To wand or to eternal wand?

[danzibr]

In another thread I got to asking why UMD is so good, and thanks to the many illuminating responses, I have a better idea. And now I'm looking to buy some wands.

So my question is... which should I buy? I know the eternal wands are more expensive, but them never running out sounds pretty appealing, despite the limitations.

By the way, we're starting at level 3 in one campaign and level 7 in another, going Bard for both of them.

[Golden Ladybug]

For certain things, Eternal Wands are the only choice. If you're going to use a spell often, but not all the time (my favourite example is Knock. I always try and buy an Eternal Wand of Knock, and not just because I wish I was the Doctor :smallredface:), an Eternal Wand is pretty sweet.

But, if you're going to be using Wands in combat, like Magic Missiles, Wings of Cover or Swift Invisibility for example, then you need to invest in normal wands. An eternal wand of Magic Missile is cute and all, but its only got two shots. 2d4+2 Damage a day is so irrelevant.

Things like Lesser Vigor or (Paladin) Lesser Restoration are a bit iffy, but it depends on the campaign. Sometimes, you need them a lot more than just twice a day, but they lend themselves well to going forever.

In summary, Utility Wands love to be made into Eternal Wands, but they aren't good for Combat. You need to be able to use them more often than that.

[Toliudar]

I'd actually place 'knock' in the 'wand, not eternal wand' category, especially if you're doing a lot of dungeon-diving - and especially if you don't have a rogue. The usage is fairly likely to come up in bursts.

I really like Endure Elements on an eternal wand - the kind of thing that you might use every single day, for comfort. Rope Trick - with an appropriate caster level - is also great on an eternal wand, since it's relatively rare to use it more than once or twice a day.

Another way to look at it: if you don't think your campaign is going to last for more than, say, twenty to thirty encounters, get the regular wand.

[Alefiend]

In another thread I got to asking why UMD is so good, and thanks to the many illuminating responses, I have a better idea. And now I'm looking to buy some wands.

So my question is... which should I buy? I know the eternal wands are more expensive, but them never running out sounds pretty appealing, despite the limitations.

By the way, we're starting at level 3 in one campaign and level 7 in another, going Bard for both of them.

I expect that somebody will come by with better information very soon, as I've never had occasion to use an eternal wand. But I see the issue as this:

IF you expect to need the spell most days
AND IF you only expect to need it once or twice each day
THEN you should get an eternal wand of that spell

Modify as needed for whether the spell requires an opposed check or saving throw (Dispel Magic, for example). If there's a chance it will fail, a regular wand is a better choice.

Edit: Golden Ladybug makes good points.

[ILM]

I like to Eternal Wand either very circumstancial spells or long-duration low-level buffs. I have a hard time justifying not giving every one of my characters an Eternal Wand of Primal Instinct (Dragon Magic), for instance. +5 to initiative to two characters, all day long, for 10,900 gp? Yes please.

[Essence_of_War]

Wand Chamber a weapon, and get 2-3 eternal wands of Nerveskitter.

As long as you're holding the weapon, you can cast Nerveskitter before you roll initiative. If you're in a dungeon, or any semi-dangerous environment, you should be holding your weapon :smalltongue:

Swap out the wands as you use them, and you should be covered for most adventuring days!

[Draz74]

So my question is... which should I buy?
As others have said, it depends on the spell


I know the eternal wands are more expensive, but them never running out sounds pretty appealing, despite the limitations.
Actually, the price comparison depends on the spell level. For higher-level spells, Eternal Wands are actually cheaper. But regardless of the spell level, the difference isn't very big.


For certain things, Eternal Wands are the only choice. If you're going to use a spell often, but not all the time (my favourite example is Knock. I always try and buy an Eternal Wand of Knock, and not just because I wish I was the Doctor :smallredface:), an Eternal Wand is pretty sweet.

I'd actually place 'knock' in the 'wand, not eternal wand' category, especially if you're doing a lot of dungeon-diving - and especially if you don't have a rogue. *The usage is fairly likely to come up in bursts.

