|
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
Okay so I was looking at what I can do with this feat and touch of idiocy is hilarious. For a 3rd level spells, you can make life of any caster hell for 10 min/level at low levels. On top of the 1d6 casting stat penalty, you need to make a DC 12+casting stat+spell being cast +0-2(for spell focus) concentration check. At level 5, your probably looking at DC 18-24 to get spells off. Course at higher levels your gonna need higher spells to base this off on and mages sword is comes to mind...but that is only for one round per level. Then I went umm no wait...what about buff? Disruptive mind blank...24 hours of disruption :P . DC 19+ casting stat+spell being cast can easily top out at 37. I'm gonna ignore spell focus because really, who takes spell focus abjuration?!? I'm so gonna make a BBEG that casts disruptive mind blanks.
Okay so I was looking at what I can do with this feat and touch of idiocy is hilarious. For a 3rd level spells, you can make life of any caster hell for 10 min/level at low levels. On top of the 1d6 casting stat penalty, you need to make a DC 12+casting stat+spell being cast +0-2(for spell focus) concentration check. At level 5, your probably looking at DC 18-24 to get spells off. Course at higher levels your gonna need higher spells to base this off on and mages sword is comes to mind...but that is only for one round per level. Then I went umm no wait...what about buff? Disruptive mind blank...24 hours of disruption :P . DC 19+ casting stat+spell being cast can easily top out at 37. I'm gonna ignore spell focus because really, who takes spell focus abjuration?!? I'm so gonna make a BBEG that casts disruptive mind blanks.
*rubs chin thoughtfully* Innnnteresting. I suspect the original intent of the metamagic was to throw off damaged casters for a round or so, but I can certainly see why your idea is such an appealing one. It's almost like a mini-feeblemind.
I'd love to get an official ruling on whether the metamagic works the way you're proposing. If so, I'm a-usin' it against my PCs in a confrontation with a wizard-monk. *evil grin*
|
Maybe I'm missing something, or maybe you're missing something...
Disruptive Spell (Metamagic)
Your magical energies cling to enemies, interfering with their spellcasting.
Benefit: Targets affected by a disruptive spell must make concentration checks when using spells or spell-like abilities (DC equals the save DC of the disruptive spell plus the level of the spell being cast) for 1 round. Targets that avoid the spell’s effects avoid this feat’s effect as well. A disruptive spell uses up a spell slot one level higher than the spell’s actual level.
The way I read it, the forced concentration check only happens for 1 round after being affected by the disruptive spell; the effect doesn't last for the spell's duration.
Maybe I'm missing something, or maybe you're missing something...
Disruptive Spell (Metamagic)
Your magical energies cling to enemies, interfering with their spellcasting.
Benefit: Targets affected by a disruptive spell must make concentration checks when using spells or spell-like abilities (DC equals the save DC of the disruptive spell plus the level of the spell being cast) for 1 round. Targets that avoid the spell’s effects avoid this feat’s effect as well. A disruptive spell uses up a spell slot one level higher than the spell’s actual level.
The way I read it, the forced concentration check only happens for 1 round after being affected by the disruptive spell; the effect doesn't last for the spell's duration.
*nods* That's how I read it too, but I suspect CN's looking more at the part I bolded. Since the targets of touch of idiocy are affected by said spell for 10 minutes per level... I think that's how long he believes the disruption would last.
Correct me if I'm misinterpreting you here, Cold Napalm.
|
|
Yeah, but I'm pretty sure it doesn't work that way.
The feat checks to see if the target was affected by the spell. If the answer is yes, the target is disrupted for one round.
The duration of the spell effect is irrelevant, because the feat doesn't ask "How long are you affected for?", it's just asking "Are you affected?"
Vaarsuvius - errr, I mean, Cold Napalm's argument would have a better footing (IMO) if he focused on spells that required multiple saves over the course of several rounds, or had ongoing effects like acid arrow.
I'd still say he was wrong, but at least he'd have a better justification ;p
|
|
Well the reading is if you get affected by the spell, you need to make a concentration check for one round. So in the case of mind blank, every round your affected by it, you need to make the con check for one round after that...which is what makes it a 24 hour buff that isn't :P . But honestly that's just funny. Mage's sword at high levels and touch of idocy at low levels work much better. After all the a disruptive mind blank is worse in all ways compared to feeble mind. But it is hilarious. Might make a good cursed item too....
Well the reading is if you get affected by the spell, you need to make a concentration check for one round. So in the case of mind blank, every round your affected by it, you need to make the con check for one round after that...which is what makes it a 24 hour buff that isn't :P . But honestly that's just funny. Mage's sword at high levels and touch of idocy at low levels work much better. After all the a disruptive mind blank is worse in all ways compared to feeble mind. But it is hilarious. Might make a good cursed item too....
Whoa. You're starting to read rules like I sometimes read rules.
