.

At all.

If I have line of effect for part of a spell's subject, then I have line of effect for the whole subject.

If I can Dispel any part of a spell, I can Dispel all of it.

If I have line of effect for Dispel Magic on an MMM portal then I have line of effect for the whole Mansion.

And if I have line of effect to cast Dispel Magic on the Mansion, then I should have line of effect to cast other spells on the Mansion, too.

There are a number of absurd spell effects that can be brought into play if you allow line of effect against Rope Trick and Mage's Magnificent Mansion...


Fireball

If I can Dispel a RT window or MMM portal, I should be able to burn the Mansion or the Rope with a Fireball.

The only way I can't do this is if the window and portal don't give me line of effect.

If I don't have line of effect for a 20-foot burst Fireball, then I don't have line of effect for a 20-foot burst Dispel Magic, either.


Chain Lightning

If I can target the RT window, or the MMM portal with Dispel Magic, then I can target it with Chain Lightning... using the secondary lighting bolts to hit the occupants inside the spell effect.

The only way I can't do this is if the portal and window don't give me line of effect.

If I don't have line of effect for a target based spell like Chain Lightning, then I don't have line of effect for a targeted form of Dispel Magic.


Antipathy

Casting this spell on a MMM Portal or RT window should cause its occupants to feel the overwhelming urge to leave the area.

And if i can target a MMM or RT with Dispel Magic, there is no reason I don't also have line of effect for Antipathy.


Telekinesis

If I can target the RT window or the MMM portal with Dispel Magic, then I should also be able to move the RT window and the MMM portal with Telekinesis.

And so on, and so forth...



A ruling could be as simple as this: Line of effect is blocked between planes of existence.


But the rhetorical knots people tie themselves into to argue otherwise...



Player-"I'm going to use Dispel Magic to take down the Magnificent Mansion."

DM-"Okay. The-- Wait. You don't have line of effect."

Player-"Of course I have line of effect, the spell was cast here."

DM- "I don't see how you can cast Dispel Magic on the Mansion. It's in a parallel universe."

Player- "No I'm not casting anything on the Mansion, per se. The spell was cast right here. And there are ongoing spell effects right here. I'm Dispelling the effect. Right here."

DM- "Okay, the spell was cast here, but it created an object. And that object is not here. It is in kind of a parallel universe. Which is about as Not Here as it gets."

Player-"I'm not casting anything on any physical object. I am dispelling the effect that this spell is having right here, right now."

DM-"What is the spell effect?"

Player-"This shimmering portal shows where the caster was when he cast the spell and where he will have to return when the spell ends."

DM-"So, you are Dispelling... the fact that the spellcaster is not here right now?"

Player-"No, I'm-- you aren't listening. Let me put it this way, you said that the spell provides total cover. Right?."

DM-"Yes."

Player-"Okay. I'm Dispelling the cover."

DM-"The cover..."

Player-"Yeah."

DM-"Uh... back ahead two feet..."

Player-"Okay..."

DM-"How do you Dispel the cover?"

Player-"This cover. Right here. I'm Dispelling this."

DM-"The Mansion portal. You think that is what is providing total cover."

Player-"Yes, like when a tower shield provides total cover. So, logically, I should attack the tower shield and remove the cover."

DM-"And if this portal was the source of total cover that would make sense. But it's not. That's not how it works."

Player-"Yes, it does."

DM-"No. The occupants aren't hiding behind that portal. They are hiding behind the multiverse. Are you trying to Dispel the multiverse?"

Player-"No, no. I-- You--This is really very simple. Listen. I want to Dispel a spell effect in this universe. This ongoing spell effect. Right here."

DM-"And if you cast Dispel Magic here, on this spell effect, you will be attacking what provides the occupants with total cover?"

Player-"Yes--"

DM-"No. They are not hiding behind that portal. You get that, right?"

Player-"Yeah, sure."

DM-"What is providing the occupants with cover and concealment is that they don't exist in your character's plane at the moment."

Player-"Uh huh. I know, I KNOW"

DM-"I don't think you do. You are acting like they are right behind that portal."

Player-"They will be right here after I Dispel this effect..."

DM-"Dude... Listen... this portal does not provide any cover of any kind to the occupants of the Mansion. The Mansion is not here. This portal is not the source of any protection."

Player-"It doesn't matter. Once I Dispel this effect, it will all come together."

DM-"Okay, you lost me."

Player-" I just-- Listen, listen. I'm Dispelling this effect. This shimmering portal effect right here."

DM-"So, you Dispel this spell effect... and then what happens to the Mansion?"

Player-"Okay. Well.. The Rules As Written..."

DM-"...here we go..."

Player-"...The Rules As Written say... right here in the Player's Handbook... that I am allowed to target spell effects to Dispel entire spells... See... As Written..."

DM-"Hmmm... So, by casting Dispel Magic on this spell effect, you are... in everyway that matters... casting Dispel Magic on an object in a parallel universe. Where you have no line of effect."

Player-"Hey, I'm just going by the Rules As Written..."

DM-"So... the bottom line here... you want to Dispel Magic on an object that is using the entire multiverse as total cover."

Player-"Uh huh."

DM-"You don't even know what plane of existence the Mansion might be near. That's how much cover this object has from you. It has cover and concealment."

Player-"Yes..."

DM-"You know that this portal is just a placeholder. Knowing the location of the placeholder is not the same as knowing where the Mansion is located."

Player-"Whatever."

DM-"So, you want to cast Dispel Magic on something that not here. Nowhere on this plane."

Player-"Not how I would phrase it, but okay..."

DM- "Now, the Mansion spell describes its effect as an extradimensional mansion."

Player-"But the spell effect..."

DM-"The spell created the Mansion and tucked it behind the multiverse where you can't find it."

Player-"Yeah, but... that portal is a spell effect, and the rules say..."

DM- "And the Rules As Written on the matter of Cover and Line of Effect... as you can see here... are clear as a bell... Total Cover blocks Line of Effect."

Player-"But... it says under Dispel Magic..."

DM-"Where in Dispel Magic does it say that rules governing Line of Effect are suspended?"

Player-"..."

DM-"Take your time..."

Player-"It's in here somewhere."

DM-"It isn't. The rules on Line of Effect are concise. You want to Dispel the Mansion, you need Line of Effect on the Mansion. You don't have line of effect so you can't Dispel it."

Player-"[Bad Word]"

DM-"No, it's not. What's [Bad Word] is ignoring those Rules As Written that don't support your point. The ruling is final. When the spell ends, you can attack the occupants at your leisure."

Player-"[Other Bad Word]"


A DM is well within her discretion to simply rule that Dispel Magic works on RT and MMM, but such a ruling is best made with the full awareness that it suspends one of the most basic game mechanics in the 3.0/3.5/SRD ruleset.

Interpretations of Rope Trick and Mage's Magnificent Mansion that render them vulnerable to Dispel Magic are tantamount to placing a screen door on a submarine. It destroys the stated functionality of the spell.

The only way for MMM to function as written is if it blocks line of effect to spellcasting outside of the mansion.

The only way for RT to function as written is if it blocks line of effect to spellcasting after the rope is pulled up.

RT and MMM both temporarily place occupants in a different plane of existence. Both spells should offer better protection than a glorified tower shield. A person making a plain read of the SRD could be forgiven for drawing the conclusion that this would provide total cover and block line of effect.

But only if the idea of characters enjoying complete safety some of the time doesn't make you foam at the mouth, I suppose.

[Hrugner]

dispel magic lets you target a magical effect, you don't need to cast dispel on the target itself.

pathfinder:
"You 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. No other spells or effects on the target are dispelled if your check is not high enough to end the targeted effect."

3.5:
"Area Dispel
When dispel magic is used in this way, the spell affects everything within a 20-foot radius."

Both spells describe an area that is magical and fit as the target of a dispel magic or a magic effect inside an area. Yes it makes the spells less powerful, but it also makes dispel magic more powerful which is fine considering the power of casting in this game.

[ShaneMRoth]

I'm still waiting for someone to point out where Dispel Magic ignores or suspends the rules regarding Line of Effect.

[SolarSystem]

Well, I can't speak from any experience from these things, but I would personally rule that if a spell leaves an effect on this plane, then it can be affected by dispel magic.

In these case of MMM & RT, I have two different thoughts.

First option, the spell ends and occupants are ejected as per end-of-spell effect for RT.

Second option, the portal could be supressed as if it were an item. - what effect this would have on the occupants if the spell ends with people still inside, well... being stuck in a suddenly collapsing extra-dimensional space with no exit kinda spells death to me.

[ace rooster]

Dispel does not need line of effect to the whole spell, just some part of it. Spells are like knitting; once one part of it starts to unravel the whole spell does, so dispelling the portal that is an integral effect of these spells affects the whole spell. You don't need line of effect on the whole spell effect, otherwise dispel doesn't work against whole classes of spells that break line of effect. (resiliant sphere, forcecage, wall of ice, etc) Dispel does not just strip away a thin layer that it has line of effect to. Larger effect can also be dispelled despite the limited area of dispel. Transdimensional effects are also dispelled fine, and don't leave behind effects on other planes.


The issue I and many other DMs seem to have with these spells is that they completely remove whole classes of encounter with no effort on the part of the players. If the DM wants them to be able to rest safely then they can, but these spells almost* completely remove any risk from resting at all. It makes it very hard to make players feel like they are under pressure if they can simply rest whenever they like. Making the DMs job harder is always bad.

There is also the clause on nesting extradimensional spaces that most players just ignore. The favorite item thread seemed to agree that the handy haversack is always worth having, so these spells should be unusable without leaving your gear outside.

* fun fact; The window to a rope trick is invisible, and spells cannot cross it, but mundane stuff can, so a rope trick can be firebombed. Summons also can, as well as random wildlife.

[paranoidbox]

* fun fact; The window to a rope trick is invisible, and spells cannot cross it, but mundane stuff can, so a rope trick can be firebombed. Summons also can, as well as random wildlife.

Not to derail the conversation, but I'd always interpreted the rope to be an integral part of the spell. I mean, it's not called Ladder Trick or Attic Door. I figured you need the rope to get into the extra-dimensional space. It also doesn't mention any of the particulars you reveal in your fun fact, which I would think is pretty pertinent information if these things are true. (Granted, it doesn't even mention that you actually have to use the rope to climb into the space except for a passing mention of "the rope can be climbed by only one person at a time", so it might just be a matter of opinion here.)

On topic: The Rope Trick's actual target is the rope. Once you've hoisted that in (3.5), it disappears. I would be firmly into the camp that would then assert there is nothing for anyone to dispel. The window is just that, an opaque window through which no spells or area of effects can pass. Hence, the rope, which is the bit holding the spell together, is safe and sound.

[ShaneMRoth]

Not to derail the conversation, but I'd always interpreted the rope to be an integral part of the spell. I mean, it's not called Ladder Trick or Attic Door. I figured you need the rope to get into the extra-dimensional space. It also doesn't mention any of the particulars you reveal in your fun fact, which I would think is pretty pertinent information if these things are true. (Granted, it doesn't even mention that you actually have to use the rope to climb into the space except for a passing mention of "the rope can be climbed by only one person at a time", so it might just be a matter of opinion here.)

On topic: The Rope Trick's actual target is the rope. Once you've hoisted that in (3.5), it disappears. I would be firmly into the camp that would then assert there is nothing for anyone to dispel. The window is just that, an opaque window through which no spells or area of effects can pass. Hence, the rope, which is the bit holding the spell together, is safe and sound.

And that is how line of effect works. Easy Peasy.

[Segev]

Rope trick has some room for weird argument over whether the window is accessible if you don't physically climb the rope. For example, if a wizard's beholderkin eyeball familiar is out scouting, does the wizard have to lower the rope for the beholderkin eyeball familiar to be able to enter the window, or can it just fly in? This is in question because it doesn't actually say the window closes or is inaccessible, but it strongly implies that pulling the rope in is similar to locking a door.

Magnificent mansion has no such possible questions. It explicitly states that only those the mage wishes to permit entry can pass through the portal into the extradimensional space.

