How might a person get positive caster levels?You don't because they don't exist and are not even a defined quality. You can however get effective boosts to your caster level which would impact level/dependent factors i.e. damage , duration, etc. (subject to applicable inherent caps)Appart from death knell, how would a spell caster get an effective boost to the caster level?
Ioun stone?
(3.5) Ring of Arcane Might from Complete Arcane. Worth every cp of its 20k gold!
@ Treantmonk:
In your guide, how about adding a section in the Specialist Schools where you rate schools to ban? There was some discussion of this earlier in this thread, but having it in the core guide would be useful for would-be wizards. Since specializing no longer forbids you from casting banned schools, I'd think that the choices of schools to ban would be different than in 3.5 ed.
How so?
I agree in principle, but in practice I look at the schools and would probably ban the same ones as I would in 3.5.
The only real difference would be that it wouldn't hurt as much.
In my opinion - in order of preference, I would ban:
1) Enchantment
2) Necromancy
3) Evocation
4) Abjuration
5) Illusion
the order could change varying on the build of the Wizard - but I would pretty much guarantee that my 2 opposition schools would be on the above list every time.
If you're going to memorise banned spells then you more than eliminate the advantage of specialisation's extra spells. Quipso Itto Dotto.
Really? Not unless you memorize a spell from a banned school for every level you can cast.
If you find that this is the case - you likely have banned the wrong schools. No matter what your level and how diverse your spell list - the fact is that there will be several schools of magic non-represented in every level of memorization you have.
Even if you memorize no two spells of the same school.
They key is simply to ban those schools which end up under-represented.
Then you should still end up with more castings per day - even if you memorize a few of those "banned" spells.
I was wondering if you would recomend any of the Prc's from 3.5. The game I am playing in is pathfinder, but all the "Completes" are allowed as well. I was looking at the Geometer just because I think it is a cool concept, but are there any others you feel are worth the effort?
|
I was wondering if you would recomend any of the Prc's from 3.5. The game I am playing in is pathfinder, but all the "Completes" are allowed as well. I was looking at the Geometer just because I think it is a cool concept, but are there any others you feel are worth the effort?
I predict... Mage of the Arcane Order.
I was wondering if you would recomend any of the Prc's from 3.5. The game I am playing in is pathfinder, but all the "Completes" are allowed as well. I was looking at the Geometer just because I think it is a cool concept, but are there any others you feel are worth the effort?
Off the top of my head - some good PrC's for Wizards from 3.5 are:
Archmage (DMG)
Mage of the Arcane Order (CA)
Master Specialist (CM)
Fatespinner (CA) (Take 4 levels only)
Sacred Exorcist (CD)
|
One level of Mindbender is nice, though a bit cheesy.
There's Malconvoker too--surprised Treantmonk didn't mention it since he wrote a special handbook for it. Though it's less a GOD wizard choice and more a Specialist Summoner of Doom choice. I imagine it's not quite as nice if you don't allow the Unearthed Acana rapid summoning variant, or access to the Rapid Spell feat or the like. Still, it's pretty nice even so.
Treantmonk how could you not have mentioned Incantatrix?!
Off the top of my head - some good PrC's for Wizards from 3.5 are:Archmage (DMG)
I'm playing an archmage now and took spell shaping for my first arcana. It suddenly turns a lot of orange/red colored spells on Treant's list into green or even blue. Being able to 'Cone of cold' or 'Prismatic Spray' the entire battlefield makes those spell a lot better since you will hit a lot more enemies, if not all of them now.
Archmage was the win.
Incantrix and Initiate of the Sevenfold Veils are definitely possibilities for PrC progressions but honestly both are typically banhammered by any somewhat coherent DM. Arcane Order Mage is more balanced and probably won't result in books being thrown at you.
Absolutely LOVE the Treantmonk optimization guides... they are really insightful and offer lots of great information. I've learned a lot about the various classes you've reviewed and seen lots of different angles that normally wouldn't have occurred to me. What I'd like to know is, do you take requests? I'd really love to see an Optimization of Clerics sometime in the future... preferably the near future but hey, you know what they say about beggars and choosers...
I did not mention Malconvoker because it didn't pop into my head right away. Malconvoker is very good - but it is also a very specialized PrC as well...
Treantmonk how could you not have mentioned Incantatrix?!
Umm...because he said that "complete" books from 3.5 were allowed - he didn't say FR Players Guide. Parameters of the request dude.
I should however have mentioned Initiate of the Sevenfold Veil - yes - many DM's banhammer this one, but if they don't - its the most powerful wizard PrC in any complete book even thought the requirements hurt.
[What I'd like to know is, do you take requests? I'd really love to see an Optimization of Clerics sometime in the future... preferably the near future but hey, you know what they say about beggars and choosers...
Typically no, plus I'm taking a break for a bit from handbooks.
I'm sure I will remotivate at some point here - but I'm all handbooked out for awhile.
Umm...because he said that "complete" books from 3.5 were allowed - he didn't say FR Players Guide. Parameters of the request dude.
Calm down man. The way the request was worded seemed to imply that the complete books weren't the ONLY place they could select from.
Treantmonk,
Have you reconsidered the Craft Rod feat in light of the changes to magic item crafting in PF?
In 3.5 it wasn't a good feat. Most wizards would want rods for metamagic feats, and particularly feats they didn't have, and you wouldn't be able to craft a rod if you didn't already have the feat. So it was a bit of a waste.
But with the changes to the item crafting rules, you no longer need the feat to craft the rod. And you can craft items while adventuring, albeit at a slower pace.
Nor does it seem like it would be all that difficult for most wizards to craft any of the rods once they can choose the feat at 9th level. DC to craft a metamagic rod is generally 22 (5+17 for caster level of all metamagic rods) and 27 for not having the feat. A 9th lvl wizard with max ranks in spellcraft would have a base 12 spellcraft, and should have at least a +5 Int by 9th lvl, giving a total of at least 17 Spellcraft, allowing a take 10 automatic success to make any metamagic rod even without the corresponding metamagic feat.
Thus with the craft rod feat, a wizard can produce rods of any metamagic feat, even for feats he doesn't have. And at a much reduced cost. Some of the higher level rods are prohibitively expensive, and if a DM is abiding by the Community Wealth guidelines in the old DMG, would be generally unavailable anywhere for purchase. Even the almighty Greater Quicken Rod would not be beyond the ken of most high level wizards, as the cost to create it becomes 'only' 85,000, as opposed to the ridiculous 170,000 to purchase it.
Just seems to me that Craft Rod has become a rather viable feat choice for the mid to high level wizard in PF.
Other than brew potion (the mechanics of potions are simply too limited) I think crafting feats in general are viable.
That doesn't change my statement in the guide - "Crafting feats are selling your feat slots for cash"
The question simply becomes which feat can you sell for the most? I have to think either Craft Staff or craft wondrous item may be the best choice, though I appreciate your point about metamagic rods not needing the base feat.
Before I picked up any crafting feat - I would first consider the campaign. In a campaign where the ability to buy magic items is plentiful, and there is plenty of gold to go around, I would avoid crafting feats.
In campaigns which are especially stingy with cash - I may also avoid them.
The sweet spot would be campaigns that are rigid to the rules in regards to purchase of magic items, and cash is readily available. In such a campaign, I would probably take multiple crafting feats.
Another thing to consider is the beneficial aspects of playing nice with the rest of the party when choosing craft feats. If you are playing God and/or Batman a big part of what you should be doing is making those surrounding you better rather than simply investing entirely in yourself.
As a result I do think that Craft Wondrous Items and Craft Arms & Armor are desirable picks for the aspiring caster.
Craft Wondrous Items has a ton of nice items associated with it and every class can use at least some wondrous items. If you've got plenty of downtime in your game then being able to upgrade the big standard wondrous item slots at half price is a worthwhile investment. The fighter gives you some cash and viola a few days later he's got a new belt, etc.
Almost every class besides the wizard benefits from armor and weapons so investing in this feat is also a sure way to smooth ruffled party feathers and upgrade your bodyguards ... err comrades. It's an indirect benefit that will likely pay off in the long run when the fighter shrugs off more damage in his new armor and does more damage with his spanking new sword.
