Obscure rules most people have probably forgotten about (3.5)

[taltamir]

Perhaps we had better not ressurect that argument.

I think we concluded that it was basically up to the DM as RAW is too unclear.

yea, i didn't notice the two extra pages of argument there...
it is an extremely arbitrary and confusing limit too... what with time zones and all that.

[olentu]

yea, i didn't notice the two extra pages of argument there...
it is an extremely arbitrary and confusing limit too... what with time zones and all that.

And zones of differing time unless that is what you mean by time zones.

[UserClone]

Ah, yes, that's what we need! Accelerants! We'll just soak it in lamp oil... or, better yet, alchemist's fire, and light that, and that'll catch it on fire for sure!

Except that even alchemist's fire does only 1d6 damage, which is not enough to penetrate the hardness of wood, so that won't even slightly scorch it.

And this is hardness, not energy resistance, so it's per attack, not per round.



Except that alchemist's fire can't really be used to coat something, since it ignites as soon as it contacts air.

Also, energy resistance is also per attack. Rules Compendium, IIRC.

[taltamir]

Except that alchemist's fire can't really be used to coat something, since it ignites as soon as it contacts air.

Also, energy resistance is also per attack. Rules Compendium, IIRC.

the per attack thing was always baffling... is a 9th level magic missile 1 attack or 5? is a hail of stone spell one attack?

what is the difference between being hit simultaneously by 5 vials of acid that deal 1d6 each, or 1 giant blob of acid capable of dealing 5d6?

[jmbrown]

the per attack thing was always baffling... is a 9th level magic missile 1 attack or 5? is a hail of stone spell one attack?

what is the difference between being hit simultaneously by 5 vials of acid that deal 1d6 each, or 1 giant blob of acid capable of dealing 5d6?

Each damage die is its own attack (except in cases where it's added onto another die). A vial of acid is of weaker concentration than a glob of acid thus it's easier to resist against.

[Darrin]

Back OT, I'd have to say I don't understand how Shape Soulmeld works, when taken as a floating feat with the Chameleon class feature of the same name. Do you keep the soulmeld when you change the feat? Does that mean you can just fill all your available slots with soulmelds?

Yes, when you shape a soulmeld, it stays in place until you unshape it or it gets unshaped by something else. Yes, a Chameleon can use his daily bonus feat to shape a soulmeld, and then pick another soulmeld to shape the next day. He can shape up to 10 soulmelds because he has 10 chakra available, but the total number of soulmelds he can have shaped at one time is determined by his Con score minus 10. So to shape all 10, he needs a Con of 20.

For Person_Man's Haberdash (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=88633) build, I listed what I thought might be the 10 most useful basic soulmelds (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=5158609&postcount=32) that a Chameleon can shape if he were so inclined.

[John Campbell]

Also, energy resistance is also per attack. Rules Compendium, IIRC.
Hmm. So it is. I thought it was established earlier in the thread that it wasn't, and was too lazy to check the actual rules.

It's not actually relevant to the question, anyway.

[icefractal]

Regarding the "8 hours vs 24 hours" thing - outside of some very specific situations, it really doesn't matter. The time it takes to have four or even eight encounters could easily be less than an hour. It might be longer, depending on travelling and searching, but in general, your viable "adventuring day" is going to be less than eight hours. Whether you then sit around carving scrimshaw for 3 hours or 16 hours before resting is not usually something which makes a difference. While a nine-hour cycle might make NPC spellcasters more powerful in an army situation, it doesn't really affect the power of PCs.


It's generally possible to come up with a convoluted alternative interpretation of the rules, but you should keep common sense in mind. Adventuring for twenty minutes and then going to sleep again is (1) ludicrous from a character point of view, and (2) further skewing the power balance in favor of casters. The narcoleptic party problem is clearly and obviously not what the designers intended, and of course the DM is under no obligation to allow it.It's not usually that clearcut though. What happens is often this:

* Rogue: That sure was a tough battle. I'm a bit poisoned over here.
* Cleric: Here you go *restoration*. That was my last one, try not to get hurt any more. How's everyone doing?
* Wizard: I'm out of everything good.
* Barbarian: No more rage, but I can keep fighting. Got any Haste left?
* Wizard: Nope, nothing above 2nd level.
* Rogue: I'm ok, but with no backup ... we should probably rest.
* DM: But this is only the second encounter of the day!
* Cleric: Well, we're not looking too good.
* DM: Maybe you should have saved your spells more.
* Cleric: Maybe, but we didn't. Anyway, who wants first watch?
* DM: If you rest now, you might get attacked during it.
* Rogue: All the more reason to rest before we're totally helpless!
* DM: It's only been an hour! You'll have to sit around for 15 hours before sleeping!
* Wizard: Well it's not like we could survive 15 hours worth of fighting, so I guess we'll play cards or something.

[taltamir]

@icefractal
bravo, that was a perfectly SANE approach to running out of spells... totally in character too.

[jmbrown]

8 hours vs. 24 hours matters during time critical scenarios. Sometimes you just have to press on and remember in the future not to blow your wad too early. You have wands, rods, scrolls, and other magic items for the very purpose of backup magic. This shouldn't be a problem to anyone but the lowest level party.

[Joey/Flake]

Not sure if this is the place for it.. but there is a rule I'ld like a source for!

Right, I play NWN,and DnD. And in both there seems to be a cap on Bonuses.

For example, +12 Str/Dex/Con, +20 EB..

Now, I know the table in the Epic level hand Book shows you price up to +20 Weapons.. But I've never found any rule stating that there is a cap upon these things..

Anyone able to give me a Page and Book refrence? Coz' I'm starting to think it's just taken from NWN where all my group play it.

[J.Gellert]

I'll confirm it for you, but you'll have to take my word on it; It's from NwN :smallredface:

[Foryn Gilnith]

Yeah, there's not really a citation we can give for a rule that doesn't exist.

[Joey/Flake]

*Evil grin*

I'ma go make some changes to my Cleric/Bard Buff support.. Hehe..

And this SoulMeld stuff, everyone mentioning it, but it's not something I've used, what book is it? And I guess it a feat/class featre?

[Kurald Galain]

It's not usually that clearcut though. What happens is often this:
True.

This is why the DM should inform the players in advance that they will have to ration their resources; telling them afterwards essentially means the DM has to give in or do a TPK.

I must say I've never had the narcolepsy problem in any of my games, but this seems mostly by tacit assumption of all players that no, we're not gonna do it like that. I've also had the opposite situation a few times, in that the party could rest all they like but it wouldn't actually help (e.g. if you have to get to <city> in mid-winter and have limited food available).

[Saph]

I think we concluded that it was basically up to the DM as RAW is too unclear.

It's not THAT unclear. You get a certain number of spells per day. Whether you define "per day" as an astronomical day or a calender day is up to you, but there's no reasonable interpretation that lets you ignore it completely.


Regarding the "8 hours vs 24 hours" thing - outside of some very specific situations, it really doesn't matter. The time it takes to have four or even eight encounters could easily be less than an hour. It might be longer, depending on travelling and searching, but in general, your viable "adventuring day" is going to be less than eight hours. Whether you then sit around carving scrimshaw for 3 hours or 16 hours before resting is not usually something which makes a difference. While a nine-hour cycle might make NPC spellcasters more powerful in an army situation, it doesn't really affect the power of PCs.

Not really true, actually. Our DM used to allow PCs to regain spells after eight hours rest multiple times per day, and I came up with several ways to exploit it.

[Kurald Galain]

Regarding the "8 hours vs 24 hours" thing - outside of some very specific situations, it really doesn't matter.
Thinking about it for thirty seconds, any caster of moderate level (and/or a lesser rod of extend) could use this to cast long-lasting buff spells the minute before he's done resting. That seems like clear abuse to me.

[jmbrown]

Thinking about it for thirty seconds, any caster of moderate level (and/or a lesser rod of extend) could use this to cast long-lasting buff spells the minute before he's done resting. That seems like clear abuse to me.

Seriously. Sudden extend + whatever spell that lasts hours, rest for 8 hours to regain spell slots, continue going for the rest of the day. I don't know how anyone can interpret spell casting as being every time you rest.

Books after core began to be more meticulous with their wording. You'll notice they specifically use 24 hours especially when it comes to auras or special abilities you can resist.

[Chrono22]

Drowning rules automatically set the drowning creature's hitpoint total to 0. So, if your ally is at -9 and you don't have any heal kits, dunk his head in a bucket of water.

[Kurald Galain]

Seriously. Sudden extend + whatever spell that lasts hours, rest for 8 hours to regain spell slots, continue going for the rest of the day. I don't know how anyone can interpret spell casting as being every time you rest.
I do. Whenever rules are unclear (or even when they are clear but can be constructed to be unclear), there are always some people arguing for whichever interpretation makes their character more powerful.

And, of course, players who care about their character's power appear to be more likely to visit RPG-related msg boards, and as a result, they tend to outnumber DMs there. Particularly on the WOTC CharOp board, an interpretation can appear to be consensual even though in practice many DMs would simply veto it.

[jseah]

It's not THAT unclear. You get a certain number of spells per day. Whether you define "per day" as an astronomical day or a calender day is up to you, but there's no reasonable interpretation that lets you ignore it completely.
What I meant was that the psionic PP regaining mechanic appeared to state an exception to the 24 hour rule that isn't stated but commonly understood.
(And arguably, the spellcasting regain mechanic is also technically an exception but let's not go there)

I might have this impression that the 24 hour thing didn't work like that because none of the games I was in worked like that. So never mind, I don't think I have the stamina to go through another round.
- On pre-casting hour/level buffs before resting, my games treated the end of an 8 hour rest as 24 hours worth of duration after the end of the previous 8 hour rest if it was less than 24 hours ago.

Bah, it just shows that WotC needs to tighten up their wording.

I don't think anyone has found a definition for "object" or "creature" in game.
Constructs are creatures. A metal plate is an object. Steam engine? Mecha-like robot? er... >.<
Multiple plates stacked together... one object or many objects?

[Wardog]

If you're a DM that allows the Baldur's Gate "Free rest in a hostile area" then you're a DM I wouldn't want to play with.

I think that's a bit unfair on BG.

The more dangerous the area, the more likely you were to get attacked in the night, and if you were low enough on spells or hp that you felt it necessary to rest, then you wouldn't necessarily be in a good condition to fight them off. (Especially given that in BG you were often at quite a low level, as an (un)lucky crit from a xvart with a short sword could easily kill a wounded or squishy character. Let alone kobold commandos with +1d6 fire damage on thieir arrows).

And given that interupted sleep counted for nothing other than "time since you last had a full night's rest", after a few interuptions you would have few/no spells, low hp, and major fatigue penalties on your attack rolls as well, so the casters couldn't even safely hide behind the fighters.

All in all, resting in the wilderness or in a monster's lair was a risky gamble that could easily turn out worse than just pressing on.


If you want to criticise CRPG implentation of resting rules, it's NWN thats the problem (you can rest pretty much anywhere as long as there are no monsters within an arbitrary distance; resting only takes a few seconds real time, which only represents a couple of hours at most game time; resting restores all spells and full HP; no fatigue penalties for not resting; and in most official campaigns, some sort of "stone of recall" that can telport you back to a safe area any time you want anyway).

[jmbrown]

I'm not criticizing CRPG interpretation of resting rules. I'm criticizing people who use video game rules at their tabletop. Video games have restrictions that table top doesn't have. Calling it "unfair" to the players by attacking them with a wave of monsters because they decided to set up camp in the middle of a battlefield with the enemy army a stone's throw away is dumb. If you get attacked by the bear because you're sleeping in his den without killing him first, don't whine and complain.

[UserClone]

*Evil grin*

I'ma go make some changes to my Cleric/Bard Buff support.. Hehe..

And this SoulMeld stuff, everyone mentioning it, but it's not something I've used, what book is it? And I guess it a feat/class featre?

It's a new type of magic, that works almost like a worn magic item that you can make better by allocating points from a limited pool you have, called your "essentia." Magic of Incarnum, one of the few books I own, and totally worth it. A very neat system, even if the Soulborn class is pretty lame.

[Zom B]

Drowning rules automatically set the drowning creature's hitpoint total to 0. So, if your ally is at -9 and you don't have any heal kits, dunk his head in a bucket of water.

TMMD.

I'm not so sure it's really obscure to all of you, but since not every spell is dismissable, you have to blow a Dispel Magic to end the effects early. I had no idea that you automatically succeeded on dispel checks against your own spells. It came up in a game where my wizard was in a "Wizard's Tournament" and round three's challenge was to find a needle in a haystack.
Round one, I cast Acid Fog on the haystack, and prayed that the 2d6 acid damage would not exceed 10 (since iron/steel has hardness 10 and that would have eaten the needle). Fortunately, I did 8 damage. The next round, I dispelled my Acid Fog and was able to pick up my needle.

If anyone knows the adventure I'm talking about, since it was a pre-made downloadable adventure, I destroyed the rolling boulder with Transmute Rock to Mud and retrieved the feather atop the tower in one round thusly:
1) Cast a Quickened Summon Monster III to summon a small air elemental adjacent to the top of the tower.
2) The air elemental uses its action to grab the feather and moves its 100' movement speed to fly it down to me.
3) I grab it from it and Dimension Door to the judge's table.

Also, I thought Quicken Spell only worked on standard action spells, and that if you had a full-round action spell, you'd have to reduce it to a standard action via that one feat (name escapes me) and then Quicken it.

[Foeofthelance]

Thinking about it for thirty seconds, any caster of moderate level (and/or a lesser rod of extend) could use this to cast long-lasting buff spells the minute before he's done resting. That seems like clear abuse to me.

Except...casting spells violates the resting part. Having a conversation violates the resting part. So stopping to cast spells before being done with the rest means the rest break doesn't count, which means if I recall the rest of the thread you'd have to wait another 1-8 hours before getting to memorize the spells again.

[Sliver]

No, if your rest is broken you just need to rest an extra hour or so.. But all spells cast up to 8 hours before you prepare your spells count for spent slots you can't prepare in..

[Kurald Galain]

Except...casting spells violates the resting part. Having a conversation violates the resting part.

Yes, although a DM that makes you rest again for talking is, frankly, being a jerk for no reason.

By RAW, though, the following works: rest for eight hours, cast your long-lasting buff spell, rest for one hour, memorize. So that's where the eight-hour clause comes in.

Anyway, this is all nitpicking the grammar. In my opinion, RAI is clearly that "five spells per day" does not mean "five spells plus one long-lasting buff per day" and that a reasonable DM could and would veto that (regardless of how RAW can be interpreted otherwise).

[Sliver]

By RAW, though, the following works: rest for eight hours, cast your long-lasting buff spell, rest for one hour, memorize. So that's where the eight-hour clause comes in.

Yeah.. No, doesn't work like that..


When she prepares spells for the coming day, all
the spells she has cast within the last 8 hours count against her daily
limit.

The way to get extra spells is extending a spell before you rest. If the spell lasts for more then 9 hours, you have a buff for free for that time.

Also, just interrupting the caster's sleep won't mean he needs another 8 hours..


If her rest is interrupted, each interruption adds 1
hour to the total amount of time she has to rest in order to clear her
mind, and she must have at least 1 hour of uninterrupted rest immediately
prior to preparing her spells.

Also, it is pretty clear to me that it is daily, not 8-hourly.


Spell Slots: The various character class tables in Chapter 3:
Classes show how many spells of each level a character can cast per
day.

PHB, p178, check it today :smallbiggrin:

[Kurald Galain]

Yeah.. No, doesn't work like that..
Well duh. It doesn't work like that because, as I said, that's where the eight-hour clause comes in.

[Sliver]

Well duh. It doesn't work like that because, as I said, that's where the eight-hour clause comes in.

Maybe that is what you meant, but you said that it does work, by RAW.

[taltamir]

"Spell Slots: The various character class tables in Chapter 3:
Classes show how many spells of each level a character can cast per
day."

day
–noun
1. the interval of light between two successive nights; the time between sunrise and sunset: Since there was no artificial illumination, all activities had to be carried on during the day.
2. the light of day; daylight: The owl sleeps by day and feeds by night
5. the portion of a day allotted to work: an eight-hour day.

A day is only about 12 hours :)... does that mean that you cannot prepare spells during the night?

If you insist on using the day rulings you have two problems:
1. If a day is midnight to midnight. Then adventurers will start the adventure at 11pm, burn all their spells before midnight. then cast extended rope trick and rest till 8am, prepare spells, and go blasting again... when done, retreat until it is night again... Thus, adventurers adventure at night & dawn basically. Not to mention time zones and the like confuse things a lot.

2. If a day is 24 hour period starting whenever you cast a spell, you have to keep track of when you cast each spell exactly.

To all those who say "its because people want a ruling that makes their character more powerful", no it isn't. It is to avoid either of the two situations mentioned above.

I think part of the issue stems from elves sleeping only 4 hours... so they made it a "period of rest" with all those stupid rules to prevent "abuse" by using elves to cut down magic down time (which is silly, elves are supposed to be good at magic, that would have been a minor yet valid way in which they could)...

if you simply say "you must have a full night of sleep" then the simple result is that:
PC: i wake up at 8 am, prepare spells until 9, burn all my spells by 10am... I go to sleep again
DM: You woke up from a full rest @ 8am... You are not tired and can't fall asleep. You will be tired again around midnight.

[Yuki Akuma]

I can't help but notice you skipped definitions 3 and 4 there, buddy.

[Foryn Gilnith]

Calling it "unfair" to the players by attacking them with a wave of monsters because they decided to set up camp in the middle of a battlefield with the enemy army a stone's throw away is dumb.

That's not unfair. What's unfair is when the enemy army has scouts capable of detecting Rope Tricks hidden by your mage's best illusions. Because uber diviners are exactly what an army would be using for casual scouting duty. /rage

[taltamir]

I can't help but notice you skipped definitions 3 and 4 there, buddy.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/day

there are 15 different definitions. I pointed out specific ones on purpose. You already discussed certain interpretations of the word day.
Definition 3 (a, b,and c) is the "24 hours" one... the other 14 definitions are not.


That's not unfair. What's unfair is when the enemy army has scouts capable of detecting Rope Tricks hidden by your mage's best illusions. Because uber diviners are exactly what an army would be using for casual scouting duty. /rage

exactly. Oh, and somehow they bypass your alarm spells, etc etc...

[Sliver]

exactly. Oh, and somehow they bypass your alarm spells, etc etc...

And you are awakened by the alarm, or w/e. The attacks are going to wake the wizard and he will need even more rest to get his spells, it doesn't matter if you are surprised by the attack or not. The only way to regain your spells in that case is if the rest of the party members wake up and take care of the threats alone, and quietly so that you won't wake up. Sounds kinda tough..

