PDA

View Full Version : Scroll cost savings?



Tyger
2007-06-06, 02:02 PM
I know that I haven't discovered anything new here, but I want to check to make sure that I am correct on something.

Rope Trick scrolls. If you want 10 hours in duration (eight hours rest, one hour to memorize spells and an hour for breakfast or whatever), you have to be 10th level. The cost would thus be:

(2 (spell level) x 10 (caster level) x 25) / 2 for GP or / 25 for XP. So total cost is 250 GP and 20XP.

In the alternative, you could scribe an extended Rope Trick at cast level 5 for the same benefit.

(3 (spell level) x 5 (caster level) x 25) / 2 for GP or / 25 for XP. So total cost is 187.5 GP and 15 XP.

Of course, the same, only on a larger scale would apply to a wand of extended Rope Trick. There you'd save 1875 GP and 150 XP.

Is this correct? I know its not a big deal, but every copper counts in our game! Or is this just too munchkiny? Seems like its reasonable, after all, you have to take the feat to pull it off.

Jasdoif
2007-06-06, 02:18 PM
For a wizard, that's all correct. A sorcerer needs CL 6 to cast a third-level spell, but that's the only difference there.

If you can pick up a metamagic rod of extend, you can use it instead of spending a feat on extend spell (although the scroll/wand will still use the higher spell level). Might be expensive at 3,000gp for a lesser one, but you might prefer having that feat for something else.


Of course, once you have CL 10, you should be able to consistently set aside a second-level spell slot for rope trick with little trouble (and no gold/XP).

Tyger
2007-06-06, 02:20 PM
Oh yeah, no question there. But for now, at level 8, its a nice compromise. And while its not the most optimal build, I'll be keeping my extend feat. Not the most devestating one perhaps, but adds a lot of versatility. Metamagic rods are all well and good, but they are down the road a ways. Plus, you can always lose items. Feats are forever.

Thanks for confirming that though! Nice to know I'm not off my rocker.

Yechezkiel
2007-06-06, 02:20 PM
Your numbers are correct, and you shouldn't feel "munchiny" for using a feat you've learned on this, it's not breaking the spell or anything.

Now Rope Trick on it's own... some feel that's broken by itself, but I digress.


P.S. WTF who uses the word digress?

Citizen Joe
2007-06-06, 02:57 PM
Be careful with bags of holding in there. I'm not sure if there has been an official ruling. Best case scenario would be they simply don't work inside the Rope Trick's extra dimensional space. Worst case, rocks fall, everyone dies.

Since Handy haversack and Bag of Holding are Secret Chest based magic items, and portable hole is Plane shift based, I favor the inaccessible bag status rather than explosion thing.

Jack Mann
2007-06-06, 03:01 PM
Officially, there's no problem with rope tricks and bags of holding. You can take your bag of holding up with you and it'll work just fine. The only time you run into trouble is when you try combining a bag of holding with a portable hole.

Cruiser1
2007-06-06, 04:26 PM
Officially, there's no problem with rope tricks and bags of holding. You can take your bag of holding up with you and it'll work just fine.The issue is that the spell description of Rope Trick (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/ropeTrick.htm) gives the vague but serious warning:

Note: It is hazardous to create an extradimensional space within an existing extradimensional space or to take an extradimensional space into an existing one.

Jasdoif
2007-06-06, 04:42 PM
The issue is that the spell description of Rope Trick (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/ropeTrick.htm) gives the vague but serious warning:

Note: It is hazardous to create an extradimensional space within an existing extradimensional space or to take an extradimensional space into an existing one.That doesn't apply to a bag of holding, because a bag of holding opens into a nondimensional space, not an extradimensional space.

Yechezkiel
2007-06-06, 04:56 PM
That doesn't apply to a bag of holding, because a bag of holding opens into a nondimensional space, not an extradimensional space.

So as long as it's not opened while up a Rope Trick?

Jasdoif
2007-06-06, 05:00 PM
So as long as it's not opened while up a Rope Trick?Doesn't matter if it's opened or not. It's still not an extradimensional space.

Emperor Tippy
2007-06-06, 05:01 PM
The issue is that the spell description of Rope Trick (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/ropeTrick.htm) gives the vague but serious warning:

Note: It is hazardous to create an extradimensional space within an existing extradimensional space or to take an extradimensional space into an existing one.

And it has no mechanical effect at all. It is meaningless.

Shhalahr Windrider
2007-06-06, 05:02 PM
That doesn't apply to a bag of holding, because a bag of holding opens into a nondimensional space, not an extradimensional space.
More to the point, nowhere do the rules specify what makes extradimensional spaces within other extradimensional spaces hazardous. That line is really nothing more than a relic from previous editions helped along by the portable hole/bag of hoding issue. It is possible the 3e rules at one time did include provisions for more general hazards and were cut, but the writers forgot to change the spell.

In any case, I recommend taking Skip Williams's advice (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20051101a) on the issue.

Dausuul
2007-06-06, 05:05 PM
That doesn't apply to a bag of holding, because a bag of holding opens into a nondimensional space, not an extradimensional space.

True by RAW... but I don't think most DMs split hairs quite that fine. And since portable holes are extradimensional spaces, it would be quite reasonable to extend the effect of bringing a bag into a hole to cover bringing one into other extradimensional spaces as well.

Yechezkiel
2007-06-06, 05:10 PM
Ah, the line I read wrong was:

"The bag of holding opens into a nondimensional space"

Jasdoif
2007-06-06, 05:30 PM
More to the point, nowhere do the rules specify what makes extradimensional spaces within other extradimensional spaces hazardous. That line is really nothing more than a relic from previous editions helped along by the portable hole/bag of hoding issue. It is possible the 3e rules at one time did include provisions for more general hazards and were cut, but the writers forgot to change the spell.But that's no fun! :smalltongue: Takes away the oddball possibility of using rope trick to distinguish the nondimensional-space of a bag of holding from the extradimensional-maw of a bag of devouring. I suppose you could still use augury to see if tossing the bag into the rope trick is a bad idea....



True by RAW... but I don't think most DMs split hairs quite that fine....could you explain to me how realizing that things with different names are different things, in the absence of rules to the contrary, is "splitting hairs"?

Counterpower
2007-06-06, 05:35 PM
Honestly, I think I would do something to my players if they started mixing extradimensional spaces. But that's just me. By RAW, nothing serious happens. And I think that's a really neat way to save some money on scrolls.

TSGames
2007-06-06, 05:39 PM
Your numbers are correct, and you shouldn't feel "munchiny" for using a feat you've learned on this, it's not breaking the spell or anything.

Now Rope Trick on it's own... some feel that's broken by itself, but I digress.


P.S. WTF who uses the word digress?
I do.

This makes me wonder if you didn't mean to use the word "disagree."
Here is the definition of the word "digress":
"to deviate or wander away from the main topic or purpose in speaking or writing; depart from the principal line of argument, plot, study, etc. "
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/digress

Anyway, I do not think that the OP is doing anything game-breaking or wrong at all, it seems that the OP is just making efficient use of resources.

Tellah
2007-06-06, 05:42 PM
...could you explain to me how realizing that things with different names are different things, in the absence of rules to the contrary, is "splitting hairs"?

"Extradimensional" means "outside the current dimension." A nondimensional space would necessarily be outside the prime material, and thus extradimensional by default.

Since neither term is precisely defined in game terms, it seems a bit picky to derive a ruling from semantics the game designers glossed over. Hence, I feel it is best practice to take Slim Williams' advice to simply ignore the ominous warning of dangerous, undefined consequences.

Rincewind
2007-06-06, 05:50 PM
Is this correct? I know its not a big deal, but every copper counts in our game! Or is this just too munchkiny? Seems like its reasonable, after all, you have to take the feat to pull it off.

What you have here is the pure and untouched soul of munchkinship. Be my player, I let my wizards scribe their scrolls for free, but I give them a number of scroll they can scribe. "You can scribe six 4 level scrolls before the action starts"... He may use the time to scribe six 4 lvl spell scrolls, or 24 first lvl scrolls. you get the general idea.

And I couldn't care less how many he actually did. :smallsmile: I generally beat them to the inches of their lives, no matter the scrolls. :smallamused: