Hello. I have a question regarding dispelling potion effects. Can they be done? Our DM's argument is that since potions grant magical effects and dispel magic works with "magical effects" then he should be able to do it. I don't think this is a fair conclusion since potions are not granted by spell effects, and Sage Advice doesn't have an entry about this. What do you think?
I think so, sure. A potion grants a magical effect. Dispel Magic effects, "one creature, object, or magical effect within range."
So if you drink a potion, its magic takes effect on you, so if someone casts Dispel Magic on you, it could end that magical effect. In fact, I would even say if you don't drink the potion - if the potion is just sitting in its container on a shelf - and someone casts Dispel magic on the potion, it would/could become inert non-magical liquid.
Except the bit that immediately follows that sentence says "Any ongoing spell of level 3 or lower on the target ends. For each ongoing spell of level 4 or higher on the target, make an ability check using your spellcasting ability (DC 10 plus that spell’s level). On a successful check, the spell ends." Certain potions grant the effects of spells and so can be affected after they've been used, but by RAW you cannot render a Potion of Heroism inert by casting the spell on the items before they're used, and you cannot affect a Potion of Fire Breath at all because its effect is not tied to a spell.
In addition to what Ace said, this is from the SAC (which has more on Dispel Magic if you/the DM wants to look).
Can you use Dispel Magic to dispel a magical effect like a Druid’s Wild Shape?
Dispel Magic has a particular purpose: to break other spells. It has no effect on a magical effect that isn’t created by a spell unless the text says otherwise (though the DM can always make exceptions).
And the 2014 SAC had the same answer (but with more explanation).
Can you use dispel magic to dispel a magical effect like a vampire’s Charm ability or a druid’s Wild Shape?
Dispel magic has a particular purpose: to break other spells. It has no effect on a vampire’s Charm ability or any other magical effect that isn’t a spell. It also does nothing to the properties of a magic item. It can, however, end a spell cast from a magic item or from another source. Spells—they’re what dispel magic is about. For example, if you cast dispel magic on a staff of power, the spell fails to disrupt the staff’s magical properties, but if the staff’s wielder casts hold monster from the staff, dispel magic can end that spell if cast on the target of hold monster.
There are abilities and other spells that can end or suspend magical effects that aren’t spells. For example, the greater restoration spell can end a charm effect of any sort on a target (such as a vampire’s Charm or a dryad’s Fey Charm), and a paladin’s Aura of Devotion can prevent or suspend such an effect.
I understand that my position may not comport exactly with RAW. I was simply stating what I think is appropriate and what would guide my decision making at my table. A Potion of Fire Breath doesn't duplicate the effect of a named spell, but it is still a magical effect. Dispel Magic specifies "magic effect", not "magic effect that exactly duplicates a named spell". The inclusion in the spell description of spell levels is simply to enable you to calculate the chance of dispelling a spell of a defines level. If you drink an ounce of liquid and gain the ability to breathe fire, I'd say that's a pretty magical effect.
And why can't Dispel Magic be used on a potion before it's used? Dispel Magic says it effects, "one object, creature, or magical effect". After you drink the potion, it's a magical effect. But before you drink the potion, it's an object imbued with magic.
I understand that my position may not comport exactly with RAW. I was simply stating what I think is appropriate and what would guide my decision making at my table. A Potion of Fire Breath doesn't duplicate the effect of a named spell, but it is still a magical effect. Dispel Magic specifies "magic effect", not "magic effect that exactly duplicates a named spell". The inclusion in the spell description of spell levels is simply to enable you to calculate the chance of dispelling a spell of a defines level. If you drink an ounce of liquid and gain the ability to breathe fire, I'd say that's a pretty magical effect.
I got ninja:d by @Tarodnet. but you should read his post and links. You can of course play the game in any way you want but just note that you are making Dispel Macig a lot stronger/more versatile than it is intended to be.
@zolt4r Can Dispel Magic dispel potions' effects that are named like spells? And other potions? @JeremyECrawford Thanks! @JeremyECrawford Dispel magic can be used against a spell effect created by a potion, but a potion can't be robbed of its magic by it.
I understand that my position may not comport exactly with RAW. I was simply stating what I think is appropriate and what would guide my decision making at my table. A Potion of Fire Breath doesn't duplicate the effect of a named spell, but it is still a magical effect. Dispel Magic specifies "magic effect", not "magic effect that exactly duplicates a named spell". The inclusion in the spell description of spell levels is simply to enable you to calculate the chance of dispelling a spell of a defines level. If you drink an ounce of liquid and gain the ability to breathe fire, I'd say that's a pretty magical effect.