[Kurald Galain]

Maybe that is what you meant, but you said that it does work, by RAW.

No, that's what I wrote, literally. You're taking the second sentence of my post out of the context of the rest of it, not to mention the rest of the thread.

/nitpick

Anyway, getting back on topic. I find that experience penalties for multiclass characters are a rule most people forget. I also find that material components are something most people forget: they aren't even aware that they're skipping them as a houserule. Actually that goes for S/V/DF components as well; it's easier to assume that all spells have S and V, and all divine spells have DF, and it rarely makes much of a difference. In other words, these are rules that are needlessly complex: the complexity doesn't add anything to the game, so people omit it and forget that they're doing so.

[taltamir]

And you are awakened by the alarm, or w/e. The attacks are going to wake the wizard and he will need even more rest to get his spells, it doesn't matter if you are surprised by the attack or not. The only way to regain your spells in that case is if the rest of the party members wake up and take care of the threats alone, and quietly so that you won't wake up. Sounds kinda tough..

well...


Mental Alarm
A mental alarm alerts you (and only you) so long as you remain within 1 mile of the warded area. You note a single mental “ping” that awakens you from normal sleep but does not otherwise disturb concentration. A silence spell has no effect on a mental alarm.
It awakens you, alerts you, and does not disturb your concentration? mmm... I guess, even if you say it does not count against yout 8 hours, you are still forced to actually warn your friends, which does count as an action...

It actually would be better not to use alarm... You could give the non casters rings of sustenance (they only sleep 2 hours) and have them patrol the area... they detect someone? good, they can fight them in silence.


Anyway, getting back on topic. I find that experience penalties for multiclass characters are a rule most people forget. I also find that material components are something most people forget: they aren't even aware that they're skipping them as a houserule. Actually that goes for S/V/DF components as well; it's easier to assume that all spells have S and V, and all divine spells have DF, and it rarely makes much of a difference. In other words, these are rules that are needlessly complex: the complexity doesn't add anything to the game, so people omit it and forget that they're doing so.

well... A lot of time that is done on purpose too... people are aware of multi class penalties, but say "they can go die in a fire" as my DM put it :) (I agree with him).
And as for component... they are welcome to do the same.

[Sliver]

well...


It awakens you, alerts you, and does not disturb your concentration? mmm... I guess, even if you say it does not count against yout 8 hours, you are still forced to actually warn your friends, which does count as an action...

It actually would be better not to use alarm... You could give the non casters rings of sustenance (they only sleep 2 hours) and have them patrol the area... they detect someone? good, they can fight them in silence.

It doesn't break spell concentration, or the one that is needed when preparing the spells, but for resting it counts as a disturbance and you will need an extra hour to regain spells. That is how I read it..

Yeah, you could cast silence so the wizard won't hear anything while the others are outside of the rope trick...

[taltamir]

It doesn't break spell concentration, or the one that is needed when preparing the spells, but for resting it counts as a disturbance and you will need an extra hour to regain spells. That is how I see it..

then don't use that spell...
rope trick is still invisible and undetectable... so it doesn't matter

[Saph]

If you insist on using the day rulings you have two problems:

:smallconfused: "Insist on using the day rulings"? It's not some sort of bizarre optional rule, it's the core principle of D&D spellcasting.

Look, this really isn't as hard as you're making it out to be. You sleep, wake up, prepare your spells, cast them over the day, prepare a new lot tomorrow. Looking up 15 different definitions of "day" is overanalysing just a tad. It only becomes a problem when players start actively trying to game the system to gain more spell slots than they're supposed to have, which is really just an example of what always happens once players start taking the rules of an RPG too seriously.

[taltamir]

:smallconfused: "Insist on using the day rulings"? It's not some sort of bizarre optional rule, it's the core principle of D&D spellcasting.
It is mentioned in passing that those are "daily" spells. It doesn't even have it as the subject of the sentence, it is merely used as an adjective to attach "daily" to them while discussing something else.
And when it does give an in depth explanation of the rules, exactly how many hours you should rest, etc... it makes no mention of a 24 hour limit.


Look, this really isn't as hard as you're making it out to be. You sleep, wake up, prepare your spells, cast them over the day, prepare a new lot tomorrow. Looking up 15 different definitions of "day" is overanalysing just a tad. It only becomes a problem when players start actively trying to game the system to gain more spell slots than they're supposed to have, which is really just an example of what always happens once players start taking the rules of an RPG too seriously.

Did you actually notice the examples I have given? you sleep wake, prepare spells, wait patiently until it is night and then go out into the dungeon at 11pm so that you could go nuclear, sleep immediately, and regain spells.

[Kurald Galain]

Did you actually notice the examples I have given? you sleep wake, prepare spells, wait patiently until it is night and then go out into the dungeon at 11pm so that you could go nuclear, sleep immediately, and regain spells.

...so do you recommend that as a strategy, or use it as a hypothetical example? Think this is the way the rules are intended, or just some far-fetched loophole? Would you allow it as a DM, or play with a DM that doesn't? I'm failing to see what your point is, here.

[Saph]

Did you actually notice the examples I have given? you sleep wake, prepare spells, wait patiently until it is night and then go out into the dungeon at 11pm so that you could go nuclear, sleep immediately, and regain spells.

Yes, I noticed them. If you go back and read my earlier posts, you'll see I actually pointed that specific example out myself, several pages ago.

Now, did you notice the bit I said about taking the rules too seriously? There's a certain point beyond which analysing the same text over and over again stops producing any kind of worthwhile results. Once you start saying that "per day" doesn't actually mean "per day", it's a sign that it's time to give up and do something else.

[taltamir]

the per day is not a rule. there is no "per day" rule. there is a point where, while discussing rules, spells are referred to using the adjective "daily".

Yes, I see you made the same point...
@ Kurald Galain... how do you recommend a DM actually STOP that? I listed the only possible variant I could think of, and it requires obscene amount of book keeping.

How would you actually phrase the rule to stop such behavior?

[UserClone]

I'd phrase it rather succinctly: "Dude, you're being a ****. You know what daily means, the same as Bill Clinton knows what is means. Cut it out, or we'll just play without you. And yes, I have discussed it with the rest of the group."

[Saph]

the per day is not a rule. there is no "per day" rule.

*sigh*

Let's take a look at the SRD entry on the Wizard class, which can be found here (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/classes/sorcererWizard.htm#wizard). Gotten there? Good. Now take a look at the Wizard's class feature table, at the top and over to the right. It reads as follows:


Spells per Day

Now look a little further down, under the 'Spells' subheading. Third paragraph reads as follows:


Like other spellcasters, a wizard can cast only a certain number of spells of each spell level per day.

Now let's read yet further into that paragraph, to the following:


Her base daily spell allotment is given on Table: The Wizard. In addition, she receives bonus spells per day if she has a high Intelligence score.

In short: You are wrong. That is all.

[taltamir]

and that is the FIRST time in this entire discussion where someone linked and quoted those specific rules.

Thank you for proving me wrong.

So the per day rules are not actually mentioned in the magic rules section. But in the wizard/sorcerer section specifically.

[UserClone]

And in the Cleric, Bard, Paladin, Ranger, Druid, and Bard sections. In fact, they're in each class's section, except Fighter, Barbarian, and Rogue. Go figure...:smallsigh:

[taltamir]

And in the Cleric, Bard, Paladin, Ranger, Druid, and Bard sections. In fact, they're in each class's section, except Fighter, Barbarian, and Rogue. Go figure...:smallsigh:

but they are not in the general "magic" section, which has been quoted in full.
Only in the specific individual spell casting classes sections, which have not been linked to or quoted even once until that point in time.
And I conceded the point immediately after it was quoted. After 3 pages of argument with no single person quoting it.

[Tyndmyr]

PG 178 of the PHB. Spells have a daily limit IE 24 hours. The act of casting your spell goes against your daily limit. To memorize spells you have to have 8 hours of rest but you're still restricted by your daily casting limit.

RAW specifies that a day is 24 hours?

That seems sketchy to me. However, the implications of a campaign world in which the day is vastly shorter or longer than 24 hours suddenly seem interesting.

[PhoenixRivers]

*sigh*

Let's take a look at the SRD entry on the Wizard class, which can be found here (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/classes/sorcererWizard.htm#wizard). Gotten there? Good. Now take a look at the Wizard's class feature table, at the top and over to the right. It reads as follows:



Now look a little further down, under the 'Spells' subheading. Third paragraph reads as follows:



Now let's read yet further into that paragraph, to the following:



In short: You are wrong. That is all.

Not quite. The rules you give are not primary source.

Primary source is the text on resting/recovering spells, which states that spells cast within the last 8 hours count against your allotment.

Meaning spells cast 9 hours ago don't.

[Tyndmyr]

Eternal wands have a X/day limit instead of 50 charges.

It's an eberron thing.

They are also in MiC, so they're not campaign specific.

That said, each level has a specified CL. So, yes you could get an eternal wand of extended mage armor. It'd be a level two wand, and thus, CL 3, and would last for six hours.

Or you could just use Greater Mage Armor, which is +6AC, a 24 hr duration, and level 3(still within the range of eternal wands).

I see no particular problem with the idea of a buff cast the night before still being active while the slot/item used to cast it has recharged. I use this, though still following the usual eight hour limit, routinely on my incantatrix. With extend and persist shenanigans, you can have all sorts of RAW fun.

Daily strikes me as meaning "once per day". When exactly the day begins and ends is not specified, but presumably that point is constant. Midnight is a good such point. Anytime between when you typically go to bed/wake up would be, honestly. The rules weren't designed with variable schedules in mind, though...

[PhoenixRivers]

They are also in MiC, so they're not campaign specific.

That said, each level has a specified CL. So, yes you could get an eternal wand of extended mage armor. It'd be a level two wand, and thus, CL 3, and would last for six hours.

Or you could just use Greater Mage Armor, which is +6AC, a 24 hr duration, and level 3(still within the range of eternal wands).

I see no particular problem with the idea of a buff cast the night before still being active while the slot/item used to cast it has recharged. I use this, though still following the usual eight hour limit, routinely on my incantatrix. With extend and persist shenanigans, you can have all sorts of RAW fun.

Daily strikes me as meaning "once per day". When exactly the day begins and ends is not specified, but presumably that point is constant. Midnight is a good such point. Anytime between when you typically go to bed/wake up would be, honestly. The rules weren't designed with variable schedules in mind, though...

Especially when spells have durations that approach days and weeks when cast at high CL.

[Tyndmyr]

Especially when spells have durations that approach days and weeks when cast at high CL.

Yeah, considering available CL boosters, it actually doesn't take long before extend becomes more valuable than persist for hours/level spells.

Still, persisting, then extending is still useful for them for a while. Well, useful for buffs of pretty much any duration less than a day, really. Then we've got the day/level buffs....like Contingency.

It's quite possible to have full spell slots, and more buffs on you than you have spell slots, if you're creative. Is it ridiculous? Sure. But the definition of "day" isn't really going to change it.

[John Campbell]

For bonus fun, note that the spell slots gained from casting Rary's mnemonic enhancer last significantly longer than it takes to rest and recover spells. Sadly, it's not technically a duration, so it can't be Extended or the like, but it lasts plenty long enough without that.

There's nothing that prevents you, if you know you've got a day of downtime before a major encounter, from loading up all your 4th+ slots with mnemonic enhancer and spending 10 minutes per casting them all back-to-back right before going to bed, and gaining a whole mess of extra 1st - 3rd level spells for the next 24 hours, then resting and re-filling all those 4th+ slots with other spells. You'll still have 12 - 15 hours left to use those extra spells when you're done prepping new ones. Just, uh, don't get ambushed before you have a chance to replace all of your higher-level spells.

If you want to get really ridiculous, you can put it in a wand.

(I'm still trying to figure out what happens if someone who doesn't have Wizard spells in the first place UMDs a wand of Rary's mnemonic enhancer...)

[Nanan]

Quote:
Originally Posted by jseah View Post
Can only summon extraplanar outsiders.

A rare creature type among PCs.
Nope they can actually summon a pc...

Quote:
Extraplanar Subtype

A subtype applied to any creature when it is on a plane other than its native plane. A creature that travels the planes can gain or lose this subtype as it goes from plane to plane. Monster entries assume that encounters with creatures take place on the Material Plane, and every creature whose native plane is not the Material Plane has the extraplanar subtype (but would not have when on its home plane). Every extraplanar creature in this book has a home plane mentioned in its description. Creatures not labeled as extraplanar are natives of the Material Plane, and they gain the extraplanar subtype if they leave the Material Plane. No creature has the extraplanar subtype when it is on a transitive plane, such as the Astral Plane, the Ethereal Plane, and the Plane of Shadow.
So in other words someone from another plane can summon the pc


As part of my plot in a 2e game a few years ago I had a Devil summon a wizard player( who had been abusing summoned devils) to take him to court for a civil trial.

[taltamir]

I thought about it... and... well what is actually wrong with going out to adventure at 11 PM, burning all your magic, and then going to sleep?

If a good night's rest recharges your magics, it even makes sense in character to do so.

[John Campbell]

There's nothing wrong with that.

Where it gets silly is when you sleep for eight hours, spend an hour preparing spells, go out and spend fifteen minutes burning off those spells, then immediately go to sleep for another eight hours so that you can prepare spells again when you wake up.

[Tyndmyr]

(I'm still trying to figure out what happens if someone who doesn't have Wizard spells in the first place UMDs a wand of Rary's mnemonic enhancer...)

Let's see...thats 4th level, right? So it's beyond eternal wand shenanigans, but still eligible for regular wands. So, a 1/day item of it would cost what, 5600 GP? I don't know if there are other, cheaper ways of getting daily spells, but it's a cheaper route to level 3 spell slots than pearls of power, and has the advantage of being more flexible.

This is before getting into cheddar like reducing the cost via limiting who can use it.

[jseah]

Or take Signature Spell (Mnemonic Enhancer) to convert unused slots for the day into bonus spell levels tomorrow!

[taltamir]

Originally Posted by John Campbell
(I'm still trying to figure out what happens if someone who doesn't have Wizard spells in the first place UMDs a wand of Rary's mnemonic enhancer...)

You instant recall / memorize lower level spells you can cast... since you cannot cast any lower level spells, nothing happened...
it is no different than a non caster taking eschew materials... a waste.

[sonofzeal]

Let's see...thats 4th level, right? So it's beyond eternal wand shenanigans, but still eligible for regular wands. So, a 1/day item of it would cost what, 5600 GP? I don't know if there are other, cheaper ways of getting daily spells, but it's a cheaper route to level 3 spell slots than pearls of power, and has the advantage of being more flexible.

This is before getting into cheddar like reducing the cost via limiting who can use it.
The question is, could a Fighter (say) use it for early entry shenanigans to odd PrCs?
Ah, taltamir's correct. More's the pity.

[Siosilvar]

Let's see...thats 4th level, right? So it's beyond eternal wand shenanigans, but still eligible for regular wands. So, a 1/day item of it would cost what, 5600 GP? I don't know if there are other, cheaper ways of getting daily spells, but it's a cheaper route to level 3 spell slots than pearls of power, and has the advantage of being more flexible.

This is before getting into cheddar like reducing the cost via limiting who can use it.

You don't know any spells to prepare.

[Sliver]

This is before getting into cheddar like reducing the cost via limiting who can use it.

This option should only be used for selling the items, not for creating them. Otherwise, everybody would just craft the items with most restrictions (could "only usable by a male human whose name starts with B and ends with ob, wizard of higher then X level etc.." be a legit restriction?) to make it real cheap.. Madness! Only rich people can screw the rules.

[taltamir]

you know... in gurps limiting who can use an item actually INCREASES its cost... it requires that the item have security type enchantments on it in addition to the base enchantment...

that is the only sensible way of doing it.

[PhoenixRivers]

This option should only be used for selling the items, not for creating them. Otherwise, everybody would just craft the items with most restrictions (could "only usable by a male human whose name starts with B and ends with ob, wizard of higher then X level etc.." be a legit restriction?) to make it real cheap.. Madness! Only rich people can screw the rules.

Boccob? :smallbiggrin:

[taltamir]

actually... lets see how much restrictions (which are given as a raw example) we can pile up to make the cheapest item...

1. Race
2. Exact Alignment (both on the law-chaos axis and good-evil axis)
3. Class
4. Level

mmm... how much of there are allowed in RAW examples, and how much cheaper does each make the item?

[Flickerdart]

Boccob? :smallbiggrin:
Beelzebob. :smallbiggrin:

[SurlySeraph]

actually... lets see how much restrictions (which are given as a raw example) we can pile up to make the cheapest item...

1. Race
2. Exact Alignment (both on the law-chaos axis and good-evil axis)
3. Class
4. Level

mmm... how much of there are allowed in RAW examples, and how much cheaper does each make the item?

Hm, not sure. I think the MiC goes into greater detail, but I don't have access to it right now so let's see what the SRD says.


Item Requires Skill to Use
Some items require a specific skill to get them to function. This factor should reduce the cost about 10%.

Item Requires Specific Class or Alignment to Use
Even more restrictive than requiring a skill, this limitation cuts the cost by 30%.

So if you take the "or" as an "and/or" and have ranks in whatever skill, you can reduce costs by 30%, then 30% of that, then 10% of that (not a flat 70%). I don't want to work out what that would come to right now, but I'm guessing near 50% of base price. If someone can dig up the rules on race-specific and level-specific magic items, that would help.

[John Campbell]

You instant recall / memorize lower level spells you can cast... since you cannot cast any lower level spells, nothing happened...
it is no different than a non caster taking eschew materials... a waste.

That isn't actually what the spell description says. The relevant bit:

Casting this spell allows you to prepare additional spells or retain spells recently cast. Pick one of these two versions when the spell is cast.

Prepare: You prepare up to three additional levels of spells. A cantrip counts as 1/2 level for this purpose. You prepare and cast these spells normally.

It's worth noting that it doesn't specify Wizard spells or Wizard casting ability anywhere in the spell description. It's also not entirely clear to me what "normally" is intended to mean here, particularly since casting mnemonic enhancer is obviously not normal spell preparation. I think it's supposed to mean "you can't prep or cast spells that you couldn't prep or cast otherwise", but there are much more broken ways to read it.

But at minimum, I think it allows other prepared casters, such as Clerics or Rangers, to prepare additional slots of their own spells.

[taltamir]

Prepare: You prepare up to three additional levels of spells. A cantrip counts as 1/2 level for this purpose. You prepare and cast these spells normally.

Having you prepare them "normally" is the key here. you need to rest 8 hours, clear your mind, and prepare spells as your class does (book, prayer, whatever).
if you don't have an ability to normally prepare spells, then you don't get anything from this usage...

Speaking of... is there any reason whatsoever not to get an eternal wand of it for extra daily prepared slots?

[The Glyphstone]

Now what happens when we add Spelljammer into the mix? Is a 'day' the local day, or the day of the wizard's home sphere? If you have a caster who lives on a tiny moon with a 1-hour day, and he travels to a planet with a 30-hour day, or is he arbitrarily constrained to the 24-hour day?

[taltamir]

if you live near the planet's pole... is a day 6 months?

[Saph]

Not quite. The rules you give are not primary source.

Primary source is the text on resting/recovering spells, which states that spells cast within the last 8 hours count against your allotment.

Meaning spells cast 9 hours ago don't.

*headdesk*

Okay, I am officially through with beating my head against this particular brick wall. Y'all have fun.

[jmbrown]

RAW specifies that a day is 24 hours?

That seems sketchy to me. However, the implications of a campaign world in which the day is vastly shorter or longer than 24 hours suddenly seem interesting.

By RAW


Normal Time

This trait describes the way time passes on the Material Plane. One hour on a plane with normal time equals one hour on the Material Plane. Unless otherwise noted in a description, every plane has the normal time trait.

So whatever the DM considers a day on the Prime is what a day is in your game. If the DM says "A day lasts 8 hours" then all daily effects recharge after 8 hours of use.

Also


But for that traveler and the items, spells, and effects working on him, that year away was entirely real.

When designating how time works on planes with flowing time, put the Material Plane’s flow of time first, followed by the same flow in the other plane.

and


The rate of time’s passage can vary on different planes, though it remains constant within any particular plane. Time is always subjective for the viewer. The same subjectivity applies to various planes. Travelers may discover that they’ll pick up or lose time while moving among the planes, but from their point of view, time always passes naturally.

Time is subjective so 8 hours on a plane with slower time is 8 hours regardless of how it flows on the prime. If you spend 24 hours in Plane A which is actually 24 years in Plane B, you still spent 24 hours regardless.

[Tyndmyr]

if you live near the planet's pole... is a day 6 months?

Wow...yeah, with that and spelljammer, I see all sorts of issues. I mean, what happens when you're on a planet with a 10 minute day? X/day items become godly.

This is, sadly, actually relevant to a campaign world(well, multiple worlds in one setting) I'm building.

[jmbrown]

Wow...yeah, with that and spelljammer, I see all sorts of issues. I mean, what happens when you're on a planet with a 10 minute day? X/day items become godly.

This is, sadly, actually relevant to a campaign world(well, multiple worlds in one setting) I'm building.

Then it's only 10 minutes. Time is subjective based on the viewer. An hour is an hour regardless of what they consider a day. Let's say on alternate earth, the sun rises and falls every 10 minutes but people are still only 10 minutes older.

Yes, there's no rule specifying how long a day is however


Material Plane

The Material Plane tends to be the most Earthlike of all planes and operates under the same set of natural laws that our own real world does. This is the default plane for most adventures.

One can safely assume 24 hours = day. Time in the rest of the planes are based in relation to the Prime and whenever erratic time is used the Prime is determined first.

Edit: Add the planar rules to "obscure rules most people have probably forgotten." Actually I would say "most people probably don't know about" because I've seen very few true planar adventures.

[sdream]

I thought about it... and... well what is actually wrong with going out to adventure at 11 PM, burning all your magic, and then going to sleep?

If a good night's rest recharges your magics, it even makes sense in character to do so.

I would say that daily spells is based on the presumption that people rest once a day. It makes much more sense that a person specifically doing nothing but resting and gathering energy would recover spell energy at twice their normal daily rate, just as bed rest recovers health at an accelerated rate beyond the normal daily amount.

All the annoyance of some (very respected) people aside, resting is a valid way to recover energy, health, and perspective, whether the time is spent sleeping or in idle chatter with friends .

As covered with elves, sleep is not necessary to prepare spells, only rest, thus eliminating tired speedbumps such as "you are not tired enough to rest yet".

Furthermore, the rule specifying spell slots may not be re-used if less than 8 hours have passed clearly indicates that they MAY be reused if MORE than 8 hours have passed.

Many sources, pearls, wands, rings, robes, spells, and indeed rest allow casters to vastly exceed their normal spells per day, and this causes no significant trouble.

[taltamir]

I would say that daily spells is based on the presumption that people rest once a day. It makes much more sense that a person specifically doing nothing but resting and gathering energy would recover spell energy at twice their normal daily rate, just as bed rest recovers health at an accelerated rate beyond the normal daily amount.

All the annoyance of some (very respected) people aside, resting is a valid way to recover energy, health, and perspective, whether the time is spent sleeping or in idle chatter with friends .

As covered with elves, sleep is not necessary to prepare spells, only rest, thus eliminating tired speedbumps such as "you are not tired enough to rest yet".

that is an excellent point... an elf needs to "trance" for 4 hours, then "medidate" for another 4 to recover his spells... why not meditate for 8 hours in a row in the middle of the day?

the only reason not to allow it is mechanical... that is... in 3e casters have only daily powers, while non casters only at will powers. (to borrow 4e terminology)... and the "balance" between them is entirely determined by endurance... how many encounters (of how many enemies) you have to go through before you are allowed to rest determines which is stronger, daily or at will powers.

I have started a thread to discuss this issue specifically:
http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=136710

[Foryn Gilnith]

From a purely IC perspective, if you're rushed for time (as you might often be), there's a very good reason to not allow your teammate to slack off for 8 hours.

[icefractal]

On the other hand, for most casters, it's pretty much a choice between resting or following you around to shout encouragement - going into melee as a Wizard is probably a bad thing for the whole party. If you're ready and able to take on the next encounter with half a party, continuing is a valid choice; otherwise, it's just failing by TPK instead of by retreat.

[Curmudgeon]

If a spellcaster doesn't have a heavy crossbow as a backup weapon, you should buy one -- and shoot them with it. Yes, sending a Wizard into melee is a bad idea. But they don't have to be completely useless when they've burned through their spells. Knowledge checks can point out enemies' strong and weak points. A flying familiar can be an able scout. And why doesn't the spellcaster have wands and/or scrolls? Get that crossbow and shoot them again!

[Realms of Chaos]

Hmm... I wonder...

In DnD, is a day defined as...
1). a cycle of day and night (making for 6-month days in the arctic)
2). a full rotation of your current planet around its axis (no spellcasting in outer space, I guess)
3) An artitrary amount of time defined as 24 hours here on earth, translated into the DnD world regardless of in-game factors.

[UserClone]

Hmm... I wonder...

In DnD, is a day defined as...
1). a cycle of day and night (making for 6-month days in the arctic)
2). a full rotation of your current planet around its axis (no spellcasting in outer space, I guess)
3) An artitrary amount of time defined as 24 hours here on earth, translated into the DnD world regardless of in-game factors.

3. It's just 3. Can't we just let this go and get back to gaming?:smalltongue:

[John Campbell]

Having you prepare them "normally" is the key here. you need to rest 8 hours, clear your mind, and prepare spells as your class does (book, prayer, whatever).
It's an Instantaneous spell, not a "some undefined future time after a rest period" spell. And there is no language at all in the spell description that describes, defines, or limits this assumed ability to prepare additional spells at some future time, which opens it up to other broken assumptions. Given the duration, and in the absence of so much as a "next time you prepare spells", I have to assume that the extra spell levels are prepared immediately upon completion of the casting.


if you don't have an ability to normally prepare spells, then you don't get anything from this usage...
It grants the ability to prepare three levels of spells "normally". Maybe "normally" means "as normal for a 7th+ level Wizard".


Speaking of... is there any reason whatsoever not to get an eternal wand of it for extra daily prepared slots?
It's a 4th level spell; eternal wands only go up to 3.

[icefractal]

If a spellcaster doesn't have a heavy crossbow as a backup weapon, you should buy one -- and shoot them with it.Beyond very low levels, 1d10 damage every couple of rounds (which probably misses anyway) is not going to matter. The Wizard is still jeopardizing the rest of the party just by standing out in the open potentially needing protection. Wands can sometimes work, but their fixed-CL nature means they don't often get used with offensive spells, and aren't very useful in that capacity anyway. Really the only reason I can see for a depleted Wizard to get near combat is if he's saving a Teleport to retreat and is high enough CL to bring the rest of the party along.

[JaronK]

If said Wizard is an Outsider, I can definitely see him getting near combat. Alter Self into a Dwarf Outsider for +15 natural AC and get right in there! Since the spell lasts quite a while, it might even last a few encounters.

JaronK

[Xenogears]

Beyond very low levels, 1d10 damage every couple of rounds (which probably misses anyway) is not going to matter. The Wizard is still jeopardizing the rest of the party just by standing out in the open potentially needing protection. Wands can sometimes work, but their fixed-CL nature means they don't often get used with offensive spells, and aren't very useful in that capacity anyway. Really the only reason I can see for a depleted Wizard to get near combat is if he's saving a Teleport to retreat and is high enough CL to bring the rest of the party along.

So how come it is advisable to do crowd control and buffs all day long and even though those spells are still quite good, though not as good as normal, with wands it is a hindrance? Really a wizard out of spells should whip out a wand of enlarge person, haste, etc. and use those.

[Sstoopidtallkid]

If the DM is making you do endurance runs, snag a couple Reserve feats. The real problem with this is that you can replace entire characters with a couple weak at-will abilities.

[Tyndmyr]

So how come it is advisable to do crowd control and buffs all day long and even though those spells are still quite good, though not as good as normal, with wands it is a hindrance? Really a wizard out of spells should whip out a wand of enlarge person, haste, etc. and use those.

I do tend to use eternal wands for buff. At least, for things of good duration.

A CL 1 wand of haste is a waste of time. Yay, one round duration.

Buffing everyone with Mage Armor or it's greater cousin is worthwhile. Ditto the better resistance spells. Presumably, you would have done this before starting to fight, though, so there's no need to stick around for it.


On a side note, can sanctum spell be abused to get wands of things that are normally higher level? Or even just to get wands cheaper?

[Flickerdart]

I do tend to use eternal wands for buff. At least, for things of good duration.

A CL 1 wand of haste is a waste of time. Yay, one round duration.

Buffing everyone with Mage Armor or it's greater cousin is worthwhile. Ditto the better resistance spells. Presumably, you would have done this before starting to fight, though, so there's no need to stick around for it.


On a side note, can sanctum spell be abused to get wands of things that are normally higher level? Or even just to get wands cheaper?
Pretty sure you can't have a CL1 wand of haste - you need a CL of at least 5.

[Tyndmyr]

Pretty sure you can't have a CL1 wand of haste - you need a CL of at least 5.

Good point. I don't know what I was thinking of a level 1 spell....yeah, 5 rounds. Which is handy, but still, round/level buffs off a wand are still relatively short.

5 a cast is actually not bad for most normal fights, but if you're doing endurance grinds, length becomes relevant.

[Tyndmyr]

On a side note, can sanctum spell be abused to get wands of things that are normally higher level? Or even just to get wands cheaper?

Worse thought...if this works...and you use this on a cantrip...you now have a -1 level spell. Obviously, not a goal in itself...but what happens when you create a wand of it?

Does doing so create gold?

[Darrin]

Pretty sure you can't have a CL1 wand of haste - you need a CL of at least 5.

You might want to discuss that with a Trapsmith (Dungeonscape).

(They get haste as a 1st level spell.)

[Tyndmyr]

You might want to discuss that with a Trapsmith (Dungeonscape).

(They get haste as a 1st level spell.)

See, I didn't even know that...but I shoulda known there would be SOME way to make it happen, and stuck with my original mistake.

[icefractal]

In addition to a poor caster level, wands also have incredibly poor save DCs, unless they were self-crafted. So you're limited to no-save, non-CL-based spells of 3rd level or lower. Not impossible to have a good wand in that category, but it's not something you'd necessarily be packing.

[Tyndmyr]

So, basically orbs and lesser orbs, then? The odd ray spell or two?

I mean, it's not inconceivable, but the caster level still hurts the damage. Usable in a pinch, but I don't honestly bother to carry around wands of the above stuff. I carry wands of the spells wands work good for, and use my slots for the heavily CL/Save based stuff.

[Claudius Maximus]

In addition to a poor caster level, wands also have incredibly poor save DCs, unless they were self-crafted.

Crafting it yourself normally does not fix this. Your Wand of Fireball has a DC of 14 even if you have 60 intelligence. There's a feat that overcomes this, though.

[Zaydos]

How about just craft a custom staff? They use your casting stat and level if better without an extra feat, and I don't remember anything that says they have to have multiple types of spells or spells 5+, just that they can.

[Flickerdart]

You might want to discuss that with a Trapsmith (Dungeonscape).

(They get haste as a 1st level spell.)
Can you really create wands of a lower CL than you have?

[Claudius Maximus]

Yes, especially considering there are CL 1 wands when the feat requires CL 5.

You can not, however, craft a wand of a CL less than the minimum caster level of the spell it holds. So a Wand of Fireball can't be lower than CL 5, generally.

[PhoenixRivers]

So, basically orbs and lesser orbs, then? The odd ray spell or two?

I mean, it's not inconceivable, but the caster level still hurts the damage. Usable in a pinch, but I don't honestly bother to carry around wands of the above stuff. I carry wands of the spells wands work good for, and use my slots for the heavily CL/Save based stuff.

Generally, no-save effects.

Glitterdust is good. Even if they save, it does the job of outlining invisible.
Obscuring mist/Fog Cloud.
Ray of Dizziness
Blinding Spittle
Snake's Swiftness

You get the idea.

[Rockphed]

In addition to a poor caster level, wands also have incredibly poor save DCs, unless they were self-crafted. So you're limited to no-save, non-CL-based spells of 3rd level or lower. Not impossible to have a good wand in that category, but it's not something you'd necessarily be packing.

You do know that wand can go all the way up to 4th level, right? Not saying that that makes them any better, but a wand of flame-strike must be worth something, right?

[Ashram]

You do know that wand can go all the way up to 4th level, right? Not saying that that makes them any better, but a wand of flame-strike must be worth something, right?

Flame Strike is 5th level. I hope you have Craft Epic Wands. >.>

[TooManySecrets]

I like how this turned into a discussion of what constitutes a day in D&D.

[taltamir]

Can you really create wands of a lower CL than you have?

yes.


Crafting it yourself normally does not fix this. Your Wand of Fireball has a DC of 14 even if you have 60 intelligence. There's a feat that overcomes this, though.

crafting it yourself allows you to fix the CL problem but not the DC problem. And it is very expensive; too expensive to be worth it.

CL = caster level
SL = spell level
a wand / scroll costs CL x SL x Constant
Constant = 25 for a scroll, 750 for a wand.
You may craft a wand at any CL you wish as long as it is high enough to cast its SL and lower then your own.
So, an SL3 (ex: fireball) requires CL5 min... a level 50 wizard can craft such a wand with CL5 to 50.

problem is, going from 3*5*750 gp to 3*50*750gp is painful. And the DC is still crap. But you CAN make a useable orb wand out of it.

[Tyndmyr]

How about just craft a custom staff? They use your casting stat and level if better without an extra feat, and I don't remember anything that says they have to have multiple types of spells or spells 5+, just that they can.

Staves are awkward. Can't use them with wand bracers, for example. They require a different feat, Craft Staff, which isn't, so far as I know, a prereq for anything. Several feats apply to wands, allowing you to do fun stuff, like wand with both hands at once. So far as I know, there is a lack of similar feats for staves.

Plus, the biggest problem with staves is they're bloody expensive. Sure, a staff of time stop sounds awesome, but if I make it, it'll cost me 375 * 9 * 17 in gp alone. 57,375 GP in total. Add in the XP cost, and the fact that stuff with components are even more expensive, and it's clear that crafting high level spells into items is...painful. You won't be doing it much.

[Irreverent Fool]

DM: You woke up from a full rest @ 8am... You are not tired and can't fall asleep. You will be tired again around midnight.

This is what I do. Most sane players won't argue the fact. Though some will try to get cute and cast sleep or the like on themselves.

obnoxious
sig

[Tyndmyr]

This is what I do. Most sane players won't argue the fact. Though some will try to get cute and cast sleep or the like on themselves.

obnoxious
sig

If I ever actually need to use this, we'll hole up in the rope trick, and play cards. I do carry a deck with me, just because. One of the others carries a game board and a set of dice. So yes, our characters will then roll up characters and play an RPG to pass the time.

[Irreverent Fool]

If I ever actually need to use this, we'll hole up in the rope trick, and play cards. I do carry a deck with me, just because. One of the others carries a game board and a set of dice. So yes, our characters will then roll up characters and play an RPG to pass the time.

That's what mine do too. The bad guys use this time to further their plots. Works out well for everyone. :)

obnoxious
sig

[TooManySecrets]

If I ever actually need to use this, we'll hole up in the rope trick, and play cards. I do carry a deck with me, just because. One of the others carries a game board and a set of dice. So yes, our characters will then roll up characters and play an RPG to pass the time.

Exactly. Players have the advantage of not being their characters. What do the players care if it's rather boring just waiting around for hours on end? They just say that they wait and then "Several hours later..."

As for the bad guys using the time to further their plots a) there usually aren't bad guys in dungeon crawling games, b) bad guys usually had plenty of time before the players showed up anyways, and c) most DMs are usually not dynamic enough to have the bad guys advance forward. Plus, the bad guys would have as much time as they needed to do their nefarious deeds if the players were dead. http://img36.imageshack.us/img36/3123/emotawesomel.gif

[Rockphed]

Flame Strike is 5th level. I hope you have Craft Epic Wands. >.>

Flame strike is a 4th level druid spell (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/flameStrike.htm). As such, it can be wanded, unless I missed an obscure rule about how spells must be wanded at the highest spell level that it becomes available. This would be the thread where such would come up.

[icefractal]

My mistake. :smallredface:

I did notice that and fixed it in an edit, but then when I did a second edit, it reverted to the original. Have I mentioned I hate how this board software works? :smallannoyed:

Flame Strike isn't very good as a wand spell though. If you're a Druid, may as well use Mass Snake's Swiftness, which is non-CL-dependent and kicks a lot of ass with a melee-heavy party. Of course, if you're a Druid, you probably still have hours of Wild Shape left, so why are you reverting to wands?

[Rockphed]

My mistake. :smallredface:

I did notice that and fixed it in an edit, but then when I did a second edit, it reverted to the original. Have I mentioned I hate how this board software works? :smallannoyed:

Flame Strike isn't very good as a wand spell though. If you're a Druid, may as well use Mass Snake's Swiftness, which is non-CL-dependent and kicks a lot of ass with a melee-heavy party. Of course, if you're a Druid, you probably still have hours of Wild Shape left, so why are you reverting to wands?

Ah, sorry. Flame strike was just the most awesome 4th level spell I could think of. Also, it seemed to fit with the whole "Obscure rules people forget" theme of this thread, as demonstrated by your original assumption that flame strike was a 5th level spell. Furthermore, can't clerics use wands of flame strike? I should look that up.

4th level flame strike, mixed blessing of being a druid.:smallannoyed:

[Irreverent Fool]

As for the bad guys using the time to further their plots a) there usually aren't bad guys in dungeon crawling games, b) bad guys usually had plenty of time before the players showed up anyways, and c) most DMs are usually not dynamic enough to have the bad guys advance forward. Plus, the bad guys would have as much time as they needed to do their nefarious deeds if the players were dead. http://img36.imageshack.us/img36/3123/emotawesomel.gif

Not all games are dungeon-crawls and even when they are, in an ongoing campaign there can be side-effects to spending undue amounts of time removed from the world in which one's group is generally considered to be the heroes.

Points b) and c) are valid, I suppose. It's kind of sad that the majority of DMs seem to be running such static gamist worlds where things advance due to PC action but not due to PC inaction.

obnoxious
sig

[Signmaker]

Ride checks. Similarly, the existence of barding.

[Tyndmyr]

Well, resting always beats being dead. In my experience, players almost invariably fight until they're uncomfortable about their odds of surviving the next fight with existing resources. Leaving a healthy buffer of resources in reserve may be smart...but not a ton of players do that.

By the time players rest, they usually need to rest. I don't see rope trick as terribly abusive in practice. Sure, it could be in theory, but players don't wish to spend player time describing setting up camp yet again after every fight. Even if it's just a few second...if it's not needed, they'd rather be progressing the story.

[Hyooz]

I wouldn't really call it 'sad' that most DMs don't have the world fleshed out to the point of having something prepared to happen when the PCs take 8 extra hours to get through the dungeon. I mean, the BBEG's minions have to rest at some point, too (assuming it's not some kind of necromancer.) 8 hours is just 8 hours in the big scheme of things.

[Dimers]

Worse thought...if this works...and you use this on a cantrip...you now have a -1 level spell. Obviously, not a goal in itself...but what happens when you create a wand of it?

Does doing so create gold?

And XP, too! :smallbiggrin:

[Tyndmyr]

And XP, too! :smallbiggrin:

I know...it's quite hideous. Now you have a wand, money AND xp. I believe it is limited by time though, so it's not truly infinite.

Though no doubt someone will attempt to make it so.

[Kylarra]

I know...it's quite hideous. Now you have a wand, money AND xp. I believe it is limited by time though, so it's not truly infinite.

Though no doubt someone will attempt to make it so.Well, first you need to figure out how to spend negative time crafting a wand since it's 1 day per 1000 gp.

[olentu]

Well, first you need to figure out how to spend negative time crafting a wand since it's 1 day per 1000 gp.

To a minimum of one day as I recall.

[Kylarra]

To a minimum of one day as I recall.
Either way, 375gp*Caster level & 15exp*caster level every day isn't bad. :smalltongue:

[Tyndmyr]

Lol, I had that exact chain of thought when I discovered it.

Then I thought about selling off the wands cheaply to an artificer. After all, how's he gonna know what they are? The trick will likely only work once though, and then you've got an angry artificer.

[2xMachina]

Sell it to commoners.

"Want to be able to cast cantrips? Here, I'm selling them for whatever price you'd pay." More money.

Everyone's happy (except the lvl 1 wizard to entertains people by casting cantrips. Still, might push him to start adventuring and get more lvls).

Now, everyone can cast Cure Minor Wounds, Create Water, Purify Food and Water, Prestidigitation... at any time they want.

[taltamir]

wait what? how are you making CL -1 wands again?

[olentu]

wait what? how are you making CL -1 wands again?

I think it is actually spell level -1 wands using sanctum spell on a cantrip.

Edit: Now that I think about it I assume it works given the thread but have never actually looked at the relevant info though it seems like it would work given how abusable the feat is already.

[taltamir]

mmm... for purposes of crafting, cantrips are level 1/2, not 0.
sanctum spell is a +0 LA metamagic that adds 1 to CL when casting withing your sanctum and lowers the CL by 1 if outside the sanctum.
The cost is 750xCLxSL.
SL is unchanged because sanctum is +0 LA metamagic; it remains 0, which is treated as 1/2 for purposes of crafting. CL is your choice but has to be at least enough to cast the spell (1 in this case) and at most your current CL (whatever your CL is at the moment) as long as your CL is high enough to cast that spell in the first place (aka, 1 in this case).
Merely casting it outside the sanctum doesn't chance the CL, even if you argue that by crafting it outside the sanctum it does change the CL, it still needs to meet the minimum level rule, so you can make a max CL0 wand and thus cannot craft said one...

even if we ignore all that, the CL for a cantrip is still 1, and you are lowering the CL by 1 due to sanctum spell, not the SL by 1... so you get a wand with SL 1/2 and CL 0. which is 750x0.5x0 = 0 gp and 0xp and 1 day to craft (minimum 1 day always). And said wand does not actually work because its CL is too low to cast the spell it contains.

you don't pay negative XP and Gold to craft it (aka earn)... although it was a nice try.

[olentu]

mmm... for purposes of crafting, cantrips are level 1/2, not 0.
sanctum spell is a +0 LA metamagic that adds 1 to CL when casting withing your sanctum and lowers the CL by 1 if outside the sanctum.
The cost is 750xCLxSL.
SL is unchanged because sanctum is +0 LA metamagic; it remains 0, which is treated as 1/2 for purposes of crafting. CL is your choice but has to be at least enough to cast the spell (1 in this case) and at most your current CL (whatever your CL is at the moment) as long as your CL is high enough to cast that spell in the first place (aka, 1 in this case).
Merely casting it outside the sanctum doesn't chance the CL, even if you argue that by crafting it outside the sanctum it does change the CL, it still needs to meet the minimum level rule, so you can make a max CL0 wand and thus cannot craft said one...

even if we ignore all that, the CL for a cantrip is still 1, and you are lowering the CL by 1 due to sanctum spell, not the SL by 1... so you get a wand with SL 1/2 and CL 0. which is 750x0.5x0 = 0 gp and 0xp and 1 day to craft (minimum 1 day always). And said wand does not actually work because its CL is too low to cast the spell it contains.

you don't pay negative XP and Gold to craft it (aka earn)... although it was a nice try.

The idea was not to have negative caster level but a negative spell level. In fact one would want as high a caster level as possible so as to get as much XP and gold as they could.

As I have not looked up the stuff and so am going on memory take this with the caution that what I am saying might be wrong and thus not work. As I remember sanctum spell is, like heighten spell, one of those metamagic feats that modifies spell level and not caster level. I also recall that, like heighten spell, one it specifically state that the modified level is to be used for all purposes instead of the spells original level. Thus when applying sanctum spell to a cantrip outside the sanctum it would count for all purposes as a level -1 spell. Then as I can not remember the magic item creation rules exactly presumably the specific exception in sanctum spell would override the part about in the magic item creation rules that set a cantrip's level as 1/2 when making items. thus one makes a wand of a level -1 spell. plugging -1 into the formulas gives a negative cost in gold and XP. Presumably this sort of stuff was to be avoided by setting cantrips to act as level 1/2 spells for making magic items but presumably there is language that would allow one to get around such a restriction with sanctum spell.

So going by what I remember and what i have gleaned from the discussion that is how it would work in theory.

[Tyndmyr]

Complete arcane, page 82 has most recent Sanctum Spell rules, superseding Tome and Blood.



Sanctum Spell[Metamagic]
Prereq: Any Magic Feat
Benefit: A sanctum spell has an effective spell level 1 higher than it's normal level if cast in your sanctum, but if not cast in your sanctum, the spell has an effective spell level 1 lower than normal. All effects dependant on spell level(including save DCs) are calculated according to the adjusted level. A sanctum spell uses a spell slot of the spell's normal level.


I committed the details of what constitutes a Sanctum, because it's irrelevant to crafting. Now, when crafting, you can craft stuff with metamagic feats attached. This has a couple fun effects. First off, it lets you create wands and eternal wands of spells that are normally a level too high to qualify.

Secondly, the reduction in 0th level spells to -1 level spells happens when the spell is used outside the sanctum. The clause about treating a 0th level spell as a 1/2 level spell for the purposes of cost never comes into play. CL is unaffected by sanctum spell, and you need a CL of 1 to cast anything, so that part of the equation is unchanged. So -1 SL * 1 CL * 375. You gained gold, a bit of xp, and now have a wand of cantrips. Use of this in conjunction with metamagic reducers and other fun effects to get more powerful free wands is left as an exercise for the reader.

Of course...in an actual game, if you tried to convince your DM that crafting magic items gave you money and xp, books would likely fly.

[taltamir]

A sanctum spell uses a spell slot of the spell's normal level.

