Healing Spell as a wizard.

[Yogibear41]

Is their anyway to get a healing spell as an arcane spell as a 6th level character with 4 levels in wizard and 1 in a prestige class, say mage of the arcane order? With the 1st level being this: http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?PHPSESSID=8fudrriusbeifgkrec7a5hr8t4&topic=9557.msg358535#msg358535


I know of the one where you hurt yourself to heal someone else for an equal amount and that is no good. Need something I can use on myself.

Preferably from a non Evo, Ench, or Necro School.

[Craft (Cheese)]

Off the top of my head, PF has Infernal Healing (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic/all-spells/i/infernal-healing) which is a 1st-level spell that gives you fast healing 1 for 1 minute. Not ideal as a way to patch yourself up in combat, but get a wand and you'll get 10 hit points per casting out-of-combat.

I don't know of any similar 3.5 version but it wouldn't surprise me if it exists.

[Yogibear41]

Playing in 3.5 so not sure if that will work or not, also I'm good aligned :smallfrown: IDK why they never made a good version of that spell.

[justiceforall]

Arcane Disciple feat. Choose Pelor. Choose Healing.

[Yogibear41]

You sir just won the game. :smallsmile:

[Yuki Akuma]

Note that you can only prepare spells gained from Arcane Disciple once each. They're like domain spells.

[ahenobarbi]

Note that you can only prepare spells gained from Arcane Disciple once each. They're like domain spells.

Yeah, but now you can use Wand of Cure Light Wounds without UMD.

Generally I think using items to heal is your best bet. Wands of Cure Light Wounds, Healing Belts, ...

[Chronos]

I know of the one where you hurt yourself to heal someone else for an equal amount and that is no good. Need something I can use on myself.
Healing Touch. And it actually only does half the damage to you, so it could still be used to heal yourself, albeit inefficiently.

[Kish]

Playing in 3.5 so not sure if that will work or not, also I'm good aligned :smallfrown: IDK why they never made a good version of that spell.
I would guess, because being an island unto oneself is something they figured only villains would need, with a good-aligned wizard's means of self-healing being "ask the party cleric for a Cure spell."

[Vizzerdrix]

Eternal wand of CLW off the bard list

Craft: Alchemy can make a few (2 I think) different HP restorative items.

If 3rd party is allowed, I remember seeing a spell that made bloody fruits from a slain baddie that healed the eater.

As #1, but on a Drake Helm instead of an eternal wand

Improved Familiar + Extra Familiar 6 times, taking the ant looking things ( I forget their name. formians or some such): 7 of them together can use one of the Cure spells as an SLA.

A vampric weapon and 1 level of chicken infested commoner.

A vampric weapon and a familiar with some form of fast healing.

Get some shapesand. If you can't find a way to to everything with shapesand you aren't trying hard enough.

Wizards get the construct healing line of spells. Become a warforged.

[AgentofOdd]

There's the "find a bard with healing spells that can make scrolls" method, but finding such a rare beast could prove troublesome.

[morkendi]

Don't know pf, but my wizard has done summon monster 1 and then vamperic touch it. Max 10d6 that last 1 hour. Will go over your normal max HP as well.

[Yuki Akuma]

There's the "find a bard with healing spells that can make scrolls" method, but finding such a rare beast could prove troublesome.

What would that accomplish? You can't learn spells from scrolls that aren't on your class spell list.

[AgentofOdd]

What would that accomplish? You can't learn spells from scrolls that aren't on your class spell list.This rule is unfamiliar to me. May I ask where it's from? Far as I know, a wizard can learn any spell as long as it's classified as arcane.

[GreenETC]

This rule is unfamiliar to me. May I ask where it's from? Far as I know, a wizard can learn any spell as long as it's classified as arcane.
Wizards are restricted to casting spells from the Sorcerer/Wizard list. So regardless of if you put a Bard's Cure Light Wounds into your spellbook, you can't prepare it because you can't cast it.

