Refunding xp for a mandatory spell

[Garan]

I want to do a certain adventure with my players that involves one of them casting Permanency on something. This is an integral part of the quest. Should I give the wizard that casts it back the xp (or at least some of it) in light of the fact that I practically forced him to?

[LTwerewolf]

you can provide a macguffin that will provide the xp for the spell for that specific purpose.

[Kelb_Panthera]

Did you design this scenario? If so, you could try to work out some other way to reach the desired goal, or toss in some undead with energy drain to try and bring everybody down a little.

If it's only one adventure in a bigger campaign though, I wouldn't worry about it too much. Xp is a river, he'll catch back up if he falls behind.

A skillfully played wizard would likely be burning xp on casting permanent spells, scribing scrolls, casting spells with xp components, or crafting the occasional magic item anyway.

Unless you're reasonably certain this will be the only time he ever casts permanency, then there's no need to worry about asking him to burn off a resource he's already comfortable burning off. It's not like he's losing a level or anything.

[HunterOfJello]

No.

All things have their price.

[Venger]

I want to do a certain adventure with my players that involves one of them casting Permanency on something. This is an integral part of the quest. Should I give the wizard that casts it back the xp (or at least some of it) in light of the fact that I practically forced him to?

I would say yes, waive the xp cost this time. it's there as a way to discourage you from using permanency all the time. he's not choosing to use it this time and doesn't need to be discouraged by the game. I'm with you on this one.

[RandomLunatic]

It does seems a bit unfair to charge one character and one character only in order to advance the plot. You could try planting a scroll of Permancy somewhere for him to use.

[Ashtagon]

Isn't this what placing scrolls in a conveniently located treasure chest is for?

[Zaq]

Isn't this what placing scrolls in a conveniently located treasure chest is for?

I don't GM anymore, but when I used to GM, I tried doing pretty much just that several times (not Permanency in particular, but placing scrolls or potions of spells that would be very specifically useful later in the quest in the treasure hoards). It never. Ever. Worked.

[Kelb_Panthera]

It does seems a bit unfair to charge one character and one character only in order to advance the plot. You could try planting a scroll of Permancy somewhere for him to use.

It's unfair at a glance, but being a wizard can very quickly become unfair. Between that fact and the fact that we're talking maybe 500xp on a character that can reach the next level by collecting 10,000 and is gaining them at 675 per encounter, assuming he just got permanency, he'll only fall one encounter behind assuming that everyone currently has equal xp. He'll catch that up with the 900 he gets on the very next encounter after the others level up.

He'd be one level behind for one encounter. That doesn't seem all that bad to me.

[Jeff the Green]

Isn't this what placing scrolls in a conveniently located treasure chest is for?

How would one go about scribing a scroll of permanency, since it's XP cost varies?

Edit: More on-topic, I'm in the "XP is a river" crowd. I don't like conveniently placed treasure unless there's a good in-game reason for them. (For example, my players recently received a lycanthrope-bane bow and some alchemical silver arrows and will be coming up against werewolves soon enough. The bow is there because they just cleared zombies out of the former home of a werewolf hunter.) If you really think it'll be a problem, like the player will balk at the prospect of spending XP on a story-related task, allow them to go about obtaining agony/ambrosia/souls that will take the place of XP. It shouldn't be easy, though.

[DoughGuy]

Isn't this what placing scrolls in a conveniently located treasure chest is for?
Those scrolls turn into GP very, very quickly.

I don't think you should refund it. After all, this is a dangerous world they are in. Not everything should be easy for the players. Let this incident remind the wizard and the party they'll have to do things to win, not just what they want. The game is about choice, but this could make it a more real adventure. Maybe I'm taking it too far though xD.

Also, don't underestimate a PC, they're sure to try and think of a way around losing anything lol.

[Kelb_Panthera]

@ Jeff the green: The default scroll of permancy would only require 500xp since at its lowest castable level, it can only be applyed to things with the 500xp cost. There's a relationship between the caster level of permanency, the spell level of the spell to be permenanced and the xp cost associated with the spell.

The minimum caster level for permanency to permanence a spell is 8 plus the level of the spell. So first level spells require CL 9, second level spells require CL 10, etc. This assumes the spell is cast at the spell level that it's available to a sorc/wiz.

The XP cost is the spell level times 500.

So a default scroll of permanency, with minimum CL, is only capable of permenancing 1st level spells and its base-price breakdown is such:

(CL9 X Spell Level 5 X 25 = 1125) + (500xp X 5gp = 2500) = 3625gp total.

By the same token, a scroll capable of permenancing up to 5th level spells would cost:

(CL13 X spell level 5 X 25 = 1625) + (2500xp X 5gp = 12500) = 14,125 total.

That's how one prices permenancy scrolls.

Naturally using the scroll capable of permenancing 5th level spells to permenance enlarge person would be a waste of resources.

[Jack_Simth]

How would one go about scribing a scroll of permanency, since it's XP cost varies?It's mentioned at the end of the Scrolls table as a footnote: "Includes experience point cost up to 2,000 XP." for Permanency. Other scrolls of variable XP-costs (such as Miracle) have similar notes. So they're priced based on how much is put into them at their creation.

[Nightpenguin]

In my opinion, you should refund the xp cost, and explain it to him as him using the xp to cast the spell, but then getting the same amount back as a quest reward.

[demigodus]

Don't refund it. However, make a contingency for in case the players choose not to spend the xp. Then make a contingency for when they try to pull something you did not expect instead.

There is a very good chance your players will do everything possible to avoid paying that cost...

[Tvtyrant]

You could also change the Permanency rules so the spells are suppressed by Dispel, rather than dispelled. Then the player wouldn't lose a heavy investment.