PDA

View Full Version : Non-combat healing is not cheap



Belial_the_Leveler
2007-10-24, 06:13 PM
It has been stated, repeatedly, that non-combat healing not coming from spells (usually those of a cleric or druid) is, or should be, cheap usually through the use of cure light wounds wands or similar magic items.

Let's look at a wand of CLW. It costs 750 gp to make and heals an average of 275 points of damage. It is the cheapest form of healing available in core. Let's see how long does a wand of CLW last.

A group of PCs should have 4-5 encounters at their CR per day, resulting in roughly 15 rounds of combat without rest and the last 5 rounds just before rest. In ECL 5, the average noncaster encounter can deal at least 10 damage per round. The average caster encounter can deal at least 20 damage per round-though usually spread over more than 1 PC. So in 15 rounds of combat, nearly 200 points of damage should be dealt and healed. That's more than 2/3 our CLW wand. That means 550 gp cost per day on average. Loot for 4 CR 5 encounters is 4500 gp. So the cost for our CLW for the day is a bit more than 12% the group's loot. That would be, ofcourse, IF the day's loot contained a CLW wand. Much more often than not, they will not. So, the group will have to sell the loot to buy the wand. That results in double the cost in the end so 25% the group's loot. A quarter of the loot would go into healing every day for our ECL 5 group.

A group of ECL 10 PCs needs more healing than that. The average noncaster encounter can deal easily 30 damage per round with the average caster encounter dealing nearly 100 usually spread over the entire group (e.g. a fireball or firebrand or dragon's breath or whatever). That means nearly 900 points of damage because rest is not cutting it for the last 5 rounds before rest-the damage amount is too large. This means three wands of CLW or the equivalent of 4500 gp in loot. Luckily, 4 encounters at CR 10 mean 36.000 gp in loot. That means only 12% of the loot would be spent in CLW so healing is cheaper-or so it would seem.

What many people saying noncombat healing is cheap do not realise is that healing includes poisons, diseases, ability damage, ability drain, curses, negative levels and similar effects. If we try to put into noncombat healing costs the above-even for once per day-prices skyrocket.

In the end, in a running campaign, trying to do all your healing through either items or rest is expensive. It might be as low as 10% of your loot in high levels if you do not encounter serious threats beyond mere HP damage (unlikely) but even 10% of the loot is still a considerable cost, especially considering the time it takes to find merchants to sell the loot, get the gold then find merchants from which to buy those CLW wands en masse. You'd probably be spending considerable time hunting down CLW merchants. After all, most merchants don't have a magic item more than once and you need 3-4 of them per day.

Human Paragon 3
2007-10-24, 06:24 PM
No, non-combat healing is actually free. You have your cleric cast cures on everybody until you're at full health, then rest 8 hours.

Why would anybody spend money on a healing item when you can just do this? Also, I heard there's this nifty healing belt that will do basically the same thing.

Reel On, Love
2007-10-24, 06:26 PM
A Wand of Lesser Vigor heals 11 HP/charge. An Eternal Wand of CLW, for 800-odd GP, casts CLW 2/day; at higher levels a bunch of those are cheaper. And that's disregarding unused spell slots going into healing at the end of the day.

sikyon
2007-10-24, 06:33 PM
No, non-combat healing is actually free. You have your cleric cast cures on everybody until you're at full health, then rest 8 hours.

Why would anybody spend money on a healing item when you can just do this? Also, I heard there's this nifty healing belt that will do basically the same thing.

The idea is that the part doesn't have a cleric or druid.

Say a 4 member wizard party.

On the other hand, a 4 member wizard party can take things of way higher level, so they get a ton of loot, and probably don't get hit much anyways.

Anyhow, the point is that healing for a martial party is expensive.

Edit: Also, how much does a ring of command-word activated cure minor wounds cost?

Crow T. Robot
2007-10-24, 06:39 PM
No, non-combat healing is actually free. You have your cleric cast cures on everybody until you're at full health, then rest 8 hours.


And if a party has no druid or cleric? My current group has a pally and the best he can do is stop people from bleeding out. Other then that it is potions, wands, and scrolls. They accept payment in the form of healing after some jobs. Recently "An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure" has taken hold and they blow their money on higher AC. Which is very expensive as well.

OneWinged4ngel
2007-10-24, 06:41 PM
Belial... your numbers are just wrong. You're setting arbitrary amounts of damage, and for some reason putting casters at higher damage than noncasters (Why?), and giving us things like "ECL 5 deals 10 damage a round" which are just kinda silly. I mean, seriously, a level 1 orc can beat ten average damage per round. And of course, there's always the chance of defenses and alternative modes of attack (for example, when talking about spellcasters doing so much more damage, the reality is that primary casters tend to actually do more controlling and disabling than HP damage). So: How do you expect to move our opinions with seemingly randomly fabricated numbers?

Further, there are plenty of tools besides wands of Cure Light Wounds, including Wands of Faith Healing, Wands of Lesser Vigor, castings of Vigor spells, various sources of regeneration, Healing Belts, Eternal Wands, and so on and so forth. In addition, it is entirely possible for players to be able to attain healing items for less than market price (and common in loot where the DM isn't arbitrarily random and gives the NPCs nonsensical things.) For example, you could have a crafter, or you could have an affiliation with organizations, or you could have a social character who has a way of negotiating lower prices. Heck, you could even have a Rogue with sticky fingers ;)

Furthermore... I have always said that prevention is better than cures, and that's why it's more important for parties (with or without a cleric or druid!) to focus on things OTHER than healing in combat. And of course, this conserves resources better than taking every hit that comes at you, hoping you survive (you WON'T unless you ACTUALLY have a game where CR 5 creatures seriously do only a pitiful ten damage), then healing up after the fact.

Aaaaannnnd on top of all that... even if out of combat healing was taking a QUARTER out of your funds... if you were of the opinion that healing was a necessary party role in and of itself, and it's being covered for only 25% of your party loot (instead of 25% of your PARTY) then that only supports the idea that healing wasn't a necessary party role (since giving up 25% party loot is less of a cost than 25% of your party roster)

Frosty
2007-10-24, 06:57 PM
Buy a Wand of Infinite CLWs for like 1800 or 2k gold. Simple.

KillianHawkeye
2007-10-24, 07:17 PM
Which book are these infinite/eternal wands from?

Reel On, Love
2007-10-24, 07:20 PM
The unlimited item is the fruit of custom item creation rules; a command-word at-will item of Cure Light Wounds is 1 (Spell level) * 1 (caster level) * 1800 (at will command word) gp. But that would never fly in a game.

