[3.5] Usable Disjunction

[Myou]

I'm stealing an idea from PairO'Dice Lost, making Disjunction a little more usable.

What do you think?


Disjunction
Abjuration
Level: Magic 9, Sor/Wiz 9
Components: V
Casting time: 1 standard action
Range: See text
Target: See text
Duration: Instantaneous
Saving Throw: Will negates (object)
Spell Resistance: No

Disjunction can be used to end all magical effects within a burst area, or all magical effects present on a target creature, or can be used to permanently disjoin a magic item.

Burst: If used as a burst effect the spell has a range of Close and a radius of 20ft. The spell ends all magical effects within the target area, including antimagic fields.

Targeted: If used to target a specific creature, the spell is cast as a ray and has a range of Close. The spell ends all magical effects present on the target creature, including antimagic fields.

Disjoin: If used to disjoin a specific item, the spell has a range of touch. The spell utterly destroys the targeted item on a failed will save, leaving only dust. An item in a creature’s possession uses its own Will save bonus or its possessor’s Will save bonus, whichever is higher. If used in this way to destroy a minor artifact, the being which created the artifact immediately becomes aware of its destruction. Major artifacts cannot be disjoined.

[Lapak]

I like it. The 'no level check' feels like the right amount of power for a level 9 spell without all the baggage that the normal version carries. If you want the scorched-earth feel for the targeted version, you could have the targeted version also suppress all magic items in the creature's possession for, oh, 2d4 minutes.

On the disjoin side, I've never liked the idea that Disjunction can destroy artifacts. The whole THING about artifacts, in part, is that they're only vulnerable to very specific circumstances. If you MUST keep that in, I'd give it a more immediate penalty. Giving it a 100% chance of removing spellcasting ability from the caster permanently would give it that utility for a campaign-capping Moment of Ultimate Sacrifice without leaving it in as something people would consider under any but the most dire circumstances.

[Myou]

I like it. The 'no level check' feels like the right amount of power for a level 9 spell without all the baggage that the normal version carries. If you want the scorched-earth feel for the targeted version, you could have the targeted version also suppress all magic items in the creature's possession for, oh, 2d4 minutes.

On the disjoin side, I've never liked the idea that Disjunction can destroy artifacts. The whole THING about artifacts, in part, is that they're only vulnerable to very specific circumstances. If you MUST keep that in, I'd give it a more immediate penalty. Giving it a 100% chance of removing spellcasting ability from the caster permanently would give it that utility for a campaign-capping Moment of Ultimate Sacrifice without leaving it in as something people would consider under any but the most dire circumstances.

Thanks! :smallsmile:

I do like the idea of it being like a magical EMP, I think I'm going to add an effect like that.
Edit: I thought again, and decided not to. xD

Funny, I've always hated how nothing else can destroy artifacts, and hated the idea that aything could permanently take away casting ability even more. :smalltongue:
If you don't want an artifact destroyed, why not give it a higher will save?

[Myou]

I'm still pondering the disjoining. Does anything stop the DM from maknig an artifact have a high will save, such that it can't be disjoined?

[Kobold-Bard]

I like it. This is now my official Disjunction spell.

Thanks Myou and Pair'o'Dice Lost.

[Cieyrin]

I'm still pondering the disjoining. Does anything stop the DM from making an artifact have a high will save, such that it can't be disjoined?

If artifacts follow the same rules as magic items do for saves, they have saves of at least +11 or 12 (except in the case of the Talisman of the Sphere, which has an inexplicable CL of 16 and thus +10 saves), so they're actually surprisingly easy to destroy with your version of Disjunction, as the save is 23, minimum, meaning the artifact by itself has a 50% chance, maximum, if by itself. If you want them to be more resilient to Disjunction, I don't think it would be unreasonable to give them a +5 or 10 for minor artifacts and +15, 20 or higher for a major artifact.

Them's my 2 coppers. Take as you will.

[Lapak]

Thanks! :smallsmile:

I do like the idea of it being like a magical EMP, I think I'm going to add an effect like that.
Edit: I thought again, and decided not to. xDEither way seems good to me on that one; figured I'd toss the idea out there.


Funny, I've always hated how nothing else can destroy artifacts, and hated the idea that aything could permanently take away casting ability even more. :smalltongue:
If you don't want an artifact destroyed, why not give it a higher will save?I'll just agree to disagree with you there. :smallsmile: Artifacts are supposed to be Plot Devices to begin with - it seems silly to me that they could be undone by giving a PC a minute alone with it, whether they have to make a save or not. ('It made the save.' 'I try again.' 'Oh, okay, it failed that time.') Also, it is yet another thing on the list of things that Only Wizards Get To Do, and there's enough of those already at high levels for my taste.

That said, I really like the basic structure of your Disjunction, and I'm going to grab it for my own use with a little tinkering. Nice job! :smallbiggrin:

[ericgrau]

Major artifacts say they can only be destroyed by very specific means. So there's a rules contradiction there. IMO reserve disjunction for minor artifacts only and the problem is solved.

[Cieyrin]

Major artifacts say they can only be destroyed by very specific means. So there's a rules contradiction there. IMO reserve disjunction for minor artifacts only and the problem is solved.

Makes sense to me. Kinda anti-climatic to destroy the Wand of Orcus with mortal magic like that. Major artifact destruction should be the purview of special circumstances, such as crushing it under the heel of a fallen saint and crazy stuff like that.

[Myou]

Major artifacts say they can only be destroyed by very specific means. So there's a rules contradiction there. IMO reserve disjunction for minor artifacts only and the problem is solved.

Done. :smallsmile:

[Navigator]

Disjunction
Burst: If used as a burst effect the spell has a range of Close and a radius of 20ft. The spell ends all magical effects within the target area, including antimagic fields.

Targeted: If used to target a specific creature, the spell is cast as a ray and has a range of Close. The spell ends all magical effects present on the target creature, including antimagic fields.

The automatic removal of spells has always bothered me. I mean, this version is far and away more useful than the original, but this is still very powerful. Instead of auto-dispel, I would like to see the character have to make dispel checks, except with a +30 bonus cap, or even +25.

Another reason this bothers me is that there is no reason to make an epic dispel spell. Disjunction, strategically, is by far the best first action to take when going up against another creature capable of high level casting, because it has no chance of failing. For example, getting a stronger dispel with Intensify Spell to raise the bonus cap (I feel) is something casters should be doing. Does anyone else feel this way? Or would a change like that gimp the spell too much?

[Cieyrin]

The automatic removal of spells has always bothered me. I mean, this version is far and away more useful than the original, but this is still very powerful. Instead of auto-dispel, I would like to see the character have to make dispel checks, except with a +30 bonus cap, or even +25.

Another reason this bothers me is that there is no reason to make an epic dispel spell. Disjunction, strategically, is by far the best first action to take when going up against another creature capable of high level casting, because it has no chance of failing. For example, getting a stronger dispel with Intensify Spell to raise the bonus cap (I feel) is something casters should be doing. Does anyone else feel this way? Or would a change like that gimp the spell too much?

The original Disjunction auto-dispelled all spells in the area, though it destroyed the magic items in the area while it was at it. That's why Myou pulled it back, so people would use it more so they wouldn't have to worry about destroying their loot unless they did it on purpose.

The reason the epic dispel exists is because you can't disjoin epic spells.

[Myou]

The reason the epic dispel exists is because you can't disjoin epic spells.
Yeah, this. :smallsmile: