Disintegrate vs. Slay Living

[Norfleet]

Hm... it would be a spell that deals 1d6 per caster level (20d6 maximum) without save - and then some!

Yeah. And where have we seen THAT before?

 

[jgsugden]

Just a point on the 3.5 disintegrate versus nonepic PC classes:

A disintegrate spell does 2d6 per level. That is an average of 7 hps per level.

Assuming average hp rolls and a failed save:

A wizard or sorcerer needs to have a con of 20 to have a better than 50% chance to survive a disintegrate when starting at full hps. This is possible with a strong enhancement bonus amulet and a 14 con, but unlikely.

A rogue or bard needs to hav an 18 con for that better than 50% chance. Again, possible with a strong enhancement bonus amulet, but unlikely.

A cleric, druid, monk or ranger needs a 16 con for roughly the same chances. By the levels that these PCs face off against this type of spell, this is pretty likely. Of course, all these classes have strong fort saves. You're better off with spells that go after different saving throws.

A fighter or paladin needs a 14 con for similar chances. Again, these classes can probably stand off against this spell, but it is a bad choice. On the flip side, I don't see many combats where the fighter types run around at full hit points for the entire battle.

A barbarian needs only a 12 con (or rage with an 8 or greater con). Almost a sure thing, but this is not a good choice versus barbarians. If you're trying to disintegrate a barbarian, you're not being efficient.

As for non-PCs, most monsters of appropriate CR can not survive a failed save versus a disintgrate. Those that can probably have a very high con score (and thus a great fort save), so it is a poor choice anyway.

If you keep in mind who is supposed to be vulnerable to the spell, it becomes clear that the spell still works just fine against the intended victims.

 

[hong]

As for non-PCs, most monsters of appropriate CR can not survive a failed save versus a disintgrate. Those that can probably have a very high con score (and thus a great fort save), so it is a poor choice anyway.

If you keep in mind who is supposed to be vulnerable to the spell, it becomes clear that the spell still works just fine against the intended victims.

EXACTLY. Asking that disintegrate be equally effective against all types of creatures is just asking for trouble. It's like wanting a fighter to be an equal match for a melee brute monster of equivalent CR: if that happens, you simply guarantee that the character will be completely overwhelming against every other type of encounter. Everything in D&D has strengths and weaknesses, and you balance something first by seeing how useful it is against creatures who are susceptible to it.

As written in 3.5E, disintegrate is still a very powerful spell against constructs and undead, as well as any classed character other than a specialist tank. It may not be able to take down a raging barbarian straight away, but then it shouldn't be expected to. For that, you use something like hold or dominate, or just stand off and fireball him to death.

 

[Grog]

As for non-PCs, most monsters of appropriate CR can not survive a failed save versus a disintgrate. Those that can probably have a very high con score (and thus a great fort save), so it is a poor choice anyway.

Actually, most monsters of appropriate CR would have no problem surviving a failed save versus a disintegrate.

A cloud giant, 178 hp, CR 11. An 11th level disintegrate will do 77 damage, on average. Not even close to killing it.

A balor, 290 hp, CR 20. A 20th level disintegrate does 140 average damage. Less than half its hit points.

A frost worm, 142 hp, CR 12. A 12th level disintegrate will do 84 damage, more than half its hp, but still far from an instant kill.

Most dragons will take a disintegrate from a wizard of equivalent level to their CR and not even blink.

You get the idea. Disintegrate has been heavily nerfed vs. monsters, but it's still a save-or-die spell for many PCs.

 

[Darklone]

EXACTLY. Asking that disintegrate be equally effective against all types of creatures is just asking for trouble. It's like wanting a fighter to be an equal match for a melee brute monster of equivalent CR: if that happens, you simply guarantee that the character will be completely overwhelming against every other type of encounter. Everything in D&D has strengths and weaknesses, and you balance something first by seeing how useful it is against creatures who are susceptible to it.

As written in 3.5E, disintegrate is still a very powerful spell against constructs and undead, as well as any classed character other than a specialist tank. It may not be able to take down a raging barbarian straight away, but then it shouldn't be expected to. For that, you use something like hold or dominate, or just stand off and fireball him to death.

Another thing. BBEGs often have more levels than your group average. If that's the case, a disintegrate even at the groups barbarian might make sense, he'd have problems to make the save and damage is always nice ... makes the player chars shiver for their lives. (Better than straightforward killing them with one spell).

And the mooks will stand a chance to whack the barbarian down.

