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.
The bolded words in the above description are what I'm interested in discussing and getting some other folks thoughts on. Here's how I've always interpreted the spell when running my games.
Creature = a single creature that's affected by one or more spells. Dispel magic would negate any effects on it that it can based on the level used to cast it and/or the ability check succeeding when cast.
Object = any single object affected by one or more spells. Dispel magic would negate any effects on it that it can based on the level used to cast it and/or the ability check succeeding when cast.
Magical Effect = a single, ongoing magical effect created by a spell (or some similar source).
But to clarify how I've interpreted "magical effect" - I've always read this as a single magical effect like an illusion or a spell like call lightning or wall of fire that is ongoing and NOT something like Faerie Fire, Hold Person or Slow which happen and instantly affect multiple creatures/objects (assuming higher level slots on Slow/Hold Person). Once a spell like Faerie Fire, Hold Person, or Slow are cast, they are affecting (potentially) multiple creatures/objects and dispel magic then must be used to target an individual creature in order to remove the spell effect. IE, the ongoing magical effects of these spells are dispersed among multiple creatures/objects so the target of dispel magic becomes ONE of those individual creatures/objects because the spell that was cast is not imparting ONE magical effect but many.
What are other DM thoughts on ruling this - specifically the "magical effect" language? I'm honestly just curious to hear how others have interpreted this.
Edit 7/27/18: I'm updating the original post with some additional details in order to summarize some of what's in this thread and give folks some easy references at the start here. There seem to be 2 schools of thought on what the "magical effect" target option means/applies to when trying to determine a ruling on Dispel magic. I'll try to sum up those 2 different schools of thought based on the conversations had in this thread. You can read them for yourself as well and the various arguments given for/against. Like one or the other? Cool, do what you need to as a DM to make your game fun.
One Magical Effect = one spell affecting one creature - I can use Dispel Magic to dispel a spell like Bless by targeting the spell's magical effect only on one target. In this school of thought, the spell Bless itself is considered to have created a unique magical effect on each target creature, hence the magical effect of Bless can be targeted to remove ONLY one single spell effect from that one creature. Each creature affected by Bless would require a dispel magic cast on them to remove that magical effect. (Alternately you can target the creature instead of the magical effect of one spell to try to remove all spells affecting it but we're concerned with targeting "Magical Effects" for this conversation.)
One Magical Effect = one spell affecting all creatures - I can use Dispel Magic to dispel a spell like Bless by targeting the spell's single magical effect in order to remove it from all creatures. In this school of thought, the spell Bless itself is considered a single magical effect that can be targeted based on the Dispel Magic spell description and targeting this way should remove all effects on any creature benefiting from that Bless spell.
So the crux of the argument is can a spell that targets multiple creatures with an effect of some duration be considered a single magical effect to dispel (and remove from all creatures being affected) or is it instead multiple magical effects requiring the dispel target of a single effect on a single creature?
Please note: If you are a DM/GM, you are the person who needs to make the call on how Dispel Magic functions for your table. Take what you need from this thread and make the decision you need to in order to keep having fun at your table. One idea sounds better than the other and makes things more interesting for PCs and the enemies they face? Sweet, do that thing.
Here are some other sources of info that have been posted that can help you make a decision. Arguments have been made for & against the clarity of these statements.
And here's the link to the Sage Advice Compendium (if you want to know if the link is current, just go to @JeremyECrawford's twitter account as he usually has the most current link on his bio). Page 15 has the example of Bless and specific wording concerning this which is also discussed further on in this thread.
Edit 7/29/18: Jeremy Crawford has answered some more questions on Dispel Magic. The answers would seem to imply a specific direction for your rulings. Based on how you interpret these, they should give you the firm footing you want to answer this in your own game if you weren't already of a set opinion.
I also agree with your interpretation... mostly. Faerie Fire, Hold Person, and Slow are all Concentration spells. That is not the point I am trying to make but I am going to use that to hopefully get my point across. If the caster loses concentration does any of those spell's effects end on just one target, or some but not others? Or does the single magical effect that is affecting multiple targets end on all of them? Do not confuse multiple targets with multiple effects. You can use Dispel Magic to end a single magical effect that is affecting multiple targets. And as you pointed out, you can also target a single creature affected to just end the effect on them if that is what you choose.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"A rightful place awaits you in the Realms Above, in the Land of the Great Light. Come in peace, and live beneath the sun again, where trees and flowers grow."
— The message of Eilistraee to all decent drow.
"Run thy sword across my chains, Silver Lady, that I may join your dance.”
If dispel magic targets the magical effect from bless cast by a cleric, does it remove the effect on all the targets? Dispel magic ends a spell on one target. It doesn’t end the same spell on other targets.
At my table, I rule that Dispel Magic can target magical effects that are visible (Call Lightning, Fog, Darkness, illusions) but not a magical effect that affects x number of targets, even if that is within an area at the time of casting such as Slow or Faerie Fire. Spells like that must be dispelled on each target individually.
Basically, I treat Dispel Magic as if it read, "Choose one creature, object, or magical effect within range that you can see." [bold is my addition]
For some reason that I cannot comprehend, the D&D community has recently become obsessed with how Dispel Magic works against the Slow spell *coughcirticalrolemollymauktealeafripcough*
Personally, I agree with the "each personal effect needs to be dispelled separately" thesis - and that's how I'd do it in my game, but different tables, different interpretations ( and/or mistakes; DMs makes those ... well ... other DMs ).
Disclaimer: This signature is a badge of membership in the Forum Loudmouth Club. We are all friends. We are not attacking each other. We are engaging in spirited, friendly debate with one another. We may get snarky, but these are not attacks. Thank you for not reporting us.
Yeah, and that is what prompted the question. I watch D&D streams to steal all the ideas I can. So when a DM rules on something and I've never thought about it that way before it makes me curious if there's something I'm missing or not. No judgement for how anyone else decides to rule on anything in their game. This is merely a selfish question so I can see what other people are thinking out there and steal the best ideas for my game.
I gathered :) Honestly - I think the answer is that Matt Mercer made a mistake *cowers under a table waiting for the lightening to strike* - or has customized his table rules to that effect.
Disclaimer: This signature is a badge of membership in the Forum Loudmouth Club. We are all friends. We are not attacking each other. We are engaging in spirited, friendly debate with one another. We may get snarky, but these are not attacks. Thank you for not reporting us.
I, sad as it is to say, have not been following CR:2 so I do not know the reference to what Matt did. However, I can say with the utmost certainty that, he has made numerous decisions which do not adhere to the RAW/RAI.
I am of a mind that, using Faerie Fire as the example, if I were to cast Dispel Magic on my glowing buddy, they'd stop glowing. The other creatures around would continue to glow, as they are being affected individually. If I decided to cast Dispel Magic on the creature where the Faerie Fire originated from, nothing would happen. The caster is not affected by a magical effect, instead just focusing on maintaining a spell. Now, were I to punch the caster in the nose, they fail the CON save, then all the affected targets would cease to glow.
Basically, I treat Dispel Magic as if it read, "Choose one creature, object, or magical effect within range that you can see." [bold is my addition]
Not a fan of this; it'd prevent someone from dispelling a wall of fire that's burning them or a web that's trapping them just because they happen to be blinded. Dispel Magic not requiring sight is a feature.
Do not confuse multiple targets with multiple effects. You can use Dispel Magic to end a single magical effect that is affecting multiple targets.
If I cast Slow on 5 creatures, they can all make their saves and end the effect on themselves at different times. Casting Dispel Magic on one of them is no different. You can't end an effect like Slow on all targets because there's nothing to target but the individual creatures it's affecting, you can only target one of them, and the lifetime of the spell on one target doesn't affect the others.
Interesting, @Brian_Avery. So in your interpretation a single spell that impacts multiple targets isn't imparting multiple magical effects (one for each target) but is considered a single magical effect? Or maybe could be considered both if you can pick whether to dispel the entire spell vs. a single target affected by it?