Eternal Wands are in the Magic Item companion; they're a lot like regular wands, but for arcane spells only; any arcanist can use any Eternal Wand, regardless of his spell list, and they work 2/day rather than having 50 charges.

bignate
2007-10-24, 07:25 PM
The unlimited item is the fruit of custom item creation rules; a command-word at-will item of Cure Light Wounds is 1 (Spell level) * 1 (caster level) * 1800 (at will command word) gp. But that would never fly in a game.

Eternal Wands are in the Magic Item companion; they're a lot like regular wands, but for arcane spells only; any arcanist can use any Eternal Wand, regardless of his spell list, and they work 2/day rather than having 50 charges.

i dont see any problem with allowing the unlimited use items when following the rules. i mean really, even for 1800 gp do you really think unlimited cure light wounds at 1d8+1 per round is broken?

Citizen Joe
2007-10-24, 07:52 PM
I don't think you can make a continuous use item from a spell with no duration (instantaneous).

martyboy74
2007-10-24, 07:58 PM
It's not continuous; it's command word. That means that there're activating it every round.

Machete
2007-10-24, 08:01 PM
A Dragon Shaman(is it?) with Aura of Vigor at level one is fairly cheap to hire and keep around as a hireling.

For everything else you've got potions or scrolls.

Jack_Simth
2007-10-24, 08:04 PM
i dont see any problem with allowing the unlimited use items when following the rules. i mean really, even for 1800 gp do you really think unlimited cure light wounds at 1d8+1 per round is broken?

It shifts class balance, in favor of those who's daily resources are primarily their HP - Fighters & Rogues, and to a lesser extend Barbarians, Paladins, Rangers, and Monks (also similar, non-core classes) - and away from those classes who's daily resources are primarily non-HP based (Wizard, Cleric, Druid, Sorcerer, and to a lesser extent, the Bard), PROVIDED the DM throws a lot of encounters per day at the party.

It also removes the "healer" role from the party outside battle (which may or may not be a good thing) and seriously crimps the danger in endurance runs (the horde of infinite mooks can now be dealt with by the high AC Fighter that takes a round out to heal up every now and again).

bugsysservant
2007-10-24, 08:08 PM
I never understood the advantage of buying an infinite item of CLW. Even though its dirt cheap, by the time you get it, you probably won't be using it in combat. You may as well just go for the infinite command word ring of cure minor wounds, for 900. Sure, it only heals 1 hp, but if you have some time to kill, and after combat you probably do, its much better.

martyboy74
2007-10-24, 08:33 PM
It's about saving buffs. A infinite CLW item heals you 5.5 times faster than an infinite CLM item, for only 900 gold more. If you have a minutes/level buff, that's going to be a major difference. Say your tank got ambushed and took 150 points of damage over the encounter. With an item of CLM, that's 15 minutes. A minute/level buff is probably gone by that point. With a CLW item, that's gone in 28 rounds; your buff's still going strong.

Dausuul
2007-10-24, 08:57 PM
It shifts class balance, in favor of those who's daily resources are primarily their HP - Fighters & Rogues, and to a lesser extend Barbarians, Paladins, Rangers, and Monks (also similar, non-core classes) - and away from those classes who's daily resources are primarily non-HP based (Wizard, Cleric, Druid, Sorcerer, and to a lesser extent, the Bard), PROVIDED the DM throws a lot of encounters per day at the party.

It also removes the "healer" role from the party outside battle (which may or may not be a good thing) and seriously crimps the danger in endurance runs (the horde of infinite mooks can now be dealt with by the high AC Fighter that takes a round out to heal up every now and again).

Actually...

...shifts balance away from primary casters, and toward non-casters?

I might have to introduce something like that if I happen to run another D&D campaign before 4E arrives.

TimeWizard
2007-10-24, 09:37 PM
I seem to remember a ring of constant regeneration at 1 hp/round. Is that something actually priced out? And if not, what is it's price? I'm simply terribly at these kinds of things.

brian c
2007-10-24, 10:11 PM
i dont see any problem with allowing the unlimited use items when following the rules. i mean really, even for 1800 gp do you really think unlimited cure light wounds at 1d8+1 per round is broken?

Um... that means that all of your out-of-combat healing ever only costs 2000 gold. That's a bit overpowered.

OneWinged4ngel
2007-10-24, 10:31 PM
The unlimited item is the fruit of custom item creation rules

There's a mistake here. Those aren't rules, they're guidelines. They are not considered part of the RAW, and any item created with them pretty much amounts to houseruling.

Thus, the unlimited healing item suggested by the above poster fails. However, there ARE RAW unlimited healing tricks that are very cheap (both in the monetary and abusive sense). That's just not one of them :smallwink:

(Seriously, they're not hard to find. At least one is core only, and at least one is just one item in the MiC that's *PROBABLY* a typo. But it's not like WotC ever erratas worth a damn)

Frosty
2007-10-24, 10:36 PM
My GM allows them. The cleric has better things to do than waste CLWs all day long outside of combat. We regularly get 7 encounters a day.

Belial_the_Leveler
2007-10-25, 03:09 AM
Belial... your numbers are just wrong. You're setting arbitrary amounts of damage, and for some reason putting casters at higher damage than noncasters (Why?), and giving us things like "ECL 5 deals 10 damage a round" which are just kinda silly. I mean, seriously, a level 1 orc can beat ten average damage per round. And of course, there's always the chance of defenses and alternative modes of attack (for example, when talking about spellcasters doing so much more damage, the reality is that primary casters tend to actually do more controlling and disabling than HP damage). So: How do you expect to move our opinions with seemingly randomly fabricated numbers?
They are not fabricated. They are the average damage taken from a CR 5 creature attacking in meele, factoring in attack bonus and average PC AC at that level. That does NOT mean a single attack does 10 points of damage. It may do 30 points of damage (2H PA barbarian for example). If, however, only 1 out of 3 attacks hit vs AC then it results in 10 damage per round. And casters indeed do a great deal more damage than noncasters. A fireball that hits the group from 150 ft away does 5d6-an average of 17 points per PC. Factoring in saves and evasion and the possibility that 1 PC may not be in the AoE then adding up the damage, we have a total of 15-20 points of damage per round for ECL 5 fireball. Acid arrow or scorching ray could do more against a single PC with no save-but they don't always hit. As for primary spellcasters doing more control than damage, suuuure. ECL 9, maximised scorching ray. Wizard eats 72 points fire damage, no save, and dies. Enemy wizard takes out his lesser rod of quickening (maxed scorching ray counts as a 2nd level spell) and cleric eats another 72 points of fire damage and dies. Or, empowered fireball, empowered fireball. Eat 30d6 damage for the entire party. Average 105 points of damage, 2 reflex saves DC 20+ for 53 damage. I'm quite sure even the rogue will fail one of the two. And guess what? Double Fortitude save DC 15 or die instantly because they took more than 50 points of damage. Even the fighter will have a fort save of +10 so there's a 2x 25% chance of failure. So, TPK in one round from an encounter equal to their ECL? Yeah, wizards go for control all the time... And just so I can "support my argument" you will note that the caster damage for ECL 10 is 100 spread over the entire party. Assuming a single round of empowered fireballs in an encounter, the total damage it will do will be around 500. Spread over 5 rounds, it surely is 100 per round. So, I counted mr wizard going 1 round nova and doing 4 rounds control. So I am still within your "casters usually go for control" assessment if we use it.


