For the duration, you sense the presence of magical effects within 30 feet of yourself.
For me, this seems unhelpful due to a lack of definition. Let's say the caster is in a room with a magic portal that teleports anyone who walks through it and a mundane closed chest containing a plain +1 dagger. My reading of the 2024 version tells me that the portal will glow as magic (specifically, conjuration magic) to the caster since it has a magical effect but the dagger would not, since there is no school of magic associated with it and there's not any kind of magical effect that it causes.
Am I overthinking this?
This change in wording, for me, makes it more confusing rather than less. The 2014 version of the spell worked just fine and was easy to adjudicate. The 2024 version makes me wonder what qualifies for having a magical effect vs what doesn't, even if the object or target in question is, indeed, magical.
Casting Detect Magic should reveal the dagger is magical, or extraordinary at least when handling it as per Identifying Magic Item, unless the DM rule otherwise.
Identifying Magic Item: Some magic items are indistinguishable from their nonmagical counterparts, while others are conspicuously magical. Handling a magic item is enough to give you a sense that it is extraordinary, but learning a magic item’s properties isn’t automatic.
I think that the original post makes a good point. This seems like yet another case where we just have to hope that the upcoming 2024 DMG will have some updates to the sections which discuss Magic Items and will hopefully contain some sort of definitive statement such as: "Magic Items emit a magical effect" or "an ongoing magical effect causes Magic Items to be magical". Or something to that effect.
Without such a statement, as written, it is actually pretty unclear whether or not the current version of Detect Magic should be able to detect the presence of a Magic Item. Going by what is actually written, it probably does not. Which is unlikely to be the intent, but the words say what they say, and they don't say what they don't say.
I think that the original post makes a good point. This seems like yet another case where we just have to hope that the upcoming 2024 DMG will have some updates to the sections which discuss Magic Items and will hopefully contain some sort of definitive statement such as: "Magic Items emit a magical effect" or "an ongoing magical effect causes Magic Items to be magical". Or something to that effect.
Without such a statement, as written, it is actually pretty unclear whether or not the current version of Detect Magic should be able to detect the presence of a Magic Item. Going by what is actually written, it probably does not. Which is unlikely to be the intent, but the words say what they say, and they don't say what they don't say.
I think it's clear Detect Magic is able to detect the presence of a magic item.
The Detect Magic spell says: "For the duration, you sense the presence of magical effects within 30 feet of yourself."
And Magical Effect, as I posted previously, says: "An effect is magical if it is created by a spell, a magic item, or a phenomenon that a rule labels as magical."
It wouldn't be surprising actually, more recent editions don't rely solely on Detect Magic and Identify to generally learn about magic items afterall, as opposed to older editions.
I'd keep this use of the spell if not of decades old habbit but nothing is so sure without the full magic items chapter.
An effect that is created by a magic item is not the same thing as the magic item itself emitting some sort of magical effect merely by existing.
I think it's covered by the phrase a phenomenon that a rule labels as magical. In the case of my own example, it would be the dagger giving the user a +1 modifier for their attack and damage rolls. It's a magical phenomenon and therefore detectable by the spell.
An effect that is created by a magic item is not the same thing as the magic item itself emitting some sort of magical effect merely by existing.
I think it's covered by the phrase a phenomenon that a rule labels as magical. In the case of my own example, it would be the dagger giving the user a +1 modifier for their attack and damage rolls. It's a magical phenomenon and therefore detectable by the spell.
I guess you could sort of get there with that but it's a bit unsatisfying. Like, what exactly is the "magical effect" that is being detected when a Dagger +1 is just sitting there in a mundane closed chest? What is the magical effect that is currently out there in the world that was "created by" a magical phenomenon? Or, conversely, what is the magical phenomenon that created this magical effect? So, we're saying that the fact that the dagger is capable of giving a user a boost to their attack accuracy and damage output at some future moment in time is being caused by an existing, ongoing magical effect of some sort? Which was created by . . . a magical phenomenon? It just seems a bit murky.
For example, if we look in the old 2014 DMG at the discussion for how a player character might create a Dagger +1, no actual spellcasting is required. Under the heading "Crafting a Magic Item", we have this:
The creation of a magic item is a lengthy, expensive task. To start, a character must have a formula that describes the construction of the item. The character must also be a spellcaster with spell slots and must be able to cast any spells that the item can produce. Moreover, the character must meet a level minimum determined by the item's rarity . . .
For example, a 3rd-level character could . . . make a +1 weapon (another uncommon item), no particular spell required . . .
The character is assumed to work for 8 hours each of those days. Thus, creating an uncommon magic item takes 20 days and 500 gp.
So, the creator of the Dagger needs to be a spellcaster, but no particular spell is required in the creation process -- so, what is the magical effect that can be detected on this Dagger then, and how did it get there?
