Wands


Pathfinder Society

1 to 50 of 51 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Silver Crusade 1/5

John and Mike, I would like you two to look at changing the rule that wands have to have 50 charges. A 4th level wand [Greater aspect of the Angel] costs 30,000 gp with 50 charges. With the WBL that we get by el 11 of 82,000 gp how can a caster buy a 4th level wand as that is about 30% of his total wealth. Martial casters have to spend at least 60% of their WBL on arms and armor or they get killed by normal encounters then you have to buy healing items and other general purpose spells [scrolls].

There is no logical reason that wands have to have 50 charges. I played in a long term game where wands had between 3 and 10 charges with some odd wands that had more than 20. Staffs on the other hand had up to 50 charges. It seems to me the rules team just used rules from there home games when they came up with the 50 charge rule for wands. 4th level wands do no fit in the expected WBL if they are required to have 50 charges. There are not enough wands with less than 50 charges on chronicle sheets to make a diffrence in the game.

A large number of magic items in the game are not priced so a high level character cannot buy them with the current WBL as presented on pf 399 of the core book. That table was not IMO compared with the cost of magic items in an environment where there is no crafting.

Paizo Employee 4/5 Developer

Lou Diamond wrote:
John and Mike, I would like you two to look at changing the rule that wands have to have 50 charges. A 4th level wand [Greater aspect of the Angel] costs 30,000 gp with 50 charges. With the WBL that we get by el 11 of 82,000 gp how can a caster buy a 4th level wand as that is about 30% of his total wealth. Martial casters have to spend at least 60% of their WBL on arms and armor or they get killed by normal encounters then you have to buy healing items and other general purpose spells [scrolls].

I'm listening.

Quote:
There is no logical reason that wands have to have 50 charges. I played in a long term game where wands had between 3 and 10 charges with some odd wands that had more than 20. Staffs on the other hand had up to 50 charges. It seems to me the rules team just used rules from there home games when they came up with the 50 charge rule for wands. 4th level wands do no fit in the expected WBL if they are required to have 50 charges. There are not enough wands with less than 50 charges on chronicle sheets to make a diffrence in the game.

Is 50 charges an arbitrary number for wands? In a way, yes it is, but that's largely so that the rules can standardize how one crafts wands and how readily one can craft a wand. The cost per spell on a wand is half that of a scroll because with a wand the crafter is buying in bulk, so to speak. Staves had 50 charges in 3rd edition, but Pathfinder changed that to 10 in exchange for a much more straightforward and streamlined means of recharging. I am confident that the numbers the designers selected reflect their intentions for balancing characters options and magic items.

My development response to what you're voicing is to include specific partially charged wands into the adventures and Chronicle sheets. In fact, these are showing up with some frequency, giving characters ever-increasing options for such partially charged items. A partially charged wand only arises when one uses a fully charged wand, so by asking to buy custom partially charged wands, you are asking the wand crafter to stand around and empty valuable charges into the air so that you can buy a cheaper magic item. That doesn't quite work.

When you start challenging what is reasonable for a given wealth-by-level expectation, though, I feel you're starting to veer outside of Pathfinder Society and into a rules forum discussion. You have not yet presented a reason so compelling that I feel PFS should break from the Pathfinder core rules.

Quote:
A large number of magic items in the game are not priced so a high level character cannot buy them with the current WBL as presented on pf 399 of the core book. That table was not IMO compared with the cost of magic items in an environment where there is no crafting.

Although it might be better to ask the rules team directly, I am of the impression that the WBL table was designed without crafting taken into account (or taking into account light levels of crafting and not crafting everything). Either way, it's a discussion for a different forum.

----------

What you're asking for is a fundamental change to the rules and thus needs to be addressed to the rules team in that forum. Although he's welcome to say otherwise, I believe Mike and I are of the same mind in saying "no thanks."

Silver Crusade 1/5

John Thanks for the prompt response. I think the real culprit is that the crafting rules are way broken but that's for the rules forum. I understand that PFS does not and cannot make sweeping rules changes.

Perhaps more boons like Zarta gave out that allowed you to buy one item of an X value. I Used it to buy a 7 charge wand.

]A partially charged wand only arises when one uses a fully charged wand, so by asking to buy custom partially charged wands, you are asking the wand crafter to stand around and empty valuable charges into the air so that you can buy a cheaper magic item. That doesn't quite work.[/quote wrote:

The above is why it makes no sense for a caster to have to go to Wally's wand O matic when the caster can make the wand him or her self and make it to their specs all it would require is a basic price for each level of wand
For instance limit the charges to 5, 10, 25 and 50 charges that would be only 16 prices quite easy to do. [Yes I realize that would be limited crafting but it makes more sense than the way it is now to me.] Besides any arcane caster worth his or her salt would not trust anyone to make their tools of the trade.

Paizo Employee 4/5 Developer

Lou Diamond wrote:
Perhaps more boons like Zarta gave out that allowed you to buy one item of an X value. I Used it to buy a 7 charge wand.

Um...Lou? Was that, perchance, a 4th-level wand with 7 charges (2,940 gp) that you got off a Chronicle sheet? The boon in question specifically says "This item is not restricted by your current Fame score, but must otherwise be an item you could purchase," emphasis mine. A partially charged wand not found on a Chronicle sheet is not a legal purchase, so it's not something that Zarta could give you with that boon.

5/5 *

4 people marked this as a favorite.

Lou, on this topic, I will give you a very perfect logical reason. The most obvious problem with allowing what you are asking is that it literally destroys the need for scrolls, and 99% of potions (exceptions being the potions that make longer spells into standard actions).

One cast of CLW?
Potion - 50g
Scroll - 25g
Wand charge - 15g

Casters would never purchase scrolls (for level 0-4 spells) if this rule was in place. The disparity actually gets worse the higher in spell levels you go. AND it seriously buffs UMD since wands always take DC 20 to activate unlike scrolls.

Maybe this is what you are referring to when you say "the crafting rules are broken", but to me it just makes the difference between scrolls, potions and wands matter.

There is a player in our area with an arcane trickster that was VERY dependent on having greater invis up all the time. You know what, he shelled out and purchased a wand of it (yep, all 20,000+ gold). It really made his character, and he saved up for it, but he got it and he had fun with it afterwards.

Who knows, maybe in the future we will see a boon like customer order (the "buy ammo in lots of 10" boon) but for wands (e.g., Skyreach Hand-me-downs: You may purchase a wand with 5 charges instead of the usual 50. When you do, check one of the boxes below. When you check the third box, cross this boon off the chronicle sheet.). That would be pretty neat.

Grand Lodge 4/5

Wands need to have some disadvantage, bulk buy 50 charges is a reasonable trade off.

You could offer "flawed" wands that have less than full charges at time of manufacture, but they trigger AoOs when activated. It is still a spell trigger activation device, but it doesn't necessarily trigger reliably. Even Press ENTER and nothing happens? You stop, look at the keyboard, press ENTER again and look at the screen. All very distracting.

Or you might include spell failure chance equal to the amount of the unusable charges after item completion. 40 charges available would be a 20% failure chance, 10 charges available would be 80%. Defective products are sold all the time, why not the same for magic items?

All items have 3 qualities: Cost, Advantages and Disadvantages. You can not change one without changing the other two. If the qualities are not balanced properly, you get items that are either OP or UP.

3/5

CRobledo wrote:
Who knows, maybe in the future we will see a boon like customer order (the "buy ammo in lots of 10" boon) but for wands (e.g., Skyreach Hand-me-downs: You may purchase a wand with 5 charges instead of the usual 50. When you do, check one of the boxes below. When you check the third box, cross this boon off the chronicle sheet.). That would be pretty neat.

I think this is a great idea for a boon since the PFS wealth rules are extremely hostile to expensive consumables and a boon that makes it worth it to purchase higher-level wands could make the game more interesting by increasing the use of highly situational 2nd-4th level spells.

Lantern Lodge 5/5 *

Well, there is a boon that does something similar with ammo; it wouldn't be completely out of the ordinary. And that would be a cool boon to hand out as a prize. Could even make it flavorful and only allow a certain list of spells.