If that's correct, theoretically Dispel Magic is the same thing as Counterspell then, it just would obviously take place after a spell is cast (and whatever number of rounds needed to get to the caster's turn).
So the language of "choose a magical effect," how would you interpret that in a situation where a spell is affecting multiple targets but the caster doesn't necessarily know where it originated from. Is that providing an opportunity to choose to dispel the entire spell still or would a force a target by target dispel approach? Just curious and trying to take this further down the path if you rule this way in your games.
This next bit, I hope, will clarify how the ruling should go:
The evil enchanter Tim casts Faerie Fire, runs out of the room, locks the door and then hides under the bed covers.
The rogue, fighter and barbarian all fail their save and start to glow.
The cleric casts dispel magic, he would have to choose one of the three (rogue, fighter or barbarian), and that one would stop glowing.
---
The evil enchanter Tim casts Faerie Fire, he then takes a defensive position behind some bugbear guards.
The rogue, fighter and barbarian all fail their save and start to glow.
The cleric casts dispel magic, he points to the evil enchanter Tim, the three others continue to glow as dispel magic wouldn't do anything.
---
The evil enchanter Tim casts Faerie Fire, he then takes a defensive position behind some bugbear guards.
The rogue, fighter and barbarian all fail their save and start to glow.
The Barbarian casts Rage and then attacks the evil enchanter Tim, Tim fails his "keep the spell going" save, the three (Rogue, fighter, and barbarian) all stop glowing.
Disclaimer: This signature is a badge of membership in the Forum Loudmouth Club. We are all friends. We are not attacking each other. We are engaging in spirited, friendly debate with one another. We may get snarky, but these are not attacks. Thank you for not reporting us.
Whether or not the caster of Dispel Magic knows or is aware of a magical effect is up to how each individual DM chooses to rule. The caster does get to choose how they cast such a spell, they are not forced to choose a creature. The choice is theirs, if they choose a creature then the magical effect only ends on that creature and doesn't affect any other creatures.
But if they choose the magical effect itself and not an individual creature, as is their option as per the very 1st sentence of the spell, then they are not targeting a creature. They are targeting the magical effect, and the spell says you can do that.
Nothing in the sage compendium says you cannot do this... it says one target. If your target is a creature then yes, only that creature's effect ends, but if you choose the magical effect as you sole target then the magical effect ends. A spell like Slow is a single spell with a single magical effect that can hit multiple targets, there are not multiple Slow spells that you have to lose concentration on each individually, there is only one that you lose concentration on all the targets at once if you lose concentration, or if someone uses Dispel Magic to target the effect instead of one of the targets from Slow then the Slow effect ends... for all.
(note: I am not saying this is how I would rule or that it is the only way to interpret the rule, but it is written clear as day in the spell Dispel Magic .)
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"A rightful place awaits you in the Realms Above, in the Land of the Great Light. Come in peace, and live beneath the sun again, where trees and flowers grow."
— The message of Eilistraee to all decent drow.
"Run thy sword across my chains, Silver Lady, that I may join your dance.”
Nothing in the sage compendium says you cannot do this... A spell like Slow is a single spell with a single magical effect that can hit multiple targets, there are not multiple Slow spells that you have to lose concentration on each individually, there is only one that you lose concentration on all the targets at once if you lose concentration, or if someone uses Dispel Magic to target the effect instead of one of the targets from Slow then the Slow effect ends... for all.
Xiphias_DM quoted a Sage Advice answer that contradicts you.
The sage advice compendium question was... If dispel magic targets the magical effect from bless cast by a cleric, does it remove the effect on all the targets?
The answer is... Dispel magic ends a spell on one target. It doesn't end the same spell on other targets.
I agree with this. If dispel magic is cast on one target (a creature) it doesn't end the same spell on other targets (multiple creatures)... but if instead of targeting any of the creatures targeted by bless, you target the bless spell itself (not the bless spell on a creature) the actual magical effect of a single bless spell the wording of dispel magic says it ends that spell.
Target a creature = only the spell on the creature ends.
Target a object = only the spell on the object ends.