You should never get an Eternal Wand of Knock, for three reasons:
Most campaigns I've been in don't have locked doors as significant obstacles very often. Especially locked doors that a mundane thief-type character (or a barbarian with an adamantine weapon) can't handle.
Even if you're in a campaign with a lot of locked-door dungeon diving, you'll probably want to get through more than two doors a day.
Even if you're in a campaign with a small number of locked doors to go through every day, a Rod of Escape (MIC) costs about the same as an Eternal Wand of Knock (it's actually slightly cheaper IIRC), and it casts Knock twice per day as well as other functions.

As a more general principle, though, there are many utility spells that are like Knock: you're likely to not need them at all, many days, and sometimes you'll need a lot more than two charges of them. So you're better off buying them as a normal Wand. Some of the spells I'd put in this category include: Nystul's Magic Aura, Silent Image, Protection from Evil, Comprehend Languages.


But, if you're going to be using Wands in combat, like Magic Missiles, Wings of Cover or Swift Invisibility for example, then you need to invest in normal wands.
Eh, that's debatable. Unless using a wand is your main combat tactic (e.g. a Wand-Blastificer or a gish who spams Wraithstrike as his main damage-boosting method), you may be just fine with two of a combat spell per day. If you use a spell every day, it doesn't take super-long before it becomes cheaper as an Eternal Wand than as a regular wand -- which might be worth the restriction to two uses per day.

This is especially true of buff spells. Haste, for example, could well be worth making an Eternal Wand instead of a normal Wand. Likewise Heroics or Silence or Enlarge Person.

There are a number of combat spells I could see going either way, since they can be useful to spam. Invisibility, Benign Transposition. Wings of Cover and Swift Invisibility are pretty good examples of this.

If you're really going to use a combat spell a lot, you should consider buying both kinds of wands, especially if the spell is Level 1 or Level 0 (so the wands are cheap). Use the Eternal Wand for the first two uses each day, use the other Wand for whatever's left over. Efficient compounding.


An eternal wand of Magic Missile is cute and all, but its only got two shots. 2d4+2 Damage a day is so irrelevant.
Meh. 32d4+32 damage a day is also irrelevant, if it requires 32 standard actions. I'd never buy either kind of Wand for Magic Missile without paying extra to boost the spell's caster level (which, RAW, can't be done with Eternal Wands).


Things like Lesser Vigor or (Paladin) Lesser Restoration are a bit iffy, but it depends on the campaign. Sometimes, you need them a lot more than just twice a day, but they lend themselves well to going forever.
RAW, divine spells cannot be made into Eternal Wands anyway. Only arcane. So these, as well as other useful divine-only spells (Resurgence, Align Weapon) will have to be normal Wands.

Greater Snake's Swiftness would be in the "could go ether way" category above, except that it's a lower spell level when it's a Druid spell, and is thus vastly cheaper as a normal Wand than as an Eternal Wand.


In summary, Utility Wands love to be made into Eternal Wands, but they aren't good for Combat. You need to be able to use them more often than that.
In summary, I disagree.


I really like Endure Elements on an eternal wand - the kind of thing that you might use every single day, for comfort.
Would be a good idea, except that there are cheaper items that give you 1/day Endure Elements anyway. (I don't remember there exact names at the moment, but one of them was a Bedroll in MIC.)


Rope Trick - with an appropriate caster level - is also great on an eternal wand, since it's relatively rare to use it more than once or twice a day.
Except that by RAW, you can't adjust the caster level of Eternal Wands. If your DM is willing to work around that restriction, then yes, Rope Trick becomes a pretty decent choice.


Another way to look at it: if you don't think your campaign is going to last for more than, say, twenty to thirty encounters, get the regular wand.
Well, I can't argue with the optimization acumen there. Although some of my characters are kind of paranoid about "running out" of magical equipment, and would probably go with Eternal Wands just for roleplaying's sake. :smallsmile:


I expect that somebody will come by with better information very soon, as I've never had occasion to use an eternal wand. But I see the issue as this:

IF you expect to need the spell most days
AND IF you only expect to need it once or twice each day
THEN you should get an eternal wand of that spell

Modify as needed for whether the spell requires an opposed check or saving throw (Dispel Magic, for example). If there's a chance it will fail, a regular wand is a better choice.
Well, if there's a chance it will fail, there's a good chance it's not a good choice for either kind of Wand. :smalltongue:


I like to Eternal Wand either very circumstancial spells or long-duration low-level buffs. I have a hard time justifying not giving every one of my characters an Eternal Wand of Primal Instinct (Dragon Magic), for instance. +5 to initiative to two characters, all day long, for 10,900 gp? Yes please.
Did not know about that spell. Nice find. Like most Level 3 spells, probably only worth getting in Wand form at very high levels (15+).


