Spells and Magic Items FAQ

206 posts / 0 new
Last post
Originally posted by Wizard
chonjurer, I just received an e-mail from WotC ruling that darkness doesn't provide illumination. Sorry. (I think)

[pet peeve]
From WotC?

My guess is that you got an answer from customer support. All that means is that whoever happened to be answering your e-mail made an off-the-top-of-his-head ruling. It has no more significance than any post on this message board.
[/pet peeve]
Of course someone readying an action to attack "If he starts castin' " needs to make a spellcraft roll to know that a spell is being cast...

Otherwise just shout something in draconic to make his action go off first (thinking your casting) to get that readied action out of the way...
(yes, it'll probably hurt, but better than losing the spell AND hurting)
Are you absolutely certain that attacking with a touch spell while "holding a charge" from round to round is considered unarmed? I was sort of assuming that attacking with a touch spell period was consdiered an armed attack, regardless of when you actually casted it.
You have to change your notes on how Staffs DCs are calculated. They are now calculated based on the spell DCs of the caster using the item. Attribute bonuses and all feat bonuses apply in this calculation. Also, casters can now use their caster level instead of the one inherent in the staff for determining caster level benefits if their caster level is higher.
Lets say I'm a 5th level sorcerer. I have just acquired a standard scroll of Fireball, at caster level 5. My caster level is high enough to activate the scroll with no chance of failure, but I'm not actually capable of casting 3rd level spells. Do I have to make a caster level check to use this scroll?
Wizard - this statement:

The market price is usually the same as the base price, with two exceptions:

is incorrect. I believe what you meant to say is that usually the base price is 1/2 the market price.

John Ling

Lead Pathfinder Developer for Frog God Games



That'll teach me to pay better attention next time

John Ling

Lead Pathfinder Developer for Frog God Games

Wizard - from the SRD:

Activation: Staffs use the spell trigger activation method, so casting a spell from a staff is usually a standard action that doesn’t provoke attacks of opportunity.

Since a spell must be on your spell list to activate it using the Spell Trigger method, a Specialist Wizard may not use a staff containing a spell from his or her prohibited school.

John Ling

Lead Pathfinder Developer for Frog God Games

Originally posted by Fenris_CGA
Not sure if this is the right place for this question. If it isn't, then my apologies.

I could swear I read something on this board about two casters cooperating to craft items: Something like a wizard with the Craft Wand feat working with a cleric (who doesn't have the feat) to create a wand of CLW.

Is this legal according to the rules? Who pays the xp cost?

Yep, it's legal. Anybody can be designated as the "creator" (as long as they are participating) and the creator pays the XP cost.

John Ling

Lead Pathfinder Developer for Frog God Games

Using the various formula (skill bonus, enhancement bonus, etc) compute the cost of each ability individually. When you have all those figured out, whichever one has the highest number is the "higher item cost." This one gets the modifier, then add everything together.

John Ling

Lead Pathfinder Developer for Frog God Games

Originally posted by kreynolds
For multiple abilities? No, that would be "lower item cost" that gets the modifier (x1.5).

Oh, minor detail.... ;)

John Ling

Lead Pathfinder Developer for Frog God Games

In my opinion - nope. ;)

John Ling

Lead Pathfinder Developer for Frog God Games

Tonylf - wizard gave you a good answer regarding the damage issues you raised.

I'd like to suggest that the remainder can only be answered by your DM, since you are talking about a house rule he has implemented.

John Ling

Lead Pathfinder Developer for Frog God Games

Originally posted by Wizard
chonjurer, I just received an e-mail from WotC ruling that darkness doesn't provide illumination.