In both cases, however, it is stated by the spell that the window/portal is present on the original plane of casting. Text is spent explaining how it's visible to see the invisible even if it is not visible to the naked eye. It is, thus, there.

The argument that, because you claim to have line of effect to the portal entrance, you can claim to have line of effect to those within the portal, is spurious. For one thing, rope trick explicitly states: "Creatures in the extradimensional space are hidden, beyond the reach of spells (including divinations), unless those spells work across planes." That's pretty unambiguous, and specifies that you cannot cast spells which target or even effect creatures in that space unless the spell reaches across dimensions. (So a fireball with the right metamagic feat could reach them!)

Magnificent mansion could be argued to allow non-creature effects through the portal when the portal is open; you can shut or open it at will from within the mansion, but it only explicitly states that creatures are hedged out if you do not designate them as being allowed entry.

Still, the portal remains. Just because you cannot target anything on the other side of it doesn't mean you cannot target it. To claim otherwise is as silly as claiming that you could not target a gate because it was shut, and that gate being shut prevented you from targeting the guards on the other side of it.

[ShaneMRoth]

...In both cases, however, it is stated by the spell that the window/portal is present on the original plane of casting. Text is spent explaining how it's visible to see the invisible even if it is not visible to the naked eye. It is, thus, there.


Yes, the text also says...


outside conditions do not affect the mansion, nor do conditions inside it pass to the plane beyond.

That sounds like the mansion enjoys total cover from anything outside of it, which would block line of effect for all spells, including Dispel Magic.

[Segev]

Yes, the text also says...


outside conditions do not affect the mansion, nor do conditions inside it pass to the plane beyond.

That sounds like the mansion enjoys total cover from anything outside of it, which would block line of effect for all spells, including Dispel Magic.

"Outside conditions" and "conditions inside it" are not rule terms which apply to lines or areas of effect. "Conditions" in this case refers to, for instance, weather or the like. It would seem sensible that an earthquake at the site of the mansion's entrance would not shake the mansion nor anything inside it. It would also seem to indicate that a conjured blizzard within would not influence the world outside.

It does not, however, state even that you couldn't fire an arrow through the open portal. Nor that you couldn't fire a ray of enfeeblement through it. Such things are not "conditions." (You couldn't fire a magic missile through it because that requires you to see your target, but that's not a line of effect question anyway.)

Nothing in the spell description suggets that magnificent mansion is untargetable by things which can "see" the portal, nor that it prevents line of effect to the mansion's entrance from either side. Again, think of a gate to a castle: you can target the gate, but anything on the other side of it has total cover.

(It remains arguable whether or not a fireball detonated just outside the open portal to a magnificent mansion would have its AoE go inside or not. I'd say it would, myself, because it doesn't strike me as a "condition" so much as an "effect," but it's a bit fuzzy given that spells exist for blizzards and earthquakes, and I'd definitely count those as "conditions" which would be excluded.)

Regardless, the language quoted does not prevent targetting the spell, only the interior of the mansion.

[bekeleven]

If Magnificent Mansion were a portal to, say, the astral plane I'd agree with you in that Dispel Magic could dispel the portal, but the caster would still be inside the mansion.

However, MM conjured "up an extradimensional dwelling." Basically, it's not leading to somewhere else in the multiverse, it's just blowing a bubble of spacetime from the caster's current location.

And guess what? That bubble is still connected to the wand (http://fc01.deviantart.net/fs70/i/2013/323/d/7/bubble_wand_vector_by_whiplash_katachi-d6ux4x4.png). Dispel the wand, the bubble pops.

[ShaneMRoth]

Still, the portal remains. Just because you cannot target anything on the other side of it doesn't mean you cannot target it. To claim otherwise is as silly as claiming that you could not target a gate because it was shut, and that gate being shut prevented you from targeting the guards on the other side of it.

Bear with me here.

The spell description assigns no hit points or AC to the portal. This suggests that the portal is not an object. A closed portal between two planes of existence would seem to block line of effect and offer total cover.

I don't think it is particularly silly to call into question the ability to target the barrier between two planes of existence with third level mortal magic.

The Mansion is not protected by the portal. The Mansion is protected by existing on a different plane.

Targeting the portal does not change the fact that the Mansion (the original effect of the spell) is located physically beyond the range of Dispel Magic.

[yellowrocket]

It think that there is agreement by most that the rope is a fair target. So I'll leave that alone.

However I'd argue that while the portal is an effect of the sorrel subject to being targeted the mansion and the space it occupies on a different plane are not subject to being dispelled. The reason being that the mansion in theory could exist perpetually with out a portal to the realm it originated in. However your occupants are now trapped and need to find a new way back.

[ShaneMRoth]

... think of a gate to a castle: you can target the gate, but anything on the other side of it has total cover.


Replace the word "gate" with "fabric of time and space"...

You can target the fabric of time and space, but anything on the other side (of the fabric of time and space) has total cover.

The portal for this spell is made of the fabric of space time, and this fabric separates two parallel universes. It's not something made of concrete and rebar.

Dispelling the Mansion portal is like dispelling the fabric of space-time. Dispel Magic is the wrong tool for the job.

[bekeleven]

Bear with me here.

The spell description assigns no hit points or AC to the portal. This suggests that the portal is not an object. A closed portal between two planes of existence would seem to block line of effect and offer total cover.

I don't think it is particularly silly to call into question the ability to target the barrier between two planes of existence with third level mortal magic.

The Mansion is not protected by the portal. The Mansion is protected by existing on a different plane.

Targeting the portal does not change the fact that the Mansion (the original effect of the spell) is located physically beyond the range of Dispel Magic.

Or just, you know, ignore the other posts in the thread.

No hit points or AC, can't be dispelled. (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/wallOfFire.htm)

Impossible to target with a third level spell what's created with first and second-level spells? Are you saying dispel magic can't hit Hoard Gullet?

The mansion isn't on another plane so much as it's inside a bubble of spacetime projected by the wizard's magic at time of casting. The mansion didn't exist before the spell and won't exist after it expires (or is dispelled). I expected you to argue that it was on a demiplane - which is closer to true - but on a plane? What?

Edit: You've already mentioned that dispel magic can dispell a spell if it hits the spell effect, so you've admitted that dispel works RAW-wise and were trying to justify it not working fluff-wise. So imagine my confusion when you keep bringing up line of effect? I thought you already punted that argument?

[Segev]

You're getting stuck in the weeds when you try to differentiate the "fabric of time and space" as somehow making the portal special compared to other spell effects.

It is a spell effect. It is something to which you can have line of effect. Dispel magic can therefore target it. Dispel Magic can therefore dispel it. It doesn't matter if it's made of evoked force, illusory rebar, or "the fabric of time and space;" it is a spell effect sustained by magic. It can be dispelled.

You're trying to argue that you can't target a tower shield because it gives total cover to the person holding it. The rules don't say that the shield provides total cover to itself. Nor do they say that the door to the mansion has total cover provided by...itself.

I really don't get the argument, here. The mansion doorway is right there. You can absolutely draw a line of effect to it.

[ShaneMRoth]

You're trying to argue that you can't target a tower shield because it gives total cover to the person holding it. The rules don't say that the shield provides total cover to itself. Nor do they say that the door to the mansion has total cover provided by...itself.

My argument is not that you can't target a tower shield. My argument is that that Rope Trick and Magnificent Mansion seem like they should offer better and more robust cover than a tower shield.

My argument is that spells which remove you from the Prime Material Plane seem like they would also block line of effect from spells cast from the Prime Material Plane. Including spells like Dispel Magic.

[Psyren]

Yes, the text also says...



That sounds like the mansion enjoys total cover from anything outside of it, which would block line of effect for all spells, including Dispel Magic.

The mansion (i.e. interior) is not affected, but you can absolutely dispel the door, which is on this plane.



I really don't get the argument, here. The mansion doorway is right there. You can absolutely draw a line of effect to it.

^ Yeah that.

[Crake]

Do you have line of effect to the mansion portal? It's on the material plane after all, right?

I'll assume the answer to the above is a yes, since I can't in any right mind see how it would be no.

Ok, so you can target the portal with a dispel magic, correct? Again, I cannot see why not.

The portal is part of the effect of the magnificent mansion spell, you can target the portal with a dispel magic, and you can choose to dispel the spell effect of the magnificent mansion, since they are together part of the same spell. You are not targetting the inside of the mansion with anything, but you don't NEED to, since they are part of the same spell. What you are describing is more along the lines of creating a demiplane or something via genesis, which seems to be how you describe the mansion, and then casting gate to get to the demi plane, then arguing that people dispelling the gate would not dispel the demiplane. You are correct in that scenario, which seems to be your impression of how the mansion functions. You would however be wrong, because a magnificent mansion's spell effect covers all parts of it. If you can target any part of it (including the portal) you can hit it with a targetted dispel magic, which would dispel the whole thing.

Line of effect to an extradimensional space doesn't even come into it, because you're targetting the portal which is on the material plane. That said, I would very much like a rules quote where it states that things inside an extradimensional space have total cover to things not inside, I feel like you're just making that up.

Rope trick states that spells cannot pass though, but mentions nothing about objects or creatures being unable to enter on their own, and nothing about the window being "closed" when you pull the rope in.

Magnificent mansion on the other hand has a clause limiting only those you allow to enter to be able to, which is fair enough, but doesn't stop you from dispelling it with a targetted dispel, as described above.

Both of those are niche cases though, and you seem to be talking like it's a hard and fast rule that all extradimensional spaces adhere to.

[Segev]

A fine reading of the RAW on magnificent mansion actually would seem to indicate that, as long as the door is open, while you can exclude creatures, you can't exclude objects or effects such as projectiles or ray spells. At least, nothing in the RAW says those things are hedged out while the door is open.

[Crake]

A fine reading of the RAW on magnificent mansion actually would seem to indicate that, as long as the door is open, while you can exclude creatures, you can't exclude objects or effects such as projectiles or ray spells. At least, nothing in the RAW says those things are hedged out while the door is open.

Well, it actually says "those you designate" with no mention of creatures, objects, or spell effects.

[ShaneMRoth]

Many of the arguments on this thread about line of effect regarding interdimensional interfaces (like the Mansion portal) are tantamount to arguing that you are only casting Dispel Magic on my pants.

Say there was a spell called Transdimensional Pantload.

This spell creates a magical effect that looks like a pair of pants made of magical force. While wearing this magical effect, I shift to a different plane of existence and am able to rest safely.

This pant-shaped magical effect is the nexus between me and my plane of origin.

My Pant Material Plane, if you will.

You are on that Pant Material Plane and want to attack me. And my pants.

You don't want me to rest and recover my spells.

I am hiding somewhere in an extradimensional space outside the multiverse, with my magic pants, getting some rest to be ready to face my nemesis.

(In this story, you are my nemesis. And your pants are my pants' nemesis. It's complicated.)

You want to catch me with my Pants Down.

You want to bring me, and my pants, back from the other plane.

So, naturally, you cast Show Me The Pants!

Show Me The Pants! detects and makes visible all pants, and pant-like magical effects, in all of the multiverse within a 20 foot burst.

You announce to the DM, "I am not casting Dispel Magic on him, because he has total cover. I'm not casting Dispel Magic on his pants, either. As they are also have total cover. Instead... just hear me out. Instead... I'm... casting Dispel Magic on the magical effect that his pants are having on me."

And the DM goes for it and allows you to cast Dispel Magic on the magical effect that my Pants are having on you.

And precisely what magical effects are my pants are having on you?

They are causing you to know that my magic pants exist and that they are keeping me beyond your reach.

The DM is convinced by your argument... causing me, and my magic pants, to be returned to the Pant Material Plane so you can attack me. And my pants.

When I put it this way, it sounds rather silly, somehow.

[Flickerdart]

The wizard summons a dragon to ride into battle. The dragon appears next to a corner, and its long tail is sticking out around the corner (mechanically, one row of the squares he occupies). The wizard has mounted the dragon, and is about to take off.