Wand Chamber a weapon, and get 2-3 eternal wands of Nerveskitter.

As long as you're holding the weapon, you can cast Nerveskitter before you roll initiative. If you're in a dungeon, or any semi-dangerous environment, you should be holding your weapon :smalltongue:

Swap out the wands as you use them, and you should be covered for most adventuring days!

If you're that worried about initiative, it might be more cost-effective to buy +1 Spiked Armor (or Gauntlet) of Warning.

[Khedrac]

An interesting point on Eternal Wands is that any Arcane caster can use them. This means that an eternal wand of grease (say) can be used by a warmage when a wand of grease cannot.

[danzibr]

Actually, the price comparison depends on the spell level. For higher-level spells, Eternal Wands are actually cheaper. But regardless of the spell level, the difference isn't very big.
Iiiiinteresting. Since I'm focusing on my level 3 Bard I was just looking at level 0 and 1 wands. I made a bad assumptions.

If you're really going to use a combat spell a lot, you should consider buying both kinds of wands, especially if the spell is Level 1 or Level 0 (so the wands are cheap). Use the Eternal Wand for the first two uses each day, use the other Wand for whatever's left over. Efficient compounding.
Good point. My level 7 Bard ought to be able to afford it. Probably for my level 3 Bard I'll stick with regular wands since I'm not sure how long the campaign will last.

[Jeraa]

Eternal Wands are badly designed. They are command activated, are limited to 3rd level spells and lower, and anyone that can cast arcane spells can use them. Thats fine. But using the Item Creation rules, a 2/day command word activated item can be used by everyone, has no limit on the spell level, and is cheaper then an eternal wand.

Command activated, 2/day item
0-level: 360gp
1st level: 720gp
2nd level: 4,320gp
3rd level:10,800gp

Eternal wands all all 100gp more expensive then that, have a spell level limit, and you have to be an arcane caster to use. Plus, creating an Eternal Wand requires both Craft Wand and Craft Wondrous Item. The custom 2/day command word item only requires Craft Wondrous Item.

Even if the DM doesn't allow custom items, WotC should have actually looked at what the existing item creation rules can do before coming up with a new item that is in all ways worse then what the existing creation rules allow.

[eggs]

If you're that worried about initiative, it might be more cost-effective to buy +1 Spiked Armor (or Gauntlet) of Warning.
Both!
Initiative can never be too high.

[Draz74]

Eternal Wands are badly designed.
This may very well be true. But to play devil's advocate:


They are command activated, are limited to 3rd level spells and lower, and anyone that can cast arcane spells can use them. Thats fine. But using the Item Creation rules, a 2/day command word activated item can be used by everyone, has no limit on the spell level, and is cheaper then an eternal wand.

Command activated, 2/day item
0-level: 360gp
1st level: 720gp
2nd level: 4,320gp
3rd level:10,800gp

Eternal wands all all 100gp more expensive then that, have a spell level limit, and you have to be an arcane caster to use.
That last note might be considered an advantage by the arcane casters who make Eternal Wands.

Also, spell trigger items have their own advantages over other command-activated items. Most prominently, according to Rules Compendium they can be used as a swift or immediate action for spells that have swift or immediate casting times. Important difference from command activation!


Plus, creating an Eternal Wand requires both Craft Wand and Craft Wondrous Item. The custom 2/day command word item only requires Craft Wondrous Item.
Where does it say creating an Eternal Wand requires both feats? In MIC, as I remember it, it lists only Craft Wand as a creation prerequisite.


Even if the DM doesn't allow custom items, WotC should have actually looked at what the existing item creation rules guidelines can do before coming up with a new item that is in all some ways worse then what the existing creation rules guidelines allow.
Fixed that for you.

