This spell frees victims from enchantments, transmutations, and curses. Break enchantment can reverse even an instantaneous effect. For each such effect, you make a caster level check (1d20 + caster level, ) against a DC of 11 + caster level of the effect. Success means that the creature is free of the spell, curse, or effect. For a cursed magic item, the DC is equal to the DC of the curse.
If the spell is one that cannot be dispelled by dispel magic, break enchantment works only if that spell is 5th level or lower.
If the effect comes from a permanent magic item, break enchantment does not remove the curse from the item, but it does free the victim from the item's effects.
I don't understand the game design motivation behind the cap at +15. Why should a 20th-level spellcaster have a harder time breaking a CL 20 enchantment than a 10th-level spellcaster has breaking a CL 10 enchantment?
Lots of spells have similar caps on how much damage they do, but that's because (I think) at higher levels you're supposed to use a higher-level damaging spell. But there is no greater break enchantment to use.
Is there some way in which a lack of CL cap here would break high-level play that I'm not seeing?
Because by the time you're beyond CL 15 you'll have so many 5th level slots that you can just attempt it repeatedly until you succeed.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I agree that the cap doesn't make sense. At 25+ two wizards of the same level would be unable to break each other's enchantments even on a 20.
2) There's always Mage's Disjunction with the complication of only disjoining the desired enchantment.
This was an issue with 3.5 disjunction but not Pathfinder. In 3.5 a failed will save permanently turns your magical items into non-magical ones, which was indeed a serious problem. In Pathfinder a failed will save temporarily turns your magical items into non-magical ones, and on a natural 1 they are destroyed.
Note that being destroyed is actually far better than being turned into a non-magical item, because it means a mere 2nd level spell can undo the damage in most cases. Disjunction will end permanency spells, but that's far less ubiquitous than the old magical item conundrum.
4) If it's not PFS then it's the DM's call to alter it as they see fit.
Not a PFS player here so I could be mistaken, but I don't think any PFS scenarios are actually destroyed for 16+ anyways so the cap on Break Enchantment wouldn't come up anyways.
Maybe it's an accidental holdover from 3.5. Dispel magic used to have similar language but no longer does in Pathfinder RPG.
Because by the time you're beyond CL 15 you'll have so many 5th level slots that you can just attempt it repeatedly until you succeed.
Ok, I can see that as a reason why the cap doesn't break things (at least within the normal level range), but are you suggesting that the reason for the cap is to encourage such spamming? Why don't remove curse and such have similar caps then?
Actually that last question is something I wonder whether or not we're discussing the spamming method. Accidental holdover would explain it....
D'oh, sorry, Kayerloth, didn't mean to parrot you there. -_-
Agreed on the rarity of break enchantment actually being useful. It's useful (sometimes) as a safer stone to flesh if the victim is likely to fail the Fortitude saving throw required by the latter. It's also available before stone to flesh is. But that's mostly it.
At this point I feel safe concluding that there is no valid game-design reason for the cap in PF. Thanks all.
Lower level spells have lower caps.
Higher level spells have higher caps.
From +5, +10, +15, to +20 or more.
/cevah
{. . .}
Lots of spells have similar caps on how much damage they do, but that's because (I think) at higher levels you're supposed to use a higher-level damaging spell. But there is no greater break enchantment to use.
{. . .}
And as far as I know, none of the spells having damage caps have caps on your caster level (such as for overcoming Spell Resistance).
{. . .}
4) If it's not PFS then it's the DM's call to alter it as they see fit.Not a PFS player here so I could be mistaken, but I don't think any PFS scenarios are actually destroyed for 16+ anyways so the cap on Break Enchantment wouldn't come up anyways.
I didn't realize high level PFS scenarios had a particular issue with getting destroyed . . . .
I didn't realize high level PFS scenarios had a particular issue with getting destroyed . . . .
*designed
I sometimes make stupid typos, and the way Paizo forums are I can't edit them if I don't catch them within an hour.
There are ways to get a CL of ~25 without going 20+ levels: Ioun stones 'n shizzle. Buy a couple of those stones and your CL will be unmatched for break enchantment.
However, there is sort of a "greater break enchantment", called limited wish of wish. They are capable of removing enchantments without a CL cap. And since Limited Wish is a 7th lvl spell and Wish a 9th lvl spell, they'll be available at CL 13 and CL 17, respectively. True, these spell are a bit more costly than Break Enchantment, but more effective, and you'll only be capped at CL 16 before you get acces to Wish.
Dispel Magic, Remove Disease, and Remove Curse are all similar spells that are lower level than Break Enchantment, but don't have a level cap.Lower level spells have lower caps.
Higher level spells have higher caps.
From +5, +10, +15, to +20 or more./cevah
I went to look this up, and indeed that is currently correct. However, the following 3rd party spell, Lesser Dispel Magic, not only has a caster level cap, but references Dispel Magic as if it had a caster level cap. Looks like Paizo just forgot to remove the caster level cap from Break Enchantment when converting this set of spells, as somebody else mentioned above.
I've run into this in high-level games and I believe that Break Enchantment is meant to have a cap because it's only a 5th level spell. High level problems require high level solutions, like Limited Wish, Wish, Miracle, Mage's Disjunction, etc.
^That would be understandable, but is inconsistent with what was done with Dispel Magic/Greater Dispel Magic and Remove Curse (and for that matter with most other spells, which often have limits on damage scaled by caster level but usually do not have limits on anything else scaled by caster level).