A sorcerer - the wizard's sworn enemy - comes down the hallway when he sees a dragon's tail. He has both line of sight and line of effect to the dragon, so he can attempt to dispel the summoning. He does not, however, have the ability to cast anything on the wizard rider, because the wizard himself is out of sight. However, should the dispel succeed, the wizard will fall off the (vanished) dragon.

[Deadline]

Rope Trick and Magnificent Mansion both explicitly leave a magical effect on the material plane. Those magical effects are subject to Dispels, Disjunctions, and Anti-Magic fields. I'm not sure why this is even a matter of debate?

You are trying to treat these spells like Teleport or Plane Shift, but those spells do not leave a magical effect at the departure point. Your premise appears to be flawed.

The spell effect is not a spellcaster, creature or object, so an Area Dispel has to be used, but it's very straightforward from there.

[ShaneMRoth]

Rope Trick and Magnificent Mansion also explicitly remove their occupants from the Prime Material Plane.

I assert that this explicitly confers total cover from the Prime Material Plane, and by that virtue blocks line of effect. Preventing Dispel Magic from affecting those spells.

If these spells rendered their occupants ethereal or merely invisible, then a Dispel would be more likely to work. But these spells, by their extradimensional nature, place their spell effect out of range of Dispel Magic.

Take a look at the SRD definition of a spell with Unlimited Range...


Unlimited
The spell reaches anywhere on the same plane of existence.

This strongly suggests that being removed from the Prime Material Plane removes you from the maximum range of any spell in the game. This also supports an argument that being in extra-dimensional space places an occupant outside of line of effect of a spell-caster on the PMP.

I remain convinced that a spell that removes a person from a plane of existence offers total cover from attacks and spells cast from that plane.

[Segev]

Many of the arguments on this thread about line of effect regarding interdimensional interfaces (like the Mansion portal) are tantamount to arguing that you are only casting Dispel Magic on my pants.

Say there was a spell called Transdimensional Pantload.

This spell creates a magical effect that looks like a pair of pants made of magical force. While wearing this magical effect, I shift to a different plane of existence and am able to rest safely.

This pant-shaped magical effect is the nexus between me and my plane of origin.

My Pant Material Plane, if you will.

You are on that Pant Material Plane and want to attack me. And my pants.

You don't want me to rest and recover my spells.

I am hiding somewhere in an extradimensional space outside the multiverse, with my magic pants, getting some rest to be ready to face my nemesis.

(In this story, you are my nemesis. And your pants are my pants' nemesis. It's complicated.)

You want to catch me with my Pants Down.

You want to bring me, and my pants, back from the other plane.

So, naturally, you cast Show Me The Pants!

Show Me The Pants! detects and makes visible all pants, and pant-like magical effects, in all of the multiverse within a 20 foot burst.

You announce to the DM, "I am not casting Dispel Magic on him, because he has total cover. I'm not casting Dispel Magic on his pants, either. As they are also have total cover. Instead... just hear me out. Instead... I'm... casting Dispel Magic on the magical effect that his pants are having on me."

And the DM goes for it and allows you to cast Dispel Magic on the magical effect that my Pants are having on you.

And precisely what magical effects are my pants are having on you?

They are causing you to know that my magic pants exist and that they are keeping me beyond your reach.

The DM is convinced by your argument... causing me, and my magic pants, to be returned to the Pant Material Plane so you can attack me. And my pants.

When I put it this way, it sounds rather silly, somehow.One question: In your transdimensional pants, are the pants still present on the material plane where I reside?

Your comment about "revealing all pants everywhere in the multiverse within 20 ft." is nonsensical, because most planes are not overlapping. It only would have meaning in the material plane insofar as it would affect things in the Shadow and Ethereal planes, as those are the only ones which actively overlap - that is, share a 1:1 correlation of locations - with the material.

Deadline spells it out succinctly:

Rope Trick and Magnificent Mansion both explicitly leave a magical effect on the material plane. Those magical effects are subject to Dispels, Disjunctions, and Anti-Magic fields. I'm not sure why this is even a matter of debate?

You are trying to treat these spells like Teleport or Plane Shift, but those spells do not leave a magical effect at the departure point. Your premise appears to be flawed.

The spell effect is not a spellcaster, creature or object, so an Area Dispel has to be used, but it's very straightforward from there.

Your transdimensional pants spell, by your description, sounds like it is not, in fact, leaving your pants on the material plane. They're going with you. You just will reappear where they vanished from when the spell is over.

Magnificent mansion and rope trick explicitly have interfaces that are present on the plane of origin, even while you're on the "other side" in an extradimensional space. There is something to which line of effect exists.


Well, it actually says "those you designate" with no mention of creatures, objects, or spell effects.Oh, good point.

[ShaneMRoth]

One question: In your transdimensional pants, are the pants still present on the material plane where I reside?

Your comment about "revealing all pants everywhere in the multiverse within 20 ft." is nonsensical, because most planes are not overlapping. It only would have meaning in the material plane insofar as it would affect things in the Shadow and Ethereal planes, as those are the only ones which actively overlap - that is, share a 1:1 correlation of locations - with the material.



No, the Pants are in extra-dimensional space. But the pants serve as a nexus to the Pants Material Plane, so the Magical Effect of the Pants exist on the Prime.

...

Are you calling my pants-based magic nonsensical?

[Deadline]

Rope Trick and Magnificent Mansion also explicitly remove their occupants from the Prime Material Plane.

No one debates this point.


I assert that this explicitly confers total cover from the Prime Material Plane, and by that virtue blocks line of effect. Preventing Dispel Magic from affecting those spells.

It does confer total cover to the occupants, yes. And Dispel Magic won't (and can't) target those individuals. But because these two spells explicitly leave a Spell Effect on the material plane, that Spell Effect is subject to Area Dispels. The people inside the mansion aren't the targets, and neither is anything they brought in with them. The Spell Effect left behind is smacked by the Area Dispel.

No one here (aside from possibly you) is arguing that the occupants of either spell are targeted by Dispel Magic. That isn't the case.

1. The Spell Effects are very clearly explicitly on the material plane.
2. Spell Effects are valid things to be hit by an Area Dispel Magic.

Do you disagree with either of those points?

[Frostthehero]

I feel like I am rehashing the same point, but I am going to give my two cents anyway.

Rope trick provides cover to those affected by it. Rope trick does not provide cover for itself. The same goes for magnificent mansion.
Spells cannot be cast across the extradimensional interface, nor can area effects cross it. Those in the extradimensional space can see out of it as if a 3-foot by 5-foot window were centered on the rope. The window is present on the Material Plane, but it’s invisible, and even creatures that can see the window can’t see through it. Anything inside the extradimensional space drops out when the spell ends. The rope can be climbed by only one person at a time. The rope trick spell enables climbers to reach a normal place if they do not climb all the way to the extradimensional space. Rope trick does not allow spells to cross in and out of itself, but it can be dispelled, because it leaves a window to the demiplane that it creates.

The same goes for MMM.
You conjure up an extradimensional dwelling that has a single entrance on the plane from which the spell was cast. The entry point looks like a faint shimmering in the air that is 4 feet wide and 8 feet high. Only those you designate may enter the mansion, and the portal is shut and made invisible behind you when you enter. You may open it again from your own side at will. Once observers have passed beyond the entrance, they are in a magnificent foyer with numerous chambers beyond. The atmosphere is clean, fresh, and warm.

You can create any floor plan you desire to the limit of the spell’s effect. The place is furnished and contains sufficient foodstuffs to serve a nine-course banquet to a dozen people per caster level. A staff of near-transparent servants (as many as two per caster level), liveried and obedient, wait upon all who enter. The servants function as unseen servant spells except that they are visible and can go anywhere in the mansion.

Since the place can be entered only through its special portal, outside conditions do not affect the mansion, nor do conditions inside it pass to the plane beyond. Spells cannot do anything to those inside of the demiplane, but something like dispel magic can target the door that the spell creates.

The spell leaves an effect on the material plane, and that is what can be targeted. Casters outside of the created space have line of effect to the "planar door" but not to anything inside the planar door.

Let's just make this even more clear. Rope trick and MMM leave an effect on the material plane. Things like plane shift do not. Not under any circumstances. Casters have line of effect to the effects that are left on the material plane. They do not have line of effect to the characters inside the MMM or rope trick. And you know what, rehashing it once more time. The things that can be targeted are the "doors" that the spells leave on the material plane.

I hope that makes it clear enough for you. I don't see how this is a debatable point.

[Flickerdart]

Rope Trick and Magnificent Mansion also explicitly remove their occupants from the Prime Material Plane.

I assert that this explicitly confers total cover from the Prime Material Plane, and by that virtue blocks line of effect. Preventing Dispel Magic from affecting those spells.

If these spells rendered their occupants ethereal or merely invisible, then a Dispel would be more likely to work. But these spells, by their extradimensional nature, place their spell effect out of range of Dispel Magic.

Take a look at the SRD definition of a spell with Unlimited Range...



This strongly suggests that being removed from the Prime Material Plane removes you from the maximum range of any spell in the game. This also supports an argument that being in extra-dimensional space places an occupant outside of line of effect of a spell-caster on the PMP.

I remain convinced that a spell that removes a person from a plane of existence offers total cover from attacks and spells cast from that plane.
The spells place the occupants on another plane, much like the dragon summon places its rider around the corner. But the spell, just like the summon, are still sticking out.

[Brookshw]

No, the Pants are in extra-dimensional space. But the pants serve as a nexus to the Pants Material Plane, so the Magical Effect of the Pants exist on the Prime.

...

Are you calling my pants-based magic nonsensical?

All good heroes know that pants are optional. We won't discuss how evil heroes view pants.

If part of a spell is target-able and dispelled then the whole thing is dispelled. Is this contended?

The portal is part of the spell. Is this contended?

Spells/spell like abilities can Target portals (see Gatecrasher PrC class features for evidence, or scramble portal, etc). Is this contended?

The spell can be targetted and dispelled.

Bonus round: transdimensional spells can be dispelled. A transdimensional firewall can be dispelled from either of the planes its on and its dispelled from both location.

Bonus question: where does a transdimensional manshion go?

[ShaneMRoth]

No one debates this point.

1. The Spell Effects are very clearly explicitly on the material plane.
2. Spell Effects are valid things to be hit by an Area Dispel Magic.

Do you disagree with either of those points?

Point 1...

The window for Rope Trick and the Portal for Mansion are spell effects that manifest on the Prime.

Point 2...

They are not valid targets for Dispel Magic.

While I appreciate the attention to detail that is going into the theory of how Dispel Magic works... I find it remarkable that every argument glosses over the extra-dimensional nature of these particular spells. As though these were somehow trivial side effects rather than the core function of the spells.

Rope Trick is not called Create Window. Magnificent Mansion is not called Create Portal.

Rope Trick is a trick with a rope. The spell is cast on a rope, not a window. If you want to Dispel the Rope Trick, you need line of effect to the rope, not the window.

Magnificent Mansion makes a... Magnificent Mansion. If you want to dispel the Mansion, you need line of effect to the mansion, not the portal.

As to the spell effects on the Prime... the Rope Trick window and the Mansion portal? These are extra-dimensional interfaces. The window is specifically described as such in the SRD description of Rope Trick.

The difference between the rope and the window is that the rope is an object. You can touch it. The window? No hit points. No armor class. It isn't an object.

The difference between the Mansion and the portal? The mansion is an object. Look at the description. It is a place that you can interact with. Sit on. Sleep on. Touch. The portal? No hit points. No armor class. It's not an object.

Your argument is that you are trying to Dispel a Light spell by casting Dispel Magic on the shadows, on the grounds that the shadows are a spell effect of the light.

[Bronk]

I think a character would be pretty safe in a 'rope trick', and even safer in a 'mage's magnificent mansion', assuming 3.5 rules, mainly because a normal 'dispel magic' spell can't affect the inside of a MMM or a 'rope trick' with the rope pulled in because the spell actually can't directly target the windows/portals left on the material plane.