Craft Rod doesn't really have the bang for the buck that I want in a feat selection. Yes half-off on a quicken rod is nice but generally you are going to maybe build 2-3 rods during the entire course of your career and the total cost savings over 20 levels seems way less than the party would save if you went with Create Wondrous or Create Arms & Armor.
...
Before I picked up any crafting feat - I would first consider the campaign. ...
In campaigns which are especially stingy with cash - I may also avoid them.
...
Treantmonk, could you explain your reasoning? My first impression is that in cash-short campaigns, crafting would become more valuable. Thanks.
Treantmonk, could you explain your reasoning? My first impression is that in cash-short campaigns, crafting would become more valuable. Thanks....
Before I picked up any crafting feat - I would first consider the campaign. ...
In campaigns which are especially stingy with cash - I may also avoid them.
...
In really cash poor campaigns you often don't have the cash necessary to pay even 1/2 of the base cost of many items. In those campaigns crafting will likely be limited to the really cheap items like low level wands (clw wands are really cheap and efficient even in low resource games) and low end wondrous items/arms & armor. Other item types simply require too much outlay in cash to be viable in a really cash strapped playstyle.
Another concern is the amount of time between days spent adventuring. In a campaign that has very very limited downtime (such as the PCs fighting off an invasion) item creation feats are worthless. Campaigns with limited downtime (enough to craft) but not enough to really recover extensive resources also make feats like craft staff less viable as your casters can't really maximize the spell battery aspect of the staff.
I think before investing in any craft feat beyond scribe scroll the prospective caster needs to discuss the role of crafting in the DM's vision of the game. If the campaign facilitates crafting it can be a real GP saver but if it's not geared that way it can result in some butthurt as the caster invests in ability that sees no real use.
My first impression is that in cash-short campaigns, crafting would become more valuable. Thanks.
Not if you don't have enough cash to pay for the creation of the item, hence the sweet spot mentioned above.
Treantmonk, could you explain your reasoning? My first impression is that in cash-short campaigns, crafting would become more valuable. Thanks....
Before I picked up any crafting feat - I would first consider the campaign. ...
In campaigns which are especially stingy with cash - I may also avoid them.
...
What Vuron said.
If your cash is strapped enough - sometimes you can't craft nice enough items to give you benifit enough to pay for the feat.
To Craft Metamagic Rods don't you need to be Caster Level 17 is stated on page 484-485?
Vuron, Doug, and T'monk, thanks. I wasn't considering the possiblity of a campaign that was quite that short on cash. (which is prettu ironic given that players sometimes complain that I run resource scarce games.)
|
Treantmonk,
I know I'll probably get a sarcarstic reply for this, but I think that you're being too harsh in your Wizard's Guide in classifying Mind Blank as a red, i.e., poor spell.
In my opinion it should be rated at least orange (I'd say green but you wouldn't take me seriously).
Let me explain. In all high-level campaigns I've played, Mind Blank was a real staple for the party, not only for the protection from enchantment (of course in the old times, when it gave immunity to the whole enchantment school, it was so much better) but mostly for the impressive defence it provides against divinations and all attempts to localize the party members.
My direct experience at high-levels (on both sides of the GM screen) is that PCs have cunning and (obviously) high-level opponents, who would be eager to occasionally scry or locate with other magical means the party, and then - at the first opportunity - when the party is divided, or in big troubles, or weakened, or off-guard, or otherwise impaired, (greater) teleport there (with buddies and allies of course) and finish them off.
This is a tactic that the party uses (or tries to use) often as well.
And Mind Blank provides a very effective defence against this. (It lasts 24 hours, which helps a lot!)
As an additional neat feature, the fact that it neutralizes also true seeing (a divination spell) makes it easier to go around invisible or magically disguised or polymorphed in very dangerous places, and remain undetected, when needs be.
In any case, thank you for your guides. They are really well done, I liked the spell-by-spell detailed scrutiny.
As an additional neat feature, the fact that it neutralizes also true seeing (a divination spell) .....
This is debatable.
Does it read
The subject is protected from all devices and spells that gather information about the target through divination magic (such as detect evil, locate creature, scry, and see invisible).
with the bolded words being examples of the specifics types of divination spells it blocks
Or
does it block all divination spells.
