Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="DreamChaser" data-source="post: 866093" data-attributes="member: 1190">Put it away.  If you need to prove who's bigger, do it somewhere other than the boards.Back to the subject...I personally don't think that game balance will be thrown out the window if disintegrate destroys everything in direct association with the target.  In fact, I've always played that way.  Here's my rationale.If I were to disintegrate a cart or wagon (allowing for it being within the size limit), I would not destroy merely the bed or the tailgate or the axel.  The entire thing would be disintegrated.  Why?  Because the different objects are working/moving/operating together to be a single unit.  I see people wearing/using things the same way.  If I disintegrate a fighter in chain mail armor, the chain mail (is in terms of "magical resonance") a part of him.  It moves with him, it takes damage with him (or doesn't technically because he takes the damage), it has become an extension of him.  So is the sword he's wielding and the back pack on his back and everything in it.My rational for this (further).A person is walking through a market an sees a robed figure of a race she does not recognise.  She turns to her friend and asks "What is that?" pointing at the robed figure.  The friend is not (barring some wierd joke) going to answer "That is a robe."  The friend will intuitively understand the the whole kaboodle is just part of the half-orc/half-halfling walking through town.  The answer would be "that is a horrific freek of nature that I don't even want to envision being conceived"As a caveat, I would say that a magical item that has a caster level (or whatever) higher than the wielder should get its own save to "resist" the effect.  So the artifact-level long sword doesn't get destroyed just because it was wielded by Feeble Frank the First-level Fighter.  Intelligent items should also be treated sepearately (they can choose their own save or their user).Now, the game stuff:Disintegrate targets...1 creature (counting all equipment but not everything touched) as part of the creature.  A similar "field" as the invisiblity spell's ability to make things invisible.1 object (counting all constituent parts of the object as part of it).In both cases, the volume limit must be observed.  And cannot be ignored either.  I would rule that a caster could not attempt to disintegrate just the armor a character is wearing or just the axel of a cart.  The spell desires to destroy a particular volume of matter and it will continue to destroy until it reaches its limit or the "object" or "creature" is gone.Overall, I've found that this makes my players think more before throwing around disintegrates.  They have to decide if it is worth destroying whatever the creature is carrying, since there is no going back.And I have to say, that the Sage's ruling on Rays is complete trash.  There is a mechanic for hitting other creatures in melee with a missed ranged attack.  Use it (and I do).Wow...that was longer than it seemed in my head.  *shrug*  Oh well.  Those are just my thoughts.DC</blockquote>

Verification