Why the fear and hatred of Disjunction?

[Jhulae]

But, even WISH isn't as powerful as MDJ.

I guess I could probably 'Wish' for all my enemy's magical items and current magical buffs to be forced to make a will save, but, even according to Wish, I can't 'duplicate' what MDJ does directly. So, making a Wish that mimics MDJ is *definitely* getting into 'DM screwing the players via a Wish' territory.

If MDJ was single target, it'd still be extremely powerful (as it *completely* wipes out, not surpresses, magic items). The way it's written, it should be Epic.

 

[anon]

Disjunction is a bad spell. It makes the game less fun.

Comments about 'real threats of danger' are, of course, correct so far as they go, but IMHO miss the point. As a player I do want to be challenged. Losing the use of my magic items does create a scary challenge, as characters encountering 9th level spells are very dependent on their items. But having the items changed to normal items, permanently, isn't challenging, it's just a waste of my time and a huge drain of fun.

The spell would be much much better, IMHO, and create virtually the same effect, if it simply disabled items for a certain period of time. Anything from 1 minute to 1 month, as desired for effect.

The after-fight tale of "HOLY CRAP! I didn't know what I was going to do without my .... or my ....!! I can't believe we made it out of there. Hey mage, how much longer till our stuff works?" is great and fun, and still scary. The same story isn't even told when the item changes are permanent because the players and characters are demoralized and upset.

 

[Infiniti2000]

What is it's REAL power after allowing for it's potential down side of possibly losing all spellcasting abilities forever?

It's only a potential down side IF you chance to hit an artifact AND it gets disjoined (small chance) AND you lose what should be an easy Will save.

And, as I noted above, any such artifacts have to be out in the open. If Fragarach is in his sheathe (which I would personally call total cover), then he's okay.

 

[Artoomis]

It's only a potential down side IF you chance to hit an artifact AND it gets disjoined (small chance) AND you lose what should be an easy Will save.

And, as I noted above, any such artifacts have to be out in the open. If Fragarach is in his sheathe (which I would personally call total cover), then he's okay.

Fragarach does not have totoal cover in its sheathe. The hilt is not covered.

As I previously pointed out, in a typical campaign, the odds of getting zapped when casting this spell are over 10%.

Also, if MD is used once or twice, you will lose FAR less equipment than if Sunder is used routinely.

If MD is used more often than that I have to wonder about the nature of the campaign and/or sanity of the caster.

I view MD as a somewhat less-than-optimal choice for the caster. It MIGHT have devasting effects upon the targets, but it also MIGHT have far worse and far-reaching effects upon the caster and it MIGHT destroy a significant part of your treasure.

 

[KarinsDad]

As I previously pointed out, in a typical campaign, the odds of getting zapped when casting this spell are over 10%.

Yeah, but that was math for a non-typical campaign (it was also very incorrect, the caster level was 15 instead of 17, the save chance was too low and it assumed that the caster would not put up protection from his own spell).

It also assumed that PCs had 4 artifacts at <=15th level and it assumed that all of the PCs with artifacts got caught in the area effect of an MD.

This might happen is some small percentage of Monty Haul games, but I really seriously doubt it is anywhere near the norm. Even the artifact king adventure Return to the Temple of Elemental Evil which has 7 minor artifacts and 2 major artifacts in it ends up with many of them not being found (many are well hidden), or not being kept (4 are evil, 1 has 2 charges remaining), or destroyed/lost in the process.

 

[Artoomis]

Yeah, but that was math for a non-typical campaign (it was also very incorrect, the caster level was 15 instead of 17, the save chance was too low and it assumed that the caster would not put up protection from his own spell).

It also assumed that PCs had 4 artifacts at <=15th level and it assumed that all of the PCs with artifacts got caught in the area effect of an MD.

This might happen is some small percentage of Monty Haul games, but I really seriously doubt it is anywhere near the norm. Even the artifact king adventure Return to the Temple of Elemental Evil which has 7 minor artifacts and 2 major artifacts in it ends up with many of them not being found (many are well hidden), or not being kept (4 are evil, 1 has 2 charges remaining), or destroyed/lost in the process.

Regardless of errors and assumptions, what spell caster wants to take even a one percent chance of losing spell casting abilities FOREVER?