With Paizo's new design policy that tries to get rid of blanket immunity(death ward as an example) it would not make sense to have one spell negate an entire school of magic.
This topic or one similar to it has come up before, with no clear winner. Both sides had valid points.
|
|
As an additional neat feature, the fact that it neutralizes also true seeing (a divination spell) .....
This is debatable.
Does it read
The subject is protected from all devices and spells that gather information about the target through divination magic (such as detect evil, locate creature, scry, and see invisible).
with the bolded words being examples of the specifics types of divination spells it blocks
Or
does it block all divination spells.
Interesting. While I might agree that mind blank should not prevent true strike (also a divination spell) from working, I fail to see why it would protect against see invisible but not against true seeing. Both spells "gather information" about the target, methinks.
This might have been asked before, but how do you feel about summoning monsters from a lower Summon Monster spell? Like using Summon Monster III to summon three riding dogs instead of say, a wolverine. Each of the three riding dogs is getting benefit from augmented summoning, so it seems pretty good to me.
This might have been asked before, but how do you feel about summoning monsters from a lower Summon Monster spell? Like using Summon Monster III to summon three riding dogs instead of say, a wolverine. Each of the three riding dogs is getting benefit from augmented summoning, so it seems pretty good to me.
Sorry but Riding Dog is off the list. Its so obvious if you look at what is on the list and compare to a Riding Dog's stats. I pi$$ed myself off when I found this! Doh!
(James Jacobs 12/21/09) Official Errata for Summon Monster Spell. The majority of these errors, I suspect, came from miscommunication between what was and wasn't changing with these animals in the switchover between the 3.5 Monster Manual and the Pathfinder Bestiary.[Source]
Change Giant Lizard to Monitor Lizard. (The lists don't support summoning a Giant Frilled Lizard, but you could probably add them to summon monster V or summon nature's ally V.)
Change Riding Dog to Dog.
Change Ant, drone to Ant, worker.
Change Ant, soldier to Ant, giant.
A few other notes:
The Giant Frilled Lizard is so much tougher than a bison or an ape because it's something that probably would HUNT bisons or apes. It'd be best to compare the giant frilled lizard ecologically wise to a tiger or bear; it's a top-tier predator.
Camels will be in the Bestiary II. If you need stats before then, though, they'll be VERY similar to the stats for a horse, except they'll have some sort of long-term go without water ability.
D'oh!
Treantmonk,
I know I'll probably get a sarcarstic reply for this, but I think that you're being too harsh in your Wizard's Guide in classifying Mind Blank as a red, i.e., poor spell.
In my opinion it should be rated at least orange (I'd say green but you wouldn't take me seriously).Let me explain. In all high-level campaigns I've played, Mind Blank was a real staple for the party, not only for the protection from enchantment (of course in the old times, when it gave immunity to the whole enchantment school, it was so much better) but mostly for the impressive defence it provides against divinations and all attempts to localize the party members.
My direct experience at high-levels (on both sides of the GM screen) is that PCs have cunning and (obviously) high-level opponents, who would be eager to occasionally scry or locate with other magical means the party, and then - at the first opportunity - when the party is divided, or in big troubles, or weakened, or off-guard, or otherwise impaired, (greater) teleport there (with buddies and allies of course) and finish them off.
This is a tactic that the party uses (or tries to use) often as well.
And Mind Blank provides a very effective defence against this. (It lasts 24 hours, which helps a lot!)As an additional neat feature, the fact that it neutralizes also true seeing (a divination spell) makes it easier to go around invisible or magically disguised or polymorphed in very dangerous places, and remain undetected, when needs be.
In any case, thank you for your guides. They are really well done, I liked the spell-by-spell detailed scrutiny.
The protection from enchantment spells can more or less be derived from the protection from/magic circle against spells at a much cheaper level cost.
As far as a defense from scry and die, are you really suggesting using an 8th level spell on EVERY MEMBER OF THE PARTY, EVERYDAY? Because otherwise, this defense also has holes in it from the getgo.
