I'm wondering if this has ever come up in a game, a situation where you had to destroy a major artifact using mage's disjunction. I'm interested in what players did after they failed their will save and lost all ability to cast magic.
Did the characters retire? Did they try to get their magics back? Did they change character class? Did they draw attention from something big and nasty?
Please tell your stories!
I haven't actually gotten that far, but I'm considering this as a contingency (not the spell . . . probably) at the end of AP I'm currently playing. Not sure what the repercussions would be, honestly, but since it'd be the end of the campaign anyway it might not matter.
I'll take what I can get. This isn't exactly a common thing. You have to be at least level 17, a wizard or sorcerer, know the right spell, have a major artifact and a need to destroy it. Then you have to fail a will save...
When ever we have needed something broken we have nearly always sent the barbarian after it.
Good idea normally, but artifacts almost always have specific methods of destruction. XD They're one of the few things in the game where "Barbarian smash" is unlikely to help.
GM Rednal wrote: Good idea normally, but artifacts almost always have specific methods of destruction. XD They're one of the few things in the game where "Barbarian smash" is unlikely to help. Well barbarian anti magic should work just as well as mages disjunction and has no downsides like how the spell does.
doomman47 wrote: GM Rednal wrote: Good idea normally, but artifacts almost always have specific methods of destruction. XD They're one of the few things in the game where "Barbarian smash" is unlikely to help. Well barbarian anti magic should work just as well as mages disjunction and has no downsides like how the spell does. As antimagic field says: 'Artifacts and deities are unaffected by mortal magic such as this.'
So alas, this does not work.
Cydeth wrote: doomman47 wrote: GM Rednal wrote: Good idea normally, but artifacts almost always have specific methods of destruction. XD They're one of the few things in the game where "Barbarian smash" is unlikely to help. Well barbarian anti magic should work just as well as mages disjunction and has no downsides like how the spell does. As antimagic field says: 'Artifacts and deities are unaffected by mortal magic such as this.'
So alas, this does not work. Barbarians aren't using magic to do their destroying.
Yeah, but artifacts are flat-out immune to most methods of destruction, including anything that normally breaks items. XD Even an anti-magic build probably won't be able to do anything other than knock the artifact around for awhile.
GM Rednal wrote: Yeah, but artifacts are flat-out immune to most methods of destruction, including anything that normally breaks items. XD Even an anti-magic build probably won't be able to do anything other than knock the artifact around for awhile. Well the effect states that if they beat the cmd of the target by 1-4 its supressed for 1 round, 5-9 its supressed for 2 rounds and by 10 or more the effect is completely dispelled.
doomman47 wrote: GM Rednal wrote: Yeah, but artifacts are flat-out immune to most methods of destruction, including anything that normally breaks items. XD Even an anti-magic build probably won't be able to do anything other than knock the artifact around for awhile. Well the effect states that if they beat the cmd of the target by 1-4 its supressed for 1 round, 5-9 its supressed for 2 rounds and by 10 or more the effect is completely dispelled. Artifacts wrote: Unlike all other magic items, major artifacts are not easily destroyed. Each should have only a single, specific means of destruction. Unless an ability specifically states it can destroy artifacts, it cannot.
Artifacts are beyond mortal ability to destroy.
In this case, the general rule there is outweighed by the specific rule of artifacts that they only have a single method of destruction. ...Not that this matters for most games because they show up so rarely and you usually want to keep them instead of wreck them. XD
You seem to be referring to Spell Sunder, which suppresses a spell effect. This has nothing to do with an artifact's invulnerability, which is not granted by a spell effect.
As the above even AM BARBARIAN couldn't destroy the ONE RING unless he gave it a heave into Mount Doom no matter how hard he smacks it.
Reckless wrote: You seem to be referring to Spell Sunder, which suppresses a spell effect. This has nothing to do with an artifact's invulnerability, which is not granted by a spell effect. The invulnerability might not be but the rest of their effects are and thus in the end would have a nearly indestructible non magical item.
Spell Sunder might temporarily suppress an artifacts magical output. But that is a far cry from destroying said artifact or its long term ability to generate those magical effects. Personally I'd be loathe to allow even the 'lucky' roll on Disjunction to have that effect and probably tell my players No dice on that method. Destroying an artifact ought to be a major story element and not decided by anything less than a long term campaign to do so.
I'll take what I can get. I'll also accept plot ideas. Maybe the only way this will happen is if I make a story about it. Maybe I'll have a wizard who lost his magic by destroying an evil artifact. Not only is he looking for a way to get his magic back, but he also caught the interest of something big and nasty.
doomman47 wrote: Reckless wrote: You seem to be referring to Spell Sunder, which suppresses a spell effect. This has nothing to do with an artifact's invulnerability, which is not granted by a spell effect. The invulnerability might not be but the rest of their effects are and thus in the end would have a nearly indestructible non magical item. An artifact is not a "spell effect". Spell sunder does nothing at all to magic items, much less artifacts.
Recent threads in General Discussion
|