Target a magical effect = only the spell that created the magical effect ends.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"A rightful place awaits you in the Realms Above, in the Land of the Great Light. Come in peace, and live beneath the sun again, where trees and flowers grow."
— The message of Eilistraee to all decent drow.
"Run thy sword across my chains, Silver Lady, that I may join your dance.”
It's pretty obvious the SA answer is saying the spell only ends on one person. You can't target "the Bless effect" because there is no such thing; the Bless spell doesn't manifest anything you can target.
Note the wording Crawford uses: a "phenomenon that is under the effect of a spell." He also says you'd have to target the banished creature.
He's also responded "Dispel magic ends spells on a target, not on every target affected by the same spell." when asked "Group of PC’s are Water Walked, NPC casts Dispel Magic targeting that spell. Do all potentially lose spell or just one PC?" It's clear here Jeremy is treating "targeting the Water Walk spell" as synonymous to targeting a creature affected by it, just like the Sage Advice Compendium answer.
This is, please forgive me, so very much a "I cast magic missile at the darkness" argument. Darkness is something I can see so I must be able to target it.
Sleep is a spell, sleeping is an effect of the spell, so I can dispel the sleep and wake everything in the room.
I'm pretty sure that the intention of using the term magical effect was to allow people to use dispel magic to get rid of a discrete magical effect that is not dependent on one particular target, for example the product of a wall of fire or blade barrier spell. Even before I saw the Sage Advice ruling, i would've ruled as that article suggested.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Are you a DM in need of advice? Want to get it from a DM of nearly 40 years of experience who happens to be an anthropomorphic bear? Join the thousands of readers at the DM's Den. New articles every week. Questions answered! Answers questioned! http://dmsden.tumblr.com
Everything I have on 5e Dispel Magic says you can target the blah blah blah WITHIN RANGE, says nothing about see. Could be wrong, but I rule dispel magic can remove most effects, even bless.
I would reason 1. You can see someone cast a blessing so you would know that creatures are blessed.
2. A creature with a blessing should have something unique about them afterward, a sheen, a shine, something. Add some salt and pepper to the steak. You ever see magic in any medium where someone does something and nothing tangible happens? Nope, not really.
But that is just my game, the question is highly subjective and will most likely have no clear answer until you corner a designer.
Dispel Magic per the PHB:
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.
The bolded words in the above description are what I'm interested in discussing and getting some other folks thoughts on. Here's how I've always interpreted the spell when running my games.
Creature = a single creature that's affected by one or more spells. Dispel magic would negate any effects on it that it can based on the level used to cast it and/or the ability check succeeding when cast.
Object = any single object affected by one or more spells. Dispel magic would negate any effects on it that it can based on the level used to cast it and/or the ability check succeeding when cast.
Magical Effect = a single, ongoing magical effect created by a spell (or some similar source).
But to clarify how I've interpreted "magical effect" - I've always read this as a single magical effect like an illusion or a spell like call lightning or wall of fire that is ongoing and NOT something like Faerie Fire, Hold Person or Slow which happen and instantly affect multiple creatures/objects (assuming higher level slots on Slow/Hold Person). Once a spell like Faerie Fire, Hold Person, or Slow are cast, they are affecting (potentially) multiple creatures/objects and dispel magic then must be used to target an individual creature in order to remove the spell effect. IE, the ongoing magical effects of these spells are dispersed among multiple creatures/objects so the target of dispel magic becomes ONE of those individual creatures/objects because the spell that was cast is not imparting ONE magical effect but many.
What are other DM thoughts on ruling this - specifically the "magical effect" language? I'm honestly just curious to hear how others have interpreted this.
Edit 7/27/18: I'm updating the original post with some additional details in order to summarize some of what's in this thread and give folks some easy references at the start here. There seem to be 2 schools of thought on what the "magical effect" target option means/applies to when trying to determine a ruling on Dispel magic. I'll try to sum up those 2 different schools of thought based on the conversations had in this thread. You can read them for yourself as well and the various arguments given for/against. Like one or the other? Cool, do what you need to as a DM to make your game fun.