 

[Grog]

Another thing. BBEGs often have more levels than your group average. If that's the case, a disintegrate even at the groups barbarian might make sense, he'd have problems to make the save and damage is always nice ... makes the player chars shiver for their lives. (Better than straightforward killing them with one spell).

And the mooks will stand a chance to whack the barbarian down.

Actually, it makes a lot more sense to cast the disintegrate on the wizard instead. He'd have even more problems making the save, and the spell would kill him, as opposed to merely damaging the barbarian. If the BBEG has a brain, he'll realize that a dead enemy is always preferable to a damaged one.

 

[Kae'Yoss]

If the BBEG has a brain, he'll realize that a dead enemy is always preferable to a damaged one.

Yes, sure, but that isn't really how it works, is it? The DM isn't exactly out to kill the PC's (we're not in a CoC forum). If they wanted, they'd let the enemy wizard cast one dispel at the other wizard - and then the archers would start firing at that wizard, and the melee guys - with boots of flying, of course, would streak right past the tank to pummel that poor spellslinger to pulp.

 

[Al]

As a combat spell, as it stands, Disintegrate is now definitely on the weakish side. 22d6 sounds a lot at 11th level, but bear in mind that a Maximised Scorching Ray does 72 damage with no save at one level lower. Unless the victim has a truly abysmal Fort save, saving only on a natural 20, or has significant fire resistance (or a combination thereof), MSR is clearly superior even at a level lower.

It scales well, but the problem with Disintegrate is similar to that of all of the old 'save-or-die' spells, i.e. that it is nigh ineffective if the victim makes its save. In light of this, it ought to be compared with other spells which target Fort saves of similar or lower level. Against unequipped opponents without powerful restorative magic, Flesh to Stone is almost certainly a better bet, since it bypasses hit points and touch AC. Likewise, Baleful Polymorph is probably a more powerful 'assault' spell against those with poor Fort saves, at one level lower, unless they have access to dispel magic or similar spells.

Disintegrate does of course, still possess enough uses to warrant its level. Against high magic opponents who could reverse Flesh to Stone/Baleful Polymorph it is a solid combat spell. However, it's major use is strategic. It can breach walls of force, circumvent locked doors, cause cave-ins and has a myriad of other uses. It's a good strategic spell, but in a straight arena-style combat, you're better off with FtS, Baleful Polymorph or another straight damage spell.

 

[Grog]

Yes, sure, but that isn't really how it works, is it? The DM isn't exactly out to kill the PC's (we're not in a CoC forum). If they wanted, they'd let the enemy wizard cast one dispel at the other wizard - and then the archers would start firing at that wizard, and the melee guys - with boots of flying, of course, would streak right past the tank to pummel that poor spellslinger to pulp.

Well, sure, if the DM decides to take it easy on the PCs, there's no problem with Disintegrate. But if the DM is going to take it easy on the PCs, there's no problem with any spell in any book out there.

I'm just talking strictly by the rules, here.

 

[jgsugden]

As for non-PCs, most monsters of appropriate CR can not survive a failed save versus a disintgrate. Those that can probably have a very high con score (and thus a great fort save), so it is a poor choice anyway.

Actually, most monsters of appropriate CR would have no problem surviving a failed save versus a disintegrate.

A cloud giant, 178 hp, CR 11. An 11th level disintegrate will do 77 damage, on average. Not even close to killing it.

A balor, 290 hp, CR 20. A 20th level disintegrate does 140 average damage. Less than half its hit points.

A frost worm, 142 hp, CR 12. A 12th level disintegrate will do 84 damage, more than half its hp, but still far from an instant kill.

Most dragons will take a disintegrate from a wizard of equivalent level to their CR and not even blink.

You get the idea. Disintegrate has been heavily nerfed vs. monsters, but it's still a save-or-die spell for many PCs.

All your examples fit into the exception I mentioned: Creatures with high con scores and great fort saves. They're going to likely make the saving throw anyway, so who cares what happens on a failed saving throw? You should be using other magics to fight these beasts. The spell can't be heavily nerfed versus your example monsters because only the effect on a failed save was decreased in effectiveness and the odds of them failing a save are pretty low.

The spell is balanced now. You don't use a hold monster versus a creature with a high will save and you don't use disintegrate versus a monster with a high fort save.

Disintegrate is good against aberrations, constructs, fey, giants, humanoids, monstrous humanoids, oozes, undead or vermin (all creatures with d6 HD, d8 HD or no con bonus).

Most animals, elementals, giants, outsiders and plants have strong fort saves and high con scores, so they make poor targets, but there are vulnerable creatures of these types.

Dragons and magical beasts are almost always poor targets for disintegrate.

That pretty well summs up the situation.