And why can't Dispel Magic be used on a potion before it's used? Dispel Magic says it effects, "one object, creature, or magical effect". After you drink the potion, it's a magical effect. But before you drink the potion, it's an object imbued with magic.
Anyways, just my 2 c.p.
It should be noted that the purpose of this forum is to give answers that "comport exactly with RAW" or as close to. From the forum guideline post:
The purpose of this forum is to help figure out what certain rules and wordings of mechanics mean and how they might interact, giving as helpful an answer as possible to each other.
And why can't Dispel Magic be used on a potion before it's used? Dispel Magic says it effects, "one object, creature, or magical effect". After you drink the potion, it's a magical effect. But before you drink the potion, it's an object imbued with magic.
Anyways, just my 2 c.p.
I’d say a potion before it’s used is a magic item, and dispel magic doesn’t effect (aka destroy) magic items. In the spell description “objects” to me means objects that have a spell put on them, like if you cast light on a rock. If you open dispel magic up to potions, seems like there’s a whole lot of other items you could potentially ruin.
There used to be a spell, morednkainen’s disjunction, which could end the magic on an item. They got rid of the spell, but there is a legendary magic item which does the same thing.
Dispel Magic can target a magical effect to end its associated spell. It's one of the prime example of confusion resulting from only reading the first sentence of the spell's description. Dispel Magic ends spells, and only spells. It doesn't end potion effects or magical effects like Channel Divinity. Even if the potion mimics the effect of a spell, it's still not actually a spell.
What exactly the line between "the effect of a spell" and simply "the spell itself" is in regards to this is debatable. I wouldn't judge anyone as clearly in the wrong for leaning in either direction.
If I was going to allow dispelling potions (which I would consider), they would need an effective spell level to roll against. Based on scrolls, that's probably something like level 1 for Common, level 3 for Uncommon, level 5 for Rare, level 7 for Very Rare, and level 9 for Legendary.
Notably not even all spells can be dispelled, a Wizard's or Warlock's Find Familiar, a Paladin's Find Steed, undead from the Animate Dead spell are all creatures that can not be dispelled via Dispel Magic despite all originating from a spell, since the spell has already ended. And funnily enough, if you dispel Levitate, the creature still floats to the ground as opposed to falling. Dispel Magic only dispels on-going spell effects from a spell, potions aren't spells and do not cast spells and so are not valid targets of Dispel Magic. Generally when potions do give spell effects, they specify that they give the effects of the spell, rather than casting the spell and so no spell was actually cast.
Now what might prevent potions working would be an antimagic field, as that specifically does suppress all magical effects including those from items. However funnily enough, the familiar, the steed and the skeletons can still enter an antimagic field.
Notably not even all spells can be dispelled, a Wizard's or Warlock's Find Familiar, a Paladin's Find Steed, undead from the Animate Dead spell are all creatures that can not be dispelled via Dispel Magic despite all originating from a spell, since the spell has already ended. And funnily enough, if you dispel Levitate, the creature still floats to the ground as opposed to falling. Dispel Magic only dispels on-going spell effects from a spell, potions aren't spells and do not cast spells and so are not valid targets of Dispel Magic. Generally when potions do give spell effects, they specify that they give the effects of the spell, rather than casting the spell and so no spell was actually cast.
This is also how I understand Dispel Magic and its interaction with those kinds of summoned creatures.
Now what might prevent potions working would be an antimagic field, as that specifically does suppress all magical effects including those from items. However funnily enough, the familiar, the steed and the skeletons can still enter an antimagic area.
Same opinion, though I've seen people disagree since the 2014 spell says:
Within the sphere, spells can't be cast, summoned creatures disappear, and even magic items become mundane.
Or:
Creatures and Objects. A creature or object summoned or created by magic temporarily winks out of existence in the sphere. Such a creature instantly reappears once the space the creature occupied is no longer within the sphere.
The 2024 Antimagic Field no longer specifically mentions "Creatures and Objects", though.
PS. Not long after I joined the D&D Beyond forums, one of my first friendly debates was with you and it was about a similar topic, R3sistance @ Invisibility and Detect Magic :D
Same opinion, though I've seen people disagree since the 2014 spell says:
Within the sphere, spells can't be cast, summoned creatures disappear, and even magic items become mundane.
Or:
Creatures and Objects. A creature or object summoned or created by magic temporarily winks out of existence in the sphere. Such a creature instantly reappears once the space the creature occupied is no longer within the sphere.
The 2024 Antimagic Field no longer specifically mentions "Creatures and Objects", though.
yeah, I am talking 2024 version, I suspect they originally intended such creatures to not disappear but wanted to cover other summons, however those were already covered and so removed the ambiguity that it caused by just removing it.