One Magical Effect = one spell affecting one creature - I can use Dispel Magic to dispel a spell like Bless by targeting the spell's magical effect only on one target. In this school of thought, the spell Bless itself is considered to have created a unique magical effect on each target creature, hence the magical effect of Bless can be targeted to remove ONLY one single spell effect from that one creature. Each creature affected by Bless would require a dispel magic cast on them to remove that magical effect. (Alternately you can target the creature instead of the magical effect of one spell to try to remove all spells affecting it but we're concerned with targeting "Magical Effects" for this conversation.)
One Magical Effect = one spell affecting all creatures - I can use Dispel Magic to dispel a spell like Bless by targeting the spell's single magical effect in order to remove it from all creatures. In this school of thought, the spell Bless itself is considered a single magical effect that can be targeted based on the Dispel Magic spell description and targeting this way should remove all effects on any creature benefiting from that Bless spell.
So the crux of the argument is can a spell that targets multiple creatures with an effect of some duration be considered a single magical effect to dispel (and remove from all creatures being affected) or is it instead multiple magical effects requiring the dispel target of a single effect on a single creature?
Please note: If you are a DM/GM, you are the person who needs to make the call on how Dispel Magic functions for your table. Take what you need from this thread and make the decision you need to in order to keep having fun at your table. One idea sounds better than the other and makes things more interesting for PCs and the enemies they face? Sweet, do that thing.
Here are some other sources of info that have been posted that can help you make a decision. Arguments have been made for & against the clarity of these statements.
https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/732796836004691968?s=19
https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/950170649749696513?s=19
https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/1022228236606951424
Other fun things stated about Dispel Magic.
https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/1022951482604367875
https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/1022956163195752448
https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/1022952661279236098
https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/893247870840651777
https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/862032731881865216
https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/811638194097655808
https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/805820448315318272
https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/805221903296184320
https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/798605326312292353
https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/722824165988769795
https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/692448278160502786
https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/655067480281362432
https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/643833994904121344
And here's the link to the Sage Advice Compendium (if you want to know if the link is current, just go to @JeremyECrawford's twitter account as he usually has the most current link on his bio). Page 15 has the example of Bless and specific wording concerning this which is also discussed further on in this thread.
http://media.wizards.com/2017/dnd/downloads/SA-Compendium.pdf
Edit 7/29/18: Jeremy Crawford has answered some more questions on Dispel Magic. The answers would seem to imply a specific direction for your rulings. Based on how you interpret these, they should give you the firm footing you want to answer this in your own game if you weren't already of a set opinion.
https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/1022951482604367875
https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/1022956163195752448
https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/1022952661279236098
I interpret it exactly the same way.
The Forum Infestation (TM)
I also agree with your interpretation... mostly. Faerie Fire, Hold Person, and Slow are all Concentration spells. That is not the point I am trying to make but I am going to use that to hopefully get my point across. If the caster loses concentration does any of those spell's effects end on just one target, or some but not others? Or does the single magical effect that is affecting multiple targets end on all of them? Do not confuse multiple targets with multiple effects. You can use Dispel Magic to end a single magical effect that is affecting multiple targets. And as you pointed out, you can also target a single creature affected to just end the effect on them if that is what you choose.
According to the Sage Compendium (http://media.wizards.com/2016/downloads/DND/SA-Compendium.pdf):
At my table, I rule that Dispel Magic can target magical effects that are visible (Call Lightning, Fog, Darkness, illusions) but not a magical effect that affects x number of targets, even if that is within an area at the time of casting such as Slow or Faerie Fire. Spells like that must be dispelled on each target individually.
Basically, I treat Dispel Magic as if it read, "Choose one creature, object, or magical effect within range that you can see." [bold is my addition]
For some reason that I cannot comprehend, the D&D community has recently become obsessed with how Dispel Magic works against the Slow spell *coughcirticalrolemollymauktealeafripcough*
Personally, I agree with the "each personal effect needs to be dispelled separately" thesis - and that's how I'd do it in my game, but different tables, different interpretations ( and/or mistakes; DMs makes those ... well ... other DMs ).