Also OP: Get Healing Belts from the Magic Item Compendium. 750gp, up to 6d8 HP/day, and usable by everyone. Don't go wasting your feats on the Healing domain (http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75882/19871786/A_Players_Guide_to_Healing_(And,_why_you_will_be_J ust_Fine_without_a_Cleric_to_heal)).

[HunterOfJello]

Wizards are restricted to casting spells from the Sorcerer/Wizard list. So regardless of if you put a Bard's Cure Light Wounds into your spellbook, you can't prepare it because you can't cast it.


This is quite true. However, an eternal wand can be used by anyone who can cast arcane spells, so CLW is still a good option on a eternal wand (though nowhere near as good as a Belt of Healing, as you mentioned).

You can also search around in-game to find a low level cleric through roleplaying who is willing to be dragged along for any given quest and heal your party while he's around.

[AgentofOdd]

Wizards are restricted to casting spells from the Sorcerer/Wizard list. So regardless of if you put a Bard's Cure Light Wounds into your spellbook, you can't prepare it because you can't cast it....Yes, Yuki Akuma already said that. My question was, and still is where is that rule from? The rules for learning new spells say nothing about wizards only being able to learn arcane spells from the wizard/sorcerer spell list.

[Karnith]

Wizards are restricted to casting spells from the Sorcerer/Wizard list. So regardless of if you put a Bard's Cure Light Wounds into your spellbook, you can't prepare it because you can't cast it.

...Yes, Yuki Akuma already said that. My question was, and still is where is that rule from? The rules for learning new spells say nothing about wizards only being able to learn arcane spells from the wizard/sorcerer spell list.
Not sure if you're arguing about whether you can put the spell in your spellbook (which, as far as I know, you can) or whether you can cast it (which, as far as I know, you can't), but the Wizard class description (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/classes/sorcererWizard.htm#wizard) would be a good place to start on answering the latter. Per the SRD:

A wizard casts arcane spells which are drawn from the sorcerer/wizard spell list.
Also relevant: (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicOverview/spellDescriptions.htm#level)
The next line of a spell description gives the spell’s level, a number between 0 and 9 that defines the spell’s relative power. This number is preceded by an abbreviation for the class whose members can cast the spell. The Level entry also indicates whether a spell is a domain spell and, if so, what its domain and its level as a domain spell are. A spell’s level affects the DC for any save allowed against the effect.(Emphasis mine)

[AgentofOdd]

Not sure if you're arguing about whether you can put the spell in your spellbook (which, as far as I know, you can) or whether you can cast it (which, as far as I know, you can't)I'm championing the latter. Just being able to write down a spell would be rather useless I'd say.
The Wizard class description (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/classes/sorcererWizard.htm#wizard) would be a good place to start. Per the SRD:

"A wizard casts arcane spells which are drawn from the sorcerer/wizard spell list."Fair enough. I'd argue interpreting that line in such a manner would also mean that wizards/sorcerers can't create unique spells until epic, or if they could create new spells they wouldn't be able to pass it along. Also means that despite being classified as arcane casters, bards utilize a different type of magic compared to their arcane brethren, but YMMV I suppose.
Also relevant: (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicOverview/spellDescriptions.htm#level)(Emphasis mine)That does suggest you're correct. But then the rules on spell learning still contradict this. I think this is a case where the players (and DM) should follow what they feel is right, not the rules definitely saying a certain thing.

[Mnemnosyne]

Fair enough. I'd argue interpreting that line in such a manner would also mean that wizards/sorcerers can't create unique spells until epic, or if they could create new spells they wouldn't be able to pass it along.
Not really; if they create a new spell themselves through research, they get to decide the parameters. Presumably one of those parameters would be making it a Level: Sor/Wiz X spell, therefore putting the newly created spell on the sorcerer/wizard list.

[Kish]

Also means that despite being classified as arcane casters, bards utilizes a different type of magic compared to their arcane brethren, but YMMV I suppose.

