Create Device - The Key to the Mage Killer?

[Morithias]

One of the most common ways to try to counter a mage is to create some kind of item that projects an anti-magic field. The obvious counter to this, is always disjunction.

But in a ravenloft book "Legacy of Blood" there is a feat called "Create Device" which lets you make magical items....that aren't magical. So long as you include a power source.

Disjunction starts out with "All magical effects and magic items within the radius of the spell, except for those that you carry or touch, are disjoined.", but that's just it, due to the anti-magic field being made by a device and not a magical item, it is NOT a magical effect or magical item. Meaning disjunction has no effect on the anti-magic field.

And yes I know due to astral projection, clone, and all the other crazy tricks you're probably just killing some phantom or whatever. I don't care. Not every world is the tippyverse people. This is just an idea I had, about a concept for a "mage hunter" who didn't have to rely on magic in order to be properly equipped to hunt the most dangerous game.

I AM a mage in real life people, and quite frankly I'm getting sick of the whole "mages are tyrantical gods" stuff that goes on in media. This thread is SOLELY for the judgement of the create device feat and concept, not any sort of "who would win in a fight" match. Seeing how if I wanted I could take down Pun-pun with a level 1 commoner, so long as I'm the DM. Meaning in any real campaign the whole point is moot, cause the DM has absolute power.

So what's the judgement on the create device idea?

[Kurald Galain]

I AM a mage in real life

...what...

[Morithias]

...what...

Yeah, I study the occult and practice supernatural study. Granted it's next to impossible to find spellbooks that aren't mistranslated to the point where it's basically impossible to use them, and even the ones that work aren't worth it. Say what you will about 4th edition, the "rituals" that are never worth the time and money you spend on them? Yeah that's pretty accurate. In the hour plus it would take me to cast even the most basic food conjuration spell, plus the cost of all the remnants, I could walk down to the nearest grocery store, spend the same amount, and come back with 5 days worth of food instead of one meal.

But this is BESIDES the point. The whole point of that paragraph, is that I don't want some "LOL MAGE CAN KILL ANYTHING LAWL" talk going on. I just want judgement on create device.

[supermonkeyjoe]

Yeah, I study the occult and practice supernatural study. Granted it's next to impossible to find spellbooks that aren't mistranslated to the point where it's basically impossible to use them, and even the ones that work aren't worth it. Say what you will about 4th edition, the "rituals" that are never worth the time and money you spend on them? Yeah that's pretty accurate. In the hour plus it would take me to cast even the most basic food conjuration spell, plus the cost of all the remnants, I could walk down to the nearest grocery store, spend the same amount, and come back with 5 days worth of food instead of one meal.

But this is BESIDES the point. The whole point of that paragraph, is that I don't want some "LOL MAGE CAN KILL ANYTHING LAWL" talk going on. I just want judgement on create device.

What colour text are you supposed to use for sarcasm or humour again? I'm just going to imagine that the above passage is supposed to be that colour.

As for the feat, do you need to meet all other prerequisites of making the item such as spells, caster level etc? Even with that it's pretty broken in both a flavour and mechanics level, using magic in an antimagic field or a dead magic zone is a pretty big deal, doing away with that is just crazy broken IMO.

[Morithias]

What colour text are you supposed to use for sarcasm or humour again? I'm just going to imagine that the above passage is supposed to be that colour.

As for the feat, do you need to meet all other prerequisites of making the item such as spells, caster level etc? Even with that it's pretty broken in both a flavour and mechanics level, using magic in an antimagic field or a dead magic zone is a pretty big deal, doing away with that is just crazy broken IMO.

The one requirement is Int 15. I'll post the whole feat.

"Create Device [General]"

"Your scientific knowledge and creativity allow you to invent devices that mimic the effect of certain magic items."

Prerequisites : Int 15.

Benefit: Choose an item creation feat for which your character level equals or exceeds the required caster level. You can create nonmagical equivalents of the magic items that the selected feat would normally allow you to create. For the purpose of creating these items, you are considered to be a spellcaster of the appropriate type with a caster level equal to your character level; you may ignore the spells normally required to create the items, but you cannot create an item that would produce spell effects beyond the capacity of your effective caster level. (Thus a 5th-level character could produce the scientific equivalent of a wand of fireball, a 3rd-level spell, but not a wand of dimension door (a 4th-level spell)).

The cost of creation and the time required for each device are the same as for the equivalent magic item. The devices so created duplicate the effects of the items they mimic. All other aspects of the item (including color, shape, method of function and design) are under your control, at the DM's discretion.

Items created with this feat always require the use of a power supply (see family magic later in this chapter) to function. This requirement does not change the cost to create a charged item; the power supply is an additional cost.

Special: You can gain this feat multiple times. Its effects do not stack. Each time you take the feat, it applies to a new item creation feat

[Snowbluff]

Um... what happens when I use my Device to Shatter or Disintegrate ("Death Ray!") your device?

[Morithias]

Um... what happens when I use my Device to Shatter or Disintegrate ("Death Ray!") your device?

I guess it would have to make a fortitude save or whatever the resolve for doing that to a magic item would be, but again this is judging the feat, not a pissing contest to see who is more powerful.

Why not just say "hey artificer, what happens when I use disjunction to render your entire character useless."

[Morph Bark]

Items created with this feat always require the use of a power supply (see family magic later in this chapter) to function.

Am I assuming correctly then that a power supply requires family magic to either create or maintain?

[Snowbluff]

I guess it would have to make a fortitude save or whatever the resolve for doing that to a magic item would be, but again this is judging the feat, not a pissing contest to see who is more powerful.

Why not just say "hey artificer, what happens when I use disjunction to render your entire character useless."

You use these devices, mages will be using them as well. If not, I think they can just target the device with an orb or something.

[Ryulin18]

Yeah, I study the occult and practice supernatural study. Granted it's next to impossible to find spellbooks that aren't mistranslated to the point where it's basically impossible to use them, and even the ones that work aren't worth it.

I don't even know what to say...I just gawped at the screen as I read this, bursting into laughter and tears at the end.

Congratulations sir, you win the "amazing levels of stupid". Come up to the stage in your wizard's robe, with your goblet of "dragon blood" and get your medal.

But aside from that, Create device is amazingly broken. The ability to have magic running in any anti magic area is world levelling.

[Morithias]

Am I assuming correctly then that a power supply requires family magic to either create or maintain?

No they're just things like batteries, static collectors and so on. They're not actually magic.

For example the battery requires "Create Device (wonderous item) and either 7 rank in craft (alchemy) or scientific knowledge 7 or higher.


I don't even know what to say...I just gawped at the screen as I read this, bursting into laughter and tears at the end.

Congratulations sir, you win the "amazing levels of stupid". Come up to the stage in your wizard's robe, with your goblet of "dragon blood" and get your medal.

But aside from that, Create device is amazingly broken. The ability to have magic running in any anti magic area is world levelling.

You know I could get pissed off at this, and complain about how this is allowed, yet I'm not allowed to de-construct, argue, and point out the many moronic things in say, Christianity or another main stream religion or supernatural belief system, but I have enough warnings already. I can only hope you get a trolling warning for that post.

Seriously though, if you can PM me a reasonable, logical argument that disproves my spellcasting, that can't ALSO be used to disprove virtually every religion out there other than, "their religions are more popular" I would LOVE to hear it, cause I've been searching for that answer for a LONG LONG time, and none of the fundamentalists who come to my door have EVER been able to give it.

But this is getting into dangerous forum area, so let's keep our little argument to PM, before both of us get banned.

[herrhauptmann]

Nah, you'll just get a warning, maybe a timeout.
The thread might get locked too.

Could you PM me something though? How does your real-life religious/metaphysical stance have anything to do with the game?

Back on topic.
This feat sounds amazing for warriors, since they can not make not-magic items that screw with casters, even in AMF. Unfortunately, there's nothing stopping a caster from taking the same feat.

Legacy of Blood.
Is that an adventure book? A book that details a particular part of the campaign world (maybe focusing on Strahds Domain specifically). Is it 3.0 or 3.5?

[Psyren]

One of the most common ways to try to counter a mage is to create some kind of item that projects an anti-magic field. The obvious counter to this, is always disjunction.

Actually, the obvious counter to AMF is to stay 15' away.

Also, Disjunction specifically destroys antimagic fields anyway. It does not specify magical antimagic fields (holy paradox batman) so the source of the field is irrelevant - even an (Ex) AMF is subject to disjunction.

Not going to discuss the IRL magic thing.

[Ryulin18]

Seriously though, if you can PM me a reasonable, logical argument that disproves my spellcasting, that can't ALSO be used to disprove virtually every religion out there other than, "their religions are more popular" I would LOVE to hear it

Religion can't prove or disprove themselves because they're non-physical, everything they do it based on the soul.

You very openly stated that you can create food. Make the food then!
If you can create food in front of a live group of scientists and experts, you've disproven science! CONGRATULATIONS! You have single handedly shown that all religions and science are fake, that magic exists and that you can create matter for free!