My DM Philosophy, as summed up by other people: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1rN5w4-azTq3Kbn0Yvk9nfqQhwQ1R5by1/view
Disclaimer: This signature is a badge of membership in the Forum Loudmouth Club. We are all friends. We are not attacking each other. We are engaging in spirited, friendly debate with one another. We may get snarky, but these are not attacks. Thank you for not reporting us.
Yeah, and that is what prompted the question. I watch D&D streams to steal all the ideas I can. So when a DM rules on something and I've never thought about it that way before it makes me curious if there's something I'm missing or not. No judgement for how anyone else decides to rule on anything in their game. This is merely a selfish question so I can see what other people are thinking out there and steal the best ideas for my game.
I gathered :) Honestly - I think the answer is that Matt Mercer made a mistake *cowers under a table waiting for the lightening to strike* - or has customized his table rules to that effect.
My DM Philosophy, as summed up by other people: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1rN5w4-azTq3Kbn0Yvk9nfqQhwQ1R5by1/view
Disclaimer: This signature is a badge of membership in the Forum Loudmouth Club. We are all friends. We are not attacking each other. We are engaging in spirited, friendly debate with one another. We may get snarky, but these are not attacks. Thank you for not reporting us.
I, sad as it is to say, have not been following CR:2 so I do not know the reference to what Matt did. However, I can say with the utmost certainty that, he has made numerous decisions which do not adhere to the RAW/RAI.
I am of a mind that, using Faerie Fire as the example, if I were to cast Dispel Magic on my glowing buddy, they'd stop glowing. The other creatures around would continue to glow, as they are being affected individually. If I decided to cast Dispel Magic on the creature where the Faerie Fire originated from, nothing would happen. The caster is not affected by a magical effect, instead just focusing on maintaining a spell. Now, were I to punch the caster in the nose, they fail the CON save, then all the affected targets would cease to glow.
Not a fan of this; it'd prevent someone from dispelling a wall of fire that's burning them or a web that's trapping them just because they happen to be blinded. Dispel Magic not requiring sight is a feature.
If I cast Slow on 5 creatures, they can all make their saves and end the effect on themselves at different times. Casting Dispel Magic on one of them is no different. You can't end an effect like Slow on all targets because there's nothing to target but the individual creatures it's affecting, you can only target one of them, and the lifetime of the spell on one target doesn't affect the others.
The Forum Infestation (TM)
Interesting, @Brian_Avery. So in your interpretation a single spell that impacts multiple targets isn't imparting multiple magical effects (one for each target) but is considered a single magical effect? Or maybe could be considered both if you can pick whether to dispel the entire spell vs. a single target affected by it?
If that's correct, theoretically Dispel Magic is the same thing as Counterspell then, it just would obviously take place after a spell is cast (and whatever number of rounds needed to get to the caster's turn).
So the language of "choose a magical effect," how would you interpret that in a situation where a spell is affecting multiple targets but the caster doesn't necessarily know where it originated from. Is that providing an opportunity to choose to dispel the entire spell still or would a force a target by target dispel approach? Just curious and trying to take this further down the path if you rule this way in your games.
Thanks!
This next bit, I hope, will clarify how the ruling should go:
The evil enchanter Tim casts Faerie Fire, runs out of the room, locks the door and then hides under the bed covers.
The rogue, fighter and barbarian all fail their save and start to glow.
The cleric casts dispel magic, he would have to choose one of the three (rogue, fighter or barbarian), and that one would stop glowing.
---
The evil enchanter Tim casts Faerie Fire, he then takes a defensive position behind some bugbear guards.
The rogue, fighter and barbarian all fail their save and start to glow.
The cleric casts dispel magic, he points to the evil enchanter Tim, the three others continue to glow as dispel magic wouldn't do anything.
---
The evil enchanter Tim casts Faerie Fire, he then takes a defensive position behind some bugbear guards.
The rogue, fighter and barbarian all fail their save and start to glow.
The Barbarian casts Rage and then attacks the evil enchanter Tim, Tim fails his "keep the spell going" save, the three (Rogue, fighter, and barbarian) all stop glowing.
My DM Philosophy, as summed up by other people: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1rN5w4-azTq3Kbn0Yvk9nfqQhwQ1R5by1/view
Disclaimer: This signature is a badge of membership in the Forum Loudmouth Club. We are all friends. We are not attacking each other. We are engaging in spirited, friendly debate with one another. We may get snarky, but these are not attacks. Thank you for not reporting us.
Whether or not the caster of Dispel Magic knows or is aware of a magical effect is up to how each individual DM chooses to rule. The caster does get to choose how they cast such a spell, they are not forced to choose a creature. The choice is theirs, if they choose a creature then the magical effect only ends on that creature and doesn't affect any other creatures.
But if they choose the magical effect itself and not an individual creature, as is their option as per the very 1st sentence of the spell, then they are not targeting a creature. They are targeting the magical effect, and the spell says you can do that.
Nothing in the sage compendium says you cannot do this... it says one target. If your target is a creature then yes, only that creature's effect ends, but if you choose the magical effect as you sole target then the magical effect ends. A spell like Slow is a single spell with a single magical effect that can hit multiple targets, there are not multiple Slow spells that you have to lose concentration on each individually, there is only one that you lose concentration on all the targets at once if you lose concentration, or if someone uses Dispel Magic to target the effect instead of one of the targets from Slow then the Slow effect ends... for all.
(note: I am not saying this is how I would rule or that it is the only way to interpret the rule, but it is written clear as day in the spell Dispel Magic .)
Xiphias_DM quoted a Sage Advice answer that contradicts you.
The Forum Infestation (TM)
The sage advice compendium question was... If dispel magic targets the magical effect from bless cast by a cleric, does it remove the effect on all the targets?
The answer is... Dispel magic ends a spell on one target. It doesn't end the same spell on other targets.
I agree with this. If dispel magic is cast on one target (a creature) it doesn't end the same spell on other targets (multiple creatures)... but if instead of targeting any of the creatures targeted by bless, you target the bless spell itself (not the bless spell on a creature) the actual magical effect of a single bless spell the wording of dispel magic says it ends that spell.
Target a creature = only the spell on the creature ends.
Target a object = only the spell on the object ends.
Target a magical effect = only the spell that created the magical effect ends.
The Forum Infestation (TM)
This is, please forgive me, so very much a "I cast magic missile at the darkness" argument. Darkness is something I can see so I must be able to target it.
Sleep is a spell, sleeping is an effect of the spell, so I can dispel the sleep and wake everything in the room.
I'm pretty sure that the intention of using the term magical effect was to allow people to use dispel magic to get rid of a discrete magical effect that is not dependent on one particular target, for example the product of a wall of fire or blade barrier spell. Even before I saw the Sage Advice ruling, i would've ruled as that article suggested.
Are you a DM in need of advice? Want to get it from a DM of nearly 40 years of experience who happens to be an anthropomorphic bear? Join the thousands of readers at the DM's Den. New articles every week. Questions answered! Answers questioned! http://dmsden.tumblr.com
Everything I have on 5e Dispel Magic says you can target the blah blah blah WITHIN RANGE, says nothing about see. Could be wrong, but I rule dispel magic can remove most effects, even bless.
I would reason 1. You can see someone cast a blessing so you would know that creatures are blessed.
2. A creature with a blessing should have something unique about them afterward, a sheen, a shine, something. Add some salt and pepper to the steak. You ever see magic in any medium where someone does something and nothing tangible happens? Nope, not really.
But that is just my game, the question is highly subjective and will most likely have no clear answer until you corner a designer.
Dispel Magic should dispel any spell that doesn't have an instantaneous effect. Counter spell is for the instant stuff.
A vampire casts hold monster? dispel magic all day
Someone uses a magic staff to cast an effect spell. Dispel all day
Cast dispel on the staff to break its magic? nope.
Enemy throwing magic missile or firebolt at you? hope you have counter spell.
And IMO so on and so forth.