dot
To Aelryinth about Defending ** spoiler omitted **
One, you have to be wielding the weapon for it to be effective for attacking. This means taking the attack action so you have a threatening weapon before you. The bonuses to defend shouldn't come into play any more then the bonuses th/dmg would.
Two, Note that the partial and full defense actions ALSO require attack actions to activate...otherwise all spellcasters would be using them and never attack, just cast spells.
Agree that errata should call out you need to take the attack action for the Defending bonus to apply. Casters adn archers shouldn't be able to get the benefits of a defending weapon without specific abilities that combine weapon play with spells, like the Magus.
==Aelryinth
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This thread is becoming more awesome by the hour. And special kudos to the summaries being posted. I am printing them out and will put them in my "GM handbook" for my PF campaign.
On the -4 "soft cover" penalty, I am seriously considering this not applying when you have a party member providing the soft cover since the -4 you are taking for firing into melee is supposedly due to deliberately not targeting the party member. This just feels like taking a major penalty twice for the same thing. It would apply to enemies in the way.
Yes, I think that would mean that "precise shot" would then negate both penalties if you are firing into combat where one party member is "in the way" and engaged in melee combat.
Otherwise I don't think the "precise shot" feat provides much value until you get "improved precise shot" and that would discourage players from that entire tree of feats.
Removing all ability drain for one stat costs 100 gold and a restoration spell. If multiple stats are drained, it is 100 gold and a new casting per stat drained.
Previously we had thought that it cost 1000 gold per point. That was a misread.
This last session my PCs had 7 points of Con drain that I handwaved away after a creatured died, then we realized it cost 100 gold to have it restored, and then they suddenly had 7 points of Con drain back. They ended up with 13 Con drain split between 3 of them. 6 Con drain on the fighter, 6 Con drain on the barbarian/alchemist, and... 1 Con drain on the wizard.
Later on someone said to me "Man... I wish Con drain was harder to remove."
|
These two were touched on briefly when discussing lesser restoration earlier, but are missed often enough I figure it's worth pointing them out specifically:
Activating scrolls (p.490): Activating a scroll is a standard action (or the spell's casting time, whichever is longer) and provokes attacks of opportunity just as casting a spell does.
Spell trigger items like wands, staves, etc. (p.496): Casing a spell from a wand is usually a standard action that doesn't provoke attacks of opportunity. (If the spell being cast has a longer casting time than 1 action, however, it takes that long to cast the spell from a wand).
I only focus on these two because I've seen way, way too many BBEGs try to unleash a trap via a wand of summon monster whatever or restore an ally with a wand of restoration (note: not lesser, the normal one) and been very irked to have this pointed out (I actually have the page numbers penned in the front of my book for easy reference, it comes up that much).
|
There are no rules that confirm your statement.There are no black or white medium sized dragonhide breastplates and fullplates (they included a rather stupid sage advice in the core rules).Sure there are, you just need to kill more than one dragon to get the appropriate amount of scales.
Holy crap, Ravingdork just got out-rule nitpicked! The end is nigh!
|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Most of the prerequisites for crafting a magic item can be ignored by adding 5 to the Spellcraft DC for each prerequisite missing (although you still need the requisite item creation feat).
If spells are listed as prerequisites, they aren't mandatory unless you are creating a spell trigger or spell completion item.
The Caster Level listed at the top of each item is not considered a prerequisite for crafting the item.
You can craft magic items twice as quickly by increasing the DC to make the item by +5.
You can craft while adventuring, but you're limited to 4 hours of crafting per day, however this generally only nets you 2 hours of progress.
If you can set aside uninterrupted 4-hour blocks of time for crafting, you can net a number of hours equal to what you put in. This means that someone with a Ring of Sustenance can very effectively Craft while adventuring.
On ignoring prerequisites, I find it strange that an evil necromancer can craft a magic weapon with the Holy quality by adding +10 to the Spellcraft DC (+5 for not having holy smite and +5 for the creator not being good...
