Disintegrate Question

[RisnDevil]

The wording of Disintegrate kind of intrigued me, forcing me to ask a question. This is the specific wording in question:

"Only the first creature or object struck can be affected; that is, the ray affects only one target per casting."

Ok, sounds pretty straightforward, but not when you take in the rest of the spell. You see, the spell only fires one ray, so can only affect one target. Why even put that line in? Now, what if I split it with Split Ray? Does it not work on the second target, or can the second target not be disintegrated, and only take damage? Why shouldn't Split Ray be allowed to work? And why would a spell in the PHB take into account a feat from CAr, which was not even out when the spell was written? Is this just arbitrary extra wording or what?

Thanks for any input anyone can give,
RisnDevil

 

[Dross]

The wording of Disintegrate kind of intrigued me, forcing me to ask a question. This is the specific wording in question:

"Only the first creature or object struck can be affected; that is, the ray affects only one target per casting."

Ok, sounds pretty straightforward, but not when you take in the rest of the spell. You see, the spell only fires one ray, so can only affect one target. Why even put that line in? Now, what if I split it with Split Ray? Does it not work on the second target, or can the second target not be disintegrated, and only take damage? Why shouldn't Split Ray be allowed to work? And why would a spell in the PHB take into account a feat from CAr, which was not even out when the spell was written? Is this just arbitrary extra wording or what?

Thanks for any input anyone can give,
RisnDevil

Its possible the writers of this spell were aware in the 3.0 to 3.5 revision that split ray was/would be available and wanted to circumvent that (split ray appeared in the Tomb and Blood splat book). This might be bit of a stretch though.

 

[shilsen]

I believe that was put in so that one didn't have questions about whether the ray can disintegrate a number of people, one after another.

 

[Infiniti2000]

Or, it means that it won't destroy your stuff, too.

 

[KarinsDad]

Or, it means that it won't destroy your stuff, too.

Unlikely. That is already covered in the spell:

A disintegrated creature’s equipment is unaffected.

 

[Plane Sailing]

After all, that's whats expected from computer games, isn't it? Kill the creature, the body disappears and all his goodies appear lying on the floor around it!

(ducks and runs)

 

[airwalkrr]

I believe that was put in so that one didn't have questions about whether the ray can disintegrate a number of people, one after another.

What he said.

 

[Li Shenron]

I thought it was a leftover of previous editions. Maybe the authors were thinking of a player asking if the ray could for example make a whole in a door/wall and still disintegrate the orc on the other side (if the total damage of the spell was more than the hp of the door and the orc).

 

[Infiniti2000]

Unlikely. That is already covered in the spell:

What? Are you saying that the rules are never redundant?

 

[BASHMAN]

I think it was just a little something brought to you by the department of redundancy department.