PDA

View Full Version : Wand use



Icewalker
2007-10-07, 12:54 AM
I found a rule recently, it was new to me as I am relatively new to 3.5 and I think it doesn't exist in 1st edition, which I have played more of...

Wands cannot be used unless the user has the spell on their spell list, or makes a DC 20 Use Magic Device check. This seems ridiculous. The idea I get from a wand is that people who couldn't otherwise cast the spell can use it. If it's just extra spell use for people who already can, or decided not to learn it but could, it seems like it should just be replaced by scrolls, as they function in a similar manner (except without 50 charges).

I am going to use a house rule that says either wands can be used by anyone, or it is possible to buy special wands that can be used by anyone which are at 2x cost.

Any comments on whether this sounds like a very bad idea?

JackMage666
2007-10-07, 01:06 AM
Kinda makes Use Magic Device less useful. It uses the same rules as Scrolls, as far as I know. I'm not a fan fo giving spells (even low level ones) to everyone, but it's your game.

Velvet Elvis
2007-10-07, 02:04 AM
Where do you get the idea that a wand is supposed to be usable by anyone? Wands are magic items made for and by 'magic-users' as a means of widening their ready options (for both prepared casters who are limited by their daily choices, and spontaneous casters who are usually limited to only a small part of their spell list throughout their career). Also, since using a wand doesn't cause an AoO, it can also be tactically advantageous in tight quarters.

Then there's the aspect of having a wand with a higher caster level than you can muster, which is a benefit in most cases.

And lest we forget, that allowing just anyone to use wands minimizes the unique abilities of the natural casters of those spells. UMD, as mentioned, is also marginalized as an important skill.

I see no practical reason beyond making things easier for a party, to allow just any Joe Fighter to use a wand without any special knowledge. After all, a wizard can't just pick up any sword and be as good as a fighter with it, so why should the reverse be possible?

My opinions are my own, to the joy of all other sentient beings.

Raolin_Fenix
2007-10-07, 02:12 AM
To agree with the above posters, yes, that would make UMD pretty useless. Allowing wand usage for anyone is like allowing scroll usage for anyone.

The purpose of wands is to be able to cart around 50 charges of a spell that you're going to use pretty commonly, instead of wasting spell slots on it every single day. Cure Light Wounds, Knock, that sort of thing. The purpose of wands is not to let every shmuck cast any spell in the book.

I mean, if my Wizard wakes up one ordinary morning with nothing planned, he's not going to waste a spell slot preparing Knock. But boy, will he feel silly when he's blindsided by a quest to obliterate the local kobold warren (as the Weight of the World Rests On His Shoulders), only to be stopped by a sturdy door with a good lock and no Rogue. At least, he'll feel silly until he breaks out his Wand of Knock and opens the door anyway.

Fizban
2007-10-07, 02:12 AM
Well, if you want to fundamentally change wands that way, I'd suggest increasing the price as well to compensate, since the price is balanced assuming that they can only be used as written. A command word activated item with 50 charges is 900*spell level*caster level compared to a spell trigger item with 50 charges at a cost of 750*spell level*caster level. That's a 20% increase in price to allow anyone to use it.

Josh the Aspie
2007-10-07, 02:17 AM
No. Potions and oils are supposed to be usable by anyone. They cost 2x what the scroll does, and only go up to spells of 3rd level to preserve the special abilities of casters.

If you want to give your player a 2x cost item that anyone can use, that affects themselves, or their items, it already exists.

Wands, as they were designed, were only supposed to be usable by casters who otherwise have the potential to learn that spell eventually, as it is in line with the magical schooling, training, and experience that they possess.

AslanCross
2007-10-07, 02:41 AM
Wands are meant to be extra spell storage devices for casters so that they could use those spells in case they haven't prepared those spells in particular. The UMD skill is there for a reason. Rogues, Bards and Warlocks are cool that way.

Josh the Aspie
2007-10-07, 02:44 AM
Wands are meant to be extra spell storage devices for casters so that they could use those spells in case they haven't prepared those spells in particular. The UMD skill is there for a reason. Rogues, Bards and Warlocks are cool that way.

And artificers too.

Icewalker
2007-10-07, 06:21 AM
Makes sense. It feels to me that making one skill not worthwhile isn't anywhere near enough of an impact to discount this, but other points are valid. I knew there were other ways to let non-casters use spells, such as potions and the like, but it just seemed easier to make a +cost wand to do so instead.

Also, I missed the not wasting spell slots use for wands. That makes more sense.

Skjaldbakka
2007-10-07, 06:45 AM
It feels to me that making one skill not worthwhile isn't anywhere near enough of an impact to discount this

I disagree. Marginalizing UMD is the stronger balance issue with your approach, as UMD is a powerful skill, which a relatively small number of classes have access to. Having UMD as a class skill is part of the balance of the class. Spellcasters, on the other hand, are overpowered by a lot, and so the fact that universal wand use cuts into their abilities doesn't hurt game balance on that end at all.