Do it, only then can you prove yourself.

[TopCheese]

Oh I'm loving this... Wow ...

Hey OP can I get the spell for create food? I would love to go to some poorer places and hand out free food. I could solve a ton of problems.

Maybe the spell for lead to gold? I've been wondering when that one got cracked.

I like the idea of (Ex) magical effects from devices. I would love to see core recreated with this in mind. Could you imagine the Fighter or Rogue with this for free?

*Druid casts Entangle*
*Fighter pushes a button on the legs of his armor and gives himself freefom of movement*

Give them less but usable a ton more times... I feel some homebrew coming on...

[Pechvarry]

Religion can't prove or disprove themselves because they're non-physical, everything they do it based on the soul.

You very openly stated that you can create food. Make the food then!
If you can create food in front of a live group of scientists and experts, you've disproven science! CONGRATULATIONS! You have single handedly shown that all religions and science are fake, that magic exists and that you can create matter for free!

Do it, only then can you prove yourself.


You're being rude about someone's beliefs and you're off topic. So am I, but it seemed like it needed said. Please follow Psyren's lead.

[Morithias]

Oh yes, because I'd love that attention. The governments would hunt me down out of fear of supernatural attack, the fundamentalists once realizing my magic is weaker than modern technology would find me, tie me to a stake and burn me, and virtually every spell I've found is either so expensive to cast, it's cheaper to use technology, or has a horrible downside to it.

For example, there is a spell that given around 6 months of prep would let me kill a targeted person, here's the the downside, the spell ALSO KILLS THE CASTER.

You want to create food and give it out? Okay, you can create ONE, LOW QUALITY MEAL, for what I estimate to be an hour of casting, and over $50 worth of materials, and it's brutally easy to screw up.

Go to the supermarket, buy a bunch of mac and cheese, and give it to them. They'll get a higher quality meal, more of it, and you won't have religious nuts jobs yelling about "Devil food".

What I meant in the original post, is that I do not care about the whole "god-wizard" complex that this forum seems to have. I just wanted you to judge the FEAT, not whether or not it can stand up to "Can genocide your race, and there's nothing you can do" class. This is not meant to be a munchkin challenge, this is just "would this be a legit character concept".

[Snowbluff]

...do one of the components involve a murder-suicide? If not, how do I contact your guild to have my new spell copyrighted?

In summary, you have to have the caster murder someone and then kill himself, and then you eat the bodies for food.

[Bovine Colonel]

I guess it would have to make a fortitude save or whatever the resolve for doing that to a magic item would be, but again this is judging the feat, not a pissing contest to see who is more powerful.

Why not just say "hey artificer, what happens when I use disjunction to render your entire character useless."

Out of curiosity:

If it's not about who is more powerful, then what's the basis of measurement used to judge the feat?

Edit:

What I meant in the original post, is that I do not care about the whole "god-wizard" complex that this forum seems to have. I just wanted you to judge the FEAT, not whether or not it can stand up to "Can genocide your race, and there's nothing you can do" class. This is not meant to be a munchkin challenge, this is just "would this be a legit character concept".

If you put it like that, everything and its mother would be a legit character concept. I could make a Truenamer with no ranks in Truespeak. Is it powerful? Of course not. But who is to say that it isn't a possible character?

[Ranos]

Legacy of Blood.
Is that an adventure book? A book that details a particular part of the campaign world (maybe focusing on Strahds Domain specifically). Is it 3.0 or 3.5?

It's 3.5, but 3rd Party.

[Morithias]

It's 3.5, but 3rd Party.

It's 3rd party, but it's "Campaign Setting" 3rd party. It's part of the Ravenloft line. I've found that DMs are much more willing to accept campaign setting material licensed by WOTC, than say Evil by Alderac.

But yeah, it's a Ravenloft book "Legacy of Blood" covering 9 families who have been cursed in various ways by the Dark Powers.

[Pandiano]

Actually, the obvious counter to AMF is to stay 15' away.

Also, Disjunction specifically destroys antimagic fields anyway. It does not specify magical antimagic fields (holy paradox batman) so the source of the field is irrelevant - even an (Ex) AMF is subject to disjunction.

Not going to discuss the IRL magic thing.

Oh, I always thought the counter to AMF are summoned creatures to eat the caster? :-)

[Urpriest]

OP: You have some experience on this forum. Ergo, you have observed at least one "wizard versus fighter" ish thread, and you know that Disjunction is basically never suggested as a counter to AMF-using melee. You want to counter a guy in an AMF? Stay out of the AMF, and hurl something non-magical their way, like an Orb, or a boulder, or a Called creature. You have encountered those threads, so you have encountered that suggestion. Making an AMF nonmagical with a Device solves precisely one flaw with carrying around an AMF, and it's a flaw that nobody exploits anyway because nobody uses Disjunction outside of high-op arena fights.