PS. Not long after I joined the D&D Beyond forums, one of my first friendly debates was with you and it was about a similar topic, R3sistance @ Invisibility and Detect Magic :D
Oh dear XD, don't make me feel sorry for you, I have a bad habit of going into too much detail (or on for too long) while also suffering dyspraxia. Tho at least I've gotten a bit better on not dragging things on for multiple pages.
Same opinion, though I've seen people disagree since the 2014 spell says:
Within the sphere, spells can't be cast, summoned creatures disappear, and even magic items become mundane.
Or:
Creatures and Objects. A creature or object summoned or created by magic temporarily winks out of existence in the sphere. Such a creature instantly reappears once the space the creature occupied is no longer within the sphere.
The 2024 Antimagic Field no longer specifically mentions "Creatures and Objects", though.
yeah, I am talking 2024 version, I suspect they originally intended such creatures to not disappear but wanted to cover other summons, however those were already covered and so removed the ambiguity that it caused by just removing it.
PS. Not long after I joined the D&D Beyond forums, one of my first friendly debates was with you and it was about a similar topic, R3sistance @ Invisibility and Detect Magic :D
Oh dear XD, don't make me feel sorry for you, I have a bad habit of going into too much detail (or on for too long) while also suffering dyspraxia. Tho at least I've gotten a bit better on not dragging things on for multiple pages.
Don't say that... I learn a lot from you and the other experienced DMs and players here, R3sistance, so I always appreciate your help, corrections and opinions.
You and many others are my virtual family in D&D :) Sometimes we disagree. Other times we happily agree. All in order! ;)
If I was going to allow dispelling potions (which I would consider), they would need an effective spell level to roll against. Based on scrolls, that's probably something like level 1 for Common, level 3 for Uncommon, level 5 for Rare, level 7 for Very Rare, and level 9 for Legendary.
Isn't it the spell's lowest level due to casting without a spell slot?
Notably not even all spells can be dispelled, a Wizard's or Warlock's Find Familiar, a Paladin's Find Steed, undead from the Animate Dead spell are all creatures that can not be dispelled via Dispel Magic despite all originating from a spell, since the spell has already ended. And funnily enough, if you dispel Levitate, the creature still floats to the ground as opposed to falling. Dispel Magic only dispels on-going spell effects from a spell, potions aren't spells and do not cast spells and so are not valid targets of Dispel Magic. Generally when potions do give spell effects, they specify that they give the effects of the spell, rather than casting the spell and so no spell was actually cast.
Now what might prevent potions working would be an antimagic field, as that specifically does suppress all magical effects including those from items. However funnily enough, the familiar, the steed and the skeletons can still enter an antimagic area.
Hello. I have a question regarding dispelling potion effects. Can they be done? Our DM's argument is that since potions grant magical effects and dispel magic works with "magical effects" then he should be able to do it. I don't think this is a fair conclusion since potions are not granted by spell effects, and Sage Advice doesn't have an entry about this. What do you think?
I think so, sure. A potion grants a magical effect. Dispel Magic effects, "one creature, object, or magical effect within range."
So if you drink a potion, its magic takes effect on you, so if someone casts Dispel Magic on you, it could end that magical effect. In fact, I would even say if you don't drink the potion - if the potion is just sitting in its container on a shelf - and someone casts Dispel magic on the potion, it would/could become inert non-magical liquid.
Anzio Faro. Protector Aasimar light cleric. Lvl 18.
Viktor Gavriil. White dragonborn grave cleric. Lvl 20.
Ikram Sahir ibn-Malik al-Sayyid Ra'ad. Brass dragonborn draconic sorcerer Lvl 9. Fire elemental devil.
Wrangler of cats.
Except the bit that immediately follows that sentence says "Any ongoing spell of level 3 or lower on the target ends. For each ongoing spell of level 4 or higher on the target, make an ability check using your spellcasting ability (DC 10 plus that spell’s level). On a successful check, the spell ends." Certain potions grant the effects of spells and so can be affected after they've been used, but by RAW you cannot render a Potion of Heroism inert by casting the spell on the items before they're used, and you cannot affect a Potion of Fire Breath at all because its effect is not tied to a spell.
We have this in the SAC:
EDIT: just remembered this related thread: Dispel Magic and the limits of what it can dispel
In addition to what Ace said, this is from the SAC (which has more on Dispel Magic if you/the DM wants to look).
And the 2014 SAC had the same answer (but with more explanation).