'Dispel magic' has two parts. The first part lists what the spell can do, and the second part lists how it does it. That first part says:


You can use dispel magic to end ongoing spells that have been cast on a creature or object, to temporarily suppress the magical abilities of a magic item, to end ongoing spells (or at least their effects) within an area, or to counter another spellcaster’s spell.

Later, under 'Targeted Dispel', it does say:


One object, creature, or spell is the target of the dispel magic spell.

However, the spell has to either be an ongoing spell cast on a creature or object.

So, for MMM and 'rope trick', the portal/windows are not creatures or objects, MMM wasn't cast on a creature or object, the only possible object or 'magic item' for a rope trick would be the rope you cast the spell on (which, when pulled in, is protected from outside spells), which leaves 'counter another's spell', but the spells in this case have already been cast.

That leaves the 'end ongoing spells (or at least their effects) within an area' line. The rules for that state that only the parts within the area are dispelled, which in this case is just the part on the material plane, which is just the portal or window. That's how only part of a spell gets dispelled.

(Edit: It also says that it would end area or effect spells whose point of origin is within the dispel area: for rope trick that would be the rope, which can be pulled inside, and the effect line for MMM only states the extradimensional space itself, not the portal.)

This all goes out the window if the transdimensional spell metamagic feat is being used. An area dispel using that ability would end a rope trick early and take a big chunk out of the inside of a mage's magnificent mansion. Also, AD&D rules evidently allowed dispel to target a MMM, because that was a plot point in the 'Great Modron March' adventure.

When it comes to throwing/shooting things inside one of these spaces, infiltrating it, or shooting non-magical spell effects in, it looks like 'rope trick' is vulnerable to intrusion unless it's full, and it doesn't say that the portal can close so it looks like you can be shot blindly through the portal. MMM seems to be safe, because the portal closes once you're inside.

[Shackel]

The shadows would not be a magical effect left behind by the light. The door, a magical effect left behind on the Material Plane, is a part of the MMM. Ergo, if you hit the door with a Dispel, you are hitting the spell with a Dispel. You can't just banish part of the spell, nor does this magical effect just happen to not exist whenever dispels come into play.

You said it in your own post: Line of Effect is all or nothing. Part of the spell(it's portal) exists in the Material Plane. Having this "partial" line of sight does not mean that you don't have it at all. You aren't essentially "rounding down" on this. You can see part of the spell, however small. Therefore, you can Dispel it.

If you could please address Flickerdart's "dragon behind the wall", I think that'd make your point much more clear, for his, to me, just makes arguing over this seem pointless: it just sums everything up perfectly. You can see the tip of the dragon's tail, therefore you can target it.

[ShaneMRoth]

If you could please address Flickerdart's "dragon behind the wall", I think that'd make your point much more clear, for his, to me, just makes arguing over this seem pointless: it just sums everything up perfectly. You can see the tip of the dragon's tail, therefore you can target it.

Okay... first, the example was awesome...

Second, the sorcerer and the dragon were both in the same plane of existence. Line of effect is substantially different when two parties are on different planes.

[Brookshw]

Point 1...



The difference between the rope and the window is that the rope is an object. You can touch it. The window? No hit points. No armor class. It isn't an object.
.

I have already pointed out to you several examples where spells and spell like abilities Target these windows.

[ShaneMRoth]

I have already pointed out to you several examples where spells and spell like abilities Target these windows.

And I have found those examples to be unconvincing. An interface between planes blocks line of effect, it doesn't clear a line of effect.

[Amphetryon]

Okay... first, the example was awesome...

Second, the sorcerer and the dragon were both in the same plane of existence. Line of effect is substantially different when two parties are on different planes.

Could I get a page number where these differences in Line of Effect are made explicit, please?

[Segev]

Do you dispute that the doorway to the magnificent mansion exists on the plane from which it was cast?

[ShaneMRoth]

Could I get a page number where these differences in Line of Effect are made explicit, please?

So, you need it written down in a rule that when two people are not in the same universe, then line of effect is blocked?

[ShaneMRoth]

Do you dispute that the doorway to the magnificent mansion exists on the plane from which it was cast?

No. I dispute that the doorway allows the mansion to be dispelled.

And i assert that when it is closed, it provides total cover to the mansion and blocks line of effect.

[Segev]

No. I dispute that the doorway allows the mansion to be dispelled.

And i assert that when it is closed, it provides total cover to the mansion and blocks line of effect.

So you do not believe that there is line of effect to the doorway that you do agree is on the same plane as the one casting dispel magic?

[Brookshw]

And I have found those examples to be unconvincing. An interface between planes blocks line of effect, it doesn't clear a line of effect.

Your objection had to do with windows. The window can be targetted. Are you withdrawing that objection? Are you claiming the window is not part of the spell?

[ShaneMRoth]

All good heroes know that pants are optional. We won't discuss how evil heroes view pants.

If part of a spell is target-able and dispelled then the whole thing is dispelled. Is this contended?

I do not contend this.


The portal is part of the spell. Is this contended?


I do not contend this.


Spells/spell like abilities can Target portals (see Gatecrasher PrC class features for evidence, or scramble portal, etc). Is this contended?

I do not content this.


The spell can be targetted and dispelled.


Yes, provided you have line of effect. Which in this case, you don't.

The target for MMM is the Mansion. It's in a parallel universe, so no line of effect.



Bonus round: transdimensional spells can be dispelled. A transdimensional firewall can be dispelled from either of the planes its on and its dispelled from both location.


Good to know.



Bonus question: where does a transdimensional manshion go?


I don't know.

[Segev]

I do not contend this.



I do not contend this.



I do not content this.



Yes, provided you have line of effect. Which in this case, you don't.

The target for MMM is the Mansion. It's in a parallel universe, so no line of effect.The above things you "do not contend" (I believe you mean "do not contest," but please correct me and clarify your meaning if I'm wrong) include that the portal is part of the spell and that you have line of effect to the portal. Ergo, you have line of effect to the spell.

[ShaneMRoth]

Your objection had to do with windows. The window can be targetted. Are you withdrawing that objection? Are you claiming the window is not part of the spell?

The window is not a valid target to dispel a Rope Trick since it blocks line of effect to the Rope.

Folks... really...

From the Rope Trick description...


Creatures in the extradimensional space are hidden, beyond the reach of spells (including divinations), unless those spells work across planes.

Wait, there's more...


Spells cannot be cast across the extradimensional interface

So, the window blocks line of effect. It doesn't say it in those words, but that is what blocking line of effect is.

So, you can't cast Dispel Magic on the rope itself, because the window blocks line of effect.

So, instead of just respecting the clear intent of the text, you resort to some sort of rhetorical ass-pull and say, "Well, nothing says we can't cast Dispel Magic on the thing that prevents us from casting Dispel Magic."

Actually, it does...


Beyond the reach of spells

What is the RAW read of that line?

How exactly do the occupants of a Rope Trick qualify as "beyond the reach of spells" if they can be reached with a Dispel Magic cast in a passive-aggressive manner at the thing that is supposed to keep them beyond the reach of spells?

[ShaneMRoth]

The above things you "do not contend" (I believe you mean "do not contest," but please correct me and clarify your meaning if I'm wrong) include that the portal is part of the spell and that you have line of effect to the portal. Ergo, you have line of effect to the spell.

No, you don't have line of effect. The Mansion enjoys total cover from you. So long as the Mansion has Total Cover, then line of effect is blocked. Targeting the CLOSED portal does nothing to change this.

[Flickerdart]

The entrance to a mansion is just as much part of it as the tail of a dragon is a part of the dragon. If the dragon had its tail sticking through a gate spell, it could still be targeted.

[Shackel]

The entrance to a mansion is just as much part of it as the tail of a dragon is a part of the dragon. If the dragon had its tail sticking through a gate spell, it could still be targeted.

This right here; I think you might be focusing too much on the occupants of the spell rather than the spell itself.

[ShaneMRoth]

The entrance to a mansion is just as much part of it as the tail of a dragon is a part of the dragon. If the dragon had its tail sticking through a gate spell, it could still be targeted.

Not when the Gate is closed.

[Segev]

No, you don't have line of effect. The Mansion enjoys total cover from you. So long as the Mansion has Total Cover, then line of effect is blocked. Targeting the CLOSED portal does nothing to change this.

Nowhere does it say the mansion has total cover. At best, you can argue for its interior having total cover. Its exterior may only consist of the closed doorway, but that doorway exists and I have line of effect to it.

Draw a map on a square grid. Place the doorway on the map. I place my character directly in front of it. I can draw a line of effect to it. The doorway is not gone; it's still there. It is explicitly made invisible behind you, which means it's still there. If it weren't, the spell would say so, and wouldn't say it's invisible.

Just because nothing can get through it doesn't mean it, itself, cannot be targeted.


And all your "no hp, no AC" arguments are pointless. Walls of force also lack those numbers because they're meaningless to the indestructible wall. The portal is not destructible by hp damage, and is an unmoving object so an AC is nearly pointless since you'll almost never have reason to direct an attack roll at it.



Your argument amounts to, "Because my tower shield gives me total cover, you cannot target my tower shield because I'm holding it, and you cannot target me."

But even that would have more support in the RAW (though it doesn't work that way); what you're saying is, "Because the people enjoying the effects of this spell cannot be targetted, you cannot target the spell itself!" That's silly. The spell is between you and them; of course you can target it.

[SolarSystem]

Just wow.

How much clearer does this need to be?

Part of the spell effect is left behind on the plane from which it is cast.

This leaves an easy target for dispel magic to hit and affect. Case closed.




That said, you could always just seal the near side of the portal shut with Stone Shape and leave the occupants with no way out. Now they die as they can't pass through solid stone when ejected at the end of the spell. Failing access to enough stone to shape, any spell that creates a large enough solid object could do, such as a wall of ice (although duration becomes relevant here).

[ShaneMRoth]

Just wow.

How much clearer does this need to be?

Part of the spell effect is left behind on the plane from which it is cast.

This leaves an easy target for dispel magic to hit and affect. Case closed.

Do either of these spells seem like they should be an easy target for Dispel Magic?

Oh, and what is your RAW take on the meaning of "beyond the reach of spells" as described in Rope Trick?

[Segev]

Do either of these spells seem like they should be an easy target for Dispel Magic?"Should" is irrelevant. They are, quite clearly, as part of them remains on the plane and is thus targetable.


Oh, and what is your RAW take on the meaning of "beyond the reach of spells" as described in Rope Trick?Just what it says. You cannot target the people in the rope trick's space with spells from outside of it. It says nothing about the doorway, which is called out as being invisible (and therefore present) on the originating plane. LoE to the "window" is possible. The "window" is part of the spell. LoE to the spell is thus possible. The spell can thus be targeted by dispel magic.

At no point is any person inside the rope trick's extradimensional space targeted by dispel magic. The spell ends and they come tumbling out because it ended, not because they were subjected to a spell. They were, instead, subjected to their spell ending.

[Flickerdart]

Not when the Gate is closed.
Not the same situation.

If the Gate is closed, the dragon's tail is no longer on this plane.
If the door to a Magnificent Mansion is closed, it is still on this plane.

If a kender knocked on your castle's door and you shut it in his face, he could still write rude words on the door even though it's closed.

[SolarSystem]

Oh, and what is your RAW take on the meaning of "beyond the reach of spells" as described in Rope Trick?

I see you like ignoring half the rules text for your own benefit.

"Creatures in the extradimensional space are hidden, beyond the reach of spells" does not say that the spell effect still on the original plane is beyond reach, only the creatures inside of it.

You cannot directly affect the creatures, but you can directly affect Rope Trick.

[ShaneMRoth]

Not the same situation.

If the Gate is closed, the dragon's tail is no longer on this plane.
If the door to a Magnificent Mansion is closed, it is still on this plane.

If a kender knocked on your castle's door and you shut it in his face, he could still write rude words on the door even though it's closed.

Okay, you are just being awesome on purpose now.

[ShaneMRoth]

"Should" is irrelevant. They are, quite clearly, as part of them remains on the plane and is thus targetable.

The intended function of a spell is a little relevant. It is to me, anyway.



Just what it says. You cannot target the people in the rope trick's space with spells from outside of it. It says nothing about the doorway, which is called out as being invisible (and therefore present) on the originating plane. LoE to the "window" is possible. The "window" is part of the spell. LoE to the spell is thus possible. The spell can thus be targeted by dispel magic.

Yeah, you started out okay... and then...

Well...

Let's look at what it says again...


...beyond the reach of spells (including divinations), unless those spells work across planes. ..."


See, I'm reading "unless those spells work across planes." I'm not reading "unless someone casts Dispel Magic on the thing that prevents spells from working."

That's really not a "just what it says" read.

At all.

The ability to Dispel the Rope Trick without a spell that works across planes changes "beyond the reach of spells" to "not beyond the reach of spells."

[Brookshw]

Okay, you are just being awesome on purpose now.

So is this now resolved then?

Edit: no, I see that it is not.

[ShaneMRoth]

I see you like ignoring half the rules text for your own benefit.

"Creatures in the extradimensional space are hidden, beyond the reach of spells" does not say that the spell effect still on the original plane is beyond reach, only the creatures inside of it.

You cannot directly affect the creatures, but you can directly affect Rope Trick.

So, they are really not beyond the reach of spells, then.

[ShaneMRoth]

So is this now resolved then?

No... No, it's not.

[ShaneMRoth]

Not the same situation.

If the Gate is closed, the dragon's tail is no longer on this plane.
If the door to a Magnificent Mansion is closed, it is still on this plane.



The Mansion was never on this plane, (read the spell description...), and the portal (its not a door) isn't part of the mansion. Because no part of the mansion exist on this plane. Every square foot of the mansion is extra-dimensional.

You folks are plucky... I must admit.

[Segev]

The intended function of a spell is a little relevant. It is to me, anyway.If the spell were intended to be immune to dispel magic, it would have said so. What is so special about a 2nd level spell that you think it should be immune to a 3rd or 5th level one?




See, I'm reading "unless those spells work across planes." I'm not reading "unless someone casts Dispel Magic on the thing that prevents spells from working."

That's really not a "just what it says" read.

At all.Um. Yes, it is.

What it says is that the creatures cannot be reached by spells.

What it does not say is: The spell is beyond the reach of spells
The window to the extradimensional space is beyond the reach of spells

The creatures are not dispelled. None of their items are suppressed. No spell effects targeting them are ended. The spell effect they are inside, that is protecting them from being affected, which is not actually a part of them nor "on" them in a way that requires them to be targetted for it to be affected, is being dispelled. Nothing in the text of the spell suggests this shouldn't be possible.

It does what it says it does; you're trying to read something into it that isn't there.


The ability to Dispel the Rope Trick without a spell that works across planes changes "beyond the reach of spells" to "not beyond the reach of spells."Well, if by that, you mean, "the spell rope trick ending means that the creatures once within it are no longer beyond the reach of spells," then yes. But that's not because a spell reached them. That's because the spell which protected them is gone.

Dispel magic is not being used on the creatures inside the rope trick. Therefore that clause has no power over it. They remain beyond the reach of spells as long as they're inside it. The spell itself is not, however, beyond the reach of spells.

A man holding a spellknife that makes him immune to disintegrate will laugh as a beholder blasts him with the relevant eyebeam, but will stop laughing when the same beholder disintegrates the narrow pillar holding up the platform from which he was scoffing.

[Hrugner]

Just wow.

How much clearer does this need to be?

Part of the spell effect is left behind on the plane from which it is cast.

This leaves an easy target for dispel magic to hit and affect. Case closed.




That said, you could always just seal the near side of the portal shut with Stone Shape and leave the occupants with no way out. Now they die as they can't pass through solid stone when ejected at the end of the spell. Failing access to enough stone to shape, any spell that creates a large enough solid object could do, such as a wall of ice (although duration becomes relevant here).

Exactly, it seems really straight forward. Much more so than what happens when you wall of stone over the entrance to these places anyway.

[Segev]

The Mansion was never on this plane, (read the spell description...), and the portal (its not a door) isn't part of the mansion. Because no part of the mansion exist on this plane. Every square foot of the mansion is extra-dimensional.

You folks are plucky... I must admit.

The portal is, however, part of the spell. The spell, if you wish to parse it that finely, creates an extradimensional space and a portal to it all as one effect. The portal to it exists in both planes. The portal to it is targetable. Thus the spell is targetable.

"Pluck" has nothing to do with it; we're sticklers for accuracy.

[Brookshw]

So, they are really not beyond the reach of spells, then.

I cast summon paper golem.
I put paper golem in a James bond-esque trap.
I put a delayed fireball next to the paper golem set for a two round delay.
I planeshift away.

I am safe from the delayed fireball. Mr. Paper golem we expect to die.

Same principle here.

[ShaneMRoth]

If the spell were intended to be immune to dispel magic, it would have said so.


I think it did say so.


Creatures in the extradimensional space are hidden, beyond the reach of spells (including divinations), unless those spells work across planes.


That statement applies to almost every spell in the Player's Handbook, including Dispel Magic. If they had listed every spell that affected every other spell in the PH, it would have been 1,000 pages long.

[Segev]

I think it did say so.



That statement applies to almost every spell in the Player's Handbook, including Dispel Magic. If they had listed every spell that affected every other spell in the PH, it would have been 1,000 pages long.

When have any of us suggested that the creatures inside the rope trick are subjected to the dispel magic effect?

Where does it say that the rope trick itself is "beyond the reach of spells?" Not "the rope," the spell itself.

[ShaneMRoth]

Exactly, it seems really straight forward. Much more so than what happens when you wall of stone over the entrance to these places anyway.

Having total cover from a parallel universe seems straight forward to me.

[Segev]

Having total cover from a parallel universe seems straight forward to me.

Are you just not reading what people are writing?

Nobody is targeting the people inside. They are targeting the doorway, which does not have total cover, and is part of the spell effect.

[SolarSystem]

How about I add that when about a dozen individual people in a thread agree with one interpretation of the RAW and only one is actively argueing an alternate interpretation (and maybe two people made a passing comment in support early on) that the very clear minority is quite likely wrong.

Well, whatever. The only interpretation that actually follows the RAW is clear enough to me. Argueing with someone who apparently intentionally fails to understand the points most others clearly get and is hung up on irrelevant points is rather pointless. I'm out and I suggest we all stop argueing this.

[Brookshw]

Having total cover from a parallel universe seems straight forward to me.

Let's follow this line of reasoning for a second and see where it takes us. We cast the spell, go in, the portal closes and is no longer on the prime. What happens when we want to leave as there's no longer a portal on the prime?

[bekeleven]

I hide behind a tower shield, giving me total cover, putting me beyond the reach of attacks requiring attack rolls, until I stop hiding behind it.

Someone sunders my tower shield.

Since I don't take the action "stop hiding behind tower shield" I now have total cover for the rest of my life. Or are you saying that you can attack people hiding behind tower shields? Because it says so right in the tower shield description that you can't.

[Segev]

I hide behind a tower shield, giving me total cover, putting me beyond the reach of attacks requiring attack rolls, until I stop hiding behind it.

Someone sunders my tower shield.

Since I don't take the action "stop hiding behind tower shield" I now have total cover for the rest of my life. Or are you saying that you can attack people hiding behind tower shields? Because it says so right in the tower shield description that you can't.

I believe his argument is more along the lines of: "I hide behind a tower shield, giving me total cover, putting me beyond the reach of attacks requiring attack rolls, until I stop hiding behind it. You cannot target my tower shield, because I am holding it, and it gives me total cover."

[Shackel]

I believe his argument is more along the lines of: "I hide behind a tower shield, giving me total cover, putting me beyond the reach of attacks requiring attack rolls, until I stop hiding behind it. You cannot target my tower shield, because I am holding it, and it gives me total cover."

Isn't that the logic behind the "invisible tower shield" trick?

[Segev]

Isn't that the logic behind the "invisible tower shield" trick?

Might be; I am not sure I am familiar with that trick.


edit: Oh, wait, is that the one where you use the total cover as total concealment to hide, and then claim that because you're hidden and the shield is part of your equipment, they can't see it, either?

If so, yes, it's the same logic.

However, that has more sound basis in the rules than his idea, since at least that is mucking about with the definition of having cover vs. having equipment affected by you being in cover. This...the portals are not actually "on" the characters whose protection he wants to apply to said portals. That is, he's trying to say that the portal is protected because the character is, when the character isn't even "holding" or otherwise considering the portal part of himself.

[Flickerdart]

The Mansion was never on this plane, (read the spell description...), and the portal (its not a door) isn't part of the mansion. Because no part of the mansion exist on this plane. Every square foot of the mansion is extra-dimensional.

You folks are plucky... I must admit.
The portal is part of the spell effect. It doesn't matter whether or not it's part of the mansion proper.

[ShaneMRoth]

Are you just not reading what people are writing?

Nobody is targeting the people inside. They are targeting the doorway, which does not have total cover, and is part of the spell effect.

I'm reading it. I'm just not persuaded by it.

[ShaneMRoth]

How about I add that when about a dozen individual people in a thread agree with one interpretation of the RAW and only one is actively argueing an alternate interpretation (and maybe two people made a passing comment in support early on) that the very clear minority is quite likely wrong.


I'd counter that my interpretation and the interpretations of others all fall within DM discretion.

Also, I'm right.

[ShaneMRoth]

I hide behind a tower shield, giving me total cover, putting me beyond the reach of attacks requiring attack rolls, until I stop hiding behind it.

Someone sunders my tower shield.

Since I don't take the action "stop hiding behind tower shield" I now have total cover for the rest of my life. Or are you saying that you can attack people hiding behind tower shields? Because it says so right in the tower shield description that you can't.

I'd say you are going to get a cramp if you stay behind that tower shield too long.

[glitterbaby]

Question on the Rope Trick part of this argument (I'm beyond past being convinced of MMM, it's pretty black and white). When the rope is pulled up can the spell still be dispelled? The window left behind is invisible, sure, but is it part of the spell effect? Is it a tangible (by this I mean magical energy and such, being part of the spell effect) thing that can be targeted with dispel magic or is it just plainly a window?

[ShaneMRoth]

Let's follow this line of reasoning for a second and see where it takes us. We cast the spell, go in, the portal closes and is no longer on the prime. What happens when we want to leave as there's no longer a portal on the prime?

Actually, I was hoping that those of you who disagree with my interpretation would describe some of the unintended consequences.

How would my interpretation of the function of these two spells affect game play?

[ShaneMRoth]

The portal is part of the spell effect. It doesn't matter whether or not it's part of the mansion proper.

As I interpret the spell, and its relation to the SRD, it matters.

[ShaneMRoth]

Question on the Rope Trick part of this argument (I'm beyond past being convinced of MMM, it's pretty black and white). When the rope is pulled up can the spell still be dispelled? The window left behind is invisible, sure, but is it part of the spell effect? Is it a tangible (by this I mean magical energy and such, being part of the spell effect) thing that can be targeted with dispel magic or is it just plainly a window?

NO. You have to target the rope to dispel Rope Trick.

Once an occupant pulls the rope into extra-dimensional space, you no longer have line of effect to the rope.

The window is an "extra-dimensional interface" (SRD's wording, not mine) not a window.

[glitterbaby]

I'm reading it. I'm just not persuaded by it.

You don't really need to be persuaded by it. The rules on this one are pretty clear so there isn't much room for interpretation. If by persuading you mean it doesn't make sense in your mind then that's fine and you can houserule it. The rules do funny things sometimes like with the tower shield example. Yes, the rules say that a tower shield gives you total cover, and thus concealment, and yes the hide skill would then allow you to hide yourself and all your possessions, including the tower shield, but good luck getting that to actually work out in a game. It just doesn't make sense and so I'd change the rule if I were DMing but now I'd be making a houserule. If this particular RAW doesn't make sense to you then you're fully welcome to houserule it differently. It's not a valid interpretation of the RAW but it certainly is up to DM discretion whether the rule will remain or not.