[Morithias]

OP: You have some experience on this forum. Ergo, you have observed at least one "wizard versus fighter" ish thread, and you know that Disjunction is basically never suggested as a counter to AMF-using melee. You want to counter a guy in an AMF? Stay out of the AMF, and hurl something non-magical their way, like an Orb, or a boulder, or a Called creature. You have encountered those threads, so you have encountered that suggestion. Making an AMF nonmagical with a Device solves precisely one flaw with carrying around an AMF, and it's a flaw that nobody exploits anyway because nobody uses Disjunction outside of high-op arena fights.

Actually I tend to stay out of the whole fighting thing, so I have no idea what passes as optimizing for gods now a days.

Orbs aren't affected by anti-magic field? That seems odd, oh well. I mostly just wanted to see if this feat was actually worth it. I'm assuming that if I ever play the "science hunter" that the DM isn't going to be sending me after bounties that are outside of my reach on purpose.

[Urpriest]

Actually I tend to stay out of the whole fighting thing, so I have no idea what passes as optimizing for gods now a days.

Orbs aren't affected by anti-magic field? That seems odd, oh well. I mostly just wanted to see if this feat was actually worth it. I'm assuming that if I ever play the "science hunter" that the DM isn't going to be sending me after bounties that are outside of my reach on purpose.

Most of the Orb of X spells are Instantaneous Conjurations, so it's like conjuring a boulder and throwing it at people: the AMF doesn't do a thing since it's just a nonmagical projectile.

What you have discovered is a nonmagical way to produce various items, including AMFs, which would certainly be handy for a dedicatedly nonmagical mage hunter. It just doesn't make you any more effective than magical mage hunters like clerics or Runescarred Berserkers.

[Boci]

Orbs aren't affected by anti-magic field? That seems odd, oh well.

Yes, they are instanenous conjurations, so as long as they are cast outside of the AMF, they can still hit a target in one.


I mostly just wanted to see if this feat was actually worth it. I'm assuming that if I ever play the "science hunter" that the DM isn't going to be sending me after bounties that are outside of my reach on purpose.

Is the feat worth it? Yes, very much so. Its an item creation feat with two very powerful advantages (available to mundane classes, non-magical), so depending on how crippling the power supply is, its probably going to be somewhere between situationally useful and incredably powerful.


OP: You have some experience on this forum. Ergo, you have observed at least one "wizard versus fighter" ish thread, and you know that Disjunction is basically never suggested as a counter to AMF-using melee. You want to counter a guy in an AMF? Stay out of the AMF, and hurl something non-magical their way, like an Orb, or a boulder, or a Called creature. You have encountered those threads, so you have encountered that suggestion. Making an AMF nonmagical with a Device solves precisely one flaw with carrying around an AMF, and it's a flaw that nobody exploits anyway because nobody uses Disjunction outside of high-op arena fights.

that's a bit extreme. With non-magical magical items to use inside a AMF, a fighter could use magical items to cover themselves against such tactics (ranged deflection for orbs, and just general items for summmoned creatures).

[Morithias]

Is the feat worth it? Yes, very much so. Its an item creation feat with two very powerful advantages (available to mundane classes, non-magical), so depending on how crippling the power supply is, its probably going to be somewhere between situationally useful and incredably powerful.


The power sources cost around 3k each, and have various amounts of charges. You would have to spend a little extra cash, but you could easily with the right feats have enough money to do so.

[Mephit]

Orbs aren't affected by anti-magic field? That seems odd, oh well.

Instantaneous Conjuration effects are a notable exception to AMF since the conjurations are (usually) considered non-magical objects.
Edit: Massively ninja'd because I got a phone call while typing and forgot about this. >_<

I understand your apprehension of the 'You can't beat full casters' argument, but it's pretty relevant to your question. The reality if that if a DM is willing to let the mage gimp your strategy with Disjunction, he should reasonably also be willing to gimp it with any of the other spells available to him - disjunction is only one of the problems for the AMF.

So if you think the item is cool and you want your non-caster crafting (non-)magical items, which is admittedly pretty cool if you can fluff it properly, go for it. In terms of mechanical power, it's probably not worth it.

[rot42]

The book is 3rd party (Arthaus 2004), but Skip Williams is an author (for whatever that is worth to you). Depending on how much a power source costs, it could save money on acquiring a spell to cast into the item every day of crafting. The feat in general seems fairly poorly thought out; I would use the rituals in PHB II to give non-magical access to item creation in preference.

