PDA

View Full Version : Permanancy on non-core spells: is there a way?



Brendan
2010-03-21, 10:05 AM
is there a book of any sort or an online fix that expands permanancy to non-core spells? the amount they have on the srd seems kind of restrictive for one of the few spells that lasts forever (or until a dispel)?
Thanks a lot!

nargbop
2010-03-21, 10:42 AM
From the Permanency description :

The DM may allow other selected spells to be made permanent. Researching this possible application of a spell costs as much time and money as independently researching the selected spell (see the Dungeon Masterís Guide for details). If the DM has already determined that the application is not possible, the research automatically fails. Note that you never learn what is possible except by the success or failure of your research.
This paragraph is why there's not much detail about Permanency in books outside of Core. The DM explicitly gets the chance to say 'No' to Permanent Favor of the Martyr or Permanent Sphere of Ultimate Destruction.

Sliver
2010-03-21, 10:54 AM
Note that you never learn what is possible except by the success or failure of your research.

PC: Can I permanency X?
DM: You have to research that to find out.
PC does research.
DM: No.
PC: ...

That is RAW supported dickery right there!

Jack_Simth
2010-03-21, 12:05 PM
PC: Can I permanency X?
DM: You have to research that to find out.
PC does research.
DM: No.
PC: ...

That is RAW supported dickery right there!
Yep. So's spell research. But then, generally speaking, if you want to make a spell permanent, it's to increase your character's personal power - and the DM is there partially to keep the game reasonably balanced.

If it helps, you'll occasionally see a non-Core spell that says "this spell can be made permanent with a Permanency spell" (followed by minimum caster level and an XP cost) although it's decidedly uncommon.

On the plus side, the formula for minimum caster level and XP cost is really, really simple:
Minimum caster level: 8 plus spell level of the spell to be made permanent, minimum 9.
XP cost: Spell level of the spell to be made permanent * 500 xp, minimum 500 xp.

Optimystik
2010-03-21, 12:25 PM
PC: Can I permanency X?
DM: You have to research that to find out.
PC does research.
DM: No.
PC: ...

That is RAW supported dickery right there!

I would respond thusly:

"Well, it says in the PHB that I can toss a book at your head any time you pull dickery on me."
"Really? Show me where it says that."
"Right here." *hurls book*

Boci
2010-03-21, 12:35 PM
I would respond thusly:

"Well, it says in the PHB that I can toss a book at your head any time you pull dickery on me."
"Really? Show me where it says that."
"Right here." *hurls book*

I would wait until the next time I died and then continue to act noramlly.

DM: "But you're dead."
PC: "So, show me where it says I cannot act anymore."
DM: "Fine, then I'll houserule it."
PC: "But we agreed that houserules implemented mid game come into affect next session." (This is actually true)

Fortunatly our DM is not a jerk so he wouldn't constantly make me research something noly to find out it was impossible. Once or twice is okay though. No rewards without a risk.

PhoenixRivers
2010-03-21, 12:44 PM
I would wait until the next time I died and then continue to act noramlly.

DM: "But you're dead."
PC: "So, show me where it says I cannot act anymore."
DM: "Fine, then I'll houserule it."
PC: "But we agreed that houserules implemented mid game come into affect next session." (This is actually true)

Fortunatly our DM is not a jerk so he wouldn't constantly make me research something noly to find out it was impossible. Once or twice is okay though. No rewards without a risk.

"Simple. When you die, your HP are set to -10. As the amount of nonlethal damage you have sustained (0) exceeds your current HP (-10), you are unconscious, and thus helpless."

Boci
2010-03-21, 12:51 PM
"Simple. When you die, your HP are set to -10. As the amount of nonlethal damage you have sustained (0) exceeds your current HP (-10), you are unconscious, and thus helpless."

1. There is no way my DM would know that.
2. I was just saying I would abuse RAW if my DM did so, there are plenty of other options.

On a side note I am very suprised this is the first time I've heard the death is meaningless claim disproven. Interesting.

deuxhero
2010-03-21, 12:58 PM
One web article (Forgotten Grimoire, not sure what part) allows you to permanency Animate Rope.

DragoonWraith
2010-03-21, 01:00 PM
PC: Can I permanency X?
DM: You have to research that to find out.
PC does research.
DM: No.
PC: ...

That is RAW supported dickery right there!
Actually, RAW, I think it's worse than that:
PC: Can I permanency X?
DM: You have to do the research to try.
PC does research. DM rolls some dice.
DM: You did not successfully apply Permanency to the spell.
PC: Would it be possible?
DM: Can't say, you can only keep trying to research it until you succeed, which might be impossible, or give up.

Ducklord
2010-03-21, 01:16 PM
If your DM warns you in advance, that your research might be pointless, but you do it anyway, because you consider the risk worthwhile, I really don't see any dickery in it..

Boci
2010-03-21, 01:30 PM
If your DM warns you in advance, that your research might be pointless, but you do it anyway, because you consider the risk worthwhile, I really don't see any dickery in it..

There are really four basic responses possible to the question "Is it possible?", since persumable your wizard will have an understanding of the spell and how it can be applied, and it should be used in any case for the ease of the game):

Yes (High %-tage chance)

Maybe (Medium %-tage chance)

Yes, but do not count on it (Low %-tage chance)

No (0% chance)

If the DM says anything of the above aside No when he has already deicded it won't work he is being a jerk.

taltamir
2010-03-21, 01:33 PM
1. using permanency costs XP, on every casting.
2. to use it with a non specified spell you must perform research (which as people mentioned, sucks...)
3. If you are already performing research, you might as well try to research a spell whose duration is permanent/instantanous (with potentially a GP cost instead of XP cost). after all, plenty of spells have a permanent duration

licidy
2010-03-21, 04:26 PM
I know Savage Species has a list of spells that can be permanencied. Including Greater and Superior Resistance! As well as Darkvision and Low-Light Vision spells.

I'd love to know if there are any other books besides PHB and Savage Species. :smallbiggrin:

Heliomance
2010-03-21, 04:38 PM
"Simple. When you die, your HP are set to -10. As the amount of nonlethal damage you have sustained (0) exceeds your current HP (-10), you are unconscious, and thus helpless."

"But I have Diehard, so can continue to act normally."

Hunter Noventa
2010-03-21, 04:48 PM
"But I have Diehard, so can continue to act normally."

Cute, but Diehard does specify that you remain active between -1 and -9, and that at -10 they die and since when dead you're automatically unconscious, Diehard doesn't help.

I just felt like contributing to the silliness.

Emmerask
2010-03-21, 05:29 PM
Also its quite hard to act normally if dead while Ive stamped DEAD all over your char sheet and am performing a ceremonial burial on your paper that involves lots of fire a dancing routine and pointing fingers + laughter :smallsmile:

Boci
2010-03-21, 05:32 PM
Also its quite hard to act normally if dead while Ive stamped DEAD all over your char sheet and am performing a ceremonial burial on your paper that involves lots of fire a dancing routine and pointing fingers + laughter :smallsmile:

I have a very good memory so it wouldn't bother me.

Saph
2010-03-21, 06:55 PM
Actually, RAW, I think it's worse than that:
PC: Can I permanency X?
DM: You have to do the research to try.
PC does research. DM rolls some dice.
DM: You did not successfully apply Permanency to the spell.
PC: Would it be possible?
DM: Can't say, you can only keep trying to research it until you succeed, which might be impossible, or give up.

Isn't that pretty much how scientific research works in real life?

There's a reason breakthroughs are rare. Real life is a very unforgiving GM. :smalltongue:

Jack_Simth
2010-03-21, 07:37 PM
Also its quite hard to act normally if dead while Ive stamped DEAD all over your char sheet and am performing a ceremonial burial on your paper that involves lots of fire a dancing routine and pointing fingers + laughter :smallsmile:That's fine. I pull out my marked up printout from the previous session. And/or print another one while you watch. Or maybe just reference it on my laptop...

Draz74
2010-03-21, 07:59 PM
Cute, but Diehard does specify that you remain active between -1 and -9, and that at -10 they die and since when dead you're automatically unconscious, Diehard doesn't help.

I just felt like contributing to the silliness.

It is indeed silliness, but ... got a reference for the part I bolded? Because I believe that's precisely the crux of the issue.

Emmerask
2010-03-21, 08:18 PM
That's fine. I pull out my marked up printout from the previous session. And/or print another one while you watch. Or maybe just reference it on my laptop...

