Spells on Rings

[Qc Storm]

I have only just now noticed it may have potential.

Having a permanent spell in a ring is Spell Level x Caster Level x 2000. Like wands, this means level 1 spells are very cheap. But some of them are also very good, if only limited by their temporary effects.

Things like Enlarge Person, Expeditious Retreat, Protection from Evil and Shield. Expeditious Retreat would make a monk cry for only 4000 gold. Protection from evil grants you 2 to AC and saves, as well as immunity to mind-meddling, also for 4000 gold.

Enlarge Person is a boon for many beatsticks, and Shield is useful for anybody, as well as being much cheaper than a shield. All of them also 4000 gold.

Is this legit? Do DMs allow that? Does Protection from Energy Works somehow? (I'm a trapsmith.)

[Jeraa]

As always, you must compare new items to existing items first to determine a price.

An item that grants a constant Shield effect is not 4000gp. Its the same as a +4 shield, so costs 16,000gp. It should cost a little more then that, with the added bonus of defense against Magic Missiles.

The +2 deflection bonus to AC from Protection from Evil is worth 8,000gp. Reduce that by lets say half because it only works against evil creatures, thats 4000gp for that effect alone. The bonus to saves is worth 4,000 (but again, reduced by half because it only works against evil creatures.) That right there is 6,000gp, and its not including the immunity to magical control, or the protection from summoned evil creatures.

[Urpriest]

Similarly, a Ring of Enlarge Person should be at least as expensive as the Ring of Reduce Person, which already exists in Lords of Madness.

[ArcturusV]

I think the math is off? I mean to cast a second level spell as you wanted, you need to be at least level 3, right? So the minimum price for a second level spell isn't (Spell Level: 2) + (Lowering your CL to 1) x 2000. It would be (Spell Level: 2) + (CL: At least 3) x 2000. So your Ring of Protection from Evil would be 10,000.

Which sounds much closer to the prices in general that the others are suggesting which kind of backs up my thought process on how it would work. Or at least how it should work. Or maybe I'm just crazy and you can CL: 1 a spell you shouldn't be able to cast as a CL: 1 mage.

[Qc Storm]

I think the math is off? I mean to cast a second level spell as you wanted, you need to be at least level 3, right? So the minimum price for a second level spell isn't (Spell Level: 2) + (Lowering your CL to 1) x 2000. It would be (Spell Level: 2) + (CL: At least 3) x 2000. So your Ring of Protection from Evil would be 10,000.

Which sounds much closer to the prices in general that the others are suggesting which kind of backs up my thought process on how it would work. Or at least how it should work. Or maybe I'm just crazy and you can CL: 1 a spell you shouldn't be able to cast as a CL: 1 mage.

All of the above spells are level 1.

But the criticism given above makes sense. I'll be sure to use that if my players stumble upon the custom ring rules.

[ArcturusV]

Ah, sorry, losing my mind I guess.

[Nagukuk]

The item creation feats also have a lvl requirement. Which may or may not have a bearing on the CL of the creator.

[ArcturusV]

Yeah, page 171 of the PHB has a section on Caster Level which states that you can voluntarily lower you Caster Level as long as you retain enough of a Caster Level to actually cast the spell.

Interestingly enough I think this section also disqualifies some of the Spell Slot shenanigans I've heard about. Because sure, you could get a 2nd level spell slot at level 1 with some feat. But you can't actually cast a 2nd level spell unless you have a Caster Level of 3, regardless of slot. So a lot of those Early Entry tricks for Mystic Theurge and what not wouldn't work as I normally see them?

Just an interesting side thought.

[Ravenica]

Yeah, page 171 of the PHB has a section on Caster Level which states that you can voluntarily lower you Caster Level as long as you retain enough of a Caster Level to actually cast the spell.

Interestingly enough I think this section also disqualifies some of the Spell Slot shenanigans I've heard about. Because sure, you could get a 2nd level spell slot at level 1 with some feat. But you can't actually cast a 2nd level spell unless you have a Caster Level of 3, regardless of slot. So a lot of those Early Entry tricks for Mystic Theurge and what not wouldn't work as I normally see them?

Just an interesting side thought.