Grand Lodge 4/5 5/55/5 ** Venture-Lieutenant, Florida—Melbourne

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Zebado wrote:

Wands need to have some disadvantage, bulk buy 50 charges is a reasonable trade off.

You could offer "flawed" wands that have less than full charges at time of manufacture, but they trigger AoOs when activated. It is still a spell trigger activation device, but it doesn't necessarily trigger reliably. Even Press ENTER and nothing happens? You stop, look at the keyboard, press ENTER again and look at the screen. All very distracting.

Or you might include spell failure chance equal to the amount of the unusable charges after item completion. 40 charges available would be a 20% failure chance, 10 charges available would be 80%. Defective products are sold all the time, why not the same for magic items?

All items have 3 qualities: Cost, Advantages and Disadvantages. You can not change one without changing the other two. If the qualities are not balanced properly, you get items that are either OP or UP.

I had a defective Wand of Fireballs in one of my campaigns. It had a range of 1-ft.

Dark Archive

Saint Caleth wrote:
CRobledo wrote:
Who knows, maybe in the future we will see a boon like customer order (the "buy ammo in lots of 10" boon) but for wands (e.g., Skyreach Hand-me-downs: You may purchase a wand with 5 charges instead of the usual 50. When you do, check one of the boxes below. When you check the third box, cross this boon off the chronicle sheet.). That would be pretty neat.
I think this is a great idea for a boon since the PFS wealth rules are extremely hostile to expensive consumables and a boon that makes it worth it to purchase higher-level wands could make the game more interesting by increasing the use of highly situational 2nd-4th level spells.

I don't really follow your logic. Being able to spend 2 pretige to get a 5x scroll of a level 2 spell, 2x scroll of a level 3 spell, or level 1 spell wand have made PFS wealth rules insanely friendly to expensive consumables for my characters.

Sovereign Court 2/5

Coupled with familiars that are capable of using wands (such as imps), this would be a broken change in my opinion. Right now the only thing inhibiting people from purchasing, say, wands of haste (or BOF) for their familiars to use is the cost of a 3rd level (or 4th level) wand with 50 charges.

If it were possible to purchase partially charged wands for less money, pretty much every single wand-wielding familiar out there would be rocking one of those wands. And there would be many more wizards out there with improved familiar. And we'd have crap loads of imps. Heck, nowadays we even have clerics with imps (diabolist)!

It is very strong having an imp take care of casting haste out of a wand because it enables a caster to do other things in the opening round. But the cost of that wand is enough for casters to hold off on buying it (at least for the time being) and keep a healthy supply of scrolls instead.

Silver Crusade 1/5

The problem I see is that wands of 3rd and 4th level are still overpriced due to having to have 50 charges. The real problem is not letting caster scribe scrolls and make wands. This would not disrupt the WBL which is broke IMO but that's for SKR in the Rule Forum.

IN game I just can't see a high level arcane caster sitting around all day making wands for low level shulbs to use when they go adventuring. They would spend time researching new better spells creating there own tools for when they leave there sanctums to adventure themselves.

CRobledo letting wands have less than 50 charges would in no way harm potions and scrolls. For instance my favriote potion Enlarge person effects the imbiber the same round while a wand takes until the next round. Potions of Healing would not be harmed as they are necessary to carry because healing buddies cannot always get to you in time to fix you up. Scrolls might be a diffrent story but I only use scrolls of 3 level or above any way but that just me [My PC's]

5/5 *

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Lou Diamond wrote:
CRobledo letting wands have less than 50 charges would in no way harm potions and scrolls.

I cited a lot of examples where 1-charge wands are just plain better:

easy to UMD - harms scrolls
works underwater - harms potions
works in darkness - harms scrolls
can be used for personal range spells - harms potions
CHEAP per cast price - harms both

You cited the specific examples where potions are better, which I did cover in my initial post. Lesser restoration is a good potion. Enlarge person, reduce person.

I just don't see the difference between letting you buy 1-charge wands of a level 4 spell over just purchasing a scroll of it. Except saving you money. Just dish out for the scroll.

Paizo Employee 4/5 Developer

Citing the exception of a few potions replicating spells that have a 1 round cast time does not adequately refute the very strong argument that Crobledo and I share. I see no reason to change the policy on wands.

Lou Diamond wrote:
IN game I just can't see a high level arcane caster sitting around all day making wands for low level shulbs to use when they go adventuring. They would spend time researching new better spells creating there own tools for when they leave there sanctums to adventure themselves.

There is some truth to that, but applying that idea would actually harm our wand economy, not help you purchase cheaper wands. If the wizards, clerics, and other spellcasters of the world decided not to craft "wands for low level shulbs," then we could kiss the cheap and plentiful wands of cure light wounds goodbye.

Silver Crusade 1/5

John why would it harm the plentiful wands of cure light wounds there are many non adventuring monks/friars [not martial artist monks.] in religious orders/communities that could be assigned to craft them as part of their duties and these worthies would not be in the least by offended in the least in providing income for their orders. That is one of the main differences between arcane and divine casters is that divine casters are community oriented while arcane caster are in it for themselves for the most part.

1/5

Lou, I think that, with the rules as they are written (I try to avoid the "RAW" acronym, as it is so often used to point out lack of particular verbiage), Wands can only be created with 50 charges. Chalk it up to "magic," and the world keeps turning.

With my logic, nobody can create a 10-charge insert spell name HERE wand; you need to find one that has already had 40 charges used up.

Does that make high-level wands out of reach for most characters? Yes; as intended.

Paizo Employee 4/5 Developer

Lou Diamond wrote:
John why would it harm the plentiful wands of cure light wounds there are many non adventuring monks/friars [not martial artist monks.] in religious orders/communities that could be assigned to craft them as part of their duties and these worthies would not be in the least by offended in the least in providing income for their orders. That is one of the main differences between arcane and divine casters is that divine casters are community oriented while arcane caster are in it for themselves for the most part.

Gotta be honest here, Lou—I'm only in this thread for a little bit longer. As far as I can tell, you've made your point, and I've made my decision. I fail to see the point of arguing the minutiae of in-game reasoning based on the assumed motivations of unnamed spellcasters.

So...

We have a bunch of monks and friars going about selflessly throwing themselves at the task of creating wands for the good of well-intentioned adventurers. Let's assume, then, that the arcane spellcasters that you mentioned before are self-centered and only/mostly craft for themselves (to summarize your earlier post). Now you're clarifying your argument to say we shouldn't have wands of things like mage armor, ill omen, magic missile and the like. Once again, I feel making the in-game argument that you are only risks harming the continued plethora of wands available to folks.

Have I failed to address any of your points?

Silver Crusade 1/5

John, I just thought of what a good low level mission for PFS this season would be, as the war drags on in the world wound scrolls, potions and wands of all types of are at a premium due to all of the healing needed in the war effort. The Churches of Iomedae and Abadar have had convoys of healing items ambushed in route to the front and they want the pathfinders to stop this and deal with the culprits. This can take place almost anywhere so it can keep low levels from around the area of the world wound and still be pertinent to the theme of the year.

What do you think of this as a premise for a 1 to 4 mission?

5/5 5/55/5 ** Venture-Captain, Germany—Hamburg

Quote:
That is one of the main differences between arcane and divine casters is that divine casters are community oriented while arcane caster are in it for themselves for the most part.

Basically, divine spellcasters are religion oriented. Nothing more.

Good characters are the ones who are generally community oriented, but good alignment isn't limited to divine spellcasters ;)

Also, the way I see it, crafting magic items doesn't have much to do with wanting to help the community. There's lots of gold to be made with crafting, and within a high-fantasy world (such as Golarion), being an item-crafter is quite a common career for a lot of spellcasters. ;)

Grand Lodge 4/5

CRobledo wrote:
Lou Diamond wrote:
CRobledo letting wands have less than 50 charges would in no way harm potions and scrolls.

I cited a lot of examples where 1-charge wands are just plain better:

easy to UMD - harms scrolls
works underwater - harms potions
works in darkness - harms scrolls
can be used for personal range spells - harms potions
CHEAP per cast price - harms both

You cited the specific examples where potions are better, which I did cover in my initial post. Lesser restoration is a good potion. Enlarge person, reduce person.

