Why the fear and hatred of Disjunction?

[Particle_Man]

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

Ged got over it.

 

[Artoomis]

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 think you missed the fact that he assumed a 5% chance of missing the DC 25 save - which was already built into his calculation.

If you assume a 5 to 50 percent chance of missing the save, the result is

.99 * .9 * .2 * .05 = .00891 = 0.9% to .99 * .9 * .2 * .5 = .0891 = 9% of each artifact in the area of effect.

For four artifacts, that's a 3.6% to 36%. Actually I don't think that is correct either, but never mind.

The point is: the odds of losing spell abilities FOREVER is significantly greater than zero and is COMPLETELY out of the caster's hands.

 

[KuKu]

I think you missed the fact that he assumed a 5% chance of missing the DC 25 save - which was already built into his calculation.

If you assume a 5 to 50 percent chance of missing the save, the result is

.99 * .9 * .2 * .05 = .00891 = 0.9% to .99 * .9 * .2 * .5 = .0891 = 9% of each artifact in the area of effect.

For four artifacts, that's a 3.6% to 36%. Actually I don't think that is correct either, but never mind.

The point is: the odds of losing spell abilities FOREVER is significantly greater than zero and is COMPLETELY out of the caster's hands.

Every person you run in to has a artifact? I think my wizard will stay home instead of adventuring. He is to smart to go out and play in god country.

 

[Artoomis]

Every person you run in to has a artifact? I think my wizard will stay home instead of adventuring. He is to smart to go out and play in god country.

At 20th level? I would expect that every party would have at least one MINOR artificat, and one per PC would probably not be unusual.

Remember we are talking MINOR artifacts here. I think I would include legendary weapons in that category as they seem to be treated that way.

Plus, of course, the following list (previously in this thread) of SIX artifacts is from ONE module level 4-12 shows how common MINOR artifacts really are, typically:

Fragarach, Deck of Many Things, Orb of Oblivion, Orb of Silvery Death, Book of Vile Darkness, Talisman of Pure Good.


So yes, I think that the default D&D world (PHB and DMG) does assume MINOR artifacts will be in PCs hands fairly often.

If that is not true in your world, then this spell may need an adjustment.

 

[Nadaka]

Besides RttToEE, how many other published adventures have artifacts that the PC's might end up with? There are thousands that have no artifacts. And I would note that most of the artifacts in the one adventure you mention are intended as traps to doom the party to horrible fates.

 

[Artoomis]

Besides RttToEE, how many other published adventures have artifacts that the PC's might end up with? There are thousands that have no artifacts. And I would note that most of the artifacts in the one adventure you mention are intended as traps to doom the party to horrible fates.

Many hundreds, if not thousands, of common modules have at least one minor artifact in them. Keep in mind that D&D 3.5 has changed some former non-artifact items to minor artifact status, making them perhaps even more common than previous editions.

Note that :

"Minor artifacts are not necessarily unique items. Even so, they are magic items that no longer can be created, at least by common mortal means. "

They are not necessairly particularly rare, even, though I would only expect to find them owned by more powerful people (politically powerful and/or high-level adventurers), not ordinary citizens (commoners).

 

[KarinsDad]

If you assume a 5 to 50 percent chance of missing the save, the result is

.99 * .9 * .2 * .05 = .00891 = 0.9% to .99 * .9 * .2 * .5 = .0891 = 9% of each artifact in the area of effect.

For four artifacts, that's a 3.6% to 36%. Actually I don't think that is correct either, but never mind.

First, I wouldn't have an NPC Wizard do this if his chance to fail the Will save was not 5%. There are many boost spells that can get his Will save up.

Second, I would have him cast it as a 17th level caster instead of 20th since it has no spell resistance and hence, there is no reason (except possibly range) to cast it at the higher caster level.

Third, for the 0.9% case, that's 0.9% for one artifact, 1.79% for two (1 - .991^2), 2.68% for three (1 - .991^3), 3.552% for four (1 - .991^4), etc. Not quite the same as multiplying by the number of artifacts.


At that level, he might also have ways (an ability or a spell) to re-roll a failed save. That shoots this to .99 * .9 * .17 * .05 * .05 = .000379%. In this case, each artifact has one chance in 2641 of it adversely affecting him.

If his enemies have artifacts, why would the NPC Wizard not be able to handle that situation? Why should the 20th level NPC Wizard with Int 30 play this stupidly?

 

[Artoomis]

First, I wouldn't have an NPC Wizard do this if his chance to fail the Will save was not 5%. There are many boost spells that can get his Will save up.

Second, I would have him cast it as a 17th level caster instead of 20th since it has no spell resistance and hence, there is no reason (except possibly range) to cast it at the higher caster level.

Third, for the 0.9% case, that's 0.9% for one artifact, 1.79% for two (1 - .991^2), 2.68% for three (1 - .991^3), 3.552% for four (1 - .991^4), etc. Not quite the same as multiplying by the number of artifacts.


At that level, he might also have ways (an ability or a spell) to re-roll a failed save. That shoots this to .99 * .9 * .17 * .05 * .05 = .000379%. In this case, each artifact has one chance in 2641 of it adversely affecting him.

If his enemies have artifacts, why would the NPC Wizard not be able to handle that situation? Why should the 20th level NPC Wizard with Int 30 play this stupidly?

Exactly. The smart move is to either not do this at all or to devote significant personal assets to making this be as low a risk as possible - taking assets away from other, likely better, options.

Why would a wizard do this?

If it were me, as the wizard, I'd research something like "Spell Disjunction" that would only affect spells. Possibly also have it suppress items for 1d4 rounds or something.

I'd have this as a better option. In some ways it is better, in some not.

 

[KarinsDad]

Plus, of course, the following list (previously in this thread) of SIX artifacts is from ONE module level 4-12 shows how common MINOR artifacts really are, typically:

Fragarach, Deck of Many Things, Orb of Oblivion, Orb of Silvery Death, Book of Vile Darkness, Talisman of Pure Good.

Fragarach was not in it and the list should have included the Orb Gems and the Demon statue (there were actually 9 artifacts in that stupid module).

But, this is stupid. That was a ridiculous module with respect to artifacts.

The bad guys did not even use them, they left most of them lying around in trapped treasure troves or hidden. How boring to just find artifacts in treasure troves or in a secret compartment as opposing to taking long quests to explicitly find one and then battling the BBEG in order to pry it from his cold dead hand.

PC 1: "What's you got there Fred?"
PC 2: "Ah, just another Talisman of Pure Good hidden in a bowl of evil liquid. Here, throw it in your Haversack with the others."

Yawn. Boring. That module sucked in this regard.


Artifacts should be the basis of legendary quests, not just common everyday treasure in a dungeon crawl. Look at the 2E Rod of Seven Parts adventure. One artifact, an entire major adventure for high level PCs to acquire it.

No wonder you think this would happen in games right and left. RttToEE screwed up your expectations.

 

[KarinsDad]

Exactly. The smart move is to either not do this at all or to devote significant personal assets to making this be as low a risk as possible - taking assets away from other, likely better, options.

Why would a wizard do this?

He might do it if he were about to get killed anyway or the PCs have a reputation of tracking down the BBEG and either killing him or bringing him to justice.

There can always be motivations. He could be insane. He could be forced to do so by his even more Evil master, etc.


He could even do it because the DM never considered the possibility that he might fail the roll (i.e. this is a game, DMs do not always might the best tactical decisions for NPCs, but the spell still might be cast in games).