|
I know the wizard and sorcerer's arcane bond has caused a LOT of questions. I did a forum search on arcane bond - there are a ton of threads, all asking pretty much the same few questions. Can we please get some much needed clarification to this VERY cool concept?
Here are some questions I tend to see repeatedly ...
1. Please clarify how magical enchantment works when related to an arcane bond. What exactly can a wizard do to enhance his bond, when can he do it etc. The rules are pretty vague at this point
2. Please clarify exactly what "A bonded object can be used once per day to cast any one spell that the wizard knows, just as if the wizard had cast it" means. I think I know what the rules are going for, but it could be clearer
3. Please let us know how these rules differ from arcane bond item vs. a familiar. It seems like BOTH should have equally detailed sections in the rules
Really, I think the answer is that the arcane bond Item needs a separate, fully detailed sub-section in the text, just like the Familiar gets. Bonded items are just too darn cool and interesting (and complicated, it would seem) to get explained in just a few lines. In fact, the arcane bond probably actually might need a bigger section than the familiar in order to really explain it well!
Thanks!!!!!
Can we please get some much needed clarification to this VERY cool concept?
Really, I think the answer is that the arcane bond Item needs a separate, fully detailed sub-section in the text, just like the Familiar gets. Bonded items are just too darn cool and interesting (and complicated, it would seem) to get explained in just a few lines. In fact, the arcane bond probably actually might need a bigger section than the familiar in order to really explain it well!
I strongly agree and have 2 things to add...
(The board ate this post the firs time, so I will be much more brief this time as I have other things to do.)
1. MASTERWORK WEAPON BOND - What's to stop a player from selling said masterwork weapon and hoarding the cash?
"It can be replaced after 1 week’s time in a special ritual that costs 200 gp per wizard level. This ritual takes 8 hours to complete." -Beta PF
This is not an adaquate deterent. The time is relatively insignifigant depending on the campaign style. The gold is minimal since a Masterwork Weapon costs 300+gp anyway. Also the text does not state the the Wizard even has to be proficient with the weapon, only that it has to be wielded.
So the Elven Wizard sells his Masterwork Composite Longbow (insert MOST EXPENSIVE WEAPON)for 400gp, cleans house and buys a masterwork copper ring to replace it still having 200gp leftover; or worse yet summons a familiar instead. (see below #2)
My solution - would be to make the "BONDED" objects cost a generic amount similar to a Spellbook of 25gp. That way if a player loses (insert PAWNS OFF) his "BONDED" object (insert MAGICALLY ENHANCED CHEAPO) they get a whooping 25gp and have to shell out 200gp/level to replace it. I would really hate to see gold farmers in my D&D.
2. OBJECT or CREATURE - There is nothing stating that someone couldn't flip-flop between and Object or a Familiar. Example being above in #1, Wizard sells FREE 400gp Masterwork Composite Longbow and says "Screw the object, I'll just grab a familiar and buy something else with the money since the ranger is better with a bow than me now."
My solution - would be to insert a line fo text stating that the choice of 'object' or 'creature' is permanent and once you make that choice you cannot change how your Bond is formed. Object "OR" Creature.
Thanks again for your time and consideration in allowing us to help make Pathfinder a better product for everyone.
2. Please clarify exactly what "A bonded object can be used once per day to cast any one spell that the wizard knows, just as if the wizard had cast it" means. I think I know what the rules are going for, but it could be clearer.
My understanding of this was that the Bonded Object works similar to a "Pearl of Power", but Once per day and Any spell level you're capable of casting. This could be incorrect, but I thought I would attempt to answer anyway.
Yet another thing that needs to be clarified,
but I beleive you have to purchase a suitable MW object to be your Bond,
it's just that if you choose this at first level, you get it "free" this one time.
The rules suggest that this doesn't work any different than normal Enchanted Items,
except for the Bonus Spell (yuck!), and that you don't need the specific Magic Item Creation Feat.
For instance, you still need to meet the level requirements to Enchant a Stave.
(though I suppose you could BOND with a Stave at 1st level, just not add abilities to it)
|
2. OBJECT or CREATURE -
In this case, I think addressing the first problem, of reselling a Bonded item for more gold than you should have at 1st level, would deal with the second. I'm perfectly fine with a Wizard who has lost her Toad Poopsie after six harrowing levels of trying to keep the silly thing alive saying, 'F this!' and making herself a nice bonded headpiece instead.