Further, there are plenty of tools besides wands of Cure Light Wounds, including Wands of Faith Healing, Wands of Lesser Vigor, castings of Vigor spells, various sources of regeneration, Healing Belts, Eternal Wands, and so on and so forth. In addition, it is entirely possible for players to be able to attain healing items for less than market price (and common in loot where the DM isn't arbitrarily random and gives the NPCs nonsensical things.) For example, you could have a crafter, or you could have an affiliation with organizations, or you could have a social character who has a way of negotiating lower prices. Heck, you could even have a Rogue with sticky fingers.
For all noncore methods of healing, there's a very big problem: they may not exist. I don't mean not exist in the campaign. I simply mean that the stores won't usually have them. What is the chance of a store having a specific noncore item? 100/number of noncore items. That means less than 0.1% chance most of the time. As for the crafter or organisation, a crafter needs 1 day work for each wand minimum and the party will expend on average more than 1 wand per day. So you need more than 1 crafter. And crafters need to spend their XP to make the items continiously. Consider this: would a party member want to continiously spend XP over making items for healing? Most probably not. The crafter has much fewer opportunities for XP gain than a party member-he'll either eventually run dry (usually in only a few days' worth of healing items) or refuse to continiously craft for you at only market price. For organisations, it is up to the plot. You also need to spend time in the organisation and accept responsibilities as allies of said organisation-something incompatible with many quests.
For loot, not really. The vast majority of enemies don't have UMD or cleric levels so they'll take potions for healing, not wands. Or they'll use their own spell slots if they need to. (wizards: polymorph. anyone else: cure spells)


Furthermore... I have always said that prevention is better than cures, and that's why it's more important for parties (with or without a cleric or druid!) to focus on things OTHER than healing in combat. And of course, this conserves resources better than taking every hit that comes at you, hoping you survive (you WON'T unless you ACTUALLY have a game where CR 5 creatures seriously do only a pitiful ten damage), then healing up after the fact.
I was talking more for after combat. For inside combat, prevention is better than cure if you face casters. If you face noncasters that they do pretty low amounts of damage per round because many attacks miss due to high AC you will surely be better off using a 90 HP heal spell in combat. That's why you need a cleric during combat for more than buffing.


Aaaaannnnd on top of all that... even if out of combat healing was taking a QUARTER out of your funds... if you were of the opinion that healing was a necessary party role in and of itself, and it's being covered for only 25% of your party loot (instead of 25% of your PARTY) then that only supports the idea that healing wasn't a necessary party role (since giving up 25% party loot is less of a cost than 25% of your party roster)
I never said it was a nessecary party role. Only that it was not cheap. Consider this though: a party without a healer over a long campaign will end up with only 75% of the magic items and resources of the party with the healer. In the end that makes quite a difference in defences-and the party without the healer will be needing more healing thus higher and higher costs.

Saph
2007-10-25, 07:21 AM
If you're playing core-only, the most effective way to heal is to combine the two. Have a Cleric, and have a bunch of Wands of CLW as well. The Cleric can heal in battle when necessary, and can convert his unused spell slots into extra healing at the end of the adventuring day. This also breaks up the monotony of rolling 1d8+1 fifty times.

The real benefit of wands of CLW is that they can be used by half the classes in the game, even ones that can't effectively cast CLW. This spreads the healing out among the party, making the individual characters a bit more self-sufficient and stopping them from having to queue up in front of the cleric after every battle.

A more serious problem with relying wholly on wands for healing is that sometimes you DO need to heal up in the midst of combat, and don't have many rounds to do it - extended battles do happen. I've seen several fights where a cleric rapidly getting a character back on their feet made a big difference.

- Saph

Lord Lorac Silvanos
2007-10-25, 07:32 AM
I seem to remember a ring of constant regeneration at 1 hp/round. Is that something actually priced out? And if not, what is it's price? I'm simply terribly at these kinds of things.

It is actually worse than 1 hp/round.


Regeneration: This white gold ring continually allows a living wearer to heal 1 point of damage per level every hour rather than every day. (This ability cannot be aided by the Heal skill.) Nonlethal damage heals at a rate of 1 point of damage per level every 5 minutes. If the wearer loses a limb, an organ, or any other body part while wearing this ring, the ring regenerates it as the spell. In either case, only damage taken while wearing the ring is regenerated.

Strong conjuration; CL 15th; Forge Ring, regenerate; Price 90,000 gp.

Dausuul
2007-10-25, 07:54 AM
As for primary spellcasters doing more control than damage, suuuure. ECL 9, maximised scorching ray. Wizard eats 72 points fire damage, no save, and dies.

First, a level 9 wizard does 48 points of damage with a maximized scorching ray, not 72. Read the spell description (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/scorchingRay.htm). One ray, plus one per four levels above third, means you get one ray at 3-6, two rays at 7-10, and three rays from 11 onward.

Second, there are two ranged touch attacks involved; it's not a guaranteed hit. A 9th-level wizard has BAB +4 and maybe a 16 Dex with items; that's a +7 bonus to hit, against the PC wizard whose touch AC might be, let's say 14 (+3 from Dex and +1 from a ring of protection or similar item). That means a 70% chance to hit with each ray.

A 9th-level PC wizard is likely to have at least a 12 Constitution, for an average of 33 hit points. So both of those rays have to hit in order to take the wizard down. At a 70% chance to hit, that's a 49% chance to take down one PC.