Weird.
"Behold the latest masterpiece of mighty Masochistos the Necromancer. All shall tremble before...gah, that hurts!"
** spoiler omitted **To Aelryinth about Defending ** spoiler omitted **** spoiler omitted **
==Aelryinth
==Aelryinth
Most of the prerequisites for crafting a magic item can be ignored by adding 5 to the Spellcraft DC for each prerequisite missing (although you still need the requisite item creation feat).
If spells are listed as prerequisites, they aren't mandatory unless you are creating a spell trigger or spell completion item.
The Caster Level listed at the top of each item is not considered a prerequisite for crafting the item.
You can craft magic items twice as quickly by increasing the DC to make the item by +5.
You can craft while adventuring, but you're limited to 4 hours of crafting per day, however this generally only nets you 2 hours of progress.
If you can set aside uninterrupted 4-hour blocks of time for crafting, you can net a number of hours equal to what you put in. This means that someone with a Ring of Sustenance can very effectively Craft while adventuring.
On ignoring prerequisites, I find it strange that an evil necromancer can craft a magic weapon with the Holy quality by adding +10 to the Spellcraft DC (+5 for not having holy smite and +5 for the creator not being good...
Weird.
"Behold the latest masterpiece of mighty Masochistos the Necromancer. All shall tremble before...gah, that hurts!"
He'd need +11. Don't forget the -1 negative level!
==Aelryinth
|
|
On ignoring prerequisites, I find it strange that an evil necromancer can craft a magic weapon with the Holy quality by adding +10 to the Spellcraft DC (+5 for not having holy smite and +5 for the creator not being good...
Weird.
"Behold the latest masterpiece of mighty Masochistos the Necromancer. All shall tremble before...gah, that hurts!"
He'd need +11. Don't forget the -1 negative level!
==Aelryinth
Nah. He wouldn't take that negative level until immediately after he'd created the weapon. It wouldn't be a Holy weapon until after he'd succeeded on the Spellcraft roll.
|
** spoiler omitted **==Aelryinth
For what it's worth, the SRD says, "You threaten all squares into which you can make a melee attack, even when it is not your turn." Also, "Moving out of a threatened square usually provokes attacks of opportunity from threatening opponents." In other words, if you are holding or are otherwise equipped with an item (such as a spiked gauntlet or armor spikes), you can make AoO's with it, even if you haven't previously attacked with it. Where in the rules does it say that doesn't count as wielding it?
Reach Weapons: Most creatures of Medium or smaller size have a reach of only 5 feet. This means that they can make melee attacks only against creatures up to 5 feet (1 square) away. However, Small and Medium creatures wielding reach weapons threaten more squares than a typical creature. In addition, most creatures larger than Medium have a natural reach of 10 feet or more.
I think ToZ brought this up earlier.
Are you(Aelryinth) saying I must attack with a reach weapon before I can make an AoO?
Now with this ruling if a bad guy want to charge the softies all they have to do is play keep away until after one of their buddies charges.
Most of the prerequisites for crafting a magic item can be ignored by adding 5 to the Spellcraft DC for each prerequisite missing (although you still need the requisite item creation feat).
Which reminds me... for the cost of a feat (Master Craftsman) ANYONE with 5 ranks in a Craft or Profession skill qualifies to take Craft Wondrous Item or Craft Magic Arms and Armor. Yup... the Fighter can make his own +1 Keen Scimitar.
Pretty sure this was the same under 3.5 but I still see old-timers get mixed up about it...
Darkvision: Black and white only (no color), you are subject to gaze attacks and illusions as normal, and the presence of light does not spoil it.
BTW...
Best
Thread
EVER!
|
|
When using a ranged weapon, if there is anything blocking line of effect or providing cover, or a creature (enemy OR ALLY) in between you and your target, the target is given a +4 cover (soft in case of creatures) bonus to AC (unless you have certain feats).
This applies to reach weapons as well when used against targets that are not adjacent to you (such as with a spiked chain or with certain class abilities that allow you to use a reach weapon against an adjacent opponent).
I've lost count of the number of times people have been surprised by this, mainly that allies can provide an opponent with soft cover.
Spiked chain is no more a reach weapon (god bless who decided that):
Chain, spiked 25 gp 1d6 2d4 ×2 — 10 lbs. P disarm, trip
and
Reach: You use a reach weapon to strike opponents 10 feet away, but you can't use it against an adjacent foe.
So unless you have some special feat (I don't recall one, but it is possible it exist) you can't use a reach weapon to strike nearby opponents.
|
Spell trigger items like wands, staves, etc. (p.496): Casing a spell from a wand is usually a standard action that doesn't provoke attacks of opportunity. (If the spell being cast has a longer casting time than 1 action, however, it takes that long to cast the spell from a wand).
Thank you! Wands of Enlarge Person just got a lot less abusable.
8. Characters can draw a weapon during a charge, but can only charge a single move distance.
Still think this needs a bit more clarification:
8. Characters whose BAB is +1 or higher can draw a weapon during a charge, but can only charge a single move distance.
8a. If you are limited to a single standard action (i.e. surprised) you can still charge a single move action. However you cannot also draw a weapon unless you can quickdraw it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So unless you have some special feat (I don't recall one, but it is possible it exist) you can't use a reach weapon to strike nearby opponents.
APG fighter archetype: Polearm Master.
I'll add another: You only get one swift or immediate action per round (you lose your swift on the following round if you use an immediate between rounds).
A wizard (or any spellcaster) can create cure potions (or any potions for that matter) simply by upping the craft DC by 5.
Since they are not spell trigger or spell completion items, the spell known limitations do not apply to them.
|
|
My group played that way as well. Now I'm trying to figure out why.That's not in 3.5 to my recollection.In 3.5, if you shot a ranged attack into melee and missed by 4 or less, you hit the other person in the melee (often an ally).
You might be thinking of "firing into a grapple" in which case you roll randomly to see who you potentially hit.
See here:
http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/combatModifiers.htm
Not in Pathfinder.
Now when firing or using meele attacks against a grappled/grappling creature you never risk to hit the wrong target.
A wizard (or any spellcaster) can create cure potions (or any potions for that matter) simply by upping the craft DC by 5.
Since they are not spell trigger or spell completion items, the spell known limitations do not apply to them.
Except on page 551 under Creat a potion it says the creator must have prepared the spell to be placed in the potion(or atleast know the spell for spontaneous casters).
You really should learn to read the specfics of things and not just assume the general rules can't be overridden...heck even the feat Brew Potion says you must know the spell.
Except on page 551 under Creat a potion it says the creator must have prepared the spell to be placed in the potion(or atleast know the spell for spontaneous casters).
Yeah, and it says the same thing under every other types of magic item. They all say if a spell is involved, you must have it prepared (or known). And since it is perfectly fine to not have the spells for those items (which increases the DC by 5), the same holds true for potions.
Only spell-trigger and spell-completion items require the spells to create - all other items, potions included, don't need them. It is just harder to create them without the needed spells.
A wizard (or any spellcaster) can create cure potions (or any potions for that matter) simply by upping the craft DC by 5.
Since they are not spell trigger or spell completion items, the spell known limitations do not apply to them.
Except on page 551 under Creat a potion it says the creator must have prepared the spell to be placed in the potion(or atleast know the spell for spontaneous casters).
You really should learn to read the specfics of things and not just assume the general rules can't be overridden...heck even the feat Brew Potion says you must know the spell.
RD is correct. I don't like the rule, but he is right by RAW.
I wonder when that blog on magic item creation is going to be made. :)| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
You really should learn to read the specfics of things and not just assume the general rules can't be overridden...heck even the feat Brew Potion says you must know the spell.
And you should learn that if you can't say anything nice, you shouldn't say anything at all.
Except on page 551 under Creat a potion it says the creator must have prepared the spell to be placed in the potion(or atleast know the spell for spontaneous casters).