I just don't see the difference between letting you buy 1-charge wands of a level 4 spell over just purchasing a scroll of it. Except saving you money. Just dish out for the scroll.

How does wands being usable for Personal range spells, which cannot be put into potions, harm potions? Null data.

Also, note, he was not asking for single charge wands, he was asking for wands to be available at other than a flat 50 charges, whether that would be 10, 20, 25, or what-have-you would be up to campaign management.

A 25 charge wand would be in a reasonable price range, and might be something that might be "logically" sold by a retired adventurer who no longer needs it. "Youngling, I used half this wand keeping me and my buddies alive. May it serve you as well."

5/5 5/55/5 ** Venture-Captain, Germany—Hamburg

kinevon wrote:
Personal range spells, which cannot be put into potions

Where exactly did you get that from?

This is what the CRB says:
Core Rulebook wrote:
A potion or oil can be used only once. It can duplicate the effect of a spell of up to 3rd level that has a casting time of less than 1 minute and targets one or more creatures or objects.

A personal range spell has "you" listed as the target. So of course it targets a creature. The only limitation is it can only target the caster.

Liberty's Edge 4/5 5/5

Andreas Forster wrote:
kinevon wrote:
Personal range spells, which cannot be put into potions
Where exactly did you get that from?

Here:

PRD wrote:
The imbiber of the potion is both the caster and the target. Spells with a range of personal cannot be made into potions.

I don't have my CRB with me, but the text is the same.

Grand Lodge 4/5

Yep, the rules for making potions are split between two parts of the CRB. The one less noticed, which is in the section on actual potions, rather than the item creation feats, is where the personal range potions are not allowed is referenced, IIRC.

Also, on second thought, the works underwater thing is still subject to table variation, since it is reliant on the potion spoinge from the ARG to support that potions won't work underwater.

Works in darkness is, again,m fairly much not an issue for scrolls, since that is the province of Oils of Daylight... And, for PFS, other than a cast from another PC, Continual Flame items are trumped by Deeper Darkness anyhow.

On Easy to UMD: Pretty much null, since anyone really wanting to use UMD is going to get it high, so they can use the free scrolls, if any, provided during the scenario.

Cheap is the only real objection that carries any weight, and the price is still higher per cast than a self-scribed scroll would have been.

Batman Wizards are still going to go for scrolls, in general, since many spells are only likely to be used on rare occasions, so whether scrolls and potions are still the go-to for single casts is up to the definition of how many charges a partially charged wand would have.

Spoiler:
And how to explain the Wand of Cure Light Wounds available on one of the First Steps chronicles with 25 charges, but no purchase limit?

The Exchange 4/5 5/5

I'm really surprised no on has brought this up, but the potion/wand/scroll difference in pricing has plenty of real-world analogies based on the concept of bulk pricing.

So let's say I want to buy...a SD memory card. I go into the store and can buy a 16GB model for $25 (a scroll). However if I am willing to buy 50 of them, the total price is only $750 (a wand). That's a 40% savings! And to stretch the analogy a bit I can buy a card bundled with a USB adapter for $50 (a potion).

As a consumer I have to make the choice... Do I really think I am going to use 50 cards (or at least more than 30)? If so I should buy the bulk pack. Otherwise I buy as many of the singles as I think I need.

economic theory boring stuff:
I can't really say to the vendor "hey, sell me two of the cards out of the bulk pack for $30. That's what they cost each, so that's the only fair thing to do!" They'd laugh because (a) that eats into their profit margin and (b) the concept of marginal cost is how they are managing to sell the bulk pack so cheaply in the first place. Packaging, shipping, and component cost are all lower for the manufacturer when it is dealing with a quantity of 50 instead of 1.

Pathfinder deal with it stuff:
As has been mentioned before, the requirement that wands be fully charged when created is a design decision that causes players to have to make choices. If you could buy any wand with 1 charge, there would be no reason anyone would ever buy a scroll (and a much reduced market for potions as well).

Sovereign Court 5/5 RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I'd want to point out that partially charged wands are what make chronicle sheets awesome. :-)

5/5 *

kinevon wrote:
On Easy to UMD: Pretty much null, since anyone really wanting to use UMD is going to get it high, so they can use the free scrolls, if any, provided during the scenario.

Not Null, I have plenty of characters with 1 rank only in UMD to use wands outside combat.

All my other examples are still valid, even if there is still some table variation. If we are counting examples with table variation, then add in wands are usually allowed in spring-loaded wrist sheathes while scrolls and potions are usually not.

I don't see how opening up wands to have less charges, even 25, would do anything but hurt over help. If 25 charge wands were allowed, why would I even buy a 50 charge wand over a 25? Just to get it free with 2pp for level 1 wands? No thanks.

Like Matthew said above, they are some of the best rewards left for chronicle sheets. Let's not take that away too.

Like for ammo in <50 packs, I think this is best left for a con boon.

Silver Crusade 5/5

Frankly I would like to see the option of higher caster level wands over partially charged ones. I am not sure why they were banned in the first place, as they DO cost more. Certain wands are just not very useful because of the short duration time because they are minimum caster level.

Grand Lodge 2/5 RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Katie Sommer wrote:
Frankly I would like to see the option of higher caster level wands over partially charged ones. I am not sure why they were banned in the first place, as they DO cost more. Certain wands are just not very useful because of the short duration time because they are minimum caster level.

I would assume that the reason for always-minimum-CL on wands (and scrolls/potions, for that matter) is so that a wand of X is a wand of X is a wand of X. That is, it's for simplicity across this worldwide campaign.

That's my guess on the reason. Whether that's a good enough reason is another topic entirely, and one upon which I've personally not yet formulated an opinion.

Liberty's Edge 4/5 5/55/5 **

Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Maps, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

Actually the reason for it may be my entire Fault...

Josh Frost was originally intended to allow Higher Caster level Potions, Wands and Scrolls at higher then Min Level, but it seems I may have inadvertently pushed the exact opposite when Mark was Temp in control of PFS and he went with that...

Lantern Lodge 5/5 *

2 people marked this as a favorite.

And Dragnmoon is why we can't have nice things :P

Silver Crusade 5/5

There are other reasons to have it as well, and one came up in a game I ran last night. Fortunate die rolls are all that saved an unfortunate PC from a nasty curse, as scrolls are also only available at minimum caster level...

There already exist higher caster level wands on chronicles, so a wand of magic missile or shield (two I know for sure are out there) isn't always the same...

Dark Archive 5/5

Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Maps Subscriber

I agree, above minimum caster level items of cure spells to help the occasional bad table comp / cursed wound heal-checks-versus-death spiral wouldn't be a bad thing.

At the usual costs, so they're still going to be costly.

A note for Lou: level 1 anythings aren't 'expensive consumables', to me. Dweomer's essence is about where those start to come in.

The Exchange 5/5

Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Dragnmoon wrote:

Actually the reason for it may be my entire Fault...

Josh Frost was originally intended to allow Higher Caster level Potions, Wands and Scrolls at higher then Min Level, but it seems I may have inadvertently pushed the exact opposite when Mark was Temp in control of PFS and he went with that...

boo. i blame you. ;)

btw. if john's still listening: does the minimum caster level on wands apply to wands created by a character ( wizard ) with their arcane bonded wand? or can that caster choose what CL to set it ( up to his own caster level ) ?

Dark Archive 4/5

...

1/5

Vincent Colon-Roine wrote:
Dragnmoon wrote:

Actually the reason for it may be my entire Fault...

Josh Frost was originally intended to allow Higher Caster level Potions, Wands and Scrolls at higher then Min Level, but it seems I may have inadvertently pushed the exact opposite when Mark was Temp in control of PFS and he went with that...

boo. i blame you. ;)

btw. if john's still listening: does the minimum caster level on wands apply to wands created by a character ( wizard ) with their arcane bonded wand? or can that caster choose what CL to set it ( up to his own caster level ) ?

Why not? If he's willing to pay the extra gold to do it then what is the problem with it?

Dark Archive 4/5

Because it's not currently allowed by the PFS rules.

5/5

David Higaki wrote:
And Dragnmoon is why we can't have nice things :P

This.

4/5

This was the old dragnmoon....I hear the 5-star version is much nicer....lol

edit: fixed!

