Thwarting Mord's Disjunction with Contingency

[Crust]

Thanks for your help, folks, and thanks for a stirring discussion. I know how I'm going to run things. I will not be assuming immediate actions or readied actions any more than I’d assume immediate or readied actions when not specifically mentioned. If the data or examples don't exist to counter my argument, then let someone else break ground with the first fully-aware contingency that can read minds and alter reality to act before action has already taken place.

I wonder if Elminster would ever suffer hit point damage or even have a bad day if contingency worked the way some here assume it does. I've said this before, but I'll say it one final time: You'd think a 29th level wizard would construct his triggers with automatic, spontaneous immediate/readied actions assumed. Why would a 29th level wizard want to suffer his arms blown off when he could structure his contingency to make sure the spell or attack that blows his arms off never happens in the first place?

Again, because contingency doesn't work that way.

And Widow, your last paragraph is interesting, but the fact remains that the player has no real power when it comes to rules clarification, especially players who make it a regular point to find and oftentimes take feats, prestige classes, and spells that are ambiguous and/or broken only because they are ambiguous/broken. Player assumption only matters to the player. DM assumption shapes the entire campaign. And lastly, it's only an argumentum ad hominem when the player refuses to shut up. (That was directed solely at Widow, by the way.)

 

[cheshire_grin]

Why would a 29th level wizard want to suffer his arms blown off when he could structure his contingency to make sure the spell or attack that blows his arms off never happens in the first place?

Because he's not an idiot. The spell says the wizard cannot control whether the contingency goes off when the conditions are met.

Every general condition you've tried to use as an example would make sure any enemy of Elminster's could turn the contingency against him, something you've yet to acknowledge.

"Anytime someone begins to cast a spell at me, I teleport home" means that if Elminster is annoying you, you cast a simple cantrip at him and -poof-, he's out of your face. Similarly, if the condition is "anytime anyone says my name three times I'm teleported to them" then it becomes trivial to either get him out of the way (teleport a henchman to the other side of the world with instructions to say "ElminsterElminsterElminster" when he gets there) or pull him into a trap.

And any condition that is careful enough to avoid that fate while still covering all the conditions he'd want to avoid would be too complex for the spell to function.

So the best compromise is a simple condition that will only happen in situations where Elminster is truly endangered.

The fact is that just because you can make very wide-ranging conditions doesn't mean that's a good idea. Just like Wish and other powerful-but-vague spells.

 

[Crust]

OK, so the example I gave on the last page was lousy. Here's another one that links back to the OP and the original issue:

Certainly, the contingency/antimagic field combination would seem very desirable to any wizard. Elminster (and Manshoon, and Khelben, and The Simbul, and every wizard in Faerun at or over 18th level) would certainly be clever enough to come up with: "Whenever anyone within 100' begins casting a disjunction at me, an antimagic field springs into being around me before the disjunction is completed." In fact, every wizard at or over 18th level would be an absolute fool to NOT set this contingency up, making them effectively immune to disjunction for one casting. This sure-fire trick would be known by even the greenest apprentices. "Heh... That's Malchor Harpell. He just set up his first 'disjoin/contingency ward.' I can't wait until I can protect myself like that. Just have to make sure I have a teleport on hand so I can get out of there on my turn!" Such a combination would be in every arcane manual in every major city in every crystal sphere.

Certainly the authors of FR material (Ed Greenwood, Dale Donovan, Sean Reynolds, etc.), the authors of PHBs over the last 20 years (masters like David Cook, Monte Cook, and Skip Williams), and the lead designer of Complete Arcane Richard Baker would be smart enough to figure out that combination and work it into the existing material at some point over the last two decades, eventually making it one of El's triggers for his contingency or listing it as a must-have example in the PHB or Complete Arcane

Complete Arcane actually takes time to elaborate further on the functionality of contingency magic, and still, no mention is made concerning immediate actions, readied actions, and interrupting castings like counterspelling. It would have been on paper by now.

And it's not on paper. Why? Because contingency doesn't work that way.

 

[Naxas]

And yet the person making that AoO is aware and reacts accordingly. If the caster of the contingency is not aware, how will the contingency itself be aware of the oncoming disjunction? The contingency, as it stands now, is not set to react until it is hit with the disjunction, which will destroy the contingency and nullify the antimagic field contained within the contingency.