Yeah, and it says the same thing under every other types of magic item. They all say if a spell is involved, you must have it prepared (or known). And since it is perfectly fine to not have the spells for those items (which increases the DC by 5), the same holds true for potions.
Only spell-trigger and spell-completion items require the spells to create - all other items, potions included, don't need them. It is just harder to create them without the needed spells.
Exactly right.
RD is correct. I don't like the rule, but he is right by RAW.
I wonder when that blog on magic item creation is going to be made. :)
Thank you for your support.
|
|
This recently came up in a discussion with a friend of mine, and it appears that it's frequently ignored from what I've read on the forums:
Ranger's 2nd lvl Cure Light Wounds =/= Cleric's 1st level Cure Light Wounds.
E.g. a Ranger/Paladin shouldn't be able to use a cheap 750gp wand of CLW without rolling Use Magic Device, but rather have to get the 6000gp version made by a ranger.
I mean, why else have different prices for wands made by different casters?
Another example if this is ignored: Why would a wizard ever buy a wand of summon monster 3 made by a wizard when he could get a wand of summon monster 4 made by a summoner for the same price (or a wand of summon monster 5 even).
Because crafting the wand a different price, the spell is the same for the end user. [note that the ranger build wand will have a minimum CL of 4]
If a ranger want to build a CLW wand at the higher cost it is his problem, but it will be very difficult to sell it.
On the other hand he can easily sell the wands containing his class specific spells.
This recently came up in a discussion with a friend of mine, and it appears that it's frequently ignored from what I've read on the forums:
Ranger's 2nd lvl Cure Light Wounds =/= Cleric's 1st level Cure Light Wounds.
E.g. a Ranger/Paladin shouldn't be able to use a cheap 750gp wand of CLW without rolling Use Magic Device, but rather have to get the 6000gp version made by a ranger.
I mean, why else have different prices for wands made by different casters?
Another example if this is ignored: Why would a wizard ever buy a wand of summon monster 3 made by a wizard when he could get a wand of summon monster 4 made by a summoner for the same price (or a wand of summon monster 5 even).
Because crafting the wand a different price, the spell is the same for the end user. [note that the ranger build wand will have a minimum CL of 4]
If a ranger want to build a CLW wand at the higher cost it is his problem, but it will be very difficult to sell it.
On the other hand he can easily sell the wands containing his class specific spells.
Yes it seems most agree it's like that I see.
My groups will change it, though, so that not all magic is the same and can more easily distinguish between spells of the same name whether cast by a cleric, druid, ranger or bard etc. It will also make having ranks in UMD more desirable.
This recently came up in a discussion with a friend of mine, and it appears that it's frequently ignored from what I've read on the forums:
Ranger's 2nd lvl Cure Light Wounds =/= Cleric's 1st level Cure Light Wounds.
E.g. a Ranger/Paladin shouldn't be able to use a cheap 750gp wand of CLW without rolling Use Magic Device, but rather have to get the 6000gp version made by a ranger.
I mean, why else have different prices for wands made by different casters?
Another example if this is ignored: Why would a wizard ever buy a wand of summon monster 3 made by a wizard when he could get a wand of summon monster 4 made by a summoner for the same price (or a wand of summon monster 5 even).
Because crafting the wand a different price, the spell is the same for the end user. [note that the ranger build wand will have a minimum CL of 4]
If a ranger want to build a CLW wand at the higher cost it is his problem, but it will be very difficult to sell it.
On the other hand he can easily sell the wands containing his class specific spells.
Crafting a wand of Cure Light Wounds always costs 750 gold (375 to make) regardless of who makes it.
Since different classes get access to certain spells at different levels, the prices for two characters to make the same item might actually be different. An item is only worth two times what the caster of the lowest possible level can make it for. Calculate the market price based on the lowest possible level caster, no matter who makes the item.
The above is found under Magic Item Gold Piece Values. Since a cleric can make a CLW wand for 375 gold, so can a paladin. The only time you would use the actual numbers shown on the wand cost chart is for spells that only those classes can cast.
Crafting a wand of Cure Light Wounds always costs 750 gold (375 to make) regardless of who makes it.
Since different classes get access to certain spells at different levels, the prices for two characters to make the same item might actually be different. An item is only worth two times what the caster of the lowest possible level can make it for. Calculate the market price based on the lowest possible level caster, no matter who makes the item.The above is found under Magic Item Gold Piece Values. Since a cleric can make a CLW wand for 375 gold, so can a paladin. The only time you would use the actual numbers shown on the wand cost chart is for spells that only those classes can cast.
Read it again. An item can have varying COSTS during creation, based on who makes it. However, the MARKET PRICE is always the same regardless of who makes it.
|
|
Referred rules: -4 to ranged attacks (included missile fire) for soft cover. -4 to meele and ranged attacks for cover.
The rule was also in 3.5, which is when I started ignoring it. Or maybe 3.0, it's been awhile.
I consider it a silly rule because of stuff like: There's 50 orcs. You pick one. The other gives it cover. But, you don't care what orc you hit! And it's not like you assign two spots on the die wherein you roll versus the other orc, or any orc, or your friend if he's close. It just seems incomplete.
a) Why are you firing at a orc in the second rank of the enemy formation if you don't really care who you are hitting? Fire at the one in the first row.
b) It is one of the few advantage of fighting in a formation that is reflected in D&D. You can give shields and heavy armor to the first rank and lighter armor and reach weapons to the second and following ranks (the pike in RL can have the equivalent of a 15' reach)
3)- No other similar thing has such "soft cover". "I hide behind this guy" doesn't let you not get targetted by a spell, avoid a fireball, a sword swing, a ranseur, or even like a whip or silly 3.5 spiked chain.
Ray: Some effects are rays. You aim a ray as if using a ranged weapon, though typically you make a ranged touch attack rather than a normal ranged attack. As with a ranged weapon, you can fire into the dark or at an invisible creature and hope you hit something. You don't have to see the creature you're trying to hit, as you do with a targeted spell. Intervening creatures and obstacles, however, can block your line of sight or provide cover for the creature at which you're aiming.
Cover
When making a melee attack against an adjacent target, your target has cover if any line from any corner of your square to the target's square goes through a wall (including a low wall). When making a melee attack against a target that isn't adjacent to you (such as with a reach weapon), use the rules for determining cover from ranged attacks.
Touch Attacks: Some attacks completely disregard armor, including shields and natural armor—the aggressor need only touch a foe for such an attack to take full effect. In these cases, the attacker makes a touch attack roll (either ranged or melee). When you are the target of a touch attack, your AC doesn't include any armor bonus, shield bonus, or natural armor bonus. All other modifiers, such as your size modifier, Dexterity modifier, and deflection bonus (if any) apply normally. Some creatures have the ability to make incorporeal touch attacks. These attacks bypass solid objects, such as armor and shields, by passing through them. Incorporeal touch attacks work similarly to normal touch attacks except that they also ignore cover bonuses. Incorporeal touch attacks do not ignore armor bonuses granted by force effects, such as mage armor and bracers of armor.
Soft cover and firing into meele count for spells that require a ranged touch attack.
Cover (the standard kind, like a wall) count for meele touch attacks.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Wait, so a Wand of Lesser Restoration will always cost only 750 gp because a paladin can cast the spell as level 1 spell? Now that's good to know...
|
|
Note that:Spell trigger items like wands, staves, etc. (p.496): Casing a spell from a wand is usually a standard action that doesn't provoke attacks of opportunity. (If the spell being cast has a longer casting time than 1 action, however, it takes that long to cast the spell from a wand).Thank you! Wands of Enlarge Person just got a lot less abusable.
Multiple magical effects that increase size do not stack.
