PDA

View Full Version : Mordenkainan's Disjunction



Eldritch_Ent
2007-03-29, 02:04 PM
I probably mangled the spelling there, but regardless, how do you handle this spell?

Illiterate Scribe
2007-03-29, 02:11 PM
Ban it. It, to me, seems just a way of railroading players. At least with things like Reaving Dispel there's a chance of failure.

Chunklets
2007-03-29, 02:11 PM
MD is one that's coming off the books the next time I run a campaign. It's just a bit... much, IMHO.

otokokitsune
2007-03-29, 02:15 PM
Its a Abjurer's best friend at high levels and its a powerful tool for DMs if the party's rogue or wizard has the exact item to counter every last thing making the the game not fun anymore. I have to admit it is a little Deus Ex Machina but thats ok as long as the game as a whole survives and the players are willing to see if they can bear to have their character learn some new tricks.

Bears With Lasers
2007-03-29, 02:23 PM
It generally goes unused. The PCs don't use it so the DM won't.

Telonius
2007-03-29, 02:25 PM
By the book. The spell is 9th level, has a strictly defined burst area, can affect the caster's allies, and requires a will save. So sure, let him cast it. Then, watch the party cry when that +5 vorpal longsword the bad guy is carrying is reduced to a MW weapon that's practically worthless for resale value.

If I had to modify it, I'd add an XP cost - say, 500 or so - or an Arcane Focus (at least 25,000 gp).

Saph
2007-03-29, 02:26 PM
Other. It's one of the spells I allow, but under a MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction) clause.

The PCs can use it, but if they do, their enemies will use it, and it'll only take one or two castings to wipe out nearly their entire party's wealth totals, putting them horribly behind WBL and making them sitting ducks for the next tough encounter.

So PCs don't use it, NPCs don't use it, and everyone's happy.

- Saph

AmberVael
2007-03-29, 02:26 PM
Mage: "Aha! All your magic and magic items are gone!"
NPC: "Curses!"
DM: "Well... there goes your reward for this quest."
Mage: "Curses!"

Yeah... just don't use it. Its bad for everyone.

Reinboom
2007-03-29, 02:29 PM
I play in campaigns where the only magical items are normally:
Simple tools and only if it's a powerful spell caster. IE: Ring of Feather Fall. Nothing of any high value whatsoever.

Those made by the PCs.


Given this, Disjunction is just an extreme Greater Dispel. Neat.

marjan
2007-03-29, 02:32 PM
Well in our campaigns we never had chance to use it (never were high enough level) but our DM is thinking to just nerf not to destroy magic items or something like that. But as it is written right now it would be one of the best spells that should be banned.

Emperor Tippy
2007-03-29, 03:27 PM
Semi MAD clause for my games. If the wizard uses it once every 8-10 encounters or so I generally won't use it or will only use it when it won't take out many items. But if they use it more often than than then it becomes fair game.

Khantalas
2007-03-29, 03:41 PM
Play Mutants and Masterminds.

Or Hunter: The Reckoning.

Morty
2007-03-29, 03:45 PM
I haven't played enough high level campaign to use it, but if I do- it's really cool spell(I like the idea of totall magical "switch-off"), it's a shame it can totally ruin party's loot and screw over fighter types even more. I'd probably houserule that caster is the target too no matter what is the spell cast on, and/or caster can't use any spells for x rounds after using Disjunction.

Black Mage
2007-03-29, 04:36 PM
It can really screw up casters. Say a wizard PC has an artifact on him. any one, doesn't matter. Enemy casts disjunction on him. It works. Wizard manages to fail the save. Now you have a character that is completely useless. We'll say 17th level. That's 17d4 HD and horrible BAB. And feats that are now useless. That's all your character is now. Ouch.

Innis Cabal
2007-03-29, 04:39 PM
by the book, its the only way to drop an AMF and if you really want to screw players, say that all the magic items fail their saves...make them think twice about casting it. It not really over powered IMO

marjan
2007-03-29, 04:42 PM
It can really screw up casters. Say a wizard PC has an artifact on him. any one, doesn't matter. Enemy casts disjunction on him. It works. Wizard manages to fail the save. Now you have a character that is completely useless. We'll say 17th level. That's 17d4 HD and horrible BAB. And feats that are now useless. That's all your character is now. Ouch.

The one who casts the Disjunction is screwed not the one possesing the artifact.

Bears With Lasers
2007-03-29, 04:42 PM
It can really screw up casters. Say a wizard PC has an artifact on him. any one, doesn't matter. Enemy casts disjunction on him. It works. Wizard manages to fail the save. Now you have a character that is completely useless. We'll say 17th level. That's 17d4 HD and horrible BAB. And feats that are now useless. That's all your character is now. Ouch.

Um, the wizard can still cast spells. He just lost the ones on him. Disjunction is instantaneous.

Jack Mann
2007-03-29, 04:44 PM
It can really screw up casters. Say a wizard PC has an artifact on him. any one, doesn't matter. Enemy casts disjunction on him. It works. Wizard manages to fail the save. Now you have a character that is completely useless. We'll say 17th level. That's 17d4 HD and horrible BAB. And feats that are now useless. That's all your character is now. Ouch.

No, it's the one casting disjunction who loses his powers, not the one holding it the artifact.

Innis Cabal
2007-03-29, 04:46 PM
you dont have to center the spell around yourself...actually...if you do that you deserve to lose your gear

marjan
2007-03-29, 04:55 PM
you dont have to center the spell around yourself...actually...if you do that you deserve to lose your gear

If you do this there is a huge list of things you deserve. Beating to death is one of them.:smallamused:

Innis Cabal
2007-03-29, 04:56 PM
perhaps we should make a thread for that then?

Morty
2007-03-29, 05:08 PM
Actually, it must be funny if you're 20 level wizard, then you cast Disjunction on someone with artifact, fail the save, and BAM! 20 level commoner. Unlikely to happen, but fun.

Collin152
2007-03-29, 05:14 PM
Actually, it must be funny if you're 20 level wizard, then you cast Disjunction on someone with artifact, fail the save, and BAM! 20 level commoner. Unlikely to happen, but fun.
Not just a COmmoner 20, but one with skill choices ABSOLUTELY USELESS to a non-magical career.

Black Hand
2007-03-29, 05:16 PM
The spell is very powerful but not worth banning.

With core spells that you feel may be too much, just add rarity to them. That way yon spellcaster can't go into any magic shoppe and buy a book of scrolls with the spell.

Innis Cabal
2007-03-29, 05:24 PM
epic is the only time this spell is whipped around with utter abandon, and in epic you have alot more to worry about then a wizard casting a dysjunction every so often

Lord Tataraus
2007-03-29, 05:25 PM
The PCs in my campaigns have never used it and it can be a useful tool for DMs. So by the book on this one. Of course, I have to fudge the numbers a bit if a wizard is stupid enough to cast this on an artifact, to good to pass up :smallamused:

Jack Mann
2007-03-29, 05:26 PM
The problem with disjunction is that it's just too hard on the non-casters. Sure, it hurts casters too, but not nearly as much, since they're much more likely to keep a fair amount of their gear, and aren't as dependent on it anyway. Your poor fighter isn't likely to make too many of the saves, and he needs his gear to be effective.

Maerok
2007-03-29, 05:32 PM
You can always sneak in a minor artifact, and just happen to fudge that roll about getting the attention of the outsider that created it. Or some karmic effect that redirects all the destroyed magics back at the caster (the ones used in its creation at the listed CL). I'm a DM that if you attack the darkness, it most certainly attacks back.

Zeta Kai
2007-03-29, 05:34 PM
I like this spell. It's a great tool for reigning in out-of-control players. It's like a Inevitables in spell form.

Me: "You just slew the king of the LG kingdom. Congratulations. You're all irredeemable subnormals."
PCs: "Who cares? We pwn!"
Me: "The chancellor takes a scroll out of his robes & begins to read the arcane words aloud..."
PCs: "Wha?"
Me: "Roll saves for everything you have on you. Artifacts too. Yes, even that one."
PCs: "Oh noez!"

That is far more effective (& satisfying) than Rocks Fall/Everyone Dies.

silentknight
2007-03-29, 05:45 PM
I have never had a player able to cast it, and I have never had reason to use it against the players. It is a powerful spell, but I have no problem with it.

Behold_the_Void
2007-03-29, 06:19 PM
Mutally Assured Destruction. Sorta. PCs use it too much, then NPCs start using it. If it's in just a few specialized situations though, I don't mind.

greenknight
2007-03-29, 06:28 PM
I think the best option is to change it via house rule. Make it act like a targeted Greater Dispel Magic to all magical effects within it's area with no limit on the Caster Level bonus (and maybe change it so it's 15+Caster Level for the dispel, not sure about that). As usual, make a Will save for any magical items in the area, and if the save fails the item becomes non-magical for 1d4 hours. If you roll a 4, then roll another Will save, and if that one fails, the item becomes permanently non-magical.

This makes Disjunction hard on the spellcasters, who are likely to lose their spellbuffs, and hard on non-spellcasters, who are likely to temporarily lose a few magical items. But spellbuffs can be re-applied with time, and even with the worst Will save, less than 1/4 of the magical items will be permanently destroyed (and since that requires two failed Will saves, it's usually going to be a lot less than 1/4).

Druid
2007-03-29, 07:15 PM
Now that I think about it I don't think anyone in my group has ever used that spell. We rarely play at high levels and most of our players favor melee types. Should it ever come up we'd just play it by the book. However, if someone started abusing it there would be repercussions.

Galathir
2007-03-29, 07:51 PM
I'd do it by the book. Sure it's a powerful spell, but so are many other level nine spells.

Aximili
2007-03-29, 07:52 PM
you dont have to center the spell around yourself...actually...if you do that you deserve to lose your gear
Deserving or not, your gear is never affected.

clarkcd
2007-03-29, 08:04 PM
Other. It's one of the spells I allow, but under a MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction) clause.

<SNIP>

So PCs don't use it, NPCs don't use it, and everyone's happy.

- Saph


I'm the same way. MAD tends to make players a bit more judicious in the use of really nasty spells.

I_Got_This_Name
2007-03-29, 08:37 PM
The issue, as I see it, is not with Mordenkainen's Disjunction itself, or with any other ninth-level spell.

It's with the size of the granularity of spell usage. If casting a ninth-level spell was a lot of work, such that you'd seldom see the same spell more than once or twice (once per side) in a campaign (counting a Ring of Three Wishes as one instance), then MD wouldn't be problematic.

However, anyone who can cast a given 9th-level spell today can automatically cast the same 9th-level spell tomorrow with hardly any effort (excepting EXP costs). Spells are always per-day, with no step where, for instance, you can cast a 9th-level spell once per month after intense effort (barring DM fiat).

That said, MD is made into a huge problem by this situation more than any other 9th-level spell.

Aquillion
2007-03-29, 08:56 PM
Um, the wizard can still cast spells. He just lost the ones on him. Disjunction is instantaneous.
They're referring to this:
Even artifacts are subject to disjunction, though there is only a 1% chance per caster level of actually affecting such powerful items. Additionally, if an artifact is destroyed, you must make a DC 25 Will save or permanently lose all spellcasting abilities. (These abilities cannot be recovered by mortal magic, not even miracle or wish.)Fairly straightforward, although I really can't imagine any DM being cruel enough to let that actually happen to a player and not give them some way to recover, no matter what the book says. I guess a diety might offer to restore their power exchange for a service or something... if they're high enough to cast disjunction, they're high enough to attract a diety's attention, and disjuncting an artifact is certainly going to attract a lot of that.

Anyway, Disjunction is kinda a nuclear option, but I think it has its place in the game. I'd usually give the players some sort of advance warning, though, if they're going go up against someone who uses it... give them a chance to stow items they don't want to risk, or bail on the whole thing if they really really hate it. And I don't think very many players use it, of course, since it's de-magicking items that are going to be theirs soon anyway most of the time.

Another idea that occurred to me a while back was to have some kind of other 9th level spell, Mordekainen's Restoration, to restore magical abilities to a non-artifact object that lost them to Disjunction, at the cost of a bit of xp and a looong casting time... but that might make Disjunction too powerful in the hands players, since it'd mostly just negate its downside for them. Maybe add a moderate XP cost to Disjunction as well, if you're doing that... Then both players and enemy mages could throw the spell around a little without completely screwing item-dependant fighter-types, while the xp cost to disjunct and restore would keep players from relying on it completely. Of course, xp costs shouldn't be the answer to everything, but it's not supposed to be a commonly-used spell anyway, so they'd work here...

Jack Mann
2007-03-29, 09:27 PM
His point is that it's the one who cast the spell who loses his magic, not the one who was holding the artifact. The wizard holding the former artifact is just inconvenienced, and fully capable of layin' out an arcane whoopin' on Mr. I-Used-To-Be-Magic. BlackMage thought it was the other way around.

Beleriphon
2007-03-29, 10:04 PM
Single greatest use for a Modenkainan's Disjunction is as a living spell. An empowered, maximized, Paragon Living Modenkainan's Disjunction. This this has obscene stats, more hit points than an entire group, and as a slime is immune to most save or die/save or suck spells. Oh, and it casts a MD with each slam attack!

Fualkner Asiniti
2007-03-29, 10:36 PM
Single greatest use for a Modenkainan's Disjunction is as a living spell. An empowered, maximized, Paragon Living Modenkainan's Disjunction. This this has obscene stats, more hit points than an entire group, and as a slime is immune to most save or die/save or suck spells. Oh, and it casts a MD with each slam attack!


That, sir, is a monster.