PDA

View Full Version : Wands vs. Staves



Darwin
2011-02-04, 10:43 PM
While running some numbers for my Artificer's wands and staves to be crafted I came across a bit of an oddity. While looking through the item creation rules for staves I noted that the only mention of custom staves requiring more than one spell on them was found in the first line:

"A staff is a long shaft of wood that stores several spells. Unlike wands, which can contain a wide variety of spells, each staff is of a certain kind and holds specific spells. A staff has 50 charges when created. "

I'm not exactly sure how to interpret this by RAW. RAI seems to be that there should be at least 2 different spells on a magic staff (as per Staff of Charming and Staff of Earth and Stone). But it still seems a bit open to interpretation.

Even if the staff does indeed require at least two spells. Let's abuse the rules a bit. First off, we want a staff with Disintegrate, it's an easy and neat little spell. We don't particularly care about the second spell, so we make it as cheap as possible (ray of frost, prestidigitation, know direction, make your choice...). In addition we'll add that Prestidigitation for half it's cost by making it cost 2 charges.

"The cost for the materials is subsumed in the cost for creating the staff—375 gp × the level of the highest-level spell × the level of the caster, plus 75% of the value of the next most costly ability (281.25 gp × the level of the spell × the level of the caster), plus one-half of the value of any other abilities (187.5 gp × the level of the spell × the level of the caster). Staffs are always fully charged (50 charges) when created."

Okely dokely!

Assuming we have the relevant feat and Extraordinary Artisan (cutting the crafting price down to 75%):

(375 x 6 x 8 + ((281.25 x 0.5 x 8) / 2)) x 0,75= 18562,5 x 0,75 = 13921,875
(375 x 6 x 12 + ((281.25 x 0.5 x 12) / 2)) x 0,75= 27843.75 x 0,75 = 20882,81257

~14000gp ~21000gp, 50 charges gives us 280 420gp a pop for blowing a Disintegrate spell at your own CL as an Artificer. Assuming CL 20th that's an average damage of 140 damage.

Let's compare that to the more common Wand of Acid Orb shall we? We want it's full blasty potential, so we make it CL 15th for 15d6.

"The base price of a wand is its caster level × the spell level × 750 gp. To craft a wand, you must spend 1/25 of this base price in XP and use up raw materials costing one-half of this base price."

(15 x 4 x 750) x 0,75 x 0,5 = 16875

~17000gp, 50 charges gives us 340 a pop at CL15th with an average damage of 52,5.

So we're paying more, for a lower level spell, doing less damage, on a lesser type of item. Did I just stumble across some nice economic abuse or did I make a mistake that you guys will have me facepalming over in a second? :smalltongue:

EDIT: Forgot that while a staff has a minimum CL of 8th level, Disintegrate has a minimum CL of 12th.

dextercorvia
2011-02-04, 11:49 PM
The staff has to be crafted at the CL required to cast the highest level spell in there (minimum 8).

I don't think there is a minimum number of spells in the staff however.

Xan_Kriegor
2011-02-05, 01:41 AM
EDIT: Just looked up staves, and they work differently than I thought. You are correct. :smalleek:

arguskos
2011-02-05, 03:25 AM
There are staves printed with as few as two spells. The intent is that staves have more than one spell, but by legalities, you are correct. Excellent abuse (if such a thing can be called "excellent"). Personally, I'd smack it down because the RAI is pretty clear here (find me a WotC printed staff with only one spell of level 5 or higher, and then I'll concede the point), but yeah, looks to work.

Darwin
2011-02-05, 06:01 AM
Right! In my eagerness I forgot about minimum CL for 6th level spells. Let's try again.

(375 x 6 x 12 + ((281.25 x 0.5 x 12) / 2)) x 0,75= 27843.75 x 0,75 = 20882,81257

418 gp a pop. That's 78gp more than the Orb of Cold. While each pop is now more expensve that the Orb wand, let's take a look at efficiency.

Wand of Orb of Cold: 340gp/charge, 52.2 average damage, 6.5gp/damage

Staff of Disintegrate: 418gp/charge, 140 average damage, 3gp/damage

Now that's efficiency! While not entirely effective as initially posted, crafting staves like this is still entire worth it in every imagineable way. It gets even more ridiculous once you start considering the Artificer's Metamagic Spell Trigger, allowing you to ex. Maximize those lovely, efficient Disintegrate rays.

I never intended to abuse this in my real game, my DM would hit me with a book and call me a fool. But it is quite satisfying to discover a new kind of rules abuse all by yourself, this is the first time I've ever done anything like that. :smallbiggrin:

Saph
2011-02-05, 06:48 AM
Yeah, it works.