So you can't turn a dwarf into a giant and then enlarge him.
|
|
You really should learn to read the specfics of things and not just assume the general rules can't be overridden...heck even the feat Brew Potion says you must know the spell.And you should learn that if you can't say anything nice, you shouldn't say anything at all.
Except on page 551 under Creat a potion it says the creator must have prepared the spell to be placed in the potion(or atleast know the spell for spontaneous casters).
Yeah, and it says the same thing under every other types of magic item. They all say if a spell is involved, you must have it prepared (or known). And since it is perfectly fine to not have the spells for those items (which increases the DC by 5), the same holds true for potions.
Only spell-trigger and spell-completion items require the spells to create - all other items, potions included, don't need them. It is just harder to create them without the needed spells.
Exactly right.
Thank you for your support.
RD is correct. I don't like the rule, but he is right by RAW.
I wonder when that blog on magic item creation is going to be made. :)
About the "I don't like this".
In most fantasy literature the wizards are capable of concocting curative potion but generally they can't cast the spells.An aside:
If anything arcane is suppose to be within a wizards understanding, why are wizards unable to cast cure spells? Bard and Witches can. Summoner can sort of, but only in regards to their pet.Because Jason doesn't want them to have cure spells. Personally, I wouldn't have a problem with +1 level cure spells for wizards (just so the cleric is still the best at it), so CLW at 2nd, CMW at 3rd, and so on.
|
The only information a wand contains a spells level and its caster level. It doesn't matter if it was created by an arcane or divine caster, anyone with the spell on his list can use the wand (as can anyone else with a DC 20 UMD check). A ranger is able to use a 750 gp CLW wand from the store, even though the wand would be much more expensive if he had crafted it.
Similarly, a cleric can use a 750 gp lesser restoration wand crafted by a paladin. Or a 750 resist energy wand crafted by a ranger.
However, the MARKET PRICE is always the same regardless of who makes it.
That is incorrect. Certain items such as scrolls are dependent on who the creator is for price since caster level is a determinator of what the market price is, which is why in PFS it is assumed that classes which get new spells at odd levels are the creators.
I agree with you for thing likes cloaks of resistance though.
About the "I don't like this".
In most fantasy literature the wizards are capable of concocting curative potion but generally they can't cast the spells.
My immersion is based on games rules though, and it I think potions should be as spell dependent as scrolls are.
There are no rules that confirm your statement.There are no black or white medium sized dragonhide breastplates and fullplates (they included a rather stupid sage advice in the core rules).Sure there are, you just need to kill more than one dragon to get the appropriate amount of scales.
By selecting only choice scales and bits of hide, an armorsmith can produce one suit of masterwork banded mail for a creature two sizes smaller, one suit of masterwork half-plate for a creature three sizes smaller, or one masterwork breastplate or suit of full plate for a creature four sizes smaller. In each case, enough hide is available to produce a light or heavy masterwork shield in addition to the armor, provided that the dragon is Large or larger.
The rules clearly state that you are selecting bits and pieces of the dragon's hide to make the armor. That right there says you can pick bits and pieces of a dragon's hide. Since the rule itself says you are selecting bits and pieces, you can select bits and pieces from multiple dragons for larger bits of armor. Which makes it fuzzy, as the rest of the block (which is left over from 3.0) leaves things up in the air as to exactly how to do that (see below about shields/etc).
As to how to determine how many dragons you need of a specific size for armor, the rules in the equipment section specify how much to increase/decrease the weight of items based on size. So it's fairly easy to figure out how many Large dragon hides you need to make a medium sized set of full plate dragonhide. One large dragon has enough to make full plate the size of a Fine size. Doubling that makes one suit of Diminuitive. Doubling that makes a small, and doubling that makes a Medium. So, you get basically 1 x 2 x 2 x 2 = 8. So you have to kill 8 large white dragons to get one set of medium full plate. It doesn't say the shield is the same size, or what size it is either. That's always been troubling, as it means you either end up with 8 medium sized shields, or you end up with 8 tiny or 1 medium when combined. I have always wished they'd clarify this though. It requires the rules to be interpreted, rather than read straight out. So it's supported by the rules, but could also be denied by the GM as well. One of those fuzzy areas where you can read the rule either way and still be perfectly valid.
|
|
However, the MARKET PRICE is always the same regardless of who makes it.That is incorrect. Certain items such as scrolls are dependent on who the creator is for price since caster level is a determinator of what the market price is, which is why in PFS it is assumed that classes which get new spells at odd levels are the creators.