Velvet Elvis
2007-10-07, 11:11 AM
True. UMD at decent levels opens up a monkey barrel full of potential for the classes that have it. It's not just for wands, either. A rogue (etc) with high UMD and access to a sweet array of magic toys is considerably more frightening/capable than one without UMD. It's pretty much why almost anyone that has UMD, maxes it, whenever possible (in my experience, of coz).

Chronos
2007-10-07, 12:04 PM
And if you're comparing to previous editions, in 2nd edition at least (and I think 1st), most wands could be used only by wizards, and there were no divine wands at all. The wand of magic missile was one of the few exceptions, along with a couple of non-spell "wands" which have been turned into rods. And while thieves (rogues) could occasionally use scrolls, it was always unreliable (no matter how high the thief's level), and didn't work with any other sort of item.

Nonah_Me
2007-10-07, 01:48 PM
I agree with most of the posters above: Keep wands as they are.

I have a divergent question but it is associated with wands. I'm at the library and don't have access to my books.

Anyway, my question is this: Can you apply a metamagic feat to a wand or potion? I ask this because the spell level of say, a maximized bullstrength would be higher than 3rd, correct? I tend to play rogues who have a veritible arsenal of wands, so I'd like to know if my wizard freind can make the spells inside said wands better.

MisterSaturnine
2007-10-07, 01:56 PM
Wait, if you have to know the spell to use a wand of it, how do Rogues use wands without dipping into Wizard?

Velvet Elvis
2007-10-07, 02:03 PM
Nonah_Me - As far as I know, you can't apply metamagic to items as they're used. It might be possible, depending on the effect of the metamagic, to do so during creation. I'm sure there's RAW on it, somewhere.

MisterSaturnine - Rogues, etc. use a skill called Use Magic Device, abbrev'd to UMD. It allows a chance to "fake" the normal requirements of various magic items so that they can be used. Check the skill entry in your PHB or the SRD.

MisterSaturnine
2007-10-07, 02:13 PM
Yes, I knew they had UMD, I just misunderstood the discussion. Guess Mark Twain was right--


"It is better to keep your mouth closed and let people think you are a fool than to open it and remove all doubt."

I thought, for some reason, it was being implied that you needed to know the spell to use UMD successfully. Thanks for clearing that up for me and my poor, addled brain.

RTGoodman
2007-10-07, 02:14 PM
Anyway, my question is this: Can you apply a metamagic feat to a wand or potion? I ask this because the spell level of say, a maximized bullstrength would be higher than 3rd, correct? I tend to play rogues who have a veritible arsenal of wands, so I'd like to know if my wizard freind can make the spells inside said wands better.

I'm not sure about crafting wands with metamagic already applied to them (I think you can though), but I know there's a feat called Metamagic Spell Trigger in Complete Mage that lets you expend charges to apply a metamagic feat you know as you use a wand/staff/etc.

Draz74
2007-10-07, 03:11 PM
Differences between Wands and Scrolls:

Wands have 50 charges, Scrolls have 1 (duh ... not enough to make them two items, by itself).

Wands are cheaper (per-charge) because you're buying in bulk.

Wands can be used regardless of whether you're high enough level to cast the spell on them. So a Level 1 Wizard who was fortunate enough to find a Wand of Fireball could use it just fine. (Foolish DM!) More importantly, a 1st-level Ranger or Paladin can use Wands of Cure Light Wounds. For a character to use a Scroll that is too high a level for him, he needs to make a caster level check.

To make the above distinctions (in favor of wands) less abusable, Scrolls come in all levels, while Wands are limited to 4th-level spells or lower.

Scrolls are also easier to make: their Item Creation feat is available at first level (for free if you're a Wizard). This is one reason you'll see more Scrolls than Wands.

KillianHawkeye
2007-10-08, 07:59 AM
Can you apply a metamagic feat to a wand or potion? I ask this because the spell level of say, a maximized bullstrength would be higher than 3rd, correct?

In any case, bull's strength no longer adds a random amount to your Strength score in 3.5, so you don't get any benefit from maximizing it.

Shhalahr Windrider
2007-10-08, 11:33 AM
Anyway, my question is this: Can you apply a metamagic feat to a wand or potion?

Can you use a metamagic feat when creating items?

Yes; calculate the magic item’s price using the new spell
level (as adjusted by the metamagic feat).

A wand of maximized cure light wounds, for example, would cost 21,000 gp (spell level 4 times caster level 7 times 750 gp). You couldn’t make a wand of maximized cure moderate wounds, because that’s a 5th-level spell, which is beyond the spell level limit of a wand.

If you’re not using the spell’s level to calculate the price, remember to estimate the price using the improved potency of the effect for comparison (rather than using the non-metamagic version of the spell).
Thus Sayeth the FAQ!

Nonah_Me
2007-10-08, 12:13 PM
Thus Sayeth the FAQ!


Hotsecks. Thanks a bundle!