A car's airbag only deploys after the impact. The airbag does not interupt the collision, does it?

Edit, ok just read the rest of the posts and wow crust, you are without a doubt the most unreasonable DM I have ever incountered, this is not meant as an insult only to say imposible to reason with, which in this case is definetly true. and if you beleive your point is so clear where is the proof that it works the way you say it does, and remember examples like the ones you used b4 are not proof.

Should a sleeping wizard expect a contingency/stoneskin to spring into being JUST before that orc arrow strikes his flesh, allowing the DR? It's my understanding that the contingency springs into effect only after the prescribed situation occurs. It's cause and effect, not cause/go back before cause/effect.

ok then sugest to the player that he has it trigger when someone is about to cast mord's disjuction on him not when and yes if worded right the contingency/stoneskin will go off when he is about to get hit. besides ou are worrying to much about such a reasonable use of contigeny, it's not like you can have more than 1 at a time anyway.

ok just read the rest of the postsand wow crust you are the most unreasonable DM I have ever incountered, no insult intended I just mean unable to be reasoned with wich in this case is true. you re right noone has provided proof to you other than that it isn't limited in the spell discription which is more than enough for most, but niether have you, think about that before you turn a simple request that would make a game more injoyable for a player which is your real job as a DM to make sure the people around your table or on your forumn or where ever you are hosting, are having fun. If they are not having fun you are doing something wronge, now if you implement this and fun is not tarnished then you are doing your job just fine.

 

[Abciximab]

You seem to think Disjunction is the absolute worst thing that can happen in a high level game. Sure it's bad, but to expect to run into one and use your one and only contingency to guard against it is not necessarily the best choice every time. Magic items can be replaced, spells can be recast, it make make an encounter tough, but it doesn't always spell defeat. If my DM was as resistant/insistant about the ability to defend against it it would make me pretty paranoid. Is there something specific you wish to destroy that is carried by the PCs?

Having a character use their Contingency in this way, against something they may not even come up against, opens up a lot of other possibilities.

You have made up your mind, you are the DM, run it as you will, but I haven't seen any proof your way is the absolute right way and I remain unconvinced by your argument.

 

[Theo R Cwithin]

Certainly the authors of FR material (Ed Greenwood, Dale Donovan, Sean Reynolds, etc.), the authors of PHBs over the last 20 years (masters like David Cook, Monte Cook, and Skip Williams), and the lead designer of Complete Arcane Richard Baker would be smart enough to figure out that combination and work it into the existing material at some point over the last two decades, eventually making it one of El's triggers for his contingency or listing it as a must-have example in the PHB or Complete Arcane

Surely the designers did think about things like this, being the clever chaps that they are? And yet they didn't explicitly disallow such cases, opting instead to hedge their statement of the rules with words like "may" and "usually". After 20 years, multiple editions, dozens of publications, and countless games, all they had to do was add an errata "...that the wizard is directly aware of," and that would have eliminated all question. This actually makes me suspect that it is intended as a DM fiat rule for the cases not covered by their examples.

And, if one makes a few assumptions about how magic works (that casting takes time, and is detectable by an evocation* pre-discharge), then the original combo is quite reasonable. Just not in Greenwood's world, because that's not how it works. By fiat.

*BTW, just a point referring back to an earlier post about "dumb" evocations: There are plenty of examples of evocations with some degree of awareness: Magic Missile must be somehow aware of its target in order to zero in on and strike it unerringly. Fireball must be aware of its distance from the caster, or have an internal clock, in order to detonate at the correct range. Call Lightning needs to have some sort of positional awareness in order to strike the correct square. So why can't Contigency be aware of a few spoken syllables within some distance, or some vague disturbance in the "magical fabric of space/time" prior to the completion of a Disjunction? It may or may not be. DM fiat.

 

[NewJeffCT]

Certainly, the contingency/antimagic field combination would seem very desirable to any wizard. Elminster (and Manshoon, and Khelben, and The Simbul, and every wizard in Faerun at or over 18th level) would certainly be clever enough to come up with: "Whenever anyone within 100' begins casting a disjunction at me, an antimagic field springs into being around me before the disjunction is completed." In fact, every wizard at or over 18th level would be an absolute fool to NOT set this contingency up, making them effectively immune to disjunction for one casting. This sure-fire trick would be known by even the greenest apprentices. "Heh... That's Malchor Harpell. He just set up his first 'disjoin/contingency ward.' I can't wait until I can protect myself like that. Just have to make sure I have a teleport on hand so I can get out of there on my turn!" Such a combination would be in every arcane manual in every major city in every crystal sphere.

.

Elminster is smart enough not to limit his contingency to just one spell/effect. He would likely rely on other defenses to defeat a one-time spell like Disjunction (Ring of counterspells or spellturning, perhaps?) A counter-spelling ring doesn't need any sort of trigger or activation, it just goes off automatically. (from the SRD: Instead, should that spell ever be cast upon the wearer, the spell is immediately countered, as a counterspell action, requiring no action (or even knowledge) on the wearer’s part. It also does not say that there are exceptions to this rule, either. Like, "except for Mordenkainen's Disjunction or Greater Dispel Magic")

Elminster also carries around artifacts, if I'm not mistaken... and, if you successfully disjoin an artifact, the disjunction caster has to make a save or else permanently lose all spellcasting abilities beyond mortal means to recover. Do you want to take a chance that you'll make 2,3, 4 or more saves? Plus, you have a 95% chance of attracting the attention of some rather powerful beings if you do disjoin an artifact.

Not to mention, Elminster likely has other epic level defenses that can also thwart a non-epic level spell like Disjunction.

 

[cheshire_grin]

Precisely. Elminster using Contingency to protect against Disjunction would be like a normal person wandering out into a busy highway wearing kevlar in case they're shot.

It's just not a common enough situation (and there are other ways to defend against it) to be worth using your one-and-only Contingency against.

Contingency is your last-ditch, oh-my-god-I-am-so-screwed spell; using it for anything less is an incredible waste and likely to get you killed by something other than the specific spell you decided to protect yourself against.

 

[Crust]

Elminster is smart enough not to limit his contingency to just one spell/effect.

Elminster's evasion allows six different triggers to protect the wizard. Only one of those six triggers would involve the disjunction--> contingency/antimagic field. The other five could protect him from any number of similar effects, interrupting castings, interrupting the outside world, interrupting anything that would hurt the Old Mage, rendering him rather invincible, which he is definitely not if you've read anything involving him.

And the authors didn't set up any of those six triggers that way. Why? Because contingency doesn't work that way.

It's just not a common enough situation (and there are other ways to defend against it) to be worth using your one-and-only Contingency against.

This confuses me. Other ways to defend against disjunction? How? By not being there?

Once a wizard hits 18th level, he/she has access to disjunction. Wouldn't it be wise for that wizard to protect himself from that first disjunction, especially if he doesn't have to be aware of the oncoming spell in order to be protected? From a disjunction? That wipes all magic and all magical items? Cast at an 18th level wizard who is most-likely draped in spells and magical items? Maybe we're not playing the same game, but disjunction is the ultimate wizard's bane spell, and every wizard over 18th level would protect him/herself from it with contingency if it worked the way some of you suggest.

Understand that an 18th level wizard isn't a regular Joe, and he/she should expect to get hit with a disjunction at some point (unless there's only one 18th level wizard in the entire campaign world). Even if it never happens, the precausion is a wise one, just like having an airbag in your car even if you never get into an accident.

Disjunction is about as rare as any 9th level spell in the PHB, so the idea that a wizard using disjunction on another wizard is rare and wouldn’t happen often is very, very confusing to me. Once the wizard has access to disjunction, he should want to protect himself from it immediately, and perhaps before that time if possible. And should any rival wizard over 18th level attack another wizard, the first action taken should be a disjunction.

Unless disjunction is banned from a campaign, the above scenario should be the norm. Disjunction is the ultimate clutch spell concerning wizard duels. There should really be no confusion about that.

Lastly, don't worry about why or why not Elminster would set up this or that contingency. Your job, folks, is to find evidence that supports the idea that contingency will instantaneously, spontaneously interrupt a casting like a counterspell, use of a readied action or immediate action without the wizard himself taking action, etc. None of your responses to my posts do this, so if you don't have evidence, this conversation is over.

It's been over for some time now, actually.

 

[FEADIN]

Even if it's a "must have" that no designer never spoke about because that's not the way it operates for you, maybe they never spoke about because it's obvious but very dangerous, an arcane caster without magic can be very dead in 1 round.