dispel magic vs magic item

[da newt]

In a mod I am prepping to DM there is a 'trap' that "radiates a field of anti-magic in a 15' radius. If an active spell or permanent magic item approaches within 15', it attempts to dispel (per dispel magic) it with a +5 to the check."


How does the spell dispel magic affect magic items? What spell level does each magic item possess? Is it based on a magic item's rarity? Is there a reference somewhere?


Dispel Magic
3 abjuration
Casting Time: 1 action
Range: 120 feet
Target: One creature, object, or magical effect within range
Components: V S
Duration: Instantaneous
Classes: Bard, Cleric, Druid, Paladin, Sorcerer, Warlock, Wizard
Choose one creature, object, or magical effect within range. Any spell of 3rd level or lower on the target ends. For each spell of 4th level or higher on the target, make an ability check using your spellcasting ability. The DC equals 10 + the spell’s level. On a successful check, the spell ends.
At Higher Levels: When you cast this spell using a spell slot of 4th level or higher, you automatically end the effects of a spell on the target if the spell's level is equal to or less than the level of the spell slot you used.

[Mastikator]

Anti magic fields suppress the magic properties of magic items (not artifacts) and spells (not directly from gods), but if this trap casts Dispel Magic then it seems to me to be a bit contradictory. Why bother dispelling if it's already an anti magic field doing the heavy lifting?

Dispel Magic does not work inside anti magic field. And Dispel Magic does nothing to magic items by RAW. Dispel Magic only ends the ongoing effect of non-instantaneous spells.

[Tanarii]

Dispel Magic only dispels spells.

It either dispel's all spells on creatures or objects, or dispels the one target spell directly if you target it's magical effect not on a creature or object it is on.

For example, if you target a creature with bless it ends the bless spell, for all targets because it's a multi target spell and it ends. If you target an object with darkness it ends the darkness spell. If you target a flaming sphere or wall of ice it ends the spell.

[ProsecutorGodot]

Dispel Magic does exactly what it states, which is really not that much.

It's strange though, many published adventures feature magical traps or hazards that they intend for you to use Dispel Magic on, which only fuels the misconception that it affects magic more broadly than the spell description states.

So to be clear, by default, this trap doesn't affect magic items at all.

You could decide otherwise though, there's no reason the trap actually has to be casting a spell, it could just radiate an effect that dispels magic under a certain spell level and temporarily renders magic items non-magical for X duration/while they remain in the area.

For example, if you target a creature with bless it ends the bless spell, for all targets because it's a multi target spell and it ends. If you target an object with darkness it ends the darkness spell. If you target a flaming sphere or wall of ice it ends the spell.
Not directly related, but I'm not sure it's really intended to work as you describe in the bolded. The upcasted spell uses a different wording, which implies that it only ends the effect on the target creature. It would be strange for the spell to function differently when not upcast so I'd say there's some sloppy wording for one of the effects.

I would assume the intention is that the bless spell ends for that target only.

[Psyren]

Dispel Magic only affects spells in 5e. Magic items and traps are not dispellable by it.

[da newt]

Thanks - I thought I had missed something about 'dispel magic' affecting permanent magical items (like a +1 weapon) because the module specifically says that's what it does, but I guess the publishers don't know RAW any better than I do ...

[Thunderous Mojo]

Dispel Magic does exactly what it states, which is really not that much.

It's strange though, many published adventures feature magical traps or hazards that they intend for you to use Dispel Magic on, which only fuels the misconception that it affects magic more broadly than the spell description states.


Historically, Dispel Magic worked on more than just spells.
Even the current spell description would seem to imply that the spell was at some point in development intended to affect more than just spells:

Choose one creature, object, or magical effect within range.

A DM, can assign an effect an appropriate equivalent spell level, and then proceed to use the spell normally.

That is how I personally run Dispel Magic when I DM, and I have never had an issue with it. Indeed, it means people start selecting Dispel Magic again.

[ProsecutorGodot]

Historically, Dispel Magic worked on more than just spells.
Even the current spell description would seem to imply that the spell was at some point in development intended to affect more than just spells:

Choose one creature, object, or magical effect within range.

A DM, can assign an effect an appropriate equivalent spell level, and then proceed to use the spell normally.

That is how I personally run Dispel Magic when I DM, and I have never had an issue with it. Indeed, it means people start selecting Dispel Magic again.

That's not necessarily evidence to suggest it was intended to cover anything other than spells, those three targets are the most common targets for lingering spell effects.

You could be correct though and I'd be inclined to run it similarly.

[Psyren]

Thanks - I thought I had missed something about 'dispel magic' affecting permanent magical items (like a +1 weapon) because the module specifically says that's what it does, but I guess the publishers don't know RAW any better than I do ...

The module isn't necessarily wrong, that could be a custom flaw of the item in question. Without knowing which module you're running it's not possible to tell what might have been intended however.

[Thunderous Mojo]

That's not necessarily evidence to suggest it was intended to cover anything other than spells, those three targets are the most common targets for lingering spell effects.

You could be correct though and I'd be inclined to run it similarly.

The sentence I quoted certainly is not overwhelming evidence that supports my interpretation.

Which is why, I emphasize the pragmatic usefulness of my interpretation.

Much of the magic in 5e, was originally intended to be tied to spells.
A Ninja, (Shadowmonk), might be using secrets of Ninjitsu to cast Silence, but the spell like effect is still subject to Dispel Magic,

As time has passed on, more and more effects that are clearly magical but not necessarily spells have crept into the game.

On the player side, subclasses like the Rune Knight, are highly magical.
I myself can see no salient reason why the magical rings of restraining fire that are created by a Rune Knight’s Fire Rune could not be dispelled.

If a Wizard PC found an ancient spell from the Giant Kingdoms of yore, that had the same effect as the Fire Rune, but was cast as a 2nd level spell, suddenly Dispel Magic works…..but not on a Rune Knight. It is an arbitrary line in the sand.

On the DM side, Mordenkainen Presents Ill Conceived Alterations to Separate you from you Money, (sometimes also referenced as MPMotM), re-introduced loads of creatures that have Spell-Like Abilities, that are labeled as Spell Attacks, but no equivalent spell level is presented.

The proliferation of non leveled Spells in 5e is legion.
(The designers should be ashamed on Monsters of the Multiverse)