[ShaneMRoth]

...Yes, the rules say that a tower shield gives you total cover, and thus concealment, and yes the hide skill would then allow you to hide yourself and all your possessions...

A tower shield can provide total cover, but I don't see how it offers concealment. And it certainly can't allow a person to Hide behind the Shield. (The player could be going for comedic effect, I suppose.)

[ShaneMRoth]

You don't really need to be persuaded by it. The rules on this one are pretty clear so there isn't much room for interpretation. ...

I believe the rules are also pretty clear, and that they support my interpretation.

[glitterbaby]

NO. You have to target the rope to dispel Rope Trick.

Once an occupant pulls the rope into extra-dimensional space, you no longer have line of effect to the rope.

The window is an "extra-dimensional interface" (SRD's wording, not mine) not a window.

I wasn't asking about LoE to the rope. You do know that you can dispel an entire spell even if you only target part of the spell, right? I feel that's been mentioned many times so far in this thread. My question wasn't if you have line of effect to the spell, my question was if the window left behind by rope trick is a tangible part of the spell effect. If it is, then it can be targeted with a dispel magic. If it isn't then it wouldn't be targetable and then your argument would hold some ground.

[ShaneMRoth]

I wasn't asking about LoE to the rope. You do know that you can dispel an entire spell even if you only target part of the spell, right? I feel that's been mentioned many times so far in this thread. My question wasn't if you have line of effect to the spell, my question was if the window left behind by rope trick is a tangible part of the spell effect. If it is, then it can be targeted with a dispel magic. If it isn't then it wouldn't be targetable and then your argument would hold some ground.

Alright, read the Rope Trick text on the interface and see what you can come up with...

[glitterbaby]

A tower shield can provide total cover, but I don't see how it offers concealment. And it certainly can't allow a person to Hide behind the Shield. (The player could be going for comedic effect, I suppose.)

Oh sorry, you're allowed to make hide checks when you have cover. I used the wrong terms to get the same result.

[ShaneMRoth]

You do know that you can dispel an entire spell even if you only target part of the spell, right?

I know that the Rope Trick spell is cast directly on the rope. That is not my opinion, that is reading the stat block for the spell. The rope is where the spell is. The entire spell.

Line of Effect...

[Deadline]

I'm reading it. I'm just not persuaded by it.

I'm not sure how you think that an Area Dispel doesn't apply to Spell Effects within it's area. But hey, I don't need to convince you of what the words in the rules say. And if you and your group have fun with your interpretation, kudos.

I'm pretty comfortable with the argument I've made. It's solid, doesn't rely on half readings of spell texts, and is consistent with the rules. If that isn't enough for you, there's really nothing else I can offer to convince you.

It also helps that I'm right, but I doubt that'll convince you either. :smallwink:

[ShaneMRoth]

Oh sorry, you're allowed to make hide checks when you have cover. I used the wrong terms to get the same result.

Is that Pathfinder?

Because according to the SRD...


If people are observing you, even casually, you can’t hide.

[glitterbaby]

Alright, read the Rope Trick text on the interface and see what you can come up with...


Spells cannot be cast across the extradimensional interface, nor can area effects cross it. Those in the extradimensional space can see out of it as if a 3-foot by 5-foot window were centered on the rope. The window is present on the Material Plane, but it’s invisible, and even creatures that can see the window can’t see through it. Anything inside the extradimensional space drops out when the spell ends. The rope can be climbed by only one person at a time. The rope trick spell enables climbers to reach a normal place if they do not climb all the way to the extradimensional space.

Here is the Rope Trick text on the interface. It states that spells cannot cross the interface and area effects cannot pass through it but that doesn't answer the question. The question is whether or not the interface itself is tangible and thus subject to dispelling from it being part of the spell effect or if it were literally just an open window through which the creatures inside can see out. The spell doesn't state it so I thought I'd ask to see if there is some other rule or precedent that would come into effect.

[ShaneMRoth]

I'm not sure how you think that an Area Dispel doesn't apply to Spell Effects within it's area. But hey, I don't need to convince you of what the words in the rules say. And if you and your group have fun with your interpretation, kudos.

I'm pretty comfortable with the argument I've made. It's solid, doesn't rely on half readings of spell texts, and is consistent with the rules. If that isn't enough for you, there's really nothing else I can offer to convince you.

It also helps that I'm right, but I doubt that'll convince you either. :smallwink:

It's a heavy burden, being right. Amirite?

[glitterbaby]

Is that Pathfinder?

Because according to the SRD...

Nope, 3.5. The hide skill allows you to make a hide check if you have cover.

[ShaneMRoth]

Here is the Rope Trick text on the interface. It states that spells cannot cross the interface and area effects cannot pass through it but that doesn't answer the question. The question is whether or not the interface itself is tangible and thus subject to dispelling from it being part of the spell effect or if it were literally just an open window through which the creatures inside can see out. The spell doesn't state it so I thought I'd ask to see if there is some other rule or precedent that would come into effect.

Spells cannot be cast across the extradimensional interface, nor can area effects cross it. Those in the extradimensional space can see out of it as if a 3-foot by 5-foot window were centered on the rope. The window is present on the Material Plane, but it’s invisible, and even creatures that can see the window can’t see through it.

[ShaneMRoth]

Nope, 3.5. The hide skill allows you to make a hide check if you have cover.

One more time, with feeling...


If people are observing you, even casually, you can’t hide.

Straight from the SRD.

Edit: What could possibly be your RAW read on that line?

[glitterbaby]

So then if the window is present, and it is a part of the spell effect, then the window can be targeted and the entire spell can be dispelled.

[Deadline]

So then if the window is present, and it is a part of the spell effect, then the window can be targeted and the entire spell can be dispelled.

Correct.

Except apparently not ... for ... reasons. :smalltongue:

[ShaneMRoth]

So then if the window is present, and it is a part of the spell effect, then the window can be targeted and the entire spell can be dispelled.

I respectfully dissent.

[Amphetryon]

I respectfully dissent.

So, folks can't target windows in your campaigns?

[ShaneMRoth]

So, folks can't target windows in your campaigns?

They can't target extra-dimensional interfaces in my campaign. In my campaign, those interfaces are made of the fabric of time and space. How do you target that?

[Deadline]

So, folks can't target windows in your campaigns?

No, they are immune to area spells, because the owners of the house containing the windows are hiding in the cellar.


They can't target extra-dimensional interfaces in my campaign. In my campaign, those interfaces are made of the fabric of time and space. How do you target that?

Wait, you rule that those interfaces aren't spell effects?

[ShaneMRoth]

No, they are immune to area spells, because the owners of the house containing the windows are hiding in the cellar.



Wait, you rule that those interfaces aren't spell effects?

No. I am ruling that the interfaces mark the boundary where two separate planes intersect, which means that is where the fabric of time and space for two separate universes meet.

You can rule that your interfaces are made of whatever you want.

They remain spell effects.

[Psyren]

Well, "I am ruling X" and "in my campaign Y" are of course perfectly valid, but based on the OP I was under the impression that you were trying to state something general that applies to the base game, rather than a houserule.

[glitterbaby]

Soooo if they're spell effects then they can be targeted by dispel magic. That's how the spell works is it not?

[ShaneMRoth]

Soooo if they're spell effects then they can be targeted by dispel magic. That's how the spell works is it not?

Can you target the heat from heat metal?

[ShaneMRoth]

Well, "I am ruling X" and "in my campaign Y" are of course perfectly valid, but based on the OP I was under the impression that you were trying to state something general that applies to the base game, rather than a houserule.

No, I was stating that general SRD rules apply as I described.

[bekeleven]

Can you target the heat from heat metal?

If it's within the are of my area dispel, I don't have to "target" it.

[Flickerdart]

As I interpret the spell, and its relation to the SRD, it matters.
Your interpretation has doors disappear off houses when they are closed. It is an incorrect interpretation.

[ShaneMRoth]

Your interpretation has doors disappear off houses when they are closed. It is an incorrect interpretation.

Actually, I don't.

[Flickerdart]

Actually, I don't.
Either the door is part of the spell effect (and thus an area dispel affects the mansion when it affects the door) or it isn't (and it's impossible to enter the mansion through it). You can't have it both ways.

[ShaneMRoth]

Point of Origin!

I totally forgot about that...

Aiming a Spell


You must make some choice about whom the spell is to affect or where the effect is to originate


Effect Spells


You must designate the location where these things are to appear


The point of origin is relevant when using Dispel Magic...


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.


In light of this information, I have modified my ruling to account for the fact that you must have line of effect to the point of origin of a spell in order to Dispel it.

This ruling prohibits Dispel Magic from targeting the Rope Trick window and the Magnificent Mansion portal on the grounds that those effects are not the point of origin of the spell.

The point of origin for Rope Trick is the Rope.

The point of origin for MMM is the Mansion.

If you don't have Line of Effect to the spell's points of origin, then you can't Dispel it.

Discuss...

[ZamielVanWeber]

Okay... first, the example was awesome...

Second, the sorcerer and the dragon were both in the same plane of existence. Line of effect is substantially different when two parties are on different planes.


So, you need it written down in a rule that when two people are not in the same universe, then line of effect is blocked?

No. We want the rule that you claims exists that treats line of effect lost due to different planes being different from line of effect being lost due to being around a corner. You did claim that there is a "substantial" difference between the two.

[Hrugner]

You should have saved us the trouble and copied the next line


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.

goodbye portal to the other world.

[ShaneMRoth]

No. We want the rule that you claims exists that treats line of effect lost due to different planes being different from line of effect being lost due to being around a corner. You did claim that there is a "substantial" difference between the two.

Okay... well, if someone had total cover from you because he is around a corner, then you can move to a position where the person is no longer around the corner and then that person no longer has total cover.

If someone has total cover from you because he is in a different plane... then no matter where you move that person will have total cover from you.

Is that substantial enough of a difference?

[ShaneMRoth]

You should have saved us the trouble and copied the next line



goodbye portal to the other world.

Yep. For a whole second.

Edit:


An interdimensional interface (such as a bag of holding) is temporarily closed.

[ZamielVanWeber]

Okay... well, if someone had total cover from you because he is around a corner, then you can move to a position where the person is no longer around the corner and then that person no longer has total cover.

If someone has total cover from you because he is in a different plane... then no matter where you move that person will have total cover from you.

Is that substantial enough of a difference?

No. Cite, in the rules, where this difference actually matters. Your argument against the dragon example is based on the above premise so it is very important you don't give your opinion on the matter, but the actual rules associated with it.

[ShaneMRoth]

No. Cite, in the rules, where this difference actually matters. Your argument against the dragon example is based on the above premise, so it is very important you don't give your opinion on the matter, but the actual rules associated with it.

Uh... could I get a rephrase of this question?

[Venger]

NO. You have to target the rope to dispel Rope Trick.

Once an occupant pulls the rope into extra-dimensional space, you no longer have line of effect to the rope.

The window is an "extra-dimensional interface" (SRD's wording, not mine) not a window.

wrong.


Those in the extradimensional space can see out of it as if a 3-foot by 5-foot window were centered on the rope. The window is present on the Material Plane, but it’s invisible, and even creatures that can see the window can’t see through it. Anything inside the extradimensional space drops out when the spell ends.
that's where the spell is. that's where you aim your dispel.


So, folks can't target windows in your campaigns?

step 1) make armor out of windows
step 2) ???
step 3) PROFIT!!!


They can't target extra-dimensional interfaces in my campaign. In my campaign, those interfaces are made of the fabric of time and space. How do you target that?


No, I was stating that general SRD rules apply as I described.

they in no way support your unfounded houserule.


Point of Origin!=
The point of origin is relevant when using Dispel Magic...



In light of this information, I have modified my ruling to account for the fact that you must have line of effect to the point of origin of a spell in order to Dispel it.

that's not RAW. if the spell is an emanation, like unhallow, you need to be able to target the PoE.

in rope trick's case, the place where the rope was anchored (even after you pull it in) is the target for dispelling.


Okay... well, if someone had total cover from you because he is around a [B]corner, then you can move to a position where the person is no longer around the corner and then that person no longer has total cover.