Compare this to, say, dominate person on the party fighter. A 9th-level wizard ought to have at least a 20 Intelligence with items factored in, which means a save DC of 20. The fighter has a base Will save of +3, probably no more than a 12 Wisdom, and maybe a +3 cloak of resistance, for a total Will save of +7. So there's a 60% chance to both eliminate one PC and gain an ally. Much better deal.


Enemy wizard takes out his lesser rod of quickening (maxed scorching ray counts as a 2nd level spell) and cleric eats another 72 points of fire damage and dies.

Where is he getting this lesser rod of quickening? It's 35K for a lesser rod. A 9th-level PC only has 36K wealth by level, and NPCs have considerably less, even if we accept your rather dubious claim that a Maximized spell's effective level is not increased for purposes of the rod (which is a cheese tactic if I ever saw one; if you're going to use stuff like that, I'll answer with polymorph).

Mistakes like these do not inspire confidence in the rest of your numbers.

Starbuck_II
2007-10-25, 10:14 AM
Where is he getting this lesser rod of quickening? It's 35K for a lesser rod. A 9th-level PC only has 36K wealth by level, and NPCs have considerably less, even if we accept your rather dubious claim that a Maximized spell's effective level is not increased for purposes of the rod (which is a cheese tactic if I ever saw one; if you're going to use stuff like that, I'll answer with polymorph).

Mistakes like these do not inspire confidence in the rest of your numbers.

Crafted it maybe? That reduces price to 1/2.

Frosty
2007-10-25, 10:34 AM
Yeah. When determining whether a metamagic rod works, you use the BASE level of the spell, not the modified metamagic level. It works, thank god.

Yakk
2007-10-25, 11:30 AM
L 9 Max ray: 24 fire damage x2, touch attack, takes a L 5 slot. Range is 45 feet.

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/treasure.htm
EL 9 encounter: 4,500 gp
3x that might be valid (concentrating treasure from 3 encounters in 1), for 13500 gp in total budget for the gear of the L 9 wizard.

To reach 35K by that standard, you need a EL 13 encounter and 2 other EL 13 encounters that have no treasure to "fund" it.

And an encounter against casters is either going to end with a TPK or the caster dead very quickly -- the caster can cast "save or die" and "dodge or die" spells relatively fast.

In-combat healing can be useful -- but when your choice is "heal the wizard from near death" or "kill the enemy wizard"...

The L 9 wizard with 14 con has an average of 42 HP. A simple +2 stat item costs him 4000 gp, about 1/3 of his budget.

The NPC starts out with the elite array (15 int, 14 dex, 13 con, 12 wis, 10 cha, 8 str to be min-max about it). Dump the stat ups into int (or if you want to be really tweaky, int and con). So only +8 to hit with rays, base spell CR of 13+level.

Maybe some weapon focus (ray) for a +9 to hit.

Saves are:
+7 will
+5 fort
+5 reflex

plus any magic boosts. PCs of that level will have a base CR of 15+spell level: so about 2/3 of spells on the wizard will fail the save (so long as they avoid will). Two d6-per-level spells hitting the wizard kill him -- or one save-or-die/suck spell (or no-save and just suck, like black tentacles -- wizard is not reduced to standard-action no-somantic spells and must make 2 concentration rolls per spell cast).

Remember: unless this is a "boss" encounter, the PCs will have the edge. If the NPC can kill a PC in a single round half of the time, the PCs as a whole will be able to kill the NPC reliably in a single round, or you messed up the CR.

Belial_the_Leveler
2007-10-26, 02:58 AM
The wizard in question is obviously getting a +1 to CL for fire spells and another +1 to CL for 1 spell per spell level from feats, resulting in CL 11 for his scorching ray. The lesser rod of quickening is crafted and personalised (specific class, specific skill, specific race) so not only it is within the wealth allotment for said NPC but also it can't be used by the PCs if they loot it-so the DM does not have to worry about exceeding wealth per encounter tables.

It seems PPL should not talk about mistaken numbers before they ask for details.

kamikasei
2007-10-26, 04:57 AM
The wizard in question is obviously getting a +1 to CL for fire spells and another +1 to CL for 1 spell per spell level from feats, resulting in CL 11 for his scorching ray. The lesser rod of quickening is crafted and personalised (specific class, specific skill, specific race) so not only it is within the wealth allotment for said NPC but also it can't be used by the PCs if they loot it-so the DM does not have to worry about exceeding wealth per encounter tables.

This is what you consider "the average caster encounter"?

mostlyharmful
2007-10-26, 05:11 AM
This is what you consider "the average caster encounter"?

Sounds a lot like my first DM, looooaaads of magical junk that "oh no you can't use this, you aren't a two headed Kuo-toa with twenty ranks in perform:kazoo" grumble grumble grumble

Kioran
2007-10-26, 05:13 AM
This is what you consider "the average caster encounter"?

It´s what I´d sic on my players, repeatedly, if they resorted to Grey-elfing + batman tactics, actually playing twinky McBlowhard. If they play a nice little game of Mim-maxing, I´ll join, and we´ll be a happy family.
Though you have a point - that´s hardly a normal encounter.

Dausuul
2007-10-26, 06:51 AM
It´s what I´d sic on my players, repeatedly, if they resorted to Grey-elfing + batman tactics, actually playing twinky McBlowhard. If they play a nice little game of Mim-maxing, I´ll join, and we´ll be a happy family.
Though you have a point - that´s hardly a normal encounter.

When were we discussing Batman wizards? I thought we were talking about the cost of wand-based healing.

Yakk
2007-10-26, 10:43 AM
The wizard in question is obviously getting a +1 to CL for fire spells and another +1 to CL for 1 spell per spell level from feats, resulting in CL 11 for his scorching ray. The lesser rod of quickening is crafted and personalised (specific class, specific skill, specific race) so not only it is within the wealth allotment for said NPC but also it can't be used by the PCs if they loot it-so the DM does not have to worry about exceeding wealth per encounter tables.

It seems PPL should not talk about mistaken numbers before they ask for details.

And thus generating an encounter that is about ECL 10 or 11: giving extra and tweaked-up resources to a bad guy, especially little ones like "he acts twice as quickly", makes bad guys tougher than RAW, you know.

Note that the rod of "I'm really cheap and I make my bad guy kick ass" is about as standard as the "ring of infinite cure light wounds", which reduces all non-combat healing to a single fixed cost. All custom magic item costs are guidelines.

