• NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.

Mordenkainen's Disjunction: Should it be changed?

Should [i]Mordenkainen's Disjunction[/i] be changed?

  • Yes, Change the spell. It shouldn't permanently destroy magic items.

    Votes: 16 18.0%
  • Yes, Change the spell. It shouldn't automatically dispel all active spells as well as destroy magic

    Votes: 4 4.5%
  • Yes, change the spell, it should be single target only, not a wide radius.

    Votes: 1 1.1%
  • Yes, change the spell. It should have differing effects depending on how it is targeted, like dispel

    Votes: 13 14.6%
  • Yes, other. List in response.

    Votes: 2 2.2%
  • I hate this spell. Get rid of it altogether.

    Votes: 5 5.6%
  • No, the spell is fine. Its a 9th level spell.

    Votes: 48 53.9%

For me it is simple: I play this game to have fun. If a spell would lessen my or my players' fun it does not get used.

I don't DM to educate my players, to teach them lessons or to make them appriciate level loss/item loss/pc loss. If they don't want those things to happen, then those things do not happen.

If a friend does not like to eat meat I won't force it on him every time I invite him.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

I think it would probably be best if the spell only temporarily disjoined magic items. Destroying permanent magic is likely lead to an ever decreasing spiral of PC wealth and more hesitance to use magic items instead of spells. Given the fact that it's a will save, it is also likely to inordinately effect PCs with poor or average will saves.
 

I like it the way it is...but in my campaigns it almost is never used, by either side.

Cause in the end...when you get down to it...greed wins out.

Yes, it would easier to kill the good/bad guys if they no longer had magic items. But heck, half of your motivation for wasting these guys is to get their stuff. You wanna go off and ruin it before you get to see what it is?

I didn't think so...

So while I like the spell as is...and yes, it is very powerful...I almost never see it used in my campaigns by either side.

Cedric
 

Fenes 2 said:
I don't DM to educate my players, to teach them lessons or to make them appriciate level loss/item loss/pc loss. If they don't want those things to happen, then those things do not happen.

Neither do I. I'm not a "teach 'em a lesson" DM and I don't give a Fabulous Furry Freak Brother whether they learn anything.

If you don't like a spell, don't use it. Petitioning WotC to remove it (since we all know they are aware of these boards) is petty and annoying.
 
Last edited:

If you're dealing with people throwing 9th level spells at you, two things:


1) Learn to Counterspell. If you're letting people get 9th level spells off on you unchecked, and the worst thing that happens is you get Disjunctioned, you just got off light.


2) It's probably not too big of a stretch to get ahold of a Wish, Limited Wish, or Miracle around that level. Saying "Boy, I sure Wish that our Magic Items had just been temporarily suppressed by that Mordenkainen's Disjunction, rather than permenantly destroyed." wouldn't be too much of a stretch for the spell to handle. You'd be out some exp for a 'not on the list' type wish, but the request it quite reasonable so you're very unlikely to get screwed on it.

Unless your DM is a prick who thinks it's their job to bone you on every single Lw/W/M spell no matter what. But that's a different problem, altogether
 

I somewhat agree, though I've never played in a game with 9th level spells, so I can't speak from experience.

I think this spell falls into the camp of spells that just suck for the players. The other spells like this are Fear-based spells. I ran a quick game for some friends, and they fought a Balor, and he Feared half the party, so they took off running into the woods. This thing lasted for minutes, so the players had to sit on their butts while those that made their save remained to save the day.

I'll never use a Fear effect again, I think. Or at the very least, modify it so they take negatives instead of running away cold. Too boring otherwise.
 

Sejs said:
Unless your DM is a ....

Now, let's not get into the "insult those who don't agree with me" mode. That's nbot constructive. You think Wish should be able to undo a Disjunction, fine. Leave it at that, please.

I see no real problem with Disjunction for an experienced DM. If the players have the spell you simply take it into account when designing encounters, just like you do with every ohter ability they've got. And the DM, of course, is always has the use of NPCs under complete control, and so can use it in planned manners, so that it doesn't give the players such a hard time that they cannot win.

People complain that PCs become reliant upon magic items. They cannot become too reliant on particular items if there's a turnover. If they know an item is unlikely to be aroudn forever, they'll remain open to the idea of working without it.

Plus, in my mind, Disjunction is a handy tool in the whole wealth/magic item system. Forcing turnover helps a DM introduce new, more powerful items to his game without completely bollixing up the wealth balance assumed by the rules.
 

I've only used this spell a couple times in all my years of playing. Why? Simple, only Mordenkainen knows how to cast it. Keeps uppity PCs from thinking that they can just waltz into Greyhawk city and act like they own the place.

Being that Mordenkainen is favored by Xagyg (and presumably Boccob as well), mages who attempt to research the spell are in for a very interesting time.
 

My DM changed the spell to one day/caster level instead of permanent. Of course he told me this after I got disjoined. :)

It's really nasty. I lost more than 250K worth of magic items in one round. Fortunately, I had charged the bad guy and panicked him, otherwise he would have disjoined the whole party, and our magic item loss would probably have been closer 2 million GP (We've got a pair of epic weapons, and the wielders have bad saves, and an artifact).

I'm not sure how one goes about replacing that much treasure.

Also, since our foes really don't care about us or our stuff, they just don't want us messing with their plans, I can easily see them Disjoining us and Quickened Teleporting away. IOWs, trashing all our stuff and not even fighting. Now that would suck.

PS
 

Umbran: Now, let's not get into the "insult those who don't agree with me" mode. That's nbot constructive. You think Wish should be able to undo a Disjunction, fine. Leave it at that, please.



No, no, I'm not saying that if your DM says no to Wish undoing Mord's Disjunction he's a .. yeah. Not saying that at all. The comment was concerning the "Twist a wish to screw the wisher, no matter what or how reasonable the request" phenomenon. Wish for a turkey sandwich, and Bephelgor the Lord of the Nineth Pit teleport in and insta-kills your player becuase you stole -his- turkey sandwich.


That sorta thing.

Which sucks.

Alot.
 

Into the Woods

Remove ads

Top