If someone has total cover from you because he is in a different plane... then no matter where you move that person will have total cover from you.

Is that substantial enough of a difference?

No. RAW does not work that way. this is how force effects, ethereal bite, and transdimensional spells work. if you have LoE, you can cast across planes/dimensions if you want to.

but that's irrelevant, because as every single post in this thread has said many times, the door is on the prime material


How about I add that when about a dozen individual people in a thread agree with one interpretation of the RAW and only one is actively argueing an alternate interpretation (and maybe two people made a passing comment in support early on) that the very clear minority is quite likely wrong.

Well, whatever. The only interpretation that actually follows the RAW is clear enough to me. Argueing with someone who apparently intentionally fails to understand the points most others clearly get and is hung up on irrelevant points is rather pointless. I'm out and I suggest we all stop argueing this.

this is the clearest example of the galileo fallacy I've ever seen. this is how threads like this usually go.

there is zero interpretation here. you follow RAW because... that's how you play the game. there can be no arguing in threads like these. I wish you well. if only these threads went the way you wanted them to, we'd all save a lot of time.

since it's very clear that, as solarsystem said, none of us is going to be able to get OP to admit he is wrong, I'll instead draw issue with Segev's post:



Magnificent mansion has no such possible questions. It explicitly states that only those the mage wishes to permit entry can pass through the portal into the extradimensional space.

there is one small addendum to this:

silver keys can ignore this limitation and gatecrash maginificent mansions whenever they feel like it.

[ShaneMRoth]

that's where the spell is. that's where you aim your dispel.

My read of the Rope Trick spell says the spell is cast on the rope.

[Brookshw]

My read of the Rope Trick spell says the spell is cast on the rope.

My reading is that the rope can be pulled completely free of the space.


A weight greater than that can pull the rope free

Not sure how it could be pulled free in your reading.

[ShaneMRoth]

they in no way support your unfounded houserule.

My ruling is founded on a plain read of SRD rules on Line of Effect, Cover, Total Cover, Spell Point of Origin, Extra-Dimensional Space, Effect Spells, Targeted Spells, The Rope Trick spell, the Mages' Magnificent Mansion spell, Dispel Magic, and Planar Rules.

None of which I made up.

[ShaneMRoth]

My reading is that the rope can be pulled completely free of the space.



Not sure how it could be pulled free in your reading.


I staked a claim that the Rope Trick spell is cast on the rope...



...When this spell is cast upon a piece of rope from 5 to 30 feet long, one end of the rope rises into the air until the whole rope hangs perpendicular to the ground...

But you all are reading the Rules As Written? That's your story?

[ZamielVanWeber]

Uh... could I get a rephrase of this question?

You claimed that the dragon example didn't work because there is a rules based difference between line of effect lost due to a physical obstruction and a line of effect due to a planar obstruction. When asked for evidence of this in the rules you first refused and, when asked again, offered only personal opinion.

Can you demonstrate that, in the rules of 3.5 DnD, there is a difference between the two?

[Brookshw]

I staked a claim that the Rope Trick spell is cast on the rope... Yes you did. And the rope can be pulled off.



But you all are reading the Rules As Written? That's your story?

Pretty sure I am.


When this spell is cast upon a piece of rope from 5 to 30 feet long, one end of the rope rises into the air until the whole rope hangs perpendicular to the ground, as if affixed at the upper end. The upper end is, in fact, fastened to an extradimensional space that is outside the multiverse of extradimensional spaces (“planes”). Creatures in the extradimensional space are hidden, beyond the reach of spells (including divinations), unless those spells work across planes. The space holds as many as eight creatures (of any size). Creatures in the space can pull the rope up into the space, making the rope “disappear.” In that case, the rope counts as one of the eight creatures that can fit in the space. The rope can support up to 16,000 pounds. A weight greater than that can pull the rope free.

Looks like the rope can be pulled completely free. Not sure how that's possible with your reading, I've never heard of a sword being pulled free of its +1.

[ShaneMRoth]

You claimed that the dragon example didn't work because there is a rules based difference between line of effect lost due to a physical obstruction and a line of effect due to a planar obstruction. When asked for evidence of this in the rules you first refused and, when asked again, offered only personal opinion.

Can you demonstrate that, in the rules of 3.5 DnD, there is a difference between the two?

This is the best I can do...


The planes of existence are different realities with interwoven connections. Except for rare linking points, each plane is effectively its own universe with its own natural laws.

The difference between being around a corner, and being in a different reality is self-evident.

[ShaneMRoth]

Looks like the rope can be pulled completely free. Not sure how that's possible with your reading, I've never heard of a sword being pulled free of its +1.

If the rope is pulled free, due to exceeding the rope's weight limit, wouldn't that cause everyone to fall out with the rope? And end the spell?

[Brookshw]

If the rope is pulled free, due to exceeding the rope's weight limit, wouldn't that cause everyone to fall out with the rope? And end the spell?

I don't see why it would. The duration hasn't expired nor has any condition been struck that would cause it to terminate. Usually spells that can be turned off in such a fashion say so, for example floating disk tells you what can cause it to wink out and what happens to the things its supporting. Rope Trick has no language of the sort for what would happen so presumably the spell continues for its duration.

[ShaneMRoth]

I don't see why it would. The duration hasn't expired nor has any condition been struck that would cause it to terminate. Usually spells that can be turned off in such a fashion say so, for example floating disk tells you what can cause it to wink out and what happens to the things its supporting. Rope Trick has no language of the sort for what would happen so presumably the spell continues for its duration.

Okay, but since it takes more than 16,000 pounds of weight to pull the rope free... I wonder how you would do this if you weren't a Storm Giant.

[Bad Wolf]

Okay, but since it takes more than 16,000 pounds of weight to pull the rope free... I wonder how you would do this if you weren't a Storm Giant.

This is GiTP. We (okay, they) can throw planets at opponents. 16,000 pounds is like asking a cleric to raise someone.

Also I didn't read the whole thread, but would any problems be solved by the Transdimensional Spell feat?

[Crake]

My read of the Rope Trick spell says the spell is cast on the rope.

That is irrelevant when you talk about dispelling the rope trick, i seriously don't know why you bring it up. Dispel magic doesn't need to target the rope to dispel the rope trick, because it can target the spell, which is at least in part on the material plane. The only issue here is your little ruling about "extradimensional interfaces" not existing on the material plane because of some made up mumbo jumbo about fabrics and time or space. That is literally your only standing argument, and it's not based on any actual rules, it's your own made-up rule, as evidenced by the fact that you had to preface your statement with "In my campaign"


In my campaign, those interfaces are made of the fabric of time and space.

If you're the DM, rule it however you want, nobody can stop you, but don't try and come to someone else's table and tell them that your houserule is RAW and that they should abide by it.

[Brookshw]

Okay, but since it takes more than 16,000 pounds of weight to pull the rope free... I wonder how you would do this if you weren't a Storm Giant.

How its accomplished is irrelevant to these types of discussions. The rule exists and needs to be accounted for. I have no idea how your going to reconcile your reading with it.

And if you really want to know, given my pick of options, I think I'm in the mood to use dinosaurs. Dinosaurs harnessed together. Because dinosaurs make everything awesome.

[ace rooster]

Ok, I see what you are saying. You are taking the fact that rope trick is a 'targetted' spell, and assuming that that is all there is to it. Reading the text for dispel magic you see that it affects targetted spells if the target is within the area, which you are correct that it is not. Rope trick also has an effect (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicOverview/spellDescriptions.htm#effect) though, which remains on the material plane and can be affected by dispel magic. You cannot part dispel a spell, so the whole spell unravels.

[ShaneMRoth]

Okay folks... listen up...

The prevailing ruling in this thread establishes a mechanical flaw in Mage's Magnificent Mansion that is so severe that it renders the spell broken. (This generally applies to Rope Trick, too. But I'm focusing on MMM for now.)

My read of Mage's Magnificent Mansion is that... on paper... it is designed to protect its occupants with robust security.

But the prevailing consensus on this thread renders the spell incapable of protecting its occupants from Dispel Magic. One of the most popular and widely used spells in the game.

In fact, the prevailing ruling renders the spell is so peculiarly vulnerable to Dispel Magic that the spell is useless at best and a deathtrap at worst.

That's not an Achilles' Heel. That's a peanut allergy. It's a thermonuclear submarine with a screen door.

The notion that the game designers published a 7th level spell with the intent that it could be easily undone with a widely available 3rd level spell seems counter-intuitive to me.

The prevailing consensus on this thread is that MMM is mechanically incapable of performing the function stated in the spell description.

My ruling boils down to this: "The mansion is not on the Prime Material Plane. This places the mansion unambiguously out of line of effect of Dispel Magic, and pretty much every spell that is not explicitly transdimensional in nature. Put more simply, If you don't have line of effect for Fireball, then you don't have line of effect for Dispel Magic."

Based on the righteous indignation that my 'provocative' ruling has inspired on this thread, a person would think I was ruling that Gelatinous Cubes are psionic or that hit points aren't a thing.

I conclude that the members who are arguing so vigorously for MMM to be so easily undone by Dispel Magic have a bias against the spell being used in the game at all.

[Brookshw]

A more productive discussion might be asking how one protects a Rope Trick or MMM from being dispelled.

[ShaneMRoth]

A more productive discussion might be asking how one protects a Rope Trick or MMM from being dispelled.

Actually, the productive discussion is that "Shouldn't a RAW read of a rule NOT break the game?"

[paranoidbox]

A more productive discussion might be asking how one protects a Rope Trick or MMM from being dispelled.

Cast an invisible Invisibility on the window/doorway and a Magic Aura to read as non-magical for good measure?

[Segev]

Spells cannot be cast across the extradimensional interface, nor can area effects cross it. Those in the extradimensional space can see out of it as if a 3-foot by 5-foot window were centered on the rope. The window is present on the Material Plane, but it’s invisible, and even creatures that can see the window can’t see through it.


So then if the window is present, and it is a part of the spell effect, then the window can be targeted and the entire spell can be dispelled.


I respectfully dissent.


So, folks can't target windows in your campaigns?


They can't target extra-dimensional interfaces in my campaign. In my campaign, those interfaces are made of the fabric of time and space. How do you target that?


No. I am ruling that the interfaces mark the boundary where two separate planes intersect, which means that is where the fabric of time and space for two separate universes meet.

You can rule that your interfaces are made of whatever you want.

They remain spell effects.Spell effects to which I have line of effect can be targetted by my dispel magic. There is no debating this without making things up whole cloth.



since it's very clear that, as solarsystem said, none of us is going to be able to get OP to admit he is wrong, I'll instead draw issue with Segev's post:

[Segev's post about the magnificent mansion keeping out those the caster does not designate]


there is one small addendum to this:

silver keys can ignore this limitation and gatecrash maginificent mansions whenever they feel like it.
I don't recall what silver keys are off the top of my head, but as this is an exception-based ruleset and magnificent mansion is providing a general case when it says "only those you designate," I will not dispute the possibility.


My ruling is founded on a plain read of SRD rules on Line of Effect, Cover, Total Cover, Spell Point of Origin, Extra-Dimensional Space, Effect Spells, Targeted Spells, The Rope Trick spell, the Mages' Magnificent Mansion spell, Dispel Magic, and Planar Rules.

None of which I made up.You have a fundamental flaw in your logic. It lies at your concept that a thing which is providing full cover to something else is therefore provided full cover by itself.

You're claiming that you can hide behind a tower shield for full cover and thus nobody can attack the tower shield because that would be attacking something you're hiding behind and that would be therefore attacking you. This is not supported by the rules. This isn't even as supported as the "invisible tower shield" trick, which at least is technically viable due to some loophole interactions.

Your logic seems to be this, just to elaborate further: The "dimensional interface" provides complete cover for the spell. The dimensional interface is therefore not targetable because if you can target it, you can target the spell.


Okay folks... listen up...