As for how many artifacts, well, take look at published adventure for parties of 17th(+) level. How many do not have at least one or two (or more) minor (or major) artifacts in them?

If minor artifacts are as rare as some would have me believe, then why are they even addressed in the DMG at all?

It matters not. Any level of risk to losing ALL spell abilities FOREVER is probably too much for most sane spell casters to take.

What fate is worse then being left alive, a broken man or woman? That a really, really sacry thought.

The point, of course, is that wizards of all sorts should be kind of afraid of the raw power contained in MD. That's both for both casters and targets.

It's a prefectly reasonable spell at 9th level provided it is rarely used and mostly the big, scary thing that is out there that MIGHT be used. It is GOOD to have a few spells like that around. Not many, mind you. If all the 9th level spells were like this that might be an issue.

 

[Infiniti2000]

As I previously pointed out, in a typical campaign, the odds of getting zapped when casting this spell are over 10%.

Let's drum up some numbers to see if you're correct (I don't recall you previously pointing this out, but long thread...hope you understand).

Assumption that the bad guy has MD and uses, we have to call this 100% otherwise we have no analysis. Let's use CL 20 (in your favor), though it could be lower.

Chance of the party have an artifact: let's call it 99% at this level.

Chance of the artifact(s) being out in the open and the possessor being in the area of effect: 90% (I think this is fair).

Chance of it being disjoined: 20%.

Chance of failing the Will save: 5% (natural 1 for a CL 20 wizard/sorcerer).

The total probability is then .99 * .9 * .2 * .05 = .00891 = 0.9%. I believe you can add this up for multiple items, so give 4 party members each one and you get 3.6%.

Even if you use 100% for the first two chances, you get only 1%. It's never as close as 10%.

 

[Infiniti2000]

Regardless of errors and assumptions, what spell caster wants to take even a one percent chance of losing spell casting abilities FOREVER?

That may be a valid point (and I'm not sure it is), but you can't exaggerate numbers and then claim those numbers don't matter when they don't hold up to scrutiny.

(INSERT exaggeration)

(debunk exaggeration)

Oh, that didn't matter anyway because ...

?

 

[Artoomis]

That may be a valid point (and I'm not sure it is), but you can't exaggerate numbers and then claim those numbers don't matter when they don't hold up to scrutiny.

(INSERT exaggeration)

(debunk exaggeration)

Oh, that didn't matter anyway because ...

?

My point is the chance of a very, very bad thing (probably about the worst thing possible) it not so small as to be dismissed out of hand.

Depending upon your assumptions, it's probably between one percent and fifteen percent or so, and, worse yet, is totally random and completely out of the control of the caster. I see little value in a debate about whether it is fice percent or seven percent, for example as even one percent is an awfully high risk when the factors involved are completely out of your control.

It is one thing to face the BBG with confidence in your abilities, quite another to risk everything (and I mean everything) on in-character pure randomness, as opposed to a roll of the dice for a chance to hit or something which in-character, is not random.

 

[Endur]

Chance of it being disjoined: 20%.

Chance of failing the Will save: 5% (natural 1 for a CL 20 wizard/sorcerer).

The total probability is then .99 * .9 * .2 * .05 = .00891 = 0.9%. I believe you can add this up for multiple items, so give 4 party members each one and you get 3.6%.

The total probability of losing spellcasting is actually less than 3.6%, as I understand MD.

I read the numbers as being a 3.6% chance of having to take a DC25 will save. Then your theoretical level 20 wizard/sorceror has to make his will save. The wizard/sorceror probably has between +15 and +25 on his saving throw, so anywhere from a 50% chance of failure to 5%, then multiplied by 3.6% so anywhere from a 1.8% to .36% chance of losing spell casting capabilities.

I'm presuming the chance of failing the will save you recite is the artifact's chance of failing the will save, and you are giving the artifact a 2+ save against the wizard/sorcerors DCwhatever (probably 29 or so). If the artifact does not have a 2+ save, then it might be more likely to fail its save and the chance of losing spell casting capabilities goes up.

I would assume that artifacts are going to be present at any combat important enough to involve MD, but the odds of an artifact being destroyed and the wizard failing his save is small.