Liberty's Edge 4/5 5/55/5 **

Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Maps, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber
June Soler wrote:
This was the old dragonmoon....I hear the 5-star version is much nicer....lol

I don't know I hear he goes crazy when people misspell his name, and his head still explodes with the mention of play, play, play!.

;)

Paizo Employee 4/5 Developer

Dragnmoon wrote:
June Soler wrote:
This was the old dragonmoon....I hear the 5-star version is much nicer....lol

I don't know I hear he goes crazy when people misspell his name, and his head still explodes with the mention of play, play, play!.

;)

As always, "play, play, play" is a great way to get past someone's being upset about "play, play, play."

Silver Crusade 3/5

John, as long as we have you here, any chance you and Mike might talk about changing the requirement that wands are always at minimum caster level, thus exonerating Dragnmoon?

5/5

I heard dragonmoon hates play, play, play.

Liberty's Edge 4/5 5/55/5 **

Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Maps, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

It is Play, Play, Play! Damn it!... *Heads explodes*...

Paizo Employee 4/5 Developer

The Fox wrote:

John, as long as we have you here, any chance you and Mike might talk about changing the requirement that wands are always at minimum caster level, thus exonerating Dragnmoon?

I imagine that's unlikely at this time. Atypical wands (both in terms of caster level as well as charges) are very appreciated items on Chronicle sheets. Allowing different CL wands would also open up the doors to higher CL scrolls and potions without Chronicle sheets; it's not quite the same, but I foresee it being a petition within a week of that first announcement. By that point, I'd be looking at a very substantial loss in Chronicle sheet material. What's more, players would start complaining about earlier Chronicle sheets' not having anything cool, for the unique wands, potions, and scroll would now be available via Fame. Although allowing this would give more options to the players, it would also undermine the reward structure that we have. Sorry, but no.

As for using an arcane bond class feature to make a wand with a higher CL, my initial thought is "no." Beyond allowing a wizard to use item crafting prices, the rules for acquiring an item are the same. Mike and I meet at least once a week to discuss campaign minutiae, and I'll bring it up then and see if there's any merit to doing otherwise.

3/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I like this answer, but you what would make me love this answer.

If there were more higher CL items on chronicles.

Silver Crusade 3/5

Thanks. *<B)

2/5 5/55/5

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Accessories, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

On the subject of wands/potions/scrolls with higher than minimum CL, looking through my 83 chronicle sheets, I've found:

In case people don't want to know these exist on chronicle sheets?:
wands:
magic missile (3rd, 5th)
dispel magic (11th, 14th)
wand of scorching ray (7th)

scrolls:
resist energy (7th)
scorching ray (7th)

potions:
cure light wounds (3rd)
neutralize poison (6th)
shield of faith (6th)
barkskin (9th)

Some of these, like the 14th level dispel magic wand, are pretty cool. But some of them, like the 6th level (instead of the minimum of 5) potion of neutralize poison and the 3rd level potion of cure light wounds are kinda underwhelming.

Regardless, as has been pointed out, the only item access that really matters on a chronicle sheet is partially-charged wands and higher-CL consumables (and the rare unique item). We need more of those, because for everything else on the chronicle sheets, we already have access to them through fame.

Grand Lodge 4/5

John: While I see your concern, I think there would be plenty of room, even with higher CL wands, potions and scrolls as only being Fame-limited access, for plenty of partially charged wands, and maybe odd-ball potions or oils for spells that aren't normally available in potion format, as limited-purchase chronicle items.

Just my initial thoughts, of course.

5/5

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Yeah that wand of [redacted] at CL 11/14 is pretty sweet. ;-)

Grand Lodge 4/5

Our players get excited when they see a higher CL Wand or partial charge item on the chronicle sheet. I like the idea of keeping it like it is but having something fun or unique on each chronicle sheet.

It can be a one time boon, misc. magic item not seen anywhere else or an influence modifier.

After sitting on the edge of our seats for a 45 minute battle and getting a plane Jane chronicle sheet is a bit of a let down.

Happy Holidays everyone!

1 to 50 of 51 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Organized Play / Pathfinder Society / Wands All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.