I agree with you for thing likes cloaks of resistance though.
Ravingdork is right.
The market price is always the same when the caster level of the item is the same.
The casters that get the spell at a even levels make a scroll that is at least 1 caster level higher and the difference in price stem from that, not from them getting the spell at a higher character level.
However, the MARKET PRICE is always the same regardless of who makes it.That is incorrect. Certain items such as scrolls are dependent on who the creator is for price since caster level is a determinator of what the market price is, which is why in PFS it is assumed that classes which get new spells at odd levels are the creators.
I agree with you for thing likes cloaks of resistance though.
Ravingdork is right.
The market price is always the same when the caster level of the item is the same.
The casters that get the spell at a even levels make a scroll that is at least 1 caster level higher and the difference in price stem from that, not from them getting the spell at a higher character level.
Actually I am correct.
My cloak example agrees with RD for caster level dependent items.My scroll example disagress for caster level variable items.
PS:I thought he was making a general magic item statement. Maybe next time I will read the entire post.
In any event wands are caster level variable items.
As an example if I make a wand of X with a caster level of 4 and another one of the same spell with a caster level of 5 then the one with the caster level of 5 will cost more to make and buy.
Spell Effect Base Price Example
Spell level x caster level x 750 gp Wand of fireball
If you want an example look at the SRD which does the math for you. Notice that a level 3 wand of magic missile and an level 5 one have different prices, and the prices are the same as if you used the above formula from the PRD.
1x3x750=2250(Same as SRD)
1x5x750=3750(Same as SRD)
PS2:If you are saying that a caster level of X does not change the price as long as X is the same for both classes then I never disagreed with that.
There are no rules that confirm your statement.There are no black or white medium sized dragonhide breastplates and fullplates (they included a rather stupid sage advice in the core rules).Sure there are, you just need to kill more than one dragon to get the appropriate amount of scales.
If RD goes outside of RAW it is fair to assume you can as well
|
|
PS2:If you are saying that a caster level of X does not change the price as long as X is the same for both classes then I never disagreed with that.
I am saying that if the caster level of a potion, wand or scroll is higher both the craft price and the sell price are higher,
but
if some caster get a spell as a level 2 spell instead of level 1 spell and the item has the same caster level the craft price change but the sell price stay the same.
Example:
- a CLW wand made by a cleric at CL 4 cost 1.500 to craft and is sold at 3.000
- a CLW wand made by a ranger at CL 4 cost 3.000 to craft but it is old at 3.000 [in a magic mart :) ] as that is the minimum price for a wand of CLW with that casting level.
The situation will change if in your game world the magic item crafting feats are taken only by a few individuals and the seller rule the market, but that is not the standard game situation.
I am almost sure this is RAW, but I will check if I can find a relevant rule.
|
|
Mind Blank
...
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). This spell also grants a +8 resistance bonus on saving throws against all mind-affecting spells and effects. Mind blank even foils limited wish, miracle, and wish spells when they are used in such a way as to gain information about the target. In the case of scrying that scans an area the creature is in, such as arcane eye, the spell works but the creature simply isn't detected. Scrying attempts that are targeted specifically at the subject do not work at all.
This spell has greatly changed.
- it has lost the blanket protection from mind affecting spells and effects in exchange for a +8 to ST (note than in 3.5 it gave protection to positive effects too, like the moreale effects from bard songs).
- it has increased the level of protection against divination. It now block any divination spell, even those that increase the perception capabilities of the guy using the divination spell like detect evil, see invisible, arcane sight.