I understand that my position may not comport exactly with RAW. I was simply stating what I think is appropriate and what would guide my decision making at my table. A Potion of Fire Breath doesn't duplicate the effect of a named spell, but it is still a magical effect. Dispel Magic specifies "magic effect", not "magic effect that exactly duplicates a named spell". The inclusion in the spell description of spell levels is simply to enable you to calculate the chance of dispelling a spell of a defines level. If you drink an ounce of liquid and gain the ability to breathe fire, I'd say that's a pretty magical effect.
And why can't Dispel Magic be used on a potion before it's used? Dispel Magic says it effects, "one object, creature, or magical effect". After you drink the potion, it's a magical effect. But before you drink the potion, it's an object imbued with magic.
Anyways, just my 2 c.p.
Anzio Faro. Protector Aasimar light cleric. Lvl 18.
Viktor Gavriil. White dragonborn grave cleric. Lvl 20.
Ikram Sahir ibn-Malik al-Sayyid Ra'ad. Brass dragonborn draconic sorcerer Lvl 9. Fire elemental devil.
Wrangler of cats.
I got ninja:d by @Tarodnet. but you should read his post and links. You can of course play the game in any way you want but just note that you are making Dispel Macig a lot stronger/more versatile than it is intended to be.
This is from the Dev:
It should be noted that the purpose of this forum is to give answers that "comport exactly with RAW" or as close to. From the forum guideline post:
Find my D&D Beyond articles here
I’d say a potion before it’s used is a magic item, and dispel magic doesn’t effect (aka destroy) magic items. In the spell description “objects” to me means objects that have a spell put on them, like if you cast light on a rock. If you open dispel magic up to potions, seems like there’s a whole lot of other items you could potentially ruin.
There used to be a spell, morednkainen’s disjunction, which could end the magic on an item. They got rid of the spell, but there is a legendary magic item which does the same thing.
Dispel Magic can target a magical effect to end its associated spell. It's one of the prime example of confusion resulting from only reading the first sentence of the spell's description.
Dispel Magic ends spells, and only spells. It doesn't end potion effects or magical effects like Channel Divinity.
Even if the potion mimics the effect of a spell, it's still not actually a spell.
If I was going to allow dispelling potions (which I would consider), they would need an effective spell level to roll against. Based on scrolls, that's probably something like level 1 for Common, level 3 for Uncommon, level 5 for Rare, level 7 for Very Rare, and level 9 for Legendary.
Notably not even all spells can be dispelled, a Wizard's or Warlock's Find Familiar, a Paladin's Find Steed, undead from the Animate Dead spell are all creatures that can not be dispelled via Dispel Magic despite all originating from a spell, since the spell has already ended. And funnily enough, if you dispel Levitate, the creature still floats to the ground as opposed to falling. Dispel Magic only dispels on-going spell effects from a spell, potions aren't spells and do not cast spells and so are not valid targets of Dispel Magic. Generally when potions do give spell effects, they specify that they give the effects of the spell, rather than casting the spell and so no spell was actually cast.
Now what might prevent potions working would be an antimagic field, as that specifically does suppress all magical effects including those from items. However funnily enough, the familiar, the steed and the skeletons can still enter an antimagic field.
This is also how I understand Dispel Magic and its interaction with those kinds of summoned creatures.
Same opinion, though I've seen people disagree since the 2014 spell says:
Or:
The 2024 Antimagic Field no longer specifically mentions "Creatures and Objects", though.
PS. Not long after I joined the D&D Beyond forums, one of my first friendly debates was with you and it was about a similar topic, R3sistance @ Invisibility and Detect Magic :D
yeah, I am talking 2024 version, I suspect they originally intended such creatures to not disappear but wanted to cover other summons, however those were already covered and so removed the ambiguity that it caused by just removing it.
Oh dear XD, don't make me feel sorry for you, I have a bad habit of going into too much detail (or on for too long) while also suffering dyspraxia. Tho at least I've gotten a bit better on not dragging things on for multiple pages.
+1
Don't say that... I learn a lot from you and the other experienced DMs and players here, R3sistance, so I always appreciate your help, corrections and opinions.
You and many others are my virtual family in D&D :) Sometimes we disagree. Other times we happily agree. All in order! ;)
Isn't it the spell's lowest level due to casting without a spell slot?
Potions aren't spells. I gave it a level based on "same level as a spell scroll of the same rarity", as that seems like a reasonable assumption.
The SAC agrees with this, its answer about "Can you use Dispel Magic on the creations of a spell like Animate Dead or affect those creations with Antimagic Field?" is quite clear on the difference between spells with a duration and spells that are instantaneous (and the answer was the same in the 2014 version).