The fact that bards have no arcane spell failure chance in light armor doesn't suggest that enough?

I think this is a case where the players (and DM) should follow what they feel is right, not the rules definitely saying a certain thing.
And wizards need boosting and should be able to cast every spell in the game, not just wizard spells?

[AgentofOdd]

The fact that bards have no arcane spell failure chance in light armor doesn't suggest that enough?Considering that bards aren't the only arcane types who're capable of that, I'd say no. Course, this means leaving the SRD, so again, YMMV.
And wizards need boosting and should be able to cast every spell in the game, not just wizard spells?Personally, I'd agree. But heck, if someone else wants to make their character even better, who am I to judge? I wouldn't be able to read this forum if such a thing bothered me.

[GreenETC]

Personally, I'd agree. But heck, if someone else wants to make their character even better, who am I to judge? I wouldn't be able to read this forum if such a thing bothered me.
This leads to inherent problems where there's no point in being anyone other than a Wizard then, since if all Arcane Bard/Trapsmith/Wu Jen/Sorcerer only spells are available to him, why would you want to be any caster who doesn't get everything?

[AgentofOdd]

Not really; if they create a new spell themselves through research, they get to decide the parameters. Presumably one of those parameters would be making it a Level: Sor/Wiz X spell, therefore putting the newly created spell on the sorcerer/wizard list.That sounds ok to me. I was just pointing out that saying a wizard can't learn an arcane spell just because it's not on their default list doesn't make sense.
This leads to inherent problems where there's no point in being anyone other than a Wizard then, since if all Arcane Bard/Trapsmith/Wu Jen/Sorcerer only spells are available to him, why would you want to be any caster who doesn't get everything?The lure of playing different archetypes seems to keep most folks interested in the suboptimal alternatives. I mean, it's a game, not the tax code. :smallsmile:

[Morty]

You do realize that both Cleric and Druids are divine casters, and yet each has spells the other cannot learn.

[AgentofOdd]

You do realize that both Cleric and Druids are divine casters, and yet each has spells the other cannot learn.Since divine casters are given prepackaged spells instead of learning spells, or using spells they instinctively know (which can be written down somehow), I don't think the analogy works.

[Yuki Akuma]

There are also actually spells Wizards can learn and Sorcerers can't, and vice versa.

Just because your magic is very similar to another caster doesn't mean you can cast their spells. See also: Beguiler, Dread Necromancer and Warmage.

Archivist is the only base class with a "learn any Divine spell" clause. Everyone else must stick with their spell list.

And Chameleons are the only class entirely with "put any Arcane spell in your spellbook".


Since divine casters are given prepackaged spells instead of learning spells, or using spells they instinctively know (which can be written down somehow), I don't think the analogy works.

Okay, how about Favoured Soul and Shugenja? Both Divine spellcasters, both learn and cast from a very limited spells-known list like a Sorcerer does, both have to stick to their spell list and can't arbitrarily decide to grab a spell from the other's spell list.

[Kish]

Since divine casters are given prepackaged spells instead of learning spells, or using spells they instinctively know (which can be written down somehow), I don't think the analogy works.
I'm uncertain what you're even arguing for at this point. It's not "RAW lets wizards learn all spells which are ever defined as arcane spells." It's not "It's a good house rule if wizards can learn all spells which are ever defined as arcane spells." It's not "Wizards need a boost." The closest I can come is, "The right of DMs to invoke Rule Zero to make goofy and poorly-balanced rulings should not be abridged." Well, sure; what the DM says goes. If s/he says enough stupid stuff, the players go too.