The prevailing ruling in this thread establishes a mechanical flaw in Mage's Magnificent Mansion that is so severe that it renders the spell broken. (This generally applies to Rope Trick, too. But I'm focusing on MMM for now.)As discussed elsewhere, it being broken doesn't make it not RAW. Now, were your interpretation equally valid, without warping and changing the denotation of the rules or flat-out ignoring how they work, I would agree that you might have an argument from the standpoint that two valid interpretations can let you choose the less broken one.

However, I would go so far as to contend that this is not the problem you think it is.


My read of Mage's Magnificent Mansion is that... on paper... it is designed to protect its occupants with robust security.

But the prevailing consensus on this thread renders the spell incapable of protecting its occupants from dispel magic. One of the most popular and widely used spells in the game.You do realize that dispel magic is not, in and of itself, a guaranteed success, right? In fact, under most circumstances, it has a 50% or less chance of working if you're facing an equal-level caster. (If you both are CL 11+, it is a lower chance of success with each progressive CL. Greater dispel magic also caps, but not for a while longer.)

Moreover, there are other ways to protect it. The truly paranoid will hide it, perhaps behind an illusory wall or a silent image. They will place it out of the way, rather than right in the middle of an enemy spellcaster's walkway.

Relatively few monsters will have dispel magic at their disposal, anyway.

And even on top of all of that, magnificent mansion is a convenience spell for luxury and comfortable resting, certainly, but it is not the be-all and end-all of security. Adventurers tend to be far more paranoid than that.

Besides, your house rule makes rope trick trump dispel magic in ways that are counter to your own claim of balance, given rope trick's numerous built-in vulnerabilities (making it obviously not what you thinks magnificent mansion is supposed to be) but somehow rendering it immune to a higher-level spell.


In fact, the prevailing ruling renders the spell is so peculiarly vulnerable to Dispel Magic that the spell is useless at best and a deathtrap at worst.

That's not an Achilles' Heel. That's a peanut allergy. It's a thermonuclear submarine with a screen door.No more a "deathtrap" than a non-spell-assisted encampment. Less of one, really, even still, because so few enemies will have dispel magic if you're not fighting other adventuring parties and lurking in their lairs.

Lower-level security spells augmenting it can go a long way, too. Alarm, strategically placed, can let you know when somebody has obtained LoE to your magnificent mansion's portal. When the spell ends, you and your party will have had time to ready actions to ambush the attackers.


The notion that the game designers published a 7th level spell with the intent that it could be easily undone with a widely available 3rd level spell seems counter-intuitive to me.I suppose you think mass invisibility, delayed blast fireball, summon monster VII, mass hold person, and reverse gravity should be immune to dispel magic, as well, then? (They aren't, by the RAW.)


The prevailing consensus on this thread is that MMM is mechanically incapable of performing the function stated in the spell description.Er, no. At best, your arguments above suggest that magnificent mansion is mechanically incapable of performing the function you believe it should have; it patently does exactly what it says it does in the spell description.

And even at that, you're wrong. It provides a great deal of safety over and above that normally had without it. It requires an enemy spellcaster of at least your level to have even odds of bringing it down. It requires they find it, first, too. And circumvent any other defenses you may have put up, which make it even stronger.


My ruling boils down to this: "The mansion is not on the Prime Material Plane. This places the mansion unambiguously out of line of effect of Dispel Magic, and pretty much every spell that is not explicitly transdimensional in nature. Put more simply, If you don't have line of effect for Fireball, then you don't have line of effect for Dispel Magic."You do have line of effect for fireball, though. The fact that it doesn't do anything to the closed door doesn't mean it doesn't erupt on top of it. (You can have line of effect to a red dragon and have fireball be equally ineffective.)


I conclude that the members who are arguing so vigorously for MMM to be so easily undone by Dispel Magic have a bias against the spell being used in the game at all.You can of course attribute whatever bias you like; I am pretty sure most of us have and continue to use magnificent mansion in our games. I know I like the spell a great deal. You can make whatever house rules you like; the fact that they're not RAW doesn't make them invalid for your games. That you resort to personal statements with implied attacks suggesting that we are mean, biased people who don't like you having fun is telling.

[Brookshw]

Cast an invisible Invisibility on the window/doorway and a Magic Aura to read as non-magical for good measure?

Hiding it definitely seems like a solid option. Invisible solid fog or sufficiently long duration spells. Not sure offhand if screen might help, would have to look it up. Basically though, layering defences to hide it and put barriers in the way that would need to be dispelled first, right?

Hmmm, going out on a limb but could it be animated? We're talking doors after all. But they're also spells so I'm not sure its feasible. Doubtful but I'd be happy to be proven wrong.

[ShaneMRoth]

...You're claiming that you can hide behind a tower shield for full cover and thus nobody can attack the tower shield because that would be attacking something you're hiding behind and that would be therefore attacking you. This is not supported by the rules. This isn't even as supported as the "invisible tower shield" trick, which at least is technically viable due to some loophole interactions. ...


I made no such claim about tower shields and total cover. If I had, you would certainly have found a quote to that effect.

My point on tower shields has always been as follows: "The total cover offered by Magnificent Mansion is exponentially superior to the total cover offered by a tower shield."

The reason I say that is because the total cover provided by the Mansion is not provided by a door or portal. It is provided by being in a different universe. The Mansion is taking cover behind the entire Prime Material Plane, or as I call it... the fabric of time and space.

My version of RAW is that the spell effect of "being in a different universe" is not subject to Dispel Magic.

And what is up with this 'invisible tower shield' trick?

The 'invisible tower shield' trick is absurd on its face and is not even technically viable...

I will refer to the SRD for the third time in this thread on this matter...

This is from the entry on the Hide skill...


If people are observing you, even casually, you can’t hide.

My "Rules As Written" take in the 'invisible tower shield' trick is... if people are observing you, even casually, you can't hide.

I wait with eager anticipation for someone to tell me how "that's not RAW"...

[Shackel]

Truth be told, if he believes that anyone who disagrees with him is just biased and doesn't ever want players to be able to rest, I don't think there will be much rationalizing with him, RAW or not.

Simply put, he's ignored or denied every other simple phrasing of RAW in place of his RAI. A bias that large isn't going to disappear any time soon.

[ShaneMRoth]

Truth be told, if he believes that anyone who disagrees with him is just biased and doesn't ever want players to be able to rest, I don't think there will be much rationalizing with him, RAW or not.

Simply put, he's ignored or denied every other simple phrasing of RAW in place of his RAI. A bias that large isn't going to disappear any time soon.

I can totally hear you.

I'm standing right here.

[vorpalvitto]

First up regarding the invisible tower shield trick. The tower shield can grant total cover to the wielder which in turn means that he is for all purposes invisible to everyone (since that is what total cover does, no one can see where you are). And seeing how everything you carry and own is on your person then it is also invisible - as is your tower shield. But as many have said that is RAW silliness.

In regards the whole Rope Trick/MMM vs Dispel Magic. If only your opinion and of anyone agreeing with you interests you, then why ask? Everyone is entitled to their own opinion after all.

I believe that both sides of the argument have been expressed so in case anyone finds this thread he will hopefully find a solution to his questions.

[Brookshw]

I can totally hear you.

I'm standing right here.

Since you're just standing there mind explaining how you're resolving the rope detachment?

[Segev]

I made no such claim about tower shields and total cover. If I had, you would certainly have found a quote to that effect.

My point on tower shields has always been as follows: "The total cover offered by Magnificent Mansion is exponentially superior to the total cover offered by a tower shield."So much so that the analogous thing to "the tower shield" is granting itself cover and thus has total cover and there's nothing to target? You're having the metaphorical turtle stuff its shell inside its shell so that nothing can target the shell.


The reason I say that is because the total cover provided by the Mansion is not provided by a door or portal. It is provided by being in a different universe. The Mansion is taking cover behind the entire Prime Material Plane, or as I call it... the fabric of time and space.There remains the portal to that "other universe." You absolutely can target the closed door. You have yet to demonstrate how you cannot. You've agreed it exists on the originatign plane. You claim it can't be targetted, but you provide no evidence to support this.


My version of RAW is that the spell effect of "being in a different universe" is not subject to Dispel Magic.That's not what you've been saying; if that's your house rule, that's fine. But what you've been claiming is that you cannot have LoE to the part of the spell that remains on the original plane because the rest of the spell isn't on the original plane. Which is patently flawed logic, no different than saying you can't have LoE to a locked and barred castle gate because you lack LoE to the interior of the castle. You claim that it's totally different, but you fail to specify how. You agree the "closed door" is on the original plane. You just keep insisting that there's no LoE to the mansion beyond. Nobody disputes that. You further insist this means there's no LoE to the "closed door." You fail to provide any evidence at all aside from your assertion that interior of the mansion beyond is out of the LoE.

That's why your "interpretation" of the RAW makes no sense and is a failed attempt to claim a house rule - that dispel magic cannot work on magnificent mansion - is not a house rule.


And what is up with this 'invisible tower shield' trick?

The 'invisible tower shield' trick is absurd on its faceTrue.
and is not even technically viable...Sadly false.


I will refer to the SRD for the third time in this thread on this matter...

This is from the entry on the Hide skill...


If people are observing you, even casually, you can’t hide.

My "Rules As Written" take in the 'invisible tower shield' trick is... if people are observing you, even casually, you can't hide.

I wait with eager anticipation for someone to tell me how "that's not RAW"...Oh, you're right. If people are observing you, you cannot hide. However, when you have Total Cover, people cannot observe you. That's part of what Total Cover means, unless otherwise excepted (as it can be with transparent sources of cover, such as walls of force).

Therefore, because the tower shield provides you total cover, you can hide (with the implication that you're doing so behind it). A rules glitch states that any equipment you're carrying - which includes the tower shield - is as hidden as you are. So per the rules glitch, because you've hidden behind the tower shield, anybody who can't make a spot check to overcome your hide check can't tell you (and your tower shield) are there.

It's unquestionably silly and a rules glitch and something I would encourage every DM out there to house rule as an unintended consequence of a rules loophole.

[ShaneMRoth]

However, when you have Total Cover, people cannot observe you. That's part of what Total Cover means, unless otherwise excepted (as it can be with transparent sources of cover, such as walls of force).

Therefore, because the tower shield provides you total cover, you can hide (with the implication that you're doing so behind it). A rules glitch states that any equipment you're carrying - which includes the tower shield - is as hidden as you are. So per the rules glitch, because you've hidden behind the tower shield, anybody who can't make a spot check to overcome your hide check can't tell you (and your tower shield) are there.

It's unquestionably silly and a rules glitch and something I would encourage every DM out there to house rule as an unintended consequence of a rules loophole.


Jesus Tap-dancing Christ...


The notion that if I read "If people are observing you, even casually, you can’t hide."... and then rule that your own observable tower shield doesn't allow you to perform a Hide check... is somehow me pulling a house rule out of my ass... then the 'A' in RAW must stand for Asperger's.

Total Cover blocks line of effect. You can infer that this also prevents people from observing you, but that inference is all you.

If the only thing offering me total cover is my own tower shield, then people are going to observe the crap out of me and my shield.

As in, "the guard observed the man as he farcically attempted to hide behind his own tower shield."

If it is the custom of RAW to parse the meaning of the word 'observe'... and at this point I'd be astonished if it wasn't... then feel free to dazzle me with some tortured rhetorical flourish about how the 'invisible tower shield trick' is in some way a more honest and logical and internally consistent RAW read of how the Hide skill works than the one I offered.

And before anyone asks, I checked the SRD, and am unable to find a rule that explicitly defines a tower shield as observable. So, I guess that my assertion that a tower shield is observable is also my own house rule.

#AtomicFacePalm

[Segev]

No, the rule is right there in the second part of the line you quoted: "If people are observing you, even casually, you can’t hide. You can run around a corner or behind cover so that you’re out of sight and then hide, but the others then know at least where you went."

The tower shield puts you "behind cover."

So they know you hid behind it. They also now, because it's hidden, can't see it...though they do know where it is.


Never said it made sense or was how you should run things. At a table, I'd fully agree with you on it not being allowed to work.

[Haruki-kun]

The Winged Mod: Closed for review.