On top of that, even with all of your assumptions, you still end up with only a relatively small fraction of your gold going to healing. Remember, CLW is an expensive solution: you can halve your costs using the alternative.

brian c
2007-10-26, 11:29 AM
When were we discussing Batman wizards? I thought we were talking about the cost of wand-based healing.

The Godwin's law of GITP: Every discussion mentions Batman eventually.

hamstard4ever
2007-10-26, 11:37 AM
I never said it was a nessecary party role. Only that it was not cheap. Consider this though: a party without a healer over a long campaign will end up with only 75% of the magic items and resources of the party with the healer. In the end that makes quite a difference in defences-and the party without the healer will be needing more healing thus higher and higher costs.

Combat healing is not cheap either.

200 points of healing a day for a 5th level party? Let's say you have a 5th level cleric, 20 WIS, with the Healing domain and Augmented Healing feat can cast 3 cure serious wounds (3d8+11 x 3 = 73.5 HP on average), 4 cure moderate wounds (2d8+9 x 4 = 72 HP), and 6 cure light wounds (1d8+7 x 6 = 69 HP). That adds up to about 215 points of healing.

So. A cleric who invests their character build options to boost healing can meet the HP healing needs of a level 5 party (according to you, and not including restoration spells or any of the other types of healing they'll regularly need), so long as they cast no more than one non-healing spell tops and use every single one of their remaining spell slots (including domain slots, of course) for cure spells. According to your numbers you are devoting one-quarter of your party contributing practically nothing except healing, just to save one-quarter on your expenses.

Of course, logically if the party with the cleric doing nothing but healing is taking 200 HP/day, then a party without a cleric, or with a cleric who spends most of their spell slots on useful battle spells, is going to end battles more quickly and take less HP damage.

Really, gimme the wands any day.

Yakk
2007-10-26, 11:44 AM
Of course, logically if the party with the cleric doing nothing but healing is taking 200 HP/day, then a party without a cleric, or with a cleric who spends most of their spell slots on useful battle spells, is going to end battles more quickly and take less HP damage.

Yep -- using a more efficient healing source, you can get the costs down to 12.5% of the group's treasure, or half a single player's group share to heal up all of the damage done. In comparison to the entire feat and spell resources of a single character, this both seems more efficient and more fun: the cleric only has to consume his resources during the combats for fast "must" healing, and only use "excess" spells to heal up when they are in a safe spot to camp for the night (thus saving a bit of cash).

Draz74
2007-10-26, 12:26 PM
Crafted it maybe? That reduces price to 1/2.

Metamagic Rods have a CL of 17. I think that means you can't craft them until you have a Caster Level of 17 too.

John Campbell
2007-10-26, 12:35 PM
Compare this to, say, dominate person on the party fighter. A 9th-level wizard ought to have at least a 20 Intelligence with items factored in, which means a save DC of 20. The fighter has a base Will save of +3, probably no more than a 12 Wisdom, and maybe a +3 cloak of resistance, for a total Will save of +7. So there's a 60% chance to both eliminate one PC and gain an ally. Much better deal.

Protection from evil is a wonderful, wonderful spell. Its nominal bonuses are pretty redundant once you get even into low midlevels, but minutes-per-level no-roll-required suppression of any mind control effect? From a 1st-level spell? Yes please!

And magic circle bumps it up to ten minutes per level, and area effect.

Lord Lorac Silvanos
2007-10-26, 12:39 PM
Metamagic Rods have a CL of 17. I think that means you can't craft them until you have a Caster Level of 17 too.

No, that is just the caster level of normal Rod. A specific caster level is only a requirement if it is mentioned specifically under prerequisites.

Arceliar
2007-10-26, 02:14 PM
If the DM allows it, craft a wonderous item or rod or other item that lets you use cure (minor or light) wounds at will.

Following the suggested guidelines for Creating Magic Items (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicItems/creatingMagicItems.htm), if it's use activated it's 1000 X (caster level) for minor wounds and 2000 X (caster level) for light wounds. Use the minimum caster level possible for the item type in question (3rd for a wondrous item, 9th for rod etc).

If it were a wondrous item, with cure minor wounds, it'd only cost 3000 GP. It'd also heal incredibly slow compared to a 6000 GP light-wound counterpart, but yeah...

Using non-core material the various Vigor spells from Complete Divine would work better.

Dausuul
2007-10-26, 04:15 PM
If the DM allows it, craft a wonderous item or rod or other item that lets you use cure (minor or light) wounds at will.

*shrug* If your DM allows it, play a troll, gestalt your racial Hit Dice with a PC class, and buy off your level adjustment.

Starbuck_II
2007-10-26, 04:20 PM
If the DM allows it, craft a wonderous item or rod or other item that lets you use cure (minor or light) wounds at will.

Following the suggested guidelines for Creating Magic Items (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicItems/creatingMagicItems.htm), if it's use activated it's 1000 X (caster level) for minor wounds and 2000 X (caster level) for light wounds. Use the minimum caster level possible for the item type in question (3rd for a wondrous item, 9th for rod etc).

If it were a wondrous item, with cure minor wounds, it'd only cost 3000 GP. It'd also heal incredibly slow compared to a 6000 GP light-wound counterpart, but yeah...

Using non-core material the various Vigor spells from Complete Divine would work better.

Nope. The guidelines have a sperate limit for at will/infinite. You count as 100 charges for cost (yes, this means it costs more!). Peeple keep forgetting this rule.

Jack_Simth
2007-10-26, 09:31 PM
Actually...

...shifts balance away from primary casters, and toward non-casters?

I might have to introduce something like that if I happen to run another D&D campaign before 4E arrives.
Only if you enforce lots of encounters per day, though, such that a caster character (as opposed to a character who can cast spells - I'll get to that) runs out of their favorite resource. This is an important aspect. In order for the infinite healing stick to have that effect, there has to be a lot of CR appropriate encounters per day.

Some styles of casters aren't overly crimped by it, though. A caster who uses spells directly offensively will run out of the top tier or two after about 3-5 serious encounters, and will be running rather dry after about 5-7. On the 8th or 10th encounter of the day, the character that's a caster first is sidelined (or burning wealth). The character that casts spells in support of a more melee role, on the other hand (combat cleric, many druid builds) making use of long-duration buffs to support a melee build, is still rather strong... but things like Divine Favor, Divine Power, and Righteous Might are out of those builds after a few encounters (well, barring such things as Persistent Spell) so they're still not generally going to make the Fighter cry. The caster who zaps away with spells that only affect a single encounter runs dry pretty fast; the caster who zaps away with spells that last all day isn't affected much (unless you include dispel effects...).