That's not what the spell says, and is an errata (i.e. changing of the spell, *not* a clarification) if I ever saw one.
Q: Does the spell Darkness actually provide illumination? (and by extension Deeper Darkness?)
A: Yes. Darkness provides shadowy illumination out to 20', and pg. 164 of the PHB describes exactly what shadowy illumination is. So essentially it acts like carrying a candle with you, and it will actually light up an area that is otherwise dark. Now that may seem like all sorts of wrong (I know it seems so to me), but that is how the rules read.
Originally posted by Wizard
For more on this topic from Monte Cook, check out this link.



Without dredging up old debates wherein the opposition employs doublethink (correcting the problem while simultaneously saying that there is no problem), you should remove that link because it references the 3.0 DMG and is out of date.
No problem. As long as you keep updating it I am quite happy to let you do it so that I can spare myself the aneurisms and flaming.

(and I suggest that you put 3.5 in the title somewhere)

And you might want to include a link to Unda Harvum's list of spell changes in 3.5.

(once I get the books I'll try to contribute some questions)
Wizard: HS is quite right.

(side note: writing to customer service will get you nothing but contradictory answers in the long haul.)
OK kids, can we try to keep the FAQ clear of clutter?
According to customer service there are contradictory rules in the books that we didn't even know about (that are actually OK as long as you read them properly), there are no problems with the published spells (which is poppycock), and the game designers who have explicitely made their intentions clear in multiple places are wrong about their actual intentions ( ).

Until I start seeing a higher-quality product of answers from them, I'm going to treat everything they say as wrong from the get-go, and let them prove otherwise.

kreynolds: It is usually better to move protracted discussions to seperate threads.
def_mornahan: For the most part the items in the DMG aren't priced properly anyways.

http://www.ucalgary.ca/~ammaster/d_n_d/DMG_magic_item_costs.html

I would just say that a the scaling factor for a +1 insight bonus to hit is 1,000gp (or 1,500gp), and go from there.

So the cost would be (insight bonus)^2 * 1,000gp

Unsidhe
Okay, I need to know about Polymorph any Object (the 8th level version).

You're not the only one. This spell was buggered in 3.0, and remains unfixed (typos and all).

What about the immunity to sleep and bonus to resist ench spells, as well as weapon proficiencies?

I would think that *physical* racial properties are inhereted (and you lose your old physical racial traits). It seems that the game designers are incapacle of coming out and describing which traits are "inherent physical" traits of a species and which are "learned social" traits. You would keep your learned social traits (dodge bonus against giants, +1 with slings, etc.) and lose your physical ones (darkvision, wings, etc.).

What happans to the humans bonus feat and extra skill point per level?

That is a mental issue, and your mind is not changed when you are Polymorphed. So you still get the extra skill point.

Would he/she now qualify for any classes (prestige) that were race specific (ie. Arcane Archer)?

Yes. Polymorph specifically states that they change creature type, and PAO inherets that trait.

If he/she had any levels an prestige classes with racial specifers, could he/she still advance in them

Yes (see below).

or still be able to claim benefits (special abilities) from them

[editorial comment]Now this is one of the dumbest things ever:[/editorial comment]
Losing the prerequisites for a PrC has no effect on PrC levels already gained or on future levels.
(gack)

Would it be able to be polymorphed into a non-standard creature like an elf with wings

Sure, why not?

---------------------------

(oh, and Wizard - the new FAQ links link is in my sig; so you can update your link)
w00t!
Originally posted by def_mornahan
I have to say, I think it should be more. A stackable bonus to attack is probably worth at least 2500 gp.

I think that's a bit harsh.

An enhancement bonus to armor is *1,000
Deflection is *2,000
Other is *2,500

+1 enhancement to hit is about *1,000 (a case can be made that it should be higher or lower, but the real answer is that it is completely dependent on the character wielding it, so I average out at *1,000)

So I would, at most, scale it like AC and put it at *2,000 and cap it at +5, and require 3 caster levels/+1 bonus
Originally posted by Moras
Do you know what a Mythallar is?

An archer with a lisp?
Everyone's stumped?
Time this thread's bumped.

