View Full Version : Disjunction: A Solution?

2007-07-24, 01:33 PM
Disjunction (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/magesDisjunction.htm) is generally agreed to be a bad spell. The reason is that it nukes all magic items; so if the PCs use it on the bad guys, they don't get any loot, and if the bad guys use it on the PCs, all the PCs' hard-won loot is annihilated.

However, I was just reading the spell description, and I noticed that all affected objects get a Will save to resist... whereas affected spells do not.

So I was wondering: Anybody know a way that a wizard or sorceror could reduce the save DC when casting disjunction, yet still be able to cast other spells at full DC? This would allow disjunction to work as simply an uber-dispel magic rather than the nuclear weapon of arcane casting.

Fax Celestis
2007-07-24, 01:39 PM
You can voluntarily cast the spell at a lower CL, down to a CL of the minimum CL needed to cast the spell.

Rachel Lorelei
2007-07-24, 01:40 PM
Which doesn't reduce the spell's DC, since that's not CL-based.

Keld Denar
2007-07-24, 01:40 PM
The quick and dirty way would be to take off your headband +6. That would drop your save DCs by 3, but you'd also lose all of the bonus spell slots for that exceptional int. Thats about 3 spells in the 4th-7th level range. Your DM might allow you to not apply any spell focus feats you have, just the same way as you can choose to cleave or not. That's pretty grey though. Other than that, you can't lower your DCs in any other way I can think of.

2007-07-24, 01:41 PM
However, CL doesn't affect Save DC.

Given that CL can be lowered, it seems reasonable to allow casting stat to be effectively lowered.

Note that that has no RAW support whatsoever, and thereby is a houserule.

Fax Celestis
2007-07-24, 01:41 PM
Which doesn't reduce the spell's DC, since that's not CL-based.

Oh! I thought it was CL-check. Um. No idea.

2007-07-24, 01:43 PM
I would houserule that a caster can voluntarily lower the save DC of any of their spells.

Of course, a natural 1 is still a failure...

2007-07-24, 01:46 PM
I always just houseruled that disjunction only temporarily suppresses the magic of items affected, instead of a permanently dispelling them.

2007-07-24, 02:19 PM
We use disjunction as written in one game. It works out fine because the game has gone epic and everyone has nasty saves. The only problem was the time 5 of us brought our unique artifacts to a fight and 3 of us rolled nat 1s on the artifacts' will saves. That got ugly.

2007-07-24, 02:44 PM
Now, if only the wizard had rolled a nat. 1 on their save vs. losing their magical powers forever as a result of that. :smalltongue:

2007-07-24, 02:51 PM
Actually, that happened to me :P The idea was, if this guy took hold of the artifact thing, he would trounce us instantly, so I decided to use disjunction (I prepared it for the battle specifically for this) to prevent him from getting the artifact etc.

The artifact failed save, and I lost 25 levels of wizard :smalleek:

But we did end up killing the baddie!

2007-07-24, 02:56 PM
Uhhh... unless you houseruled otherwise, disjoining an artifact, then losing casting, is rather difficult. First, you roll D%, if less than your Caster Level, artifact may be disjoined. Then it gets a will save to negate. Then you make a will save, if all the other steps work, DC 25. If you fail that, you lose all casting abilities.