[AgentofOdd]

There are also actually spells Wizards can learn and Sorcerers can't, and vice versa.This is getting into books that I've no knowledge of, so I'll just have to agree to disagree here pending more experience on my part. On a minor note though, Warmages learn their craft like Wizards.
Okay, how about Favoured Soul and Shugenja? Both Divine spellcasters, both learn and cast from a very limited spells-known list like a Sorcerer does, both have to stick to their spell list and can't arbitrarily decide to grab a spell from the other's spell list.Guess I wasn't too clear. What I meant was divine casters don't have a choice on their spell list. In the end, it depends on the higher power. Arcane casters on the other hand are only limited by their abilities and their imagination.
I'm uncertain what you're even arguing for at this point. It's not "RAW lets wizards learn all spells which are ever defined as arcane spells." It's not "It's a good house rule if wizards can learn all spells which are ever defined as arcane spells." It's not "Wizards need a boost." The closest I can come is, "The right of DMs to invoke Rule Zero to make goofy and poorly-balanced rulings should not be abridged." Well, sure; what the DM says goes. If s/he says enough stupid stuff, the players go too.Your post seems to boil down to, interpreting the rules the way I do is bad. I more or less agreed with you. My stance is, if someone else wants to do it anyways (for whatever reason), the rules don't explicitly forbid them. You think that's dumb, fine. I don't know why you're not chastising all the other threads who do far worse, but meh.

[Slipperychicken]

There's the "find a bard with healing spells that can make scrolls" method, but finding such a rare beast could prove troublesome.

The Bard wouldn't need to make the scroll at all, or even have the ability to do so. He merely needs to contribute a casting of the spell to the scroll's production. I was thinking of other magic items, nevermind.

[Fax Celestis]

That does suggest you're correct. But then the rules on spell learning still contradict this. I think this is a case where the players (and DM) should follow what they feel is right, not the rules definitely saying a certain thing.

Let me just say that in the 13 years that 3.0 has been around, you are the first person I've talked to who has thought this way.

[AgentofOdd]

Let me just say that in the 13 years that 3.0 has been around, you are the first person I've talked to who has thought this way.Considering all the nitpicky debates on interpreting D&D rules one can find, I'd say everyone thinks the way I do.

[Fax Celestis]

Considering all the nitpicky debates on interpreting D&D rules one can find, I'd say everyone thinks the way I do.

I meant that you are the first I've encountered who thinks that wizards can add other classes' arcane spells to their spell list.

[AgentofOdd]

I meant that you are the first I've encountered who thinks that wizards can add other classes' arcane spells to their spell list.Ah. To be precise, my pov is it could be allowed, not it must be allowed. Still, for better or for worse, my arguments have their proponents. This (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=5953521&postcount=13) would be one example. From this site to boot.

[Chronos]

Well, yes, but it also could be allowed for barbarians to learn spells. If you do allow that, though, then you're playing a very different game from the rest of us.

[AgentofOdd]

Well, yes, but it also could be allowed for barbarians to learn spells. If you do allow that, though, then you're playing a very different game from the rest of us.One is explicitly impossible w/o multiclassing, the other is ambiguous. I think folks, have already said almost everything that can be said on this topic, but still... you can do better than that.

[Fax Celestis]

One is explicitly impossible w/o multiclassing, the other is ambiguous. I think folks, have already said almost everything that can be said on this topic, but still... you can do better than that.

It is in the FAQ, for god's sake.


The PH says a wizard can scribe a spell from a spellbook or scroll into her spellbook. Can she scribe a spell from an arcane scroll that isn’t on the wizard’s spell list?
No. A wizard’s spellbook is limited to spells from the wizard class spell list.

Can a wizard prepare and cast arcane spells that are not on her spell list?
To learn a spell, it must appear on your class’s spell list, so a wizard can add only spells from that list to her spellbook.

[AgentofOdd]

Sigh... yes, that was pointed out by Karnith here (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=15937237&postcount=18). It's been discussed and debated. I bowed out of the discussion because multiple sources I wasn't familiar with were being cited and hinted at, and I felt the discussion was getting too convoluted and lawyery for a simple question about having fun with other people. If you want to continue the conversation I ended with Yuki you're welcome to (though I might not respond), but please don't act as if I haven't seen that text argument before.