Anyway, I think that your ruling is reasonable. I just think that it would be better if the upcoming new materials came right out and said point blank that magical items emit some sort of magical effect if that is actually the intent.
I just think that it would be better if the upcoming new materials came right out and said point blank that magical items emit some sort of magical effect if that is actually the intent.
Agreed. The wording change is just odd and wasn't needed at all. I'm not aware of any big controversies or ongoing disagreements on the application of the 2014 version of the spell.
Frankly this concern seems like a case of overthinking the wording. No one is going to think a magicalitem is not going to register on Detect Magic, and there's always been a fuzzy DM interpretation area on how it interacts with effects that are not explicitly the product of spells or magic items, so I don't see any practical change in the effect.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
The 2024 version of detect magic has a curious change from the 2014 version. The 2014 version starts out like this:
Whereas the 2024 version uses this wording:
For me, this seems unhelpful due to a lack of definition. Let's say the caster is in a room with a magic portal that teleports anyone who walks through it and a mundane closed chest containing a plain +1 dagger. My reading of the 2024 version tells me that the portal will glow as magic (specifically, conjuration magic) to the caster since it has a magical effect but the dagger would not, since there is no school of magic associated with it and there's not any kind of magical effect that it causes.
Am I overthinking this?
This change in wording, for me, makes it more confusing rather than less. The 2014 version of the spell worked just fine and was easy to adjudicate. The 2024 version makes me wonder what qualifies for having a magical effect vs what doesn't, even if the object or target in question is, indeed, magical.
There is a definition in the Glossary for Magical Effect:
Ah! I keep forgetting about the Rules Glossary. Well, that settles it then - thanks!
Casting Detect Magic should reveal the dagger is magical, or extraordinary at least when handling it as per Identifying Magic Item, unless the DM rule otherwise.
I think that the original post makes a good point. This seems like yet another case where we just have to hope that the upcoming 2024 DMG will have some updates to the sections which discuss Magic Items and will hopefully contain some sort of definitive statement such as: "Magic Items emit a magical effect" or "an ongoing magical effect causes Magic Items to be magical". Or something to that effect.
Without such a statement, as written, it is actually pretty unclear whether or not the current version of Detect Magic should be able to detect the presence of a Magic Item. Going by what is actually written, it probably does not. Which is unlikely to be the intent, but the words say what they say, and they don't say what they don't say.
I think it's clear Detect Magic is able to detect the presence of a magic item.
The Detect Magic spell says: "For the duration, you sense the presence of magical effects within 30 feet of yourself."
And Magical Effect, as I posted previously, says: "An effect is magical if it is created by a spell, a magic item, or a phenomenon that a rule labels as magical."
An effect that is created by a magic item is not the same thing as the magic item itself emitting some sort of magical effect merely by existing.
It wouldn't be surprising actually, more recent editions don't rely solely on Detect Magic and Identify to generally learn about magic items afterall, as opposed to older editions.
I'd keep this use of the spell if not of decades old habbit but nothing is so sure without the full magic items chapter.
I think it's covered by the phrase a phenomenon that a rule labels as magical. In the case of my own example, it would be the dagger giving the user a +1 modifier for their attack and damage rolls. It's a magical phenomenon and therefore detectable by the spell.
Oh, I see your point now. Sorry, I didn't read your previous answer carefully.
But even so, the +1 on the dagger is a magical effect from the magic item.
EDIT: the message was sent without all the text.
I guess you could sort of get there with that but it's a bit unsatisfying. Like, what exactly is the "magical effect" that is being detected when a Dagger +1 is just sitting there in a mundane closed chest? What is the magical effect that is currently out there in the world that was "created by" a magical phenomenon? Or, conversely, what is the magical phenomenon that created this magical effect? So, we're saying that the fact that the dagger is capable of giving a user a boost to their attack accuracy and damage output at some future moment in time is being caused by an existing, ongoing magical effect of some sort? Which was created by . . . a magical phenomenon? It just seems a bit murky.
For example, if we look in the old 2014 DMG at the discussion for how a player character might create a Dagger +1, no actual spellcasting is required. Under the heading "Crafting a Magic Item", we have this:
So, the creator of the Dagger needs to be a spellcaster, but no particular spell is required in the creation process -- so, what is the magical effect that can be detected on this Dagger then, and how did it get there?
Anyway, I think that your ruling is reasonable. I just think that it would be better if the upcoming new materials came right out and said point blank that magical items emit some sort of magical effect if that is actually the intent.
Agreed. The wording change is just odd and wasn't needed at all. I'm not aware of any big controversies or ongoing disagreements on the application of the 2014 version of the spell.
Frankly this concern seems like a case of overthinking the wording. No one is going to think a magical item is not going to register on Detect Magic, and there's always been a fuzzy DM interpretation area on how it interacts with effects that are not explicitly the product of spells or magic items, so I don't see any practical change in the effect.