Countering disintegrate


Pathfinder First Edition General Discussion

51 to 73 of 73 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

BladeMaster0182 wrote:
So I've run into a snag with disintegrate: one of my players is an evocator and he loves disintegrate and has been using it to one shot some tough monsters. To top this, I let him have an item called hellcat gauntlets which deal 1d6 additional slashing damage per spell level on targeted spells 3/day. This was fine until disintegrate.

Actually disintegrate (as well as any ray spell) wouldn't be valid for the gauntlet's effects by a strict reading, so you might help yourself out there?

Look for a "target" line on any ray spell and you won't find it, they are effect: ray spells. Same reason that Spell Turning doesn't work on them, Turin, Spell Turning specifies it does not work on "effect" spells.

In general, though, bad dice rolls happen sometimes vs save or dies. Just be glad he is using disintegrate instead of a real save or die ;)


Pathfinder Maps, Pawns Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber
Coriat wrote:
BladeMaster0182 wrote:
So I've run into a snag with disintegrate: one of my players is an evocator and he loves disintegrate and has been using it to one shot some tough monsters. To top this, I let him have an item called hellcat gauntlets which deal 1d6 additional slashing damage per spell level on targeted spells 3/day. This was fine until disintegrate.

Actually disintegrate (as well as any ray spell) wouldn't be valid for the gauntlet's effects by a strict reading, so you might help yourself out there?

Look for a "target" line on any ray spell and you won't find it, they are effect: ray spells. Same reason that Spell Turning doesn't work on them, Turin, Spell Turning specifies it does not work on "effect" spells.

In general, though, bad dice rolls happen sometimes vs save or dies. Just be glad he is using disintegrate instead of a real save or die ;)

It was my understanding that all ray spells were target spells since the ray has to target something. The line is omitted because it would be redundant to have it. Am I wrong in this?


Ravingdork wrote:


It was my understanding that all ray spells were target spells since the ray has to target something. The line is omitted because it would be redundant to have it. Am I wrong in this?

You are.

Take this example: you can't target something you can't see, but you can fire a ray at it blindly.

-James


Pathfinder Maps, Pawns Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber
james maissen wrote:
Ravingdork wrote:


It was my understanding that all ray spells were target spells since the ray has to target something. The line is omitted because it would be redundant to have it. Am I wrong in this?

You are.

Take this example: you can't target something you can't see, but you can fire a ray at it blindly.

-James

You can target something you can't see, but the rules say you have to be able to touch it at that point.

Dark Archive

Turin the Mad wrote:
Majuba wrote:
Rathendar wrote:
I can think of a half dozen ways to make this PC sweat 'occasionally'. (i think spell turning would be a great one myself)

For the record, spell turning does not work with disintegrate, as it is an effect spell and not a targeted spell. It does work on Flesh to Stone funny enough.

Rod of Absorption and the Lavender Ioun Stones do work.

Spell Turning most certainly does work against disintegrate, as disintegrate is a single target spell, not an area effect spell. Just because it requires an attack roll does not mean that it won't return that spell against its caster.

Unless I've missed an errata or something ... very possible.

"Spell turning also fails to stop touch range spells." - spell turning

"A thin, green ray springs from your pointing finger. You must make a successful ranged touch attack to hit."- disintegrate

so no, it doesn't work


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

My bad then, your rules-fu was greater then my off-the-top-of-my-head posted reply. ;)


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Card Game, Companion, Lost Omens Subscriber
Name Violation wrote:


"Spell turning also fails to stop touch range spells." - spell turning

"A thin, green ray springs from your pointing finger. You must make a successful ranged touch attack to hit."- disintegrate

so no, it doesn't work

See I read that completely different. It says 'touch range spells' not 'ranged touch spells' to me those are two totally different things. A 'touch range spell' is a spell that requires you to touch your opponent, like for example Vampiric Touch.

Whereas a ray, which is a ranged touch spell is a totally different beast.


As a note from 3.5 material I do recall a ray that I believe has a target entry. I believe it was the ray of deanimation from the spell compendium. It is the only one that I can think of but I suppose there could be others.

The Exchange Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 6

The key phrase for spell turning is spells targeted on you. That means spells with a "Target" or "Targets" line. Note the phrase "Effect and area spells are not affected", which makes it explicit. Disintegrate is Effect: ray rather than targeted, and is not affected by spell turning.

This does mean the list of spells that spell turning works on is not that huge.


As noted above, just cast Ray Deflection from SC


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Card Game, Companion, Lost Omens Subscriber

A ray spell still has a target, it just uses different rules for a target than a normal spell does. Instead of the normal spell targeting rules it uses the ranged weapon targeting rules. Ranged weapons require a target, it specifically says that 'you can shoot a ranged weapon at any target that is within the weapons range' under the rules for ranged weapons.

Yes you can fire a ray spell at an invisible target unlike a normal spell but that doesn't mean you don't have a target, it just means you are targeting something you only think is there hence the miss chance.

The Exchange Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 6

Aravan wrote:

A ray spell still has a target, it just uses different rules for a target than a normal spell does. Instead of the normal spell targeting rules it uses the ranged weapon targeting rules. Ranged weapons require a target, it specifically says that 'you can shoot a ranged weapon at any target that is within the weapons range' under the rules for ranged weapons.

Yes you can fire a ray spell at an invisible target unlike a normal spell but that doesn't mean you don't have a target, it just means you are targeting something you only think is there hence the miss chance.