Ka-ther Fangfoot
2007-10-26, 11:15 PM
Nope. The guidelines have a sperate limit for at will/infinite. You count as 100 charges for cost (yes, this means it costs more!). Peeple keep forgetting this rule.

Actually that rule is just for determining the effects of material components and XP costs when creating a magic item that mimics a spell. However, you are right that an unlimited use item will cost more than just the spell level X caster level X 1800 GP that people throw around. The very table in question gives a clear directive on how to determine this cost, and some examination of RAW magic items shows them to be very close to the formula. Under the "special" section of the table it says that for an item with a per day usage, as opposed to a flat number of charges, you divide the item cost by five divided by the number of charges per day. So what you end up with is this equation: Spell level X Caster Level X 360 GP X Number of Uses Per Day. Let us use this formula to determine how much it would cost to heal 200 points of damage per day with CMW and CLW. With CMW you have 1/2 X 1 X 360 X 200, which ends up being 36,000 for a ring or other body-slot using item. Double that if it is a rod. Now, CLW will heal 1d8+1 at the default caster level of 1st, so it averages 4.5+1 or 5.5 points of damage per use. From this we find that it needs 200/5.5 or about 37 uses. (rounding up so that we get all 200 points of damage) Now we apply the formula and have 1 X 1 X 360 GP X 37, or 13,320 GP for a permenant source of healing, albeit only for 200 points per day.

BardicDuelist
2007-10-27, 12:15 AM
Honestly, I would just hire a Healer. You know, the usless PC class from the miniature's handbook? It actually makes one of the best hirelings for most partys.

hamstard4ever
2007-10-27, 12:42 AM
The suggested guideline for unlimited use IS 1800 x spell level x caster level, although the items in the DMG vary on this by about 50% to 200% (on the low end more often than not, but that's mostly because there are relatively few magic items with really useful at-will abilities). Some are exact, though.

The guideline you cite is listed in the "special" area for a reason; it describes the discount for pricing an item with 1 to 4 uses per day, in terms of a fraction of the cost for an unlimited use item. A 1/day item costs 1/5 as much as an unlimited use item, 2/day costs 2/5, etc. The table assumes that if you're making an item with 5 or more uses per day you might as well give it unlimited uses--which is also an indicator that as a DM you should think twice before letting a PC make an unlimited-use item of a non-trivial spell that they're going to be using 5 or more times per day. I suspect this part of the pricing guidelines was written under the assumption that you're talking about a spell ability which will come into play about once per combat, or once per between-combat exploration/interaction. At will magic items with more spamming potential should have their costs revised upwards.

Reel On, Love
2007-10-27, 12:49 AM
The wizard in question is obviously getting a +1 to CL for fire spells and another +1 to CL for 1 spell per spell level from feats, resulting in CL 11 for his scorching ray. The lesser rod of quickening is crafted and personalised (specific class, specific skill, specific race) so not only it is within the wealth allotment for said NPC but also it can't be used by the PCs if they loot it-so the DM does not have to worry about exceeding wealth per encounter tables.

It seems PPL should not talk about mistaken numbers before they ask for details.

Oh, come on. Not only is that not an average caster, but "triple-personalized and crafted rod of quicken" is absolute BS. Do that and your party will want to triple-personalize-craft all their gear, getting equipment way in excess of their level.

Ka-ther Fangfoot
2007-10-27, 06:27 PM
The suggested guideline for unlimited use IS 1800 x spell level x caster level, although the items in the DMG vary on this by about 50% to 200% (on the low end more often than not, but that's mostly because there are relatively few magic items with really useful at-will abilities). Some are exact, though.

The guideline you cite is listed in the "special" area for a reason; it describes the discount for pricing an item with 1 to 4 uses per day, in terms of a fraction of the cost for an unlimited use item. A 1/day item costs 1/5 as much as an unlimited use item, 2/day costs 2/5, etc. The table assumes that if you're making an item with 5 or more uses per day you might as well give it unlimited uses--which is also an indicator that as a DM you should think twice before letting a PC make an unlimited-use item of a non-trivial spell that they're going to be using 5 or more times per day. I suspect this part of the pricing guidelines was written under the assumption that you're talking about a spell ability which will come into play about once per combat, or once per between-combat exploration/interaction. At will magic items with more spamming potential should have their costs revised upwards.

The table does not say that the number of uses has to be less then five. For continuous or suchlike spell effects, it does, however, give defined multipliers for the cost based upon the duration of the spell. What it does not give is a specific and clear explanation of how to handle something that can create an instantaneous effect at will. The logical way to handle this is to assume that each at will use of an instantaneous effect is just like a normal use, and so can be defined by a number of uses per day. For most spells, there is, as you say, a well-grounded assumption that they will only be used a few times per day; however some spells are very useful to use many times. The formula I gave gives the upward revision for spamming ability you mention automatically and in a RAW defined way.

EDIT: Please tell me one magic item in the DMG or SRD that has an instantaneous duration effect that can be used at will.

hamstard4ever
2007-10-27, 09:12 PM
I don't know if there are any with truly instantaneous effects, no. But there are non-continuous command activated magic items which seem to largely be based on the spell level x caster level x 1800 formula without regards to duration modifiers (which are for continuous items, not command-activated) or charge/day pricing (which are for, y'know, items with charges/day). Look under rings. Ring of meld into stone and ring of blink conform to CL X SL X 1800 exactly (well, actually blink conforms to CL 5 x SL 3, even though it has a listed CL of 7). Ring of animal friendship is double the CL X SL X 1800 value. Ring of telekinesis is actually a slight discount over the CL X SL X 1800 value (75k vs. 81k), and actually telekinesis does have instantaneous uses. As far as wondrous items, most of them use modified versions of spells or have other special stipulations, but hand of the mage casts plain mage hand on command for 900 gp, half the CL X SL X 1800 value (it's got a CL of 2).

Belial_the_Leveler
2007-10-28, 12:52 AM
Yeah, and if you want an item of CLW at will, the enemy can have an item of charm person at will. In less than an hour, anyone with such an item can charm several hundred people and send them all against the party.

Most spells should NOT be spammable at will. If you look at eternal wands that have 2/day uses instead of 50 charges, they cost the same as a wand with 50 charges-because spamming spells without resource expenditure is VERY powerful.

Yakk
2007-10-28, 12:37 PM
D&D is not a war game between the party and the DM.