Plus, I think they probably did use the custom item guidelines as a base for creating Eternal Wands, based on the consistency of the +100 gp price difference across all wand levels.


Both!
Initiative can never be too high.
Yes, actually, it can. :smalltongue: If your highest-initiative foe has +10 initiative, then any initiative bonuses beyond +29 are a waste of resources.

That example is hyperbole, but it's still true that initiative bonuses have diminishing marginal returns like anything else. I've had plenty of characters whose initiative was plenty high.

That being said, yes, combining Nerveskitter wands and a Warning weapon is a valid option. Just not one I would use.

[ILM]

If you're that worried about initiative, it might be more cost-effective to buy +1 Spiked Armor (or Gauntlet) of Warning.
The beef I've always had with Warning and Eager enchantments is that the wording specifically states you need to hold or wield the weapon, not just have it on you. I could see the gauntlet working, but the armor spike? Not so much. DM call I guess.

[Jeraa]

Where does it say creating an Eternal Wand requires both feats? In MIC, as I remember it, it lists only Craft Wand as a creation prerequisite.

You remember incorrectly.

Magic Item Compendium, page 160.

Prerequisites: Craft Wand, Craft Wondrous Item, the spell contained in the eternal wand.


Also, spell trigger items have their own advantages over other command-activated items. Most prominently, according to Rules Compendium they can be used as a swift or immediate action for spells that have swift or immediate casting times. Important difference from command activation!

Rules Compendium also says the same thing about Command word items. Besides, Eternal Wands are Command activated items, not Spell Trigger items.

Activating a command item takes the same amount of
time as the casting time of the spell that the item’s power
duplicates.


Fixed that for you.

Plus, I think they probably did use the custom item guidelines as a base for creating Eternal Wands, based on the consistency of the +100 gp price difference across all wand levels.
If they used the creation "guidelines" then Eternal Wands would be cheaper then the custom item, not more expensive. Requiring a specific class to activate lowers the cost by 30%. Requiring a specific type of class (Arcane casters) is probably the same as requiring a specific skill, so a 10% reduction in price.

[Draz74]

You remember incorrectly.

Magic Item Compendium, page 160.
Touche.


Rules Compendium also says the same thing about Command word items.
You learn something new every day ...


Besides, Eternal Wands are Command activated items, not Spell Trigger items.
Source? I never could find RAW in either direction, and assumed that RAI was "spell trigger" ...


If they used the creation "guidelines" then Eternal Wands would be cheaper then the custom item, not more expensive. Requiring a specific class to activate lowers the cost by 30%. Requiring a specific type of class (Arcane casters) is probably the same as requiring a specific skill, so a 10% reduction in price.
I didn't say they followed the guidelines, just that they used them as a base. Otherwise it is very unlikely that they would have been priced consistently at +100 gp.

Evidently when they chose the prices for Eternal Wands, they felt that the custom item guideline prices had been too generous, especially where the restriction-discounts were concerned.

[Jeraa]

Source? I never could find RAW in either direction, and assumed that RAI was "spell trigger" ...

The item itself.

Activation: Standard (command)

Page 219 of the Magic Item Compendium explains the activation methods. (Command) is command word activated. (Spell Trigger) is a separate activation method. So eternal wands are command-word activated, and follow the rules of command-word items.

(Spell Trigger items require the wielder to have that spell on his spell list. Any arcane caster even use an eternal wand, even if they don't have the spell. Therefore, eternal wands can't be spell trigger items.)

[Sudain]

Evidently when they chose the prices for Eternal Wands, they felt that the custom item guideline prices had been too generous, especially where the restriction-discounts were concerned.

Where would I find the restrction discounts information?

[Jeraa]

Where would I find the restrction discounts information?

Dungeon Masters Guide, page 282, at the bottom. Also here (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicItems/creatingMagicItems.htm#otherConsiderations).

[Sudain]

Thank you very much.

[Deophaun]

It should be noted that since it is specified that eternal wands require a standard action to activate, an eternal wand of nerveskitter wouldn't work.

[Onikani]

FWIW -
Eternal Wand of Cure Light Wounds can be used by any arcane caster.