The reason it isn't a huge problem in most games is:

a) You need to be a 12th-level caster to make staffs. By this point the campaign will likely either be over, or be close enough to over that you don't have much time left for crafting.

b) Sure, you're getting those 50 charges of Disintegrate at a good price, but 50 charges of Disintegrate is massive overkill. It's REALLY unlikely you'll need that many shots. I find it's rare to even use up a 50-charge wand of a 1st-level spell.

c) The main advantage of wands and staffs is to enable you to keep casting spells after you've used up all your spell slots. By level 12-13, though, spellcasters have a crazy amount of spell slots and very rarely run out, so in most cases having a Disintegrate staff is only a slight bump in power.

RebelRogue
2011-02-05, 07:04 AM
I find it's rare to even use up a 50-charge wand of a 1st-level spell.
Unless they're your basic wands of CLW to use between combats. The groups i've been in tend to burn a lot of those.

Saph
2011-02-05, 07:06 AM
Unless they're your basic wands of CLW to use between combats. The groups i've been in tend to burn a lot of those.

Yeah, those and Lesser Vigours are the only ones I regularly go through.

I did go through a 30-charge wand of Magic Missile with one character. It took me about three levels. I think that's the only time I've burnt through a non-healing wand.

Darwin
2011-02-05, 07:18 AM
The reason it isn't a huge problem in most games is:

a) You need to be a 12th-level caster to make staffs. By this point the campaign will likely either be over, or be close enough to over that you don't have much time left for crafting.

b) Sure, you're getting those 50 charges of Disintegrate at a good price, but 50 charges of Disintegrate is massive overkill. It's REALLY unlikely you'll need that many shots.spell.

In my experience, most encounters at higher levels usually last for 2 rounds, sometimes a little less, sometimes a little more. Assuming "most groups" play by the books and level up after an average of 13 encounters. That Staff of Disintegrate is going to be the most efficient weapon in the Artificer's repetoire, so naturally he'll want to spend most of his actions on using it in a combat. 2 uses per encounter, 13 encounters per level. It should take just about 2 levels (12-14) to expend all charges. And that's only if the Artificer is playing conservatively, not expending a lot of charges maximizing, twinning or quickening it using Metamagic Spell Trigger.

While it might not be that big of a deal to the Wizard with unlimited cosmic power already available to him, that Artificer is going to be clapping his hands in glee knowing he'll be able to do a lot of damage without blowing out the bottom of his wallet doing so every time.

Saph
2011-02-05, 07:36 AM
That Staff of Disintegrate is going to be the most efficient weapon in the Artificer's repetoire, so naturally he'll want to spend most of his actions on using it in a combat. 2 uses per encounter, 13 encounters per level. It should take just about 2 levels (12-14) to expend all charges.

Disagree here. Disintegrate is primarily a utility spell and only secondarily a combat spell. The problem with it is that it requires first a touch attack, then a SR check, then a failed Fort save. That's three chances for something to go wrong, and so it's quite rare for Disintegrate to kill something. The main creature types that Disintegrate is really good against are weak-Fort-save humanoids such as skillmonkeys and arcane casters, and undead.

The real reason Disintegrate is good is because of its versatility - it won't kill most things, but it's okay against most things, and it has lots of great utility applications outside combat. However, in many battles you should be able to pick a better option.


While it might not be that big of a deal to the Wizard with unlimited cosmic power already available to him, that Artificer is going to be clapping his hands in glee knowing he'll be able to do a lot of damage without blowing out the bottom of his wallet doing so every time.

Even with your cost reductions, you're paying 20k plus XP. You could make a Ring of Freedom of Movement for less than that. I'm not saying it's not a fairly good choice - it is - but I wouldn't necessarily get one if I was playing an Artificer.

Darwin
2011-02-05, 08:03 AM
Disagree here. Disintegrate is primarily a utility spell and only secondarily a combat spell. *snip*

I agree with you on this, Disintegrate is a bit unreliable as a pure damage spell. Let's make another example to clarify why the Artificer loves this.

Orb of Acid is an excellent offensive spell, Ranged touch, no SR, no save 1d6/level (15d6 cap). 4th level.

Our Artificer is level 15, and he wants to meet that cap.

Firstly, a wand:
15 x 4 x 375 x 0,75 = 16875gp.

And now, a staff, using the our little loophole:
8 * 4 * 375 + (281.25 x 0.5 x 8) x 0,75 = 13125gp

3750 saved by crafting a staff instead of a wand, achieving the same result. Not an impressive amount, but things like that adds up quickly for an artificer.

