Disruptive Spell (Metamagic) question...

[Moff Rimmer]

I was looking for this to have been addressed and couldn't find this anywhere.

The Disruptive Spell description says...

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.

What if the spell doesn't allow a save -- rays and magic missile come immediately to mind. Is the concentration check DC the same as what the spell would have been if it allowed a save or something else (or not at all)?

[Silent Saturn]

I'm pretty sure there's a formula for determining the save DC of your spells. Something like 10 + spell level + casting stat bonus? I want to say caster level is in there too. Presumably you'd use that formula. There's also feats that can increase your DC, so I'm guessing they'd apply to Disruptive Spell as well.

[concerro]

They don't have to make a save.

[Grick]

Moff Rimmer wrote:

Is the concentration check DC the same as what the spell would have been if it allowed a save

This is what I would do.

Assume the DC of the Disruptive spell would be standard (10 + the spell level + the relevant casting Ability modifier) to make a Concentration DC of that first DC + the level of the spell being cast.

18-Int Wizard casts Magic Missile. DC 15, even though MM doesn't allow a save.

Disrupted lich wants to cast, requires concentration check of 15+Spell Level.

[Moff Rimmer]

concerro wrote:

They don't have to make a save.

A) They aren't making a save -- they're making a concentration check.

B) It only says that they don't have to make the check if they are not affected by the spell.

I believe that the concensus would be to apply what the save DC would be, but was wondering if there was anything official on that (since it doesn't reference that specifically one way or the other).

[Sebastian]

Moff Rimmer wrote:

I believe that the concensus would be to apply what the save DC would be, but was wondering if there was anything official on that (since it doesn't reference that specifically one way or the other).

That's how I'd run it. The only alternative that comes to my mind would be to use the damage-based concentration DC, but the text of the feat clearly doesn't support that.

[Sebastian]

concerro wrote:

They don't have to make a save.

My cat's breath smells like catfood.

[Crimson Jester]

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.

So I cast a disruptive magic missile. The caster now must make a concentration check that is ???? well the dc is equal to the disruptive spell, which is a feat. WTF?? it doesn't have a DC. If it is to be the spell in question, does this mean it only works on spells that have a dc??? that is not how it reads.

What a crappy feat. You can't do anything with it. It sounds good, but it doesn't work the way it is written. I have checked the errata and it doesn't have any.

Buhlman!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Onishi]

Crimson Jester wrote:

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.

So I cast a disruptive magic missile. The caster now must make a concentration check that is ???? well the dc is equal to the disruptive spell, which is a feat. WTF?? it doesn't have a DC. If it is to be the spell in question, does this mean it only works on spells that have a dc??? that is not how it reads.

What a crappy feat. You can't do anything with it. It sounds good, but it doesn't work the way it is written. I have checked the errata and it doesn't have any.

Buhlman!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Did you completely ignore all previous posts? All spells have a DC, that formula is 10 + the spell level + the relevant casting Ability modifier. That DC is official in all cases, some spells it has no normal meaning (IE there is no option to save against the spell so the DC is ignored in normal circumstances), but in cases like this feat, the save DC does have a purpose. They have no errata because it is pretty self explanatory, when they say the DC is the DC of the "Disruptive spell", they are not referring to the feat, but to the spell that has the feat applied to it, and all spells have a DC

[Curvature]

I have a question regarding this feat slightly different from the one the OP brought up: how does the disruptive spell feat interact with area of effect spells or spells with a non-instantaneous duration?

For instance, does a disruptive Fireball affect everyone within the burst (excepting those with evasion who make their save, or those with immunity, etc.)? My guess on the intent of the feat is that it does, but the wording says "targets" rather than "creatures" or some other equivalent descriptor, and a fireball doesn't actually target anyone.

Next up, consider Acid Arrow, which lasts one round plus one round per three levels. Each round, the target is affected by the spell (in the form of additional damage), so does each tick of damage from a disruptive Acid Arrow reset the 1 round duration of the disruptive effect? Or does that only apply to the first round? My interpretation of the intent of the rules is more along the lines of "first round only," but the wording seems to suggest that the disruptive effect persists as long as the spell does (plus one round thereafter).

Where these two issues really come into play is when dealing with long duration area effect spells. For instance, consider a disruptive Spike Growth. In a lenient interpretation of the feat, this is rather a brutal combination, since it means that anyone attempting to move through the area of effect is subject to the disruptive effect of the feat. In a strict interpretation, this combination of spell and feat is useless (save for bumping the spell's DC one higher in lieu of Heighten).

Similar potentially nasty combinations would be disruptive Acid Fogs, disruptive Call Lightnings, or, for hilarity's sake, a disruptive Geas.

[Zhameng]

Or a disruptive Bestow Curse. Yick.

Another interesting thought would be to have a magus use disruptive with a multiple-use spell like Elemental Touch. Get hit by the weapon, take the extra elemental damage, take the secondary effect, and get whacked by the disruptive spell metamagics. Not a bad choice for a magus trying to duel another spellcaster, all in all.