Nevertheless, I disagree with you on this one. I think the penalty from the metamagic feat only lasts one round, regardless of the duration of the base spell.
|
|
Well the reading is if you get affected by the spell, you need to make a concentration check for one round. So in the case of mind blank, every round your affected by it, you need to make the con check for one round after that...which is what makes it a 24 hour buff that isn't :P . But honestly that's just funny. Mage's sword at high levels and touch of idocy at low levels work much better. After all the a disruptive mind blank is worse in all ways compared to feeble mind. But it is hilarious. Might make a good cursed item too....Whoa. You're starting to read rules like I sometimes read rules.
Nevertheless, I disagree with you on this one. I think the penalty from the metamagic feat only lasts one round, regardless of the duration of the base spell.
Holy s&!* it's opposite day.
.
..
...
....
.....
Holy s!## it's opposite day.
O_O
|
|
So I guess the next question would how do we errata this? Because RAW is pretty clear that if your affected by the spell, you need to make a concentration for one round.
So do we limit this to damage only? In which case touch of idocy is out, but DoT like acid arrows or effects like wall of fire or mage's sword could provide multi-round disruptions.
Or do we change the wording to when you cast the spell, affected creatures must make a concentration check for one round? This would make it clear that no matter what spell you attaching disruptive to, it only lasts for one round.
|
|
Actually, I think a disruptive Mage's Sword (or Black Tentacles, or Crushing Hand) might work exactly like that. I agree that it's a stretch to apply that to enchantments and other spells that affect you for a set duration, but I think that a spell that attacks you every round should deal all effects every hit.
My shoot-from-the-hip gut reaction is this: If the spell makes or provokes a roll to affect you, and it succeeds, then it also disrupts for that round. Reasoning: for an affect this nasty, it should always have a chance to fail, at least beyond the first round. I don't mind if it works extra-well with some spells. I do mind if it hoses somebody every round for a whole day with only one lousy save.
Under this interpretation, Disruptive Acid Arrow disrupts for only one round. But Disruptive Glitterdust disrupts until they make the save. Disruptive Mage's Sword disrupts every time it hits, and Disruptive Grasping Hand disrupts every time it succeeds on a grapple check. What do you guys think? Can it work like that? Does it work every time (every discrete instance) the spell affects you?
.
..
...
....
.....
I also read it as:
..seemingly, arguing that extended effects impose the need for additional Concentration checks violates the '..for 1 round.' clause.
I would have thought that, if the intent was for the feat to cause a/the spell to impose the Concentration check every time a/the spell effects the target they would have stated something along these lines.
I.E: ''Every round'' or ''Whenever a/the spell effects the target'' or ''While the spell continues to effect the target'', ''For the duration of the spell'' etc
So I guess the next question would how do we errata this? Because RAW is pretty clear that if your affected by the spell, you need to make a concentration for one round.
No, it's not clear that the wording supports your interpretation. For me, it's quite clear that it's supposed to work one round after the spell is cast.
What we need is clarification.
Cold Napalm: If I were in your games operating under your interpretation, I would just love to get a Bestow Curse off on an enemy spellcaster. Knock down his primary attribute 6 points AND force concentration checks FOREVER! lol. I really feel sorry for the poor SOB who fails his save against that.
I do absolutely agree with you that the wording can be cleaned up. I still don't think your interpretation is a common one though.
|
|
I actually like lyrax's way to make this feat work. It ONLY works after a failed save or a successful attack/check (in the rare case that both are needed, I would say you need to both get hit and fail the save). And I will probably use that for my game (although a cursed disruptive mind blank item is still a possibility hehe)...at least until it gets FAQ's or errata.
So I guess the next question would how do we errata this? Because RAW is pretty clear that if your affected by the spell, you need to make a concentration for one round.No, it's not clear that the wording supports your interpretation. For me, it's quite clear that it's supposed to work one round after the spell is cast.
What we need is clarification.
Suppose I use contagious flame.
I hit three targets, they all are disrupted this round. Next round I bounce the flames around hitting the three new targets -- each target is affected by the spell (for case of argument) -- so the three new targets are now disrupted. After all they are affected by the spell, even if it wasn't in the same round, and the metamagic feat doesn't say "If you are affected by the spell in the round it was cast". It says
Targets affected by a disruptive spell must make concentration checks when using spells or spell-like abilities (DC equals the save DC of the disruptive spell plus the level of the spell being cast) for 1 round.
Now if I were to bounce the spell back to the original three targets I could see thme not being affected by the disruption effect because they were already affected by the spell and had their round of disruption.
But so long as you keep bouncing to new targets then the disruption should continue to affect the new targets too.
It doesn't say "each time a creature is affected by the spell" so I can't get "redo" on those already affected once.
grumbles.... just more rules and regulations to remember.....i Vote to get ride of it in next printing :)
Neither does it say "the first time a creature is affected by the spell". So I can see an interpretation at the table going either way.
But it does say "creatures affected... for 1 round"... not one round per time affected, just one round if affected by the spell.
So if you want to skip it the first time they are affected in the hopes of getting it at a later time when they are affected again...
But that would be rather dodgy at best.