Sacks Block Distentigration

[Emperor Demonking]

First Discuss

Second, can anyone find the thread about this?

[Mr. Friendly]

First Discuss

Second, can anyone find the thread about this?

I'm sorry, I have a high INT, but I didn't put any ranks into Decipher Script.

Can I get a translation to Common?

[Swooper]

...Discuss what, exactly? What are you on about? Find the thread about what?

So many questions!

[dragonseth]

What are you talking about, exactly? Are you saying that you can use a burlap sack to stop a Disintegrate spell?

[Telonius]

Only if the Quarterback didn't take Combat Casting.

[Hannes]

Actually, yes, being covered in cloth -all over- would block the disintegrate spell.

[goat]

Is this something to do with hiding in a sack, so that when hit with a disintegrate, the sack gets fried, leaving everything else alone?

The sack provides cover, the spell only acts on the first thing it hits, so in theory a sack is as good a defence as a wall?

[dragonseth]

But this means if you get hit with a disintegrate, your armor or clothes will poof and not you (usually). And something about that seems wrong.

[Hannes]

That's where covered all over comes in. If you wear armor, there's still holes through which the ray can be directed. Slit holes in helmets, for example.

[Lochar]

I consider you the object of my hatred, so therefore I treat you as an object when I cast disintegrate and destroy the 10' cube that you're hiding in your sack it!

[NEO|Phyte]

That's where covered all over comes in. If you wear armor, there's still holes through which the ray can be directed. Slit holes in helmets, for example.

Then why does it only need Touch AC?

[dragonseth]

That's where covered all over comes in. If you wear armor, there's still holes through which the ray can be directed. Slit holes in helmets, for example.

Yes, but if you had to avoid the armor, you wouldn't ignore the armor bonus on your attack roll. And, as you do ignore it in a ranged touch attack, it means you don't have to worry about avoiding the armor. So, the ray will pass through the armor to hit you, I guess.

Edit: Oh, Blaargagh! Simu-ninja'ed.

[Hannes]

But still, I'd say disintegrate would first destroy the sack.

[13_CBS]

Only if the Quarterback didn't take Combat Casting.

Thread's over.

Seriousness: This sounds like, yet again, a 3.x edition screw up. By the SRD, a munchkin could easily make the case of having a burlap sack, or even armor, block disintegration.

[Emperor Demonking]

Does it help against disjunction?

[brian c]

If you're completely covered in a burlap sack (or whatever) then the caster of a disintegrate spell doesn't have line of sight to you

[Accountant]

Second, can anyone find the thread about this?

And I'm assuming a hefty "no" for this one?

[Citizen Joe]

A properly prepared archer could fire an arrow at the disintegration beam causing the arrow to disintegrate rather than the target. Of course this would be difficult, but it was a favorite trick of mine in Elder Scrolls III: Morrowind

[Mr. Friendly]

RE: Using a sack as a shield or as armor

If you wear a burlap sack all over, you are wearing it, therefore it counts as you for the purposes of being targetted and disintegrated along with your flesh, bones, organs, equipment, rations and meat helmet.

If you hold a sack up to block the disintegrate, I would say that it is then "a device or part that serves as a protective cover or barrier" which is the definition of shield. Ergo, the sack is acting as an improvised shield and is disintegrated along with your flesh, bones, organs, equipment, rations, meat helmet and burlap armor.

[daggaz]

Oh come one people. Its called rule zero for a reason, and reason is big ZERO ideas on how to break the game, like this one.

That said, armor doesnt stop disentegrate because yeah, it doesnt provide cover and disintigrate destroys the target and whatever they are carrying (which is why your armor poofs).

If somebody tried to pull this crap off in one of my games, I would merrily disintigrate them. But if it was an insistance on RAW, well, I can think of a LOT of nasty things to do to somebody who foolishly hides in a burlap sack in the midst of battle. Hell, just to be a pain in the arse, you could turn the sack into stone.

[goat]

If you wear a burlap sack all over, you are wearing it, therefore it counts as you for the purposes of being targetted and disintegrated along with your flesh, bones, organs, equipment, rations and meat helmet.

The important part is in the spell text, which in the SRD at least includes the words:

"A disintegrated creature’s equipment is unaffected." and "Only the first creature or object struck can be affected; that is, the ray affects only one target per casting."

So, essentially, it destroys what you hit with it, and NOTHING else. Only one continuous object. Either you, OR your armour, not both. So it would hit the sack, disintegrate the sack and that would be it. Equally, if you targeted their clothes, it would destroy their clothes (Or more likely, whichever item of clothing you specify), but leave them unhurt.

[Mr. Friendly]

Ok, well then that's good to know.

So Inertial Armor, Shield, and Mage Armor all render you immune to Disintegrate.

[Swooper]

If one of my players would try to pull this, I'd rule something like this:

"You're dead. You're in a bag, but you're still dead."

[Jack Zander]

Because the target is wearing the sack, and the sack is not targeted but the creature is, it ignores the sack and disintegrates the creature, while all his gear, sack includes are unaffected. Likewise with armor. That's why armor does not get disintegrated but the spell still only requires a touch attack. If the sack was being touched by the creature during the time of the casting, he would still be disintegrated but if he somehow managed to throw the sack at the ray, it would only affect the sack. However, you can't take actions during someone else's action, only before their action. Therefore, you cannot ready an action to throw a sack at a ray after it's been cast. You can ready an action to throw the sack at the caster once he starts casting the spell, but that won't do you much good.

So in short, no, you cannot do this. No DM worth his dice or any decent rules lawyer would allow this by RAW even.

[....]

When I first read this thread, I saw, "Stat Block Disentergration" and wondered if maybe the OP meant how your character sheet always winds up smudged and wrinkled by the time you hit level seven or so.

[Jack Zander]

Yeah, my HP block always gets a hole in it every 5 levels and I need a new sheet. That is, until we starting printing character sheets on card stock.

[Jasdoif]

If one of my players would try to pull this, I'd rule something like this:

"You're dead. You're in a bag, but you're still dead."

At least it saves the trouble of having to cremate them...depending on the orientation of the bag.

[SadisticFishing]

Because the target is wearing the sack, and the sack is not targeted but the creature is, it ignores the sack and disintegrates the creature, while all his gear, sack includes are unaffected.

Thank you, I was going to post something virtually identical.

[Irreverent Fool]

You can use a tower shield for cover. In the same entry that states this, it says a spellcaster can still hit you with spells by targeting the shield. So, if you're holding something and using it for cover, it's not going to stop someone from casting disintigrate on you. And if you managed to gain total cover with a sack, don't expect to be able to ready an action to drop it when the spellcaster finished casting because cover is a two-way street.

[raygungothic]

Chaps, I think you're missing something important.

Don't throw the sack over yourself. Throw it over the enemy spellcaster. Any DM who does not then give you a round to come up with an escape plan (if you succeed) is being rather mean.

As for new character sheets, I get through about one every other session, pretty much independent of rules system. It's embarrassing. My last longrunning character had "Mark XXVIII" written in one corner when he rode off into the sunset.