PDA

View Full Version : 3rd Ed Getting Mysteries as spells on other classes



Jowgen
2019-01-09, 04:38 PM
So Shadow Casters suck, but some of their Mysteries are quite neat. While skimming over the class I began to wonder if there might be a way for other classes to access them.


Mysteries function as spells, spell-like abilities, or supernatural abilities, depending on the category of the path and the knowledge of the mystery user [...] When you are capable of casting only apprentice mysteries, you cast them as though they were arcane spells

So mysteries aren't spells (which I believe precludes access via advanced learning), but they do function as arcane spells under certain conditions, which might open up some loopholes.

My first thought on this is the use of Knowstones.


A knowstone provides its bearer with knowledge of the inscribed spell, which he can then use his spell slots to cast normally (as if the inscribed spell were among his known spells). The knowstone’s bearer need not make any conscious decision to use the knowstone apart from deciding to cast the inscribed spell. (This is considered part of the spellcasting action.) Any spontaneous caster can use a knowstone, provided that the spell it includes is on his spell list and he can cast spells of its level. [...] You can create a knowstone for any spell you know.

So a Shadowcaster who casts a given mystery as a spell, can be argued to therefore know it as a spell, meaning they should be able to make a Knowstone of it. As a result, the Mystery is now contained as a Spell within the knowstone. In the absence of a Shadowcaster (e.g. because natural selection caused their extinction), 11th level Warlocks and Midgard Dwarves can make these as well.

Now the issue is that there are no classes that have mysteries on their spell-list (not even shadowcasters). This would render this knowstone utterly pointless, but I believe the UMD serves as a way around this. While the 3.5 description of the skill only mentions Emulating Class features, which arguably wouldn't be sufficient by itself, the more expansive 3e version had the Emulate Spell Ability:


This use of the skill allows you to use a magic item as if you had a particular spell on your class spell list. [...] By using the skill this way, you can use such an item as if you did have the spell on your class spell list. Your effective caster level is your result minus 20. (It's okay to have a caster level of 0.)

Per my understanding, 3e skill uses are still legal in 3.5 if they weren't explicitly replaced/removed, so it should allow us to emulate having the Spell "Mystery-whatever" on our spell-list with a UMD check of 20.

So we now as a result have a mystery as an arcane spell known, and since it comes with a built in spell level, there should be no issue with casting this known spell using one's own classes spell slots. Hence providing a means for mysteries to be part of the magical collective even in a world where Shadowcasters don't exist

So, what are people's thoughts on this?

How would you rate it on the "DM-fiat to RAW-legal" scale, as well as the "Munchkin-cheese to perfectly PO" gradient?

Can you think of any other way to get Mysteries on a non-shadowcaster?

Jowgen
2019-01-10, 06:59 PM
Genuinely surprised there doesn't seem to be more interest in this. Usually people are all about getting nifty stuff onto their spell-lists.

In supplementation of my OP, it probably bears mention that wands, scrolls and potions of mysteries, as well as "other standard magic items" can all be created with mysteries per the regular rules


In addition to new items, mystery users create their own potions, scrolls, staffs, and wands. These items function based on the mystery’s level, and a mystery always functions like a spell when cast by an item, even if the caster level is high enough that a shadowcaster would use it as a supernatural ability. The mystery user must know the mystery or mysteries he wishes to imbue in the item. [...] In all respects, this process follows the standard rules for creating magic items

Also


In addition to potions, scrolls, staffs, and wands, shadow magic-specific variants exist of various magic items that do not receive a full write-up in this section. These items function, and are priced, as indicated in the Dungeon Master’s Guide.

Based on the above, I do in fact believe that creating a Knowstone for a mystery is not only sensible but RAW legal.

flappeercraft
2019-01-10, 07:41 PM
Seems pretty good. Since mysteries work as arcane spells at some points during their progressions maybe an StP Erudite could learn them? That's all I can think of and I'm doubting it would work myself.

ColorBlindNinja
2019-01-10, 07:43 PM
Getting a Wand of Flicker could be good for a Rogue, if you could make such a thing.

Falontani
2019-01-10, 08:14 PM
Artificers can create runestaves with those if custom magic items are game

Feantar
2019-01-11, 12:11 AM
Artificers can create runestaves with those if custom magic items are game

I don't think custom runestaves count under the standard custom magic items limitations (namely that those are guidelines not rules). I think runestaff crafting rules are just that - rules. Otherwise you couldn't have wands, scrolls, potions etc except those explicitly priced in a table.

Might be wrong on this though, haven't read about runestaff crafting in MIC in a long time.

peacenlove
2019-01-11, 02:39 AM
Divine shadowcaster in the adaptation paragraph (makes the shadowcaster a divine caster) and that dragon feat that allows you to customise your domains.

Jowgen
2019-01-13, 04:51 AM
Seems pretty good. Since mysteries work as arcane spells at some points during their progressions maybe an StP Erudite could learn them? That's all I can think of and I'm doubting it would work myself.

Hmmm... not an expert on psionics myself, but at a cursory glance I don't think that'll work as written. Mysteries are still their own thing, even though they function as arcane spells when in items, which is the quirk that seems to lets knowstones work.

Of course a DM could just hand-wave it and say that mysteries are just a category of spells, and that paths are just a type of spell list (like domains). Then it should be fair game.


Getting a Wand of Flicker could be good for a Rogue, if you could make such a thing.

Entirely feasible. Spell-trigger items of mysteries are explicitly allowed. 5625 gp per wand at CL 5, or 10,900 gp for an eternal wand if that's accepted. Nets you immediate action 10 ft teleport for 5 rounds. Quite handy indeed, like a more effective shadow cloak (DotU).


I don't think custom runestaves count under the standard custom magic items limitations (namely that those are guidelines not rules). I think runestaff crafting rules are just that - rules. Otherwise you couldn't have wands, scrolls, potions etc except those explicitly priced in a table.

Might be wrong on this though, haven't read about runestaff crafting in MIC in a long time.

I have checked, and you are correct, Runestaves have their own explicit rules for how to price them.

Using UMD on the runestaff should work the same as for the Knowstone no problem.

At first I thought the language for the creation of runestaves might be a problem in crafting, as it's not as specific as that for knowstones, but then I realised the point is moot.

ToM explicitly states that you can make staves with mysteries as spells in them, and runestaves are staves (same crafting feat and everything), so it is completely legit.



Divine shadowcaster in the adaptation paragraph (makes the shadowcaster a divine caster) and that dragon feat that allows you to customise your domains.

This would be doable, except it still requires access to the shadowcaster spell list, which does not exist.

Troacctid
2019-01-13, 05:00 AM
Alternatively, who needs it on your spell list when you have the Wand Bonding feat? (Or Channel Charge or Master Wand.)

ShurikVch
2019-01-13, 07:57 AM
Maybe, Spellhoarding Dragon may do it via Spellcatching SQ?

Jowgen
2019-01-13, 03:53 PM
Alternatively, who needs it on your spell list when you have the Wand Bonding feat? (Or Channel Charge or Master Wand.)

It might matter in scenarios where you need a better CL out of a mysteries, but you are right, these three do offer a means to effectively get mysteries in practice into ones repertoire as if they were known.


Maybe, Spellhoarding Dragon may do it via Spellcatching SQ?

Bizarrely enough, this works as long as the mystery was cast as a spell. Spellcatching in no way limits the spells acquired to wizard only, so sponteneous arcane spells are a-ok aparently.