This might have been asked before, but how do you feel about summoning monsters from a lower Summon Monster spell? Like using Summon Monster III to summon three riding dogs instead of say, a wolverine. Each of the three riding dogs is getting benefit from augmented summoning, so it seems pretty good to me.
Oh I would use this tactic quite often when I played summoners. This is especially nice at higher levels when you can summon multiple Huge elementals. Multiple Celestial Bison were a really good summons in mid levels as well in 3.5.
It depends on the situation of course. If you just need meat shields then usually summoning multiple creatures that are generally hard to get rid of is best. If you need particular abilities from your summons--such as something with true seeing--and you can only get one such creature with your summons then do that instead. Or if relying on the combat abilities of your summons to actually damage the enemy instead of just occupying it, then sometimes a single tough summons would be better than multiple less tough ones.
So it all just depends.
Multiple smaller summons can be a better strategy if what you are really looking for is battlefield control / meatshields. 2-3 monsters instead of 1 often results in a higher number of HPs, a higher number of blocked squares, and a higher number of total actions. While many of those actions can't effectively hurt a CR appropriate foe, they can be used to attempt grapples, etc. Further the act of killing the summoned minions represents an opportunity cost for the foe as actions spent killing minions are not actions spent killing the PCs.
To Craft Metamagic Rods don't you need to be Caster Level 17 is stated on page 484-485?
This is right?, right?
|
|
To Craft Metamagic Rods don't you need to be Caster Level 17 is stated on page 484-485?This is right?, right?
Well, the Current Rules would seem to suggest that, yes, you must be at least 17th level to craft any of the metamagic rods.
I think that's a little nuts, personally. Why does it take knowledge of 9th level spells to make a Lesser Rod of Silence that only works on 1-3rd level spells?
Personally, I'd houserule the caster level of the items to 5th for lesser, 11th for regular, and 17th for greater.
Well, the Current Rules would seem to suggest that, yes, you must be at least 17th level to craft any of the metamagic rods.
I think that's a little nuts, personally. Why does it take knowledge of 9th level spells to make a Lesser Rod of Silence that only works on 1-3rd level spells?
Personally, I'd houserule the caster level of the items to 5th for lesser, 11th for regular, and 17th for greater.
Well the caster level is a prereq, right? And if you don't meet the prereq, then the DC to create increases by 5. For rods, I'd use BobChuck's minimum caster levels and then recalculate the DC to create. So, for a 17th level caster to create a greater metamagic rod, the DC would be 5 + 17 = 22. For an 11th level caster to create a regular metamagic rod you get a DC = 5 + 11 + 5 = 21, which seems reasonable.
Treantmonk,
I know I'll probably get a sarcarstic reply for this,
Probably ;)
Let me explain. In all high-level campaigns I've played, Mind Blank was a real staple for the party, not only for the protection from enchantment (of course in the old times, when it gave immunity to the whole enchantment school, it was so much better) but mostly for the impressive defence it provides against divinations and all attempts to localize the party members.
So basically - immunity to enchantment wasn't as important to you as the ability of Mind Blank to emulate the endless stream of anti-scry options of lower level. Uh-huh.
My direct experience at high-levels (on both sides of the GM screen) is that PCs have cunning and (obviously) high-level opponents, who would be eager to occasionally scry or locate with other magical means the party, and then - at the first opportunity - when the party is divided, or in big troubles, or weakened, or off-guard, or otherwise impaired, (greater) teleport there (with buddies and allies of course) and finish them off.
Your DM's would use scry-and-die as a regular tactic against the players to generate TPK's? Wow.
Did I mention there are lower-level anti-scry options available?
This is a tactic that the party uses (or tries to use) often as well.
And Mind Blank provides a very effective defence against this. (It lasts 24 hours, which helps a lot!)
It's an 8th level spell that needs to be cast on each party member separately. That's a lot of daily 8th level spell usage.
At that level, 24 hours/casting isn't that much better than 1 hour/level.
In any case, thank you for your guides. They are really well done, I liked the spell-by-spell detailed scrutiny.
Thanks - much appreciated!
|
|
So basically - immunity to enchantment wasn't as important to you as the ability of Mind Blank to emulate the endless stream of anti-scry options of lower level. Uh-huh.
Thank you for your reply!
Yeah, that is my personal experience. Not to say that we did not like the immunity to enchantment, but protection from divination was irreplaceable.
In fact, we went extremely close to a TPK in one occasion when our abjurer was not able to replenish the party's mind blank.
Your DM's would use scry-and-die as a regular tactic against the players to generate TPK's? Wow.
It is not that surprising after all. We also used (or tried to use) that very effective tactic almost every time when it was viable. Don't see why our opponents should be dumber than us -- that would not make for a lot of fun, I think.
If the party is conducting an epic struggle against an evil overlord and threatening his master plan (plots of this kind tend to be fairly common at 17+ level), it just makes sense that he would do everything in his power to get rid of the characters, and scry-and-die (in all its variations) is by far the most effective tactic. So it just makes sense.In any case, we were cautious (or fortunate) enough to avoid TPK, although we went really close in a few occasions and damn close once.
Did I mention there are lower-level anti-scry options available?
Are you referring mostly to nondetection?
Unfortunately that does not protect against discern location and it is not even guaranteed to protect one against (greater) scrying. So in the long run scry-and-die is doomed to end up in "die" for the characters.Mage's private sanctum (and similar spells) lasts 24 hours (and no costly material components) but again it does not prevent discern location from working. Moreover it is a stationary effect, which is very limiting, since the party can hardly spend all of its time entrenched within a private sanctum (or a magnificent mansion).
Only mind blank is fully reliable. It even thwarts attempts of location from an enemy who is desperate enough to use a wish in order to locate the PCs.
(Not to mention the fact that nondetection has a material component that - while cheap - adds up when you think of casting it every day on all the party members).
It's an 8th level spell that needs to be cast on each party member separately. That's a lot of daily 8th level spell usage.
I agree, but it is a life-saver in my experience. I am aware that you are a big supporter of summoning, and I am ok with that, but it is difficult to deny that summon monster VIII is largely useless if the party does not wake up in the morning because they were all scryed, surprised and killed by a high-level commando during the night! ;)
At any rate, the party supported the abjurer's effort in protecting the group by collectively putting together the gps to buy a couple of pearls of power VIII.
At that level, 24 hours/casting isn't that much better than 1 hour/level.
Well, it is actually (unless you are level 24+ of course), since it provides full cover from casting to casting. At 18th level, for example, a 1 hour/level spell leaves 6 unblanketed hours which is 25% of the day. Too risky.
I don't know, maybe you might want to mention in your guide that mind blank is actually important in these situations, but your mileage may vary.
As I said, my experience (both direct and indirect after talking with other groups) is that at the higher levels scry-and-die (or more aptly "magically locate-and-die") is the greatest threat to the party, and TPKs do happen occasionally. In most other situation, even tough combat, at least the casters can usually manage to escape and regroup, but if the party is surprised in a moment of weakness or distraction then things can get really ugly.
In regards to mind blank, I think a lot of the uses being ascribed to it are sadly open to interpretation by DM, i.e. divination spells used to gather information is too nebulous.
However, a blanket +8 to mind affecting spells is nice. Granted, most smart players with standard treasure will have probably a +3-+5 resistance bonus already, but this is at the very least a self-buff I would use every day on myself if I were a wizard of this level. If nothing else it lets you fly around invisible when used in tandem with Invisibility, which can be a great boon. Pretty much only creatures with blindsight will be able to see you then (I'm assuming Overland Flight self-cast every day also).
Back in 3.0 when it gave blanket immunity to mind-affecting effects our entire party had this cast on them every day, draining all the 8th level spells from our wizard at high levels and then some. We had a party of 9. I'm not saying this is typical, and I'd not expect every DM to be busting out dominate monsters left and right or at this point scry and die tactics but DMs can be jerks. They are the enemy!!
Edit: Basically I feel it would be a green spell based on how often I use it. But how much I use it shouldn't make you feel you need to change it in your guide.
I don't understand why more people don't just use lead paint... or tiny hut... or any other the other millions of low cost or low level spells that would help with the scry and die problem... or why you didn't just have the cleric give everyone spell immunity scry with his spells instead...
Just saying.