And let's not forget that we can also use this trick to get really cheap access to high level spells compared to how you normally do it. I'll admit I don't have a lot of experience at high level play (my highest character made it to level 14) but I'm sure there are blasty spells overshadowing the Orb lines somewhere up there.

We aren't talking game breaking here though, we'll leave that up to the wizards, and the players who refuse to realize Metamagic Spell Trigger only lets you apply a single metamagic effect at a time :smallbiggrin:

Gnaeus
2011-02-05, 09:37 AM
Of course, there are other advantages to wands. You can put them in wand chambers in weapons (to allow rapid drawing with eager, weapon crystals or the quick draw feat). You can put them in a Rod of wands or a metamagic grip. Maybe a wrist sheath. You can dual wield them with the right feats. Staves are heavy, bulky, hard to hide. You can tie a wand to your wrist or belt so that if you drop it, you can recover it easily.

Darwin
2011-02-05, 10:02 AM
As far as I'm aware there aren't any rules prohibiting you from enchanting a staff like a weapon. That means you can buy (or craft!) a bunch of Least Augment Crystal of Return and slap them on each of your staves, making it a free action to draw them. Upgrade those to the lesser model and you'll be able to call the staff from 30 ft. away as a move action.

Then there's the ever popular Handy Haversack that lets you store loads of staffs quite easily, and drawing any of those would be a move action.

But really, staves aren't that heavy. You should be able to carry at least 3-4 of them on your back, and that's likely more than you'll need.

The Artificer replicates metamagic wand grip as a class feature, useable on both wands and staves.

There's no way to dual cast from staves as far as I know. But the extra oomph you get from the higher level spells of the staves could probaly outdamage a double wand wielder, and do it several times cheaper might I add.The wand wielder could probaly outblast the staff users with double twinned, double quickened CL15th Orb of Cold, but it'd be so ridiculously expensive I'd have no real use in a DnD game.

No brains
2011-02-05, 12:52 PM
I'm not very good at magic, magic items, and their add-ons, so forgive me if I miss something.

Firstly, why is it that you need to craft the wand of acid orb at its max CL?

Secondly, why not make a wand of disintegrate?

I ask the first question because if the artificer can use their CL when casting any spell from any magic item, why not make the orb of acid wand/staff at its mimimum CL? I saw the CL of 15 for the wand of orb of acid as the major problem here, so why can't it be avoided?

I ask the second question because you're comparing two different items containing different spells. Is there some reason that disintegrate isn'y just ALWAYS better than orb of acid and that staffs aren't just ALWAYS better than wands?

I know you need a higher CL for staffs and disintegrate vs wands and orb of acid. That menas that you need more (a higher level) for better (bigger damage), so why not make better cheaper to be even better?

Could you please clarify these for me?

dextercorvia
2011-02-05, 12:55 PM
Wands use the CL that they are made with, and can only contain up to 4th level spells.

Staffs use either their creation CL or their wielders, whichever is higher. The can contain any level of spell, and more than one spell.

Kobold Esq
2011-02-05, 02:03 PM
I had a wizard who used to carry a slew of staffs in her efficient quiver. Each had one 4th or 5th level attack spell, allowing me to free up my spell slots for utility spells, but still always be prepared for combat. It made me happy.

ericgrau
2011-02-05, 02:15 PM
FAQ or Sage or whoever said that 1 spell on a staff is fine and not unbalancing. Switching staffs repeatedly could get annoying, as it's 2 move actions without quick draw: 1 to put away 1 to draw. It's unlikely you'll find the staff you want used and partially charged, which means if you want multiple spells on different staffs you need to pay NPCs to craft 50 charge staffs and that's a lot of charges to buy which you might never burn through. 50 on one staff is already a lot. It would be better to only get 1 staff with multiple spells, maybe 2 if you have a ridiculous number of spells but by then you'll want high level spells instead anyway, rather than a large number of low level spells.

Comparing disintegrate to a SoD isn't really fair, b/c there isn't any pure 6th level SoD in core. Your only option is flesh to stone which requires you to memorize a 2nd spell to get your loot and it's more likely to find an immune target. Disintegrate is more reliable, loot friendly and versatile with utility but only removes half a target's HP on an average failed save. It's give and take.

No brains
2011-02-05, 03:02 PM
Wands use the CL that they are made with, and can only contain up to 4th level spells.

Staffs use either their creation CL or their wielders, whichever is higher. The can contain any level of spell, and more than one spell.

This just goes with my higher level needed = better theory. This isn't so much a cheat as yet another bonus for progressing your character.

Then again, I'm always missing stuff so extra clarification (though frustrating) would be beneficial.