If nothing else, it's worth grabbing one as a backup in case your cleric goes down...

[Doug Lampert]

In another thread I got to asking why UMD is so good, and thanks to the many illuminating responses, I have a better idea. And now I'm looking to buy some wands.

So my question is... which should I buy? I know the eternal wands are more expensive, but them never running out sounds pretty appealing, despite the limitations.

By the way, we're starting at level 3 in one campaign and level 7 in another, going Bard for both of them.

Unless your campaign has downtime, and lots of it, and you have spells you want to cast once or twice a day in downtime, then eternal wands where standard wands will do are a trap.

You need 3-4 adventuring days to level. Closer to 3 actually.

You gain about 30% in wealth each time you level (faster than that at the very low levels).

This comes out to well over 8% increase per adventuring day, compounded, at two castings a day your standard wand will last till your wealth has gone up by roughly 750%, so a standard wand of anything you are casting so rarely that an eternal wand would work is good till the replacement cost is pocket change.

You are paying a bit more now, while you are poor, to be less versatile (limited casting rather than up to 50 times when you need it), and when the "cost" of a charged wand comes due (you run out of charges and need another), you will find that the cost is trivial by that time.

If you want mage armor twice a day, or rope trick once a day, and want them even in downtime, and you expect to have lots of downtime, then get the eternal wand, you don't earn money fast enough in downtime to be able to burn real wand charges, but that's it.

[danzibr]

All of this conversation makes me wonder... Where's the rule on putting a wand in a weapon?

[Deophaun]

Dungeonscape pg 34. It's an equipment option to add to a weapon with an appropriately long handle.

[Jeraa]

It can also be applied to shields. It doesn't even have to be a long handle either - any weapon can have a wand chamber. The picture on page 35 seems to show a wand chamber in a rather short shortsword, or possibly a dagger.

[Taelas]

You can't use a wand of nerveskitter while flat-footed, which is the entire point of the spell.

[deuxhero]

(Paladin) Lesser Restoration are a bit iffy, but it depends on the campaign.

Party composition too. A Barbarian or (non-cheese) Hellfire Warlock in the party change a lot.

[Deophaun]

It doesn't even have to be a long handle either - any weapon can have a wand chamber. The picture on page 35 seems to show a wand chamber in a rather short shortsword, or possibly a dagger.
Check the general description for the weapon modifications on page 33. It must have a handle of at least 6 inches, which isn't much, but it does exclude some things such as a spiked chain. Also, I'd guess a dagger crafted for a small creature wouldn't qualify, either.

[Taelas]

Check the general description for the weapon modifications on page 33. It must have a handle of at least 6 inches, which isn't much, but it does exclude some things such as a spiked chain. Also, I'd guess a dagger crafted for a small creature wouldn't qualify, either.

Spiked chains have handles. (They're the big round things that you, y'know, hold on to.) If they didn't have handles, they would be literally impossible to use. Said handles fit the requirements (6 inch in length; they are more than that in circumference). Nevertheless, spiked chains are specifically called out as not acceptable, so whatever, but it's not an exception that is explained well. If it's because the handle is round, it should say so.

[Chronos]

Quoth Jeraa:
(Spell Trigger items require the wielder to have that spell on his spell list. Any arcane caster even use an eternal wand, even if they don't have the spell. Therefore, eternal wands can't be spell trigger items.)
Then again, all of the beads on a Strand of Prayer Beads are spell trigger items, even though the Bead of Karma doesn't duplicate any spell at all.

And for Rope Trick, another option is to get an eternal wand of Extended Rope Trick.

A couple of other good eternal wands are Explosive Runes and Shrink Item, since you can cast those during downtime and use the results in an adventure later.

[Deophaun]

Spiked chains have handles. (They're the big round things that you, y'know, hold on to.) If they didn't have handles, they would be literally impossible to use.
Or you could just hold onto one of the many non-spiked chains. And I'm not sure how artwork is supposed to be treated rules-wise.

But if you don't like that example, spiked gauntlet.

[Taelas]

Or you could just hold onto one of the many non-spiked chains. And I'm not sure how artwork is supposed to be treated rules-wise.
Even if you ignore the artwork, a spiked chain has a handle by virtue of the fact that it is a weapon that you swing around. You have to hold onto something. That something is a handle, regardless of whether it is a piece of chain or a ring or a sword hilt.


But if you don't like that example, spiked gauntlet.
I would argue that you could put one into a gauntlet (spiked or otherwise) fairly easily, actually; while it doesn't have a handle, you could put it inside the wrist of the gauntlet. Not RAW-legal, perhaps, but I would argue the case with a DM.

I agree that there are weapons which do not allow it, though, just so we don't get caught up in semantics. Slings, for instance, or small throwing weapons like shuriken, or throwing nets.

[Deophaun]

Even if you ignore the artwork, a spiked chain has a handle by virtue of the fact that it is a weapon that you swing around. You have to hold onto something. That something is a handle, regardless of whether it is a piece of chain or a ring or a sword hilt.
Even allowing for such a generous definition, are you saying each chain link is six inches long? Besides, the examples in Dungeonscape are included to clarify which definition of handle the writers meant, which rules out any definition that would fit a spiked chain.

Of course you can get a DM to allow anything. But, you don't need rules for DM fiat.

[Taelas]

Even allowing for such a generous definition, are you saying each chain link is six inches long? Besides, the examples in Dungeonscape are included to clarify which definition of handle the writers meant, which rules out any definition that would fit a spiked chain.
No, no; the chain "handle" obviously wouldn't fit the description of a handle that is 6 inches long. But I really don't see an explanation for why the ring handle wouldn't work (it is more than 6 inches in circumference, I am sure); they just say a spiked chain doesn't count. If it's because the handle is round, all right, but they don't say that.


Of course you can get a DM to allow anything. But, you don't need rules for DM fiat.
Agreed.

[phlidwsn]

I didn't say they followed the guidelines, just that they used them as a base. Otherwise it is very unlikely that they would have been priced consistently at +100 gp.


The +100gp looks to be an artifact of the original source for eternal wands. The ECS where they first appeared had them as dragonshard items. All dragonshard items have +100gp for the cost of attuning the shard to the spell. (ecs265)

[JeminiZero]

You can't use a wand of nerveskitter while flat-footed, which is the entire point of the spell.

Just a note: Errata added a line to the description that states that unlike normal immediate actions, Nerveskitter can be used, even when you are flat-footed.

[ericgrau]

I was surprised to see that eternal wands are only 2/day and yet cost the same as 50 charge wands. I'd expect 20 charge pricing or else 5/day. They look like a horrible deal. Basically you need to ask yourself if you'll use the eternal wand more than 50 times in the near future. Given that 25 encounters is never "near future" I don't see how you could possibly pull it off in combat or even between combats. At high levels I might use it on hour/level buffs cast every day whether there's a fight or not.

I could add examples but no matter how you slice it you end up behind in power compared to the alternative. So even if you save money 5 levels from now the risk of death in the meantime isn't worth it (and you can't repeat it 5 levels from now without overspending again and NEVER coming out ahead). If there's a spell you use less often then try scrolls.

Since nerveskitter is coming up a lot I will mention that eternal wands of nerveskitter are good because nerveskitter is good not because eternal wands are good. Wands (3+ encounters/day) or scrolls (1-2 encounters/day) are better. But at 820 gp you won't notice no matter how wasteful you are; you might even think it's saving money in the long run because you don't feel the debilitation of a high upfront cost. But likewise the savings several levels from now are trivial and again the temporary debilitation outweighs the long term savings.

[Taelas]

Just a note: Errata added a line to the description that states that unlike normal immediate actions, Nerveskitter can be used, even when you are flat-footed.

The spell nerveskitter can be cast while flat-footed; this is part of the spell's description. You cannot activate a wand flat-footed, even if the cast time is an immediate action, as you cannot take immediate actions while flat-footed.

[Doug Lampert]

Quoth Jeraa:
Then again, all of the beads on a Strand of Prayer Beads are spell trigger items, even though the Bead of Karma doesn't duplicate any spell at all.

And for Rope Trick, another option is to get an eternal wand of Extended Rope Trick.