The -1 or +1 is only for CASTING the spell. the actual spell SLOT is unchanged (+0 LA).
Crafting a wand is based on spell slot used, not on effective spell level when cast.

that is, you would craft a sanctum spell cantrip wand with the standard spell level and cost. If you cast from that wand within your sanctum, it goes off as a level 1 spell, if you cast it outside the sanctum, it goes off as a level -1 spell. But the wand cost is unchanged.

if the argument was valid, you could use sanctum spell to prepare spells at -1 slot, and preparing them in your sanctum would take a +1 slot.

[ex cathedra]

No, actually, for the purposes of all effects based on spell level, a sanctum spell is +/- 1. What spells you can affect with metamagic rods, the spells you can craft into wands, etc., are based on the spell's level. Therefore, Sanctum spell does that. Stupid, yes, but RAW.

[9mm]

multi-classing penalties... its so assumed they're not used it's a surprise when they are.

[Tyndmyr]

The -1 or +1 is only for CASTING the spell. the actual spell SLOT is unchanged (+0 LA).
Crafting a wand is based on spell slot used, not on effective spell level when cast.

that is, you would craft a sanctum spell cantrip wand with the standard spell level and cost. If you cast from that wand within your sanctum, it goes off as a level 1 spell, if you cast it outside the sanctum, it goes off as a level -1 spell. But the wand cost is unchanged.

if the argument was valid, you could use sanctum spell to prepare spells at -1 slot, and preparing them in your sanctum would take a +1 slot.

It specifically says that for all purposes EXCEPT preparing them, you use the modified spell level.

So, yeah...it's interesting. It's a very useful feat for everything but it's intended purpose, defending a sanctum.

[taltamir]

No, actually, for the purposes of all effects based on spell level, a sanctum spell is +/- 1. What spells you can affect with metamagic rods, the spells you can craft into wands, etc., are based on the spell's level. Therefore, Sanctum spell does that. Stupid, yes, but RAW.

where does it say the effective level of casting and not the effective level of preparation is what counts for crafting?


It specifically says that for all purposes EXCEPT preparing them, you use the modified spell level.

So, yeah...it's interesting. It's a very useful feat for everything but it's intended purpose, defending a sanctum.

ah, now I get it... specific trumps general, and "crafting" is a purpose.... so by saying all purposes except preparation it is specifically saying "for the purpose of crafting" among others.

[Tyndmyr]

I presume the reason they excluded preparing was to prevent having to waste spells on preparing both in and out of sanctum version of spells, which would get confusing.

They just clearly didn't think enough about the interactions.

[taltamir]

I presume the reason they excluded preparing was to prevent having to waste spells on preparing both in and out of sanctum version of spells, which would get confusing.

They just clearly didn't think enough about the interactions.

they meant for it to be a slight modification that if you make to your spell it goes off as more powerful in your sanctum, and less powerful out of.

you can already prepare it twice, once as a non sanctum spell (no penalty) and once as a sanctum (penalty or benefit, depending on where cast).

obviously "for all purposes" meant to be "spell penetration, DC, etc" not crafting... but the wording indicates crafting.

[Curmudgeon]

multi-classing penalties... its so assumed they're not used it's a surprise when they are.
I suggest you broaden your horizons. All the people I've gamed with use them. The RPGA uses the multiclassing rules, so anybody who's ever played in Living Greyhawk does, too. With the largest official D&D group using these rules I see no reason for surprise here.

[Boci]

I suggest you broaden your horizons. All the people I've gamed with use them. The RPGA uses the multiclassing rules, so anybody who's ever played in Living Greyhawk does, too. With the largest official D&D group using these rules I see no reason for surprise here.

They lock races into their stereotype, limit your options and make humans an even better choice. I know they are used but I'm suprised why people do.

[Zaydos]

I did till a year and a half ago. They were RAW, they were intended as a point of balance, and I didn't see the need for excessive multiclassing excluding PrCs. I had it come up once with a ranger 1/fighter 9 and once with a ninja/shaman; otherwise nobody I played with really multiclassed (I made a barbarian/fighter that was aiming for exotic weapons master and was a 1/3 but he was human for the fluff and bonus feat). I also used them because it helped me reinforce what the races were in my campaign worlds.

I do not use them now, because 1) humans are very powerful compared to the other races already (I'll maybe play a dwarf fighter or crusader, an elf rogue, a halfling wizard or warlock, a gnome wizard [never intended to use shadowcraft mage stuff], dragonfire adept or warlock; and except for Dragonfire Adept and Crusader my first choice is still human). 2) I decided not to bother checking them, since my PCs don't even remember they exist (nobody multiclassed either except for a theurge class with no early entry used so it didn't matter). I still put them down for any race I make. Same thing with Bonus Languages, I let the PCs choose any non-secret language but I list them when I make a race anyway.

[JonestheSpy]

I wouldn't really call it 'sad' that most DMs don't have the world fleshed out to the point of having something prepared to happen when the PCs take 8 extra hours to get through the dungeon. I mean, the BBEG's minions have to rest at some point, too (assuming it's not some kind of necromancer.) 8 hours is just 8 hours in the big scheme of things.

Really? I'm having a hard time imagining this one.

Sir, we haven't heard from anyone upstairs in the last four hours.
Oh, nothing to worry about, they're probably just playing an RPG and lost track of time.

or

Sir, Thak was wandering past the first antechamber and noticed all the guards were dead. Turns out everyone in the north half of the complex has been annihalted.
Hmm, that's very interesting, but really it's nap time, so remind me again after tea, there's a good lad.
Should we set up checkpoints? Traps? Increase patrols? Release the hounds? Go to Code Red?
Maybe later. What's the rush?

[Tyndmyr]

I suggest you broaden your horizons. All the people I've gamed with use them. The RPGA uses the multiclassing rules, so anybody who's ever played in Living Greyhawk does, too. With the largest official D&D group using these rules I see no reason for surprise here.

I think we used them in my very first 3.0 game ever. I made a sorcerer/fighter. He would likely have the optimizers here sobbing in a corner at the sheer crappiness of the build.

We decided after that to ignore the multiclassing rules, on the grounds that they were stupid.

[Dimers]

I know...it's quite hideous. Now you have a wand, money AND xp. I believe it is limited by time though, so it's not truly infinite.

Though no doubt someone will attempt to make it so.

Psh. That's easy -- just be an elan. They don't age.

Okay, fine, there's still the whole "eventual heat-death of the universe" thing, but since you're getting all this free XP, just gain epic levels and research a spell to fix that.

:smallwink:

[Sstoopidtallkid]

The multiclassing rules increase bookkeeping, limit creativity, and make melee weaker while making humans more powerful. And they don't actually work, either. A Barbarian 1/Fighter 2/Monk 2/PsyWar 1/Warblade 2/Crusader 2/Swordsage 2 has no multiclass penalties. An Elf Fighter 2/Barb 4 does.:smallannoyed:

[Tyndmyr]

Psh. That's easy -- just be an elan. They don't age.

Okay, fine, there's still the whole "eventual heat-death of the universe" thing, but since you're getting all this free XP, just gain epic levels and research a spell to fix that.

:smallwink:

Eh, the universe on which plane? Surely it's possible to eventually create a new universe on a different plane. Genesis, for example.

Given the amount of time involved, surely the cost of swapping is comparatively trivial.

[taltamir]

The multiclassing rules increase bookkeeping, limit creativity, and make melee weaker while making humans more powerful. And they don't actually work, either. A Barbarian 1/Fighter 2/Monk 2/PsyWar 1/Warblade 2/Crusader 2/Swordsage 2 has no multiclass penalties. An Elf Fighter 2/Barb 4 does.:smallannoyed:

thats right there, if the multi classing rules were meant to stop builds that are all over the place then they are a failure. Bypassing them is easy and actually encourages more "crazy" builds.
Notice the build above is all base classes (to make a point), there are no multiclassing rules for PrCs so those can always be dipped into.

[Kommadore]

I think something most people overlook is how level adjustments work, they forget they have to spend levels on the monster's hit dice as well.

[BigBadBugbear]

You can make AoO if you have a bow in your hand:
You just draw a arrow at the end of each turn (free action) and use it as an improvised dagger… Taadaa…

[Akal Saris]

The multiclassing rules increase bookkeeping, limit creativity, and make melee weaker while making humans more powerful. And they don't actually work, either. A Barbarian 1/Fighter 2/Monk 2/PsyWar 1/Warblade 2/Crusader 2/Swordsage 2 has no multiclass penalties. An Elf Fighter 2/Barb 4 does.:smallannoyed:

This pretty much sums up how I feel about multiclass penalties in 3.5, especially when you're playing a non-core class. It's one of the things that Pathfinder fixed well IMO.

[Kaulesh]

While looking through Races of Stone, I see that goliaths never have to acclimate to different altitudes. The section that describes that feature of the goliath points back to the DMG (page 90, if you're curious). I didn't know there were altitude rules.

[Captainocaptain]

Since casters can always fill higher level spell slots with lower level spells, doesn't this mean that if a 1st level sorcerer has a 16 Charisma, he can use his 2nd and 3rd level bonus spell slots for first level spells?

[Godskook]

Since casters can always fill higher level spell slots with lower level spells, doesn't this mean that if a 1st level sorcerer has a 16 Charisma, he can use his 2nd and 3rd level bonus spell slots for first level spells?

No. You do not receive bonus spells at a given spell level unless it is 'unlocked' for you. Some classes will explicitly give you 0 spell slots just so you can benefit from having bonus spells. The Paladin gives an example of this.