Vyv - a poet who didn't know it.
Can a lesser metamagic rod be used on a 3rd-level spell already empowered through feat use (thus taking up a 5th-level slot)?
Bah, Skip the Sage.
Its both his name and sound advice.
If you want to upgrade an item, just take the price of the upgraded item, subtract out the price of the item you already have, and the differance is how much it costs. Otherwise the entire freaking system breaks down.
you used to do it by changing the subject tittle of the first post in the thread... I do not know if that still works though.
nice FAQ wizard.

you might want to think about putting a link to chonjurer's FAQ links thread on the meta board.
although I can see that argument, I would tend to dissagree, and say that energy-admixture is a single feat, other wise each element would have been listed seperatly.
Special: You can gain [i]this feat[/i] multiple times,

meaning that it is the same feat taken multiple times, not a different feat each time.
by each energy type would have been listed seperatly I meant that it would have listed each energy-admixture seperatly on the feats table, and in the text... thus there would have been no energy-admixture alone on the table or in the text, instead there would have been Energy-Admixture: Fire, Energy-Admixture: Sonic, Energy-Admixture: Cold, etc.
nope, because you have to apply it more then once (using a different energy type each time)... which is forbidden by 3.5 rules, and by 3.o rules you would need to increase spell level by +4 each time you applied it.

but it is the same feat... Energy-Admixture
Nope. You said it's one feat. So you only _need_ to apply it once

by that logic you can empower as spell as many times as you want by adding +2 levels in 3.0... that is patentently wrong...

each time you apply energy admixture you need to choose which type of energy (from the ones that you have choosen) to use, that is why you have tyo take the feat more then once, to choose the seperate energy types...

but what is the feats name?

if you have one chicken mcnugget dipped in BBQ sauce, and one dipped in sweet and sour sauce... is each of them still a chicken mcnugget? just because you have two of them, and they are flavored different doesn't mean that they are not the same thing (little processed, deepfried chunks of chicken).

when you take a feat more then once it is the same feat, taken more then once, a person who takes toughness four times, has taken toughness four times, a person who has taken energy admixture twice, selecting a different element each time, has taken energy admixture twice.

Of course I realy don't care how you play, so do what you want.
Then why the heck are you arguing with me!?

because you are wrong and I don't want to see you lead to many lf the sheep astray (boredom mostly) :P
yes, and the person actually crafting the item (ie the one using the feat) pays the xp cost.
Yes, and that's my opinion as well. However, I've yet to find explicit evidence that specialist wizards have spells of their prohibited schools removed from their class lists as opposed to simply being "prohibited" (though T&B does imply it---but splatbook implications are a few too many steps removed from the designers for me).

I thought it mentioned the specialists prohibited spells not being on thier spell list someplace in the FAQ (probably the 3.0 FAQ, but it isn't likly to have changed).
Can a quickened spell be interupted with the readied action "If he starts castin..."

Can a Quickened Fireball be counterspelled (by readying the counterspell action) by a standard non-quickened Fireball?

Also the line
For more on readying, check this out in the SRD

points to a file that is 3.0 (it talks about readying partial actions).
"Oh bother." sighed Pooh as he chambered another round.
Does nobody email the Sage around here? I generally email both, but I've gotten far more reliable responses from Skip.
Originally posted by Wizard
I don't know Skip's e-mail.

[email]tsrsage@aol.com[/email]
Originally posted by cwslyclgh
although I can see that argument, I would tend to dissagree, and say that energy-admixture is a single feat, other wise each element would have been listed seperatly.

They are...

"Benefit: Choose one type of energy: acid, cold, electricity, fire, or sonic."

Also, from the feat description...

"Special: You can gain this feat multiple times, choosing a different type of energy each time. You can use Energy Admixture to further alter a spell that has already been modified with Energy Substitution. You can also use Energy Admixture to include your chosen energy type with a spell that already uses the same type, in effect doubling the damage dice."
Sign In to post comments