It really isn't open to debate. Reread the spell, and pay attention to the line about effect and area spells not being affected by spell turning. Disintegrate *is* an effect spell, period. This extempts it from spell turning. Regardless of how you feel about it being targeted or not.

And yes, disintegrate has a target, like all attacks. It still is not a targeted spell. It is an effect spell. Fireball is an area spell. Fireball still can hit multiple targets, despite not being a targeted spell.

Confusing terminology since "target for a ranged touch attack" is not the same in rules terms as "targeted spell", but still not that hard to sort out.


It makes spell turning a very sucky highly specialistic spell for its level though. Imho, spell turning should turn all spells affecting you. That would make it about right for it is a frikkin' 7th level spell which only reflects about 1 or 2 spells at that level.

It should be turned into a 10m/lvl dorment ability that you can trigger as an immediate action. "Turn spell" it should be called where you can redirect 1 single spell to a new target after it has been cast.

The Exchange Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 6

Funkytrip wrote:

It makes spell turning a very sucky highly specialistic spell for its level though. Imho, spell turning should turn all spells affecting you. That would make it about right for it is a frikkin' 7th level spell which only reflects about 1 or 2 spells at that level.

It should be turned into a 10m/lvl dorment ability that you can trigger as an immediate action. "Turn spell" it should be called where you can redirect 1 single spell to a new target after it has been cast.

Oh I dunno...

7th level:
destruction
inflict serious wounds, mass
banishment
hold person, mass
insanity
power word blind
finger of death

Pretty solid list of spells to block.


Russ Taylor wrote:


Oh I dunno...

7th level:
destruction
inflict serious wounds, mass
banishment
hold person, mass
insanity
power word blind
finger of death

Pretty solid list of spells to block.

That's 7 spells out of how many? I'd rather use my 7th level spell slot to prevent the enemy spellcaster from casting such a spell in the first place than hoping he'd cast it on me and not on one of my party members.

However, in campaigns where the DM uses the spells above AND on the spellcaster, it could be nice.


knightofstyx wrote:
...the Transmuter would have a DC around 10+6(spell level)+7(ability mod with +4 to caster stat item)+1(specialist)+1(spell focus)+1(greater spell focus)=26.

Specialist wizards don't get a +1 to save DCs anymore.

Zo


knightofstyx wrote:

Too many players assume that since disintegrate deals damage (and quite a butt load of it early on) that it's an evocation spell.

That is a good point, especially since the GM/DM in question said his player is an Evoker (Evocation Specialist).

If the player in question went all out to increase his Evocation spells, then he would not have to many disintegrates to use in the first place.

also said GM/DM may want to check which schools he has chosen as his opposition school, cause if he chose transmutation he will need to expend 2 slots for each disintegrate.


Russ Taylor wrote:
Funkytrip wrote:


Oh I dunno...

7th level:
destruction
inflict serious wounds, mass
banishment
hold person, mass
insanity
power word blind
finger of death

Pretty solid list of spells to block.

Destruction is touch range and thus exempt. Inflict wounds is pretty weak at the point where you get spell turning. But the others? Yeah, nasty stuff if it works.


Lathiira wrote:
Destruction is touch range and thus exempt.

Destruction is a targeted spell with range close. Spell turning works against it.


AvalonXQ wrote:
Lathiira wrote:
Destruction is touch range and thus exempt.
Destruction is a targeted spell with range close. Spell turning works against it.

Whoops. We've run it as touch range. You are correct. Now I don't have to provoke those annoying AoO's anymore!


Pathfinder Maps, Pawns Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber
james maissen wrote:
Ravingdork wrote:


It was my understanding that all ray spells were target spells since the ray has to target something. The line is omitted because it would be redundant to have it. Am I wrong in this?

You are.

Take this example: you can't target something you can't see, but you can fire a ray at it blindly.

-James

You can still target something you can't see, but the rules say you have to be able to touch it at that point.


Ravingdork wrote:
Coriat wrote:
BladeMaster0182 wrote:
So I've run into a snag with disintegrate: one of my players is an evocator and he loves disintegrate and has been using it to one shot some tough monsters. To top this, I let him have an item called hellcat gauntlets which deal 1d6 additional slashing damage per spell level on targeted spells 3/day. This was fine until disintegrate.

Actually disintegrate (as well as any ray spell) wouldn't be valid for the gauntlet's effects by a strict reading, so you might help yourself out there?

Look for a "target" line on any ray spell and you won't find it, they are effect: ray spells. Same reason that Spell Turning doesn't work on them, Turin, Spell Turning specifies it does not work on "effect" spells.

In general, though, bad dice rolls happen sometimes vs save or dies. Just be glad he is using disintegrate instead of a real save or die ;)

It was my understanding that all ray spells were target spells since the ray has to target something. The line is omitted because it would be redundant to have it. Am I wrong in this?

Yes. You will find a clarification of target vs effect spells under the Magic section of the PRD, subsection "Aiming a Spell."

Specifically it is worth noting that Rays are under Effect spells, while Target spells are a different category. Also worth noting is this line under the Effect (Rays) portion,

Quote:
You don't have to see the creature you're trying to hit, as you do with a targeted spell.

which makes it even clearer rays aren't targeted spells.

Aiming A Spell


I would call the PC's in as bounty hunters hired by Darth Vader. Problem solved.

Darth Vader wrote:
"You are free to use any methods necessary, but I Want Them Alive. No disintegrations!"

51 to 73 of 73 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / General Discussion / Countering disintegrate All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.