Note that sometime this effect can require a careful reading of the spells interacting with it.
For example, Arcane sight say "If you concentrate on a specific creature within 120 feet of you as a standard action, you can determine whether it has any spellcasting or spell-like abilities, ....", as the spell give a positive reading (spellcaster) or nothing the results for the guy concentrating on protecte guy a "nothing/non spellcaster" as the guy don't perceive a spellcasting ability, not "you can't determine if the guy is a spellcaster or not". Saying that will give a lot of a informations to a canny player.
Example:
- a CLW wand made by a cleric at CL 4 cost 1.500 to craft and is sold at 3.000
- a CLW wand made by a ranger at CL 4 cost 3.000 to craft but it is old at 3.000 [in a magic mart :) ] as that is the minimum price for a wand of CLW with that casting level.The situation will change if in your game world the magic item crafting feats are taken only by a few individuals and the seller rule the market, but that is not the standard game situation.
I am almost sure this is RAW, but I will check if I can find a relevant rule.
Only true if you get the same effect for it. If for some reason a different caster class has the spell at a different caster level, and that level affects the spell (such as number of dice, bonus healing, etc), then it would be worth more than the 'standard' wand from the core class.
In my own games, I've started keeping track of who or what made the wand and charging the price accordingly, just so I don't have to try to figure out on a spell by spell basis if the differences in caster level make a difference to the spell usability.
EDIT :
Example, Bard Cure Moderate Wounds wand is a CL 4 wand (2nd level spell). While a cleric's CMW wand is a CL 3. The Bard's does 2d8+4 hp per use, the cleric's does 2d8+3, being one level lower in CL. Thus, the bard wand should be more valuable than the clerics wand, given that it heals 50 more hps over it's lifetime than the cleric wand does.
Cure serious is more so, with the bard's being a CL 7 and the Cleric's being a CL 5, 2hp difference per usage.
|
|
The imbiber of the potion is both the caster and the target. Spells with a range of personal cannot be made into potions.
Considering that the site claims addition of errata...
The drinker of a potion is both the effective target and the caster of the effect (though the potion indicates the caster level, the drinker still controls the effect).
Does this mean that a Level 10 Fighter that drinks a Cure Light Wounds potion heals 1d8 or 1d8+3? (I say +3, because 3rd Caster Level is required for the Brew Potion feat.)
Either way: Cure potions do not always provide the same benefit as a maximized cure spell...
The imbiber of the potion is both the caster and the target. Spells with a range of personal cannot be made into potions.Considering that the site claims addition of errata...
The drinker of a potion is both the effective target and the caster of the effect (though the potion indicates the caster level, the drinker still controls the effect).Does this mean that a Level 10 Fighter that drinks a Cure Light Wounds potion heals 1d8 or 1d8+3? (I say +3, because 3rd Caster Level is required for the Brew Potion feat.)
Either way: Cure potions do not always provide the same benefit as a maximized cure spell...
The CLW (made by a cleric) does 1d8+1 when you drink it. It has a minimum CL of 1 (the brew potion feat is required to brew it, but that has nothing to do with the minimum caster level you can make the potion at, which is assumed to be set to the minimum level to cast the spell, level 1 in this case). A cure moderate would do 2d8+3, since 3rd level is the minimum level to cast Cure Moderate for a cleric (again, assuming a cleric made it). A bard's Cure Moderate would be 2d8+4 (since his minimum caster level for CMW is 4).
|
|
mdt, please re-read the post and example I made.
I was very careful in specifying that the CL affect the sell price of the item, what don't affect it is the level at which a class acquire the spell.
In reality there is only a very specific situation where the level of a spell matter and getting it at a later level is an advantage: if the spell require a ST.
A CLW wand made by a cleric has a ST of 11 (level 1 spell plus 11 minimum wisdom).
A CLW wand made by a ranger has a ST of 13 (level 2 spell plus 12 minimum wisdom).
So a dampyr or undead will have a harder time saving against the CLW.