I don't understand why more people don't just use lead paint... or tiny hut... or any other the other millions of low cost or low level spells that would help with the scry and die problem... or why you didn't just have the cleric give everyone spell immunity scry with his spells instead...
Just saying.
Am I missing something? Tiny Hut doesn't prevent scrying.
Spell Immunity only lasts 10 minutes/level not 24 hours.
I don't understand why more people don't just use lead paint... or tiny hut... or any other the other millions of low cost or low level spells that would help with the scry and die problem... or why you didn't just have the cleric give everyone spell immunity scry with his spells instead...
Just saying.
Am I missing something? Tiny Hut doesn't prevent scrying.
Spell Immunity only lasts 10 minutes/level not 24 hours.
No I grabbed the wrong spells, and didn't point out a few things:
The correct spell that I was thinking of was specifically for resting times and would be Mage's Private Sanctum or Nondetection (lower level, costs material component though). False Vision could also be very helpful.
Simply wearing a gilded (gold covered) armor could work for your heavy armor types (gold in even the thinnest sheet prevents divination) as can lead paint in the stronghold.
Mage's Magnificant Mansion is also a choice.
During traveling I generally see this as much less of a problem due to the save throw among other issues, however a Dimensional lock on the party would allow them to travel with no fear of someone teleporting on top of them too.
Spell Immunity is only 10 min/ level but you could get multiple spells with it, and at higher levels with a rod of extend spell or simply extending it yourself you can be immune for most the day (still going to eat up lots of slots, but they are of lower level and easier to replace).
Simply wearing a gilded (gold covered) armor could work for your heavy armor types (gold in even the thinnest sheet prevents divination) as can lead paint in the stronghold.
You've stumped me on this one. Wha? I've never heard of this before and I can't find anything in the rules about it. I know that some materials block Detect Magic, but that's not Scrying.
Simply wearing a gilded (gold covered) armor could work for your heavy armor types (gold in even the thinnest sheet prevents divination) as can lead paint in the stronghold.You've stumped me on this one. Wha? I've never heard of this before and I can't find anything in the rules about it. I know that some materials block Detect Magic, but that's not Scrying.
Apparently the gold got dropped off somewhere along the way but here is the section the rule is in:
"Divination spells enable you to learn secrets long forgotten, predict the future, find hidden things, and foil deceptive spells.
Many divination spells have cone-shaped areas. These move with you and extend in the direction you choose. The cone defines the area that you can sweep each round. If you study the same area for multiple rounds, you can often gain additional information, as noted in the descriptive text for the spell.
Scrying: A scrying spell creates an invisible magical sensor that sends you information. Unless noted otherwise, the sensor has the same powers of sensory acuity that you possess. This level of acuity includes any spells or effects that target you, but not spells or effects that emanate from you. The sensor, however, is treated as a separate, independent sensory organ of yours, and thus functions normally even if you have been blinded or deafened, or otherwise suffered sensory impairment.
A creature can notice the sensor by making a Perception check with a DC 20 + the spell level. The sensor can be dispelled as if it were an active spell.
Lead sheeting or magical protection blocks a scrying spell, and you sense that the spell is blocked. "
My major points are in any case that scrying is involved:
Give the save throw, Give the Intelligence check and be sure to check for spell resistance or lead.
I personally would never allow lead plated armor to block scrying. Lead lined dungeons or stronghold safe rooms? Sure but beside the heavy weight of lead shielding, lead has traditionally blocked scrying/porting inside of a shielded object. Just because you are in armor does not mean that a scrying sensor can't see you.
I personally would never allow lead plated armor to block scrying. Lead lined dungeons or stronghold safe rooms? Sure but beside the heavy weight of lead shielding, lead has traditionally blocked scrying/porting inside of a shielded object. Just because you are in armor does not mean that a scrying sensor can't see you.
You know, if you wanted to make them check for lead poisoning regularly ok (I believe lead is actually in the list of poisons iirc). Lead armor of equal protection being heavier and possibly with more of an ACP and less Dex? I can see that too... or the opposite where the lead simply doesn't provide as much protection would make just as much sense really.
But to say that lead full plate wouldn't stop someone from scrying you where a lead room would... just smacks of "I don't like you thinking stop now!"