This is a gaming forum: religious troll-baiting on both sides is off topic.

[Unusual Muse]

Um... what happens when I use my Device to Shatter or Disintegrate ("Death Ray!") your device?

What happens is an arms race! :smallsmile:

[TopCheese]

What happens is an arms race! :smallsmile:

Rocket Tag?

[herrhauptmann]

What I meant in the original post, is that I do not care about the whole "god-wizard" complex that this forum seems to have. I just wanted you to judge the FEAT, not whether or not it can stand up to "Can genocide your race, and there's nothing you can do" class. This is not meant to be a munchkin challenge, this is just "would this be a legit character concept".

So why not just say that?
It turns out, people on the forums CAN be reasonable.

[Morithias]

So why not just say that?
It turns out, people on the forums CAN be reasonable.

Cause I have a tendency, to let my emotions and fears get the best of me, and end up putting my foot in my mouth every other post. I'm not exactly the most charismatic person.

[Flickerdart]

There was a much better solution to walking around in an AMF all the time, which was turning all your stuff into intelligent items (which, as constructs, are not affected by an AMF). No ridiculous 3rd party feats necessary.

[Randomguy]

Specifically for mage killing, it's not that great. Disjunction has a pretty low chance of working against an AMF anyway, and most anti-AMF tactics don't use it.
The main advantage is that you can be in an AMF and not have any of your buffs suppressed, so you in an AMF are a much greater threat than a fighter with what is otherwise the exact same build but with magic items rather than devices in an AMF.

As a concept in general, it's great. The main advantage will be against other fighters, though: If you close in on someone in melee, they're completely debuffed with nonmagical gear while all of your devices are still running inside a device generated AMF. Also, your device generated buffs can't be dispelled.

[Story]

In TO, you can easily get your CL high enough to reliably disjunct AMFs. Not that that's the best option, but it's definitely possible.

[Kazyan]

Though Antimagic Field has been discussed, I would like to direct you to an alternative: the Antimagic Ray spell, from Draconomicon.

It's a ray, and allows a Will save (only for objects...?). Whatever you hit with it behaves as if it's in an AMF.

It's one of the best mage-hunter spells. You can't walk stay 15' feet away from the AMF because you always behave as if you're in it. You can't cast Orb of Cheese because it explicitly says you can't cast any spells. Your Contingencies don't work because they're on you, and you're AMF'd. It ignores your equipment, though, and you can still use scrolls...but the Wizard only has scrolls for situational things, not the spells he needs all the time, like dispel magic.

Is it perfect? Heck no; Friendly Fire and Mirror image and Celerity and everything else ever. But a Device of Antimagic Ray is a very cool toy.

[Morithias]

Though Antimagic Field has been discussed, I would like to direct you to an alternative: the Antimagic Ray spell, from Draconomicon.

It's a ray, and allows a Will save (only for objects...?). Whatever you hit with it behaves as if it's in an AMF.

It's one of the best mage-hunter spells. You can't walk stay 15' feet away from the AMF because you always behave as if you're in it. You can't cast Orb of Cheese because it explicitly says you can't cast any spells. Your Contingencies don't work because they're on you, and you're AMF'd. It ignores your equipment, though, and you can still use scrolls...but the Wizard only has scrolls for situational things, not the spells he needs all the time, like dispel magic.

Is it perfect? Heck no; Friendly Fire and Mirror image and Celerity and everything else ever. But a Device of Antimagic Ray is a very cool toy.

Clever.

Now I just need someone who will let me play this bounty hunter in a campaign.

[Flickerdart]

Yes, because hitting a wizard with a close-range ray and then having them fail their best save is a wonderful plan.

[eggs]

The save specifies objects. Ray Deflection and action coordination are still problems, but it's a nasty effect if it hits.

EDIT: Updates happen.:smallyuk:

[Flickerdart]

The save specifies objects. Ray Deflection and action coordination are still problems, but it's a nasty effect if it hits.

EDIT: Updates happen.:smallyuk:
A save of (object) doesn't mean that only objects need to make that save. It merely means that the spell can be cast on objects. I would recommend familiarizing yourself with the saving throw rules (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicOverview/spellDescriptions.htm#savingThrow).

[Kazyan]

A save of (object) doesn't mean that only objects need to make that save. It merely means that the spell can be cast on objects. I would recommend familiarizing yourself with the saving throw rules (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicOverview/spellDescriptions.htm#savingThrow).

Thank you. I didn't know that.