A laptop burns too :biggrin:

p.s.: seeing that there now is a thread about dms destroying character sheets ... the post I made before and this one are both jokes :smallwink:

Slayn82
2010-03-21, 08:28 PM
Why to make any research at all? Limited Wish for Permanency on target spell. If it did work, well, it works exactly like permanency. If it didnt work i just lose 300 xp, instead of all that money and time. Experience is a river after all.

taltamir
2010-03-21, 08:37 PM
Isn't that pretty much how scientific research works in real life?

There's a reason breakthroughs are rare. Real life is a very unforgiving GM. :smalltongue:

well... IRL you have preliminary research that indicates whether something is or isn't possible and how to go about doing it. That preliminary research is typically a tiny fraction of the overall cost.

Lysander
2010-03-21, 08:41 PM
I suppose the reason RAW requires that wizards waste their efforts even if the DM has decided against allowing the spell is that they want to discourage letting a character's actions be influenced by OOC knowledge.

The problem I think is that people treat researching a new spell (or learning whether something can be permanencied) the same as selecting your race or selecting a class. That's a choice the player makes and then runs by the DM for approval. Researching a spell on the other hand is something your character does. You can't ask in advance whether a skill check will be successful, or what weapon a creature is vulnerable too. Just because there's no dice involved doesn't mean that characters should effectively have knowledge of the future.

Slayn82
2010-03-21, 08:44 PM
Just because there's no dice involved doesn't mean that characters should effectively have knowledge of the future.

Except when they do have knowledge of the future, with resources like Communion spells or Extra plannar Contacts.

Jack_Simth
2010-03-21, 09:08 PM
A laptop burns too :biggrin:Burns about as well as a DM, in fact. :xykon:

p.s.: seeing that there now is a thread about dms destroying character sheets ... the post I made before and this one are both jokes :smallwink:
Duh?

cfalcon
2010-03-22, 12:02 PM
Well, to my way of thinking, there are three reasons you would be unable to make a spell permanent:

1- It's not the kind of spell you can make permanent by the rules of permanency (fireball, cone of cold, orb of acid).

2- It's really unbalanced to have it permanent.

3- It's just not, for whatever unstated reason, able to be made permanent.

As DM, I would clear up (1) if there were no question, and would promptly answer (2) if that were the case (aka, no research required), assuming that the character had access to a library (it only takes you ten minutes in Professia's List Of Permancies to find out that permanent greater invisibility doesn't work). I would try to reserve (3) for the cases of custom player spells where really no one WOULD know if the spell can be made permanent, or for spells that I've decided can't be made permanent for a reason that's not common knowledge. In general, if the player is doing spell research and you are just slapping his hand each time, that's abuse. Also note that in the case of unsuccessful research you can give the player clues as to what would be *successful* research- the character spent a lot of time looking into it, right?

BobVosh
2010-03-22, 12:41 PM
It is indeed silliness, but ... got a reference for the part I bolded? Because I believe that's precisely the crux of the issue.


Dying (-1 to -9 Hit Points)

When your character’s current hit points drop to between -1 and -9 inclusive, he’s dying.

A dying character immediately falls unconscious and can take no actions.

A dying character loses 1 hit point every round. This continues until the character dies or becomes stable (see below).

Dead (-10 Hit Points or Lower)

When your character’s current hit points drop to -10 or lower, or if he takes massive damage (see above), he’s dead. A character can also die from taking ability damage or suffering an ability drain that reduces his Constitution to 0.

You are no longer dying at -10, you are dead. Meaning you no longer have the effects of dying, you are dead. As for dead, there are no associated penalties.

Zeful
2010-03-22, 12:58 PM
well... IRL you have preliminary research that indicates whether something is or isn't possible and how to go about doing it. That preliminary research is typically a tiny fraction of the overall cost.

And this is magic, where such research might not work (after all, magic doesn't exactly scale well).


You are no longer dying at -10, you are dead. Meaning you no longer have the effects of dying, you are dead. As for dead, there are no associated penalties.

From the dead condition? No, their aren't. But the Nonlethal damage section still gives you the staggered and unconscious (and helpless) conditions from having more nonlethal damage (which is always a positive integer) than HP (which can be negative). So you still can't take actions.

ericgrau
2010-03-22, 01:00 PM
Heaven forbid the DM make it difficult for the PC to increase his power beyond the norm. Let's throw a fit and delay the game for everyone. [/sarcasm]

It's all the more reason for the PC to not try to push the limits, or ask 100 times. But, like the DMG says on spell research, it's reasonable for the DM to set up parameters for what might be allowed ahead of time and tell these to the players.