Sure, a wand of charm person on an opponent could result in the single opponent producing an army of charmed slaves and throwing them at the party.

But in D&D, if the DM wants the bad guy to have an army of charmed slaves, it just happens, and you generate a CR/ECL/etc based on the actual challenges faced by the party, not based on what resources you used to build it. Saying "wand of unlimited charm person" doesn't add to the challenge, and just causes problems on the back-end.

The problem with the "ultra-tweaked wizard with ultra-tweaked gear" is both that it is a challenge greater than it would be if it wasn't ultra-tweaked, and that the item used is pretty cheesy.

The problem I have with out-of-combat healing is that it isn't all that fun burning your daily resources in an out-of-combat context. As it happens, under raw, you can heal yourself up for a relatively small fraction of the game's treasure, thus removing that part of the game. I mourn the fact that the result is that HP damage that doesn't kill you is pretty meaningless -- however, that has been true in D&D for a while. The ultra-optimized healer noted demonstrates that a healer has far more HP under her belt than any tank has in their HP pool.

I've tried a few ways to fix this up.
http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=61004
is my latest attempt -- some damage to HP pools actually takes resources and time to repair. Healing in-combat is useful. Healers speed up out-of-combat recovery, but they don't do it by using lots of in-combat resources.

This means a group can go through a series of time-pressured encounters and both the spell-casters and the front-line melee will watch as their not-easy-to-replace resources dwindle. And it means the HP pool of the heavy melee characters is a serious resource for the group.

Which means an attacker who does damage that doesn't endanger instant death can be a challenge that causes worry and concern. Note that the tweaked-up NPC wizard build in this thread has that problem: it is an instant-death via HP-damage build. Fights consisting of instant-death on the first round of combat are less fun than fights consisting of challenges, responses and threats.

hamstard4ever
2007-10-28, 12:59 PM
Most spells should NOT be spammable at will. If you look at eternal wands that have 2/day uses instead of 50 charges, they cost the same as a wand with 50 charges-because spamming spells without resource expenditure is VERY powerful.

Your Honor, I would like to introduce Exhibit A, The Warlock.

The defense rests.

kamikasei
2007-10-28, 05:47 PM
Your Honor, I would like to introduce Exhibit A, The Warlock.

The defense rests.

The warlock doesn't have access to every spell ever, which magic items in principle do. If a warlock could choose as many invocations from the lists of all arcane and divine spells, I don't imagine anyone here would argue that to be less broken than they're saying magic items are.

Jack_Simth
2007-10-28, 06:11 PM
EDIT: Please tell me one magic item in the DMG or SRD that has an instantaneous duration effect that can be used at will.
Why only one?
Ring of Telekinesis (violent thrust is Instant).
Amulet of the Planes
Cubic Gate (press one side twice in quick succession - instantaneous travel effect)
Decanter of Endless Water (Create Water, essentially)
Robe of Stars (travel to the astral plane)
Well of Many Worlds (Plane Shift type effect - not controlled, though)

There's also a lot of effects that have durations that are useable at will - the Hand of the Mage, for instance, or the Eyes of Doom.


The wizard in question is obviously getting a +1 to CL for fire spells and another +1 to CL for 1 spell per spell level from feats, resulting in CL 11 for his scorching ray. The lesser rod of quickening is crafted and personalised (specific class, specific skill, specific race) so not only it is within the wealth allotment for said NPC but also it can't be used by the PCs if they loot it-so the DM does not have to worry about exceeding wealth per encounter tables.
Use Magic Device. Achievable by the Wizard or Cleric by way of the Loremaster PrC.

Oh, we can make items with those kinds of limits? Cool! I'm a dwarf Wizard-8, of course I want the Headband of Intellect I craft to require 11 ranks in Spellcraft (-10%), class levels in Wizard (-30%) and the Dwarf race (-30%) to get the thing at 30% of market ... and as I'll be crafting it myself, I get an aditional break; that +6 Headband of Intellect costs me ... what, 5,400 gp and 432 xp? Win! I'll of course do something similar for the Cleric (Peripat of Wisdom - requires levels in Cleric, the race our Cleric happens to be, and some skill or other the Cleric has - Knoweledge(Religion) should fit...), the Rogue (Gauntlets of Dexterity), and the Fighter (Amulet of Health)... and why limit it to one item each? Really, we should do all our equipment that way if it's an option. Hey - we can sell that +3 Greatsword the fighter's carrying that just anybody can use for the 9,175 gp "sell for half" that it's worth, buy a masterwork Greatsword (350 gp) and (with our 85% discount for Crafting something basically only useable by us) make it a +5 equivalent weapon, AND have 1,325 gp left over to enchant his armor.

Really - it's too cheesable. Additionally, when your NPC's are powergaming, it encourages your players to powergame in order to keep up. Nobody wins on that arms race. It's a bad idea to start it. If it's something you do for your NPC's at whim, but don't permit it to your PC's, it's not playing fair. If you do let your PC's do it, CR quickly stops being even a vaguely useful measure of how the critter will do against the PC's.

Frosty
2007-10-29, 02:12 PM
Look at how powerful your PCs are, and throw appropriate encounters at them. If the PCs are powerful, then sometimes, the enemies they fight should be optimized and min-maxed.

Dausuul
2007-10-29, 03:52 PM
Look at how powerful your PCs are, and throw appropriate encounters at them. If the PCs are powerful, then sometimes, the enemies they fight should be optimized and min-maxed.

This is not necessarily the best solution. Optimized PCs versus optimized NPCs often results in very high casualties on both sides. I prefer just to jack up the NPCs' hit points and saves, to make the PCs work a little harder to beat them.

Renx
2007-11-01, 07:18 AM
Can't you just use Heal and take 20 ?

Dausuul
2007-11-01, 07:39 AM
Can't you just use Heal and take 20 ?

...to do what?

Also, you can't take 20 on Heal checks.

Renx
2007-11-01, 08:55 AM
Also, you can't take 20 on Heal checks.

Why not? True, it doesn't cure damage anymore.

//Edit1: Get a houseruled 3.0 version in the game, that solves it.
//Edit2: Also, to whoever commented that "just have the cleric cast heals and rest", it doesn't work that way. Clerics get their spells by praying at a certain time, for about an hour, regardless of how many spells they have left at the end of the day.

Armads
2007-11-01, 09:00 AM
You're actually going to wait DAYS to heal up?

its_all_ogre
2007-11-01, 09:22 AM
heal checks only restore hps in NWN, never in dnd unless you have some homebrewed feat? i think

Dausuul
2007-11-01, 10:06 AM
Why not? True, it doesn't cure damage anymore.

Hmm, okay, I guess there is one use where you can take 20, but it's highly specialized.

First Aid (also known as "stabilize your buddy as he careens toward -10"): Taking 20 would require 20 rounds, by which time the subject would be dead.
Long-Term Care: This requires 8 hours of light activity, which means you get a maximum of three chances to try it each day before the effect is determined.
Treat Wound from Caltrop, Spike Growth, or Spike Stones: This is the one case where you could actually get something out of taking 20. If you put in 200 minutes (roughly 3 hours), you can take 20 on this check and accomplish something.
Treat Poison: You make a check every time the subject makes a saving throw. Since you only get to make a check at specific times, and each check has consequences, taking 20 would make no sense.
Treat Disease: Same as treating poison.

Tor the Fallen
2007-11-01, 10:12 AM
It has been stated, repeatedly, that non-combat healing not coming from spells (usually those of a cleric or druid) is, or should be, cheap usually through the use of cure light wounds wands or similar magic items.

Let's look at a wand of CLW. It costs 750 gp to make and heals an average of 275 points of damage. It is the cheapest form of healing available in core. Let's see how long does a wand of CLW last.

A group of PCs should have 4-5 encounters at their CR per day, resulting in roughly 15 rounds of combat without rest and the last 5 rounds just before rest. In ECL 5, the average noncaster encounter can deal at least 10 damage per round. The average caster encounter can deal at least 20 damage per round-though usually spread over more than 1 PC. So in 15 rounds of combat, nearly 200 points of damage should be dealt and healed. That's more than 2/3 our CLW wand. That means 550 gp cost per day on average. Loot for 4 CR 5 encounters is 4500 gp. So the cost for our CLW for the day is a bit more than 12% the group's loot. That would be, ofcourse, IF the day's loot contained a CLW wand. Much more often than not, they will not. So, the group will have to sell the loot to buy the wand. That results in double the cost in the end so 25% the group's loot. A quarter of the loot would go into healing every day for our ECL 5 group.

A group of ECL 10 PCs needs more healing than that. The average noncaster encounter can deal easily 30 damage per round with the average caster encounter dealing nearly 100 usually spread over the entire group (e.g. a fireball or firebrand or dragon's breath or whatever). That means nearly 900 points of damage because rest is not cutting it for the last 5 rounds before rest-the damage amount is too large. This means three wands of CLW or the equivalent of 4500 gp in loot. Luckily, 4 encounters at CR 10 mean 36.000 gp in loot. That means only 12% of the loot would be spent in CLW so healing is cheaper-or so it would seem.

What many people saying noncombat healing is cheap do not realise is that healing includes poisons, diseases, ability damage, ability drain, curses, negative levels and similar effects. If we try to put into noncombat healing costs the above-even for once per day-prices skyrocket.

In the end, in a running campaign, trying to do all your healing through either items or rest is expensive. It might be as low as 10% of your loot in high levels if you do not encounter serious threats beyond mere HP damage (unlikely) but even 10% of the loot is still a considerable cost, especially considering the time it takes to find merchants to sell the loot, get the gold then find merchants from which to buy those CLW wands en masse. You'd probably be spending considerable time hunting down CLW merchants. After all, most merchants don't have a magic item more than once and you need 3-4 of them per day.

I suggest you review what a challenge using a party's resources involves. For 4 encounters, the cost of healing is only 3 to 6% per encounter at CR 5, according to your largely arbitrary numbers.

[edit] You also forgot to factor in natural healing, which will, at party level 5, with 4 people, heal 40 hp.

Frosty
2007-11-01, 10:14 AM
This is not necessarily the best solution. Optimized PCs versus optimized NPCs often results in very high casualties on both sides. I prefer just to jack up the NPCs' hit points and saves, to make the PCs work a little harder to beat them.

You can also play them extremely intelligent and tactically. If the enemies have low int, them throw more of the enemies at them.

Tor the Fallen
2007-11-01, 10:17 AM
Crafted it maybe? That reduces price to 1/2.

CL for crafting any metamagic rod is 17.

Starbuck_II
2007-11-01, 11:02 AM
CL for crafting any metamagic rod is 17.

Sorry, Errata says false. The Caster level is not a requirement. Just the Average crafter's caster level.

Tor the Fallen
2007-11-01, 03:16 PM
Sorry, Errata says false. The Caster level is not a requirement. Just the Average crafter's caster level.

No, errata doesn't have anything in there about it.

Starbuck_II
2007-11-01, 05:42 PM
No, errata doesn't have anything in there about it.

Gotta be the FAQ than: I always confuse the two.

Yakk
2007-11-02, 12:11 PM
Caster Level: The next item in a notational entry gives the caster level of the item, indicating its relative power. The caster level determines the item’s saving throw bonus, as well as range or other level-dependent aspects of the powers of the item (if variable). It also determines the level that must be contended with should the item come under the effect of a dispel magic spell or similar situation. This information is given in the form “CL x,” where “CL” is an abbreviation for caster level and “x” is an ordinal number representing the caster level itself.

For potions, scrolls, and wands, the creator can set the caster level of an item at any number high enough to cast the stored spell and not higher than her own caster level. For other magic items, the caster level is determined by the creator. The minimum caster level is that which is needed to meet the prerequisites given.

Prerequisites: Certain requirements must be met in order for a character to create a magic item. These include feats, spells, and miscellaneous requirements such as level, alignment, and race or kind. The prerequisites for creation of an item are given immediately following the item’s caster level.

A spell prerequisite may be provided by a character who has prepared the spell (or who knows the spell, in the case of a sorcerer or bard), or through the use of a spell completion or spell trigger magic item or a spell-like ability that produces the desired spell effect. For each day that passes in the creation process, the creator must expend one spell completion item or one charge from a spell trigger item if either of those objects is used to supply a prerequisite.

It is possible for more than one character to cooperate in the creation of an item, with each participant providing one or more of the prerequisites. In some cases, cooperation may even be necessary.

If two or more characters cooperate to create an item, they must agree among themselves who will be considered the creator for the purpose of determinations where the creator’s level must be known. The character designated as the creator pays the XP required to make the item.

Typically, a list of prerequisites includes one feat and one or more spells (or some other requirement in addition to the feat). When two spells at the end of a list are separated by “or,” one of those spells is required in addition to every other spell mentioned prior to the last two.

I am quoting from the SRD. Emphasis mine.