The problem with that reasoning is that nowhere in any book does it tie ability to cast a spell to caster level

it should, it makes sense intuitively, but RAW it is not

[ericgrau]

The standard spell pricing is totally fair for utility such as endure elements that cannot be abused by spamming. Or a continuous (but not at-will) alarm. Heck even a permanent unseen servant. Once you get into stat bumps and infinitely stackable at wills then yeah it falls apart. That includes all 4 of the OP's examples.

[ArcturusV]

Actually it does. The page I quoted says (In an example explaining the rule):

"and she can't cast Fireball with a caster level lower than 5th, (the minimum level required for a wizard to cast Fireball."

So it does seem RAW that you must have a minimal caster level to cast a spell.

[Ravenica]

Actually it does. The page I quoted says (In an example explaining the rule):

"and she can't cast Fireball with a caster level lower than 5th, (the minimum level required for a wizard to cast Fireball."

So it does seem RAW that you must have a minimal caster level to cast a spell.

except that is the only blurb on it anywhere, and thus can only be applied to that instance and even then states that 5th LEVEL (not caster level) is the minimum level a fireball can be cast by a wizard

[ericgrau]

A creator can create an item at a lower caster level than her own, but never lower than the minimum level needed to cast the needed spell


It's near the top of the magic item creation rules...

And the minimum level needed to cast a spell is in each class description, on the spells per day tables.

[Ravenica]

minimum level yes (with exceptions, obviously) but not minimum CASTER level

[ericgrau]

"Caster level" is in the first part of that same sentence. So the item's caster level may not be lower than the class level required to cast that spell.

[Ravenica]

While I agree that is a perfectly reasonable interpretation it isn't RAW.

Caster Level and Level are both defined as separate entities in the system, furthermore if that "were" the case there are SO many shenanigans you can get away with (Orange Prism Ioun stone, oh look I now meet the minimum Caster Level to cast that spell I shouldn't get until next Level)

[ArcturusV]

except that is the only blurb on it anywhere, and thus can only be applied to that instance and even then states that 5th LEVEL (not caster level) is the minimum level a fireball can be cast by a wizard

"with a caster level"

It does specifically say Caster Level. It's in a section on Caster Level in the core rule books. I don't see where there's confusion about it or how it could only be applied in that one instance, or how it doesn't state Caster Level. I dunno. Seems pretty clear to me. If you want to create a magic item, you have to be able to cast the relevant spells the item replicates. To do so you must use at least it's minimum caster level. Minimum caster level is defined as the minimum level you'd need for a member the class you're drawing the spell from to cast that spell, worded that way for the exceptions that come with some spells that might be something like "Sor/Wiz 3, Bard 2" or the like.

[Ravenica]

"with a caster level"

It does specifically say Caster Level. It's in a section on Caster Level in the core rule books. I don't see where there's confusion about it or how it could only be applied in that one instance, or how it doesn't state Caster Level. I dunno. Seems pretty clear to me. If you want to create a magic item, you have to be able to cast the relevant spells the item replicates. To do so you must use at least it's minimum caster level. Minimum caster level is defined as the minimum level you'd need for a member the class you're drawing the spell from to cast that spell, worded that way for the exceptions that come with some spells that might be something like "Sor/Wiz 3, Bard 2" or the like.


A creator can create an item at a lower caster level than her own, but never lower than the minimum level needed to cast the needed spell

I agree completely that I am arguing the semantics of the wording but because of the fact that existing definitions differentiate between level and caster level it is relevant when you are looking for a strict RAW interpretation. It never defines a Minimum Caster Level, it is inferred and suggested but never defined RAW

[RFLS]

It's largely irrelevant; the most common early entry method is the feat Southern Magician which allows you to cast a spell as arcane or divine; getting to 3rd level wizard with Southern Magician means you can cast 2nd level arcane and divine spells. After that, you enter Cleric, and at 5th level you go into MT, because you can cast 2nd level arcane and divine spells and you have an arcane and a divine casting class.

[yougi]

Back to the OP:

A point to keep in mind is that if you want the effect to be continuous, that also raises the price: if not, it only makes you able to cast the spell.


If a continuous item has an effect based on a spell with a duration measured in rounds, multiply the cost by 4. If the duration of the spell is 1 minute/level, multiply the cost by 2, and if the duration is 10 minutes/level, multiply the cost by 1.5. If the spell has a 24-hour duration or greater, divide the cost in half.