[Fax Celestis]

Sigh... yes, that was pointed out by Karnith here (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=15937237&postcount=18). It's been discussed and debated. I bowed out of the discussion because multiple sources I wasn't familiar with were being cited and hinted at, and I felt the discussion was getting too convoluted and lawyery for a simple question about having fun with other people. If you want to continue the conversation I ended with Yuki you're welcome to (though I might not respond), but please don't act as if I haven't seen that text before.

What Karnith quoted was the SRD (http://www.d20srd.org/). I am quoting the FAQ (https://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/er/20030221a).

You have been given a broad spectrum of evidence that your reading of what spells a wizard can learn is incorrect. There is no argument here. Wizards cannot learn spells that are not on the wizard spell list without houserule, DM fiat, or possibly the Extra Spell feat (and that feat's wording is very ambiguous and the source of many arguments in itself). If you are suggesting a houserule, that is perfectly within reason. But do not pretend that your suggested houserule is either the "best" way to play the game or RAW.

[AgentofOdd]

Hmm, so no custom spells for the Wizard, or sharing such spells with other folks since such spells can't appear on the initial list (which was my primary issue with such a ruling regardless of source)... Dunno which supersedes the other, the DMG, (which has custom spell rules) or the FAQ, but at this point, the discussion is starting to repeat itself. Think this is a good time for me to leave well enough alone.

[SiuiS]

Hmm, so no custom spells for the Wizard, or sharing such spells with other folks since such spells can't appear on the initial list (which was my primary issue with such a ruling regardless of source)... Dunno which supersedes the other, the DMG, (which has custom spell rules) or the FAQ, but at this point, the discussion is starting to repeat itself. Think this is a good time for me to leave well enough alone.

Doesn't need to be on the initial list, in case of creating completely new spells. The entire spell would come into being at once... including it's appellation to a specific list.

[nedz]

There's nothing to stop a Wizard researching a healing spell, though this does tumble into Rule 0 territory it is something which is allowed by RAW.

I suggest positive energy bolt, or just modify some existing negative energy spell.

[Perseus]

With spell research (DMG?) you could technically make a new wiz/sorcerer spell.

Cure X Wounds
School: Necromancy
Effect: Same things as the cleric spell but comes from the correct school of magic.

[supervillan]

Be a halfling wizard and take substitution levels. They get an "alternative spell" class feature that expressly allows adding a spell not on the wizard spell list to their spellbook. This replaces the two spells normally learned automatically when gaining a wizard level. If you add a spell not on the wizard list, you get it at one level higher than it is normally.

This feature is available at level 3 and at level 12. At level 3 you can get Cure Light Wounds as a second level wizard spell. At level 12 you can get a spell no higher than 5th level: if you choose a cleric cure spell you'll add it as a 6th level wizard spell.

From Dragon magazine number 337, p102.

[Story]

or possibly the Extra Spell feat (and that feat's wording is very ambiguous and the source of many arguments in itself).

Or Arcane Disciple, Wyrm Wizard, Recaster, Rainbow Servant, etc.

[Fax Celestis]

Or Arcane Disciple, Wyrm Wizard, Recaster, Rainbow Servant, etc.

Right. But what use would those class features be if you could just put whatever spell you wanted into your spellbook?

[squera]

When you have lvl 5 spells, you have: Undying vigor of the dragonlords :http://dndtools.eu/spells/dragon-magic--62/undying-vigor-of-the-dragonlords--1055/

which may well be the title of the next album of Dragonforce.

[Chronos]

That's sorcerer-only, though.

[erikun]

This is getting into books that I've no knowledge of, so I'll just have to agree to disagree here pending more experience on my part.
Just a note, but Rary's Mnemonic Enhancer (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/mnemonicEnhancer.htm) and Mordenkainen's Lubrication (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/magesLucubration.htm) are both in the PHB, pages 268 and 256, so examples aren't necessarily that obscure. I think you need to go outside core to find a Sorcerer-only spell, though.