A couple of other good eternal wands are Explosive Runes and Shrink Item, since you can cast those during downtime and use the results in an adventure later.

Good suggestions since they're usable out of combat. Usable out of combat is key to making eternal wands a good deal.


I was surprised to see that eternal wands are only 2/day and yet cost the same as 50 charge wands. I'd expect 20 charge pricing or else 5/day. They look like a horrible deal. Basically you need to ask yourself if you'll use the eternal wand more than 50 times in the near future. Given that 25 encounters is never "near future" I don't see how you could possibly pull it off in combat or even between combats. At high levels I might use it on hour/level buffs cast every day whether there's a fight or not.

I could add examples but no matter how you slice it you end up behind in power compared to the alternative. So even if you save money 5 levels from now the risk of death in the meantime isn't worth it (and you can't repeat it 5 levels from now without overspending again and NEVER coming out ahead). If there's a spell you use less often then try scrolls.

Agreed: I'll give an example from actual play below.

But many players are insanely reluctant to spend consumables, you see the same thing with 4th edition rituals, my players in my 4th edition campaign have well over 1,000,000 GP each in gear, and most are at over 100,000 GP in cash and equivalents.

Yet they treat 100 GP rituals as some sort of horrible cost. They risk DEATH by not bothering with simple divinations, in 4th edition at their level death costs 50,000 GP per character, assuming you avoid TPK and your allies recover the body. I include ransoms in play, their ransoms are higher than their raise dead, and they have had a couple of characters have their bodies looted prior to the body being recovered.

Stupid.

I remember when I was running my first 3.0 campaign way back when it came out, I roll dice openly and let the player's track their own damage and status, the rogue opened a door and was surprised by a multiheaded pyro-hydra, which breathed on him with every head. Roll 9 saves, bad results, roll damage, anounce the total. It's something like 63 after saves.

Rogue's player: I'm dead.
Me: You've got more than 54 HP, you should just be unconcious.
Rogue's player: I still had 5 damage left from the last encounter.
Me: Why? You all have wands of cure light wounds, you all took time to heal.
Rogue's player: Yeah, but if I'd used a wand charge part of the healing might have been wasted.
Me: YOU MORON! This is the third time this exact thing has happened to someone in this group! You people are paying 26,530 GP for true resurects to avoid level loss, how many half wand charges is 26,530 GP worth?!

That's the thing, over HALF the PC deaths in that entire campaign as of that date were specifically and directly because someone had "saved" a wand charge on a CLW, that's 15 GP at worst. And the waste is only based on the overage, had he spent another charge, on average it would have "wasted" anout 3.4 GP in healing capacity.

3.4 GP or 26,530 GP? One of these numbers is bigger than the other. It doesn't matter that death due to being down 5 HP instead of 0 HP is unlikely, it needs to be a less than 0.04% chance for saving the charge to even be worth considering, and with as much as 5 damage left the chance needs to be closer to 0.01%. And given that they were losing someone every 20 or so encounters to this sort of "savings" the actual chance was probably closer to 5% than 0.01%.

You can afford to use 10% or so of your budget on consumables FOREVER, and you will ALWAYS be stronger than the person who refuses to use consumables. Yes, the money is gone forever, but you get more money and your character is still alive and victorious. When you have ~90% of the expected WBL and are using consumables the consumables are effective enough to more than make up for the missing 10%.

It is possible to use so many consumables that it becomes a bad idea, but it usually takes deliberate effort. Consumables and contingent defenses are your insurance policies. Your character is in a dangerous profession. Unless the DM makes sure nothing bad ever happens you should have insurance.

[Malimar]

No, no; the chain "handle" obviously wouldn't fit the description of a handle that is 6 inches long. But I really don't see an explanation for why the ring handle wouldn't work (it is more than 6 inches in circumference, I am sure); they just say a spiked chain doesn't count. If it's because the handle is round, all right, but they don't say that.

Is there some obscure rule, either in D&D or in math, where "length" and "circumference" are synonyms?

[Taelas]

Is there some obscure rule, either in D&D or in math, where "length" and "circumference" are synonyms?

The length of a circle is its circumference. So 'obscure', no. It's plain English.