Best solution really is to talk to your DM. Maybe he'll use the given guidelines, or maybe he'll just give it to you if it's reasonable and he doesn't want to worry about the logistics. I mean it's a game, your group can do things however you want. Even if there was no method given (and even if there is), you can just make something up.

Grommen
2010-03-22, 03:19 PM
PC: Can I permanency X?
DM: You have to research that to find out.
PC does research.
DM: No.
PC: ...

That is RAW supported dickery right there!

Yes that is what we live for right their.

Player: "Hay can I have that +25 Holey, dancing, vorporal, luck blade?"
DM that will cost you 20 million gold.
Player (2 years, 20 levels, and 20 million gold latter): "Ok I have the gold now"
DM: "O Sorry it got sold.."

taltamir
2010-03-22, 03:39 PM
And this is magic, where such research might not work (after all, magic doesn't exactly scale well).

Which is why I didn't bring up IRL, that was a reply to a guy who said basically "its just like IRL research, you have to invest before you know if it works". my reply to that was that it isn't just like IRL, IRL you can and do find out its impossible early in the research process

taltamir
2010-03-22, 03:41 PM
Heaven forbid the DM make it difficult for the PC to increase his power beyond the norm. Let's throw a fit and delay the game for everyone. [/sarcasm]

the problem with the mechanic is that it penalizes you for ASKING... the DM can easily say "no" to every spell research you ever come up with, but by RAW he is supposed to charge you money and XP for the privilege of being told "no".
Not only that, the RAW DOES require interrupting the game for everyone, the party has to hunker down for the research period.

RAW:
PC: can I research X?
DM: *decides the answer is no* you will have to try before I tell you
Party: ok, we park in town for a month so he can research.. PC, ok, here is my GP and XP... so I do the research.
DM: it failed, would you like to try again?
PC and Party: debate debate debate... ok we will try again
DM: it failed again, would you like to try again? etc

The way people here are suggesting:
PC: can I Research X?
DM: no.

ericgrau
2010-03-22, 03:42 PM
Which is why I didn't bring up IRL, that was a reply to a guy who said basically "its just like IRL research, you have to invest before you know if it works". my reply to that was that it isn't just like IRL, IRL you can and do find out its impossible early in the research process

Not usually. Even after you're done there may be mistakes that bite you after an application of the research. Sometimes you can know if you're trying something crazy. Hence the recommendation for the DM to give the player a rough idea about what will work ahead of time. That still leaves the DM the option to be a ****, but is far from requiring it.

Kylarra
2010-03-22, 03:44 PM
the problem with the mechanic is that it penalizes you for ASKING... the DM can easily say "no" to every spell research you ever come up with, but by RAW he is supposed to charge you money and XP for the privilege of being told "no".Nah, just gold and time. No XP cost involved.

Yukitsu
2010-03-22, 03:44 PM
PC: Can I permanency X?
DM: You have to research that to find out.
PC does research.
DM: No.
PC: ...

That is RAW supported dickery right there!

This used to happen to me a lot, and went as follows.

"Can I research a level 5 spell that does X?"
DM "After you spend the money and do the research, you find out that no, you can't."
"I guess I'll just learn wings of cover instead then?"
DM "What's that do?"
"Same, thing, lower level."

Now, the DM usually agrees to any spell I try to research, and generally at the level, because every time he says no, I have a spell with the same or better effect at the same or lower level. I only generally ask if I can invent spells when the written ones with similar effects are broken.

taltamir
2010-03-22, 03:46 PM
This used to happen to me a lot, and went as follows.

"Can I research a level 5 spell that does X?"
DM "After you spend the money and do the research, you find out that no, you can't."
"I guess I'll just learn wings of cover instead then?"
DM "What's that do?"
"Same, thing, lower level."

Now, the DM usually agrees to any spell I try to research, and generally at the level, because every time he says no, I have a spell with the same or better effect at the same or lower level. I only generally ask if I can invent spells when the written ones with similar effects are broken.

he could say no to that spell too... he doesn't have to allow everything ever written by WOTC