The Bonded weapon, IMO, should just count as a Masterwork weapon *in the wizards hands,* but not be resellable for more than it's normal cost.
In fact, since one can't 'sell' a familiar, you could go one step further and say that the bonded weapon does become a masterwork weapon, but not only loses the masterwork quality, but actually rots away if the Bond is severed. Once the Wizard relinquishes it, it's toast. Even if the Wizard attempted to sell it before ending the Bond, and then skip town with the cash, the item might appear obviously magical, like an item created via Prestidigitation, and not be easily resold to any merchant who knows anything about weapons of that sort (and would recognize that something is very wrong with this item, if not exactly be able to identify what is 'wrong' with it).
CREATION?
Heh, I read and re-read this Arcane Bond section specifically about two dozen times now (all 5 paragraphs) and I'm not seeing anything about item creation feats or level restrictions. All I see is "At 1st level, wizards forge a powerful bond with an object or creature." and then the 'replacement cost and ritual'("replaced after 1 week’s time in a special ritual that costs 200gp per wizard level. This ritual takes 8 hours to complete.") which does not specify whether or not it includes the price of the masterwork item (despite the fact we all know it does not).
ACQUISITION?
Nor am I seeing anything about how the 1st level Wizard acquires his newly found Masterwork item, most importantly that 300+gp weapon possibility. Specifically something similar to this line... "A wizard begins play with a spellbook containing all 0-level wizard spells (except those..."
I don't see where it says the wizard gets his or her bonded weapon for free. They still have to buy it. So a first level wizard could only sell her masterwork composite longbow at a loss.
If there is a money making exploit in the mechanic, that really shouldn't be a problem for the designers. There are silly loopholes in any system. It's the responsibilty of the player not to act like a jerk. If the player can't meet that responsibilty, it's the responsibility of the DM to keep his or her players in line.
|
|
I don't see where it says the wizard gets his or her bonded weapon for free. They still have to buy it. So a first level wizard could only sell her masterwork composite longbow at a loss.
If there is a money making exploit in the mechanic, that really shouldn't be a problem for the designers. There are silly loopholes in any system. It's the responsibilty of the player not to act like a jerk. If the player can't meet that responsibilty, it's the responsibility of the DM to keep his or her players in line.
This actually brings up another question. Since the text says the item must be masterwork ... if we assume the wizard must buy his bond item, and master work items are very expensive ... doesn't that more or less mean the average first level wizard will not be able to have a bond item?
The wizard does not have to pay for a familiar, does he? It sort of seems like he should not have to pay for his bond item. I can't remember - in Pathfinder RPG, do clerics have to pay for their holy symbols?
Director of Games
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So, here is the intent. I will make sure to clarify the wording to get to this place.
- At 1st level, a wizard gets an arcane bond for free (be it familiar or item).
- Once this choice is made (familiar or item) it is set.
- Bonded items cannot be sold and do not properly function for anyone other than their owner.
- Replacing a bonded item gives you a masterwork item at the price of 200 gp x the caster level of the owner. The item has the bond properties but no others.
- You can make an existing item your bonded item, but doing so costs the same amount as if you had to replace it. In this case, it keeps its existing properties, but forevermore does not function for anyone else and cannot be sold.
Hope that clears it up.. and yes, this will probably get a more detailed section/description.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
...But why can't it be sold?
Surely it would at least be an inert, non-magical MW object, right?
Or do old Bonded Items have cooties or something? :-)
I mentioned this elsewhere:
The rules indicate that the Wizard only has one BONDED Item at a time,
and that the Enchanted Bonded Items won't function for anyone else,
(and thus would only count as a non-magical MW Item for anyone else)
but is the Wizard himself still able to use the ENCHANTED properties of the old Bonded Items?
(Enchanted via use of the Bonded Item "free Feat" benefit, not normally)
...But why can't it be sold?
Surely it would at least be an inert, non-magical MW object, right?
Or do old Bonded Items have cooties or something? :-)
*laugh* I was thinking the exact same thing. So the (non-magical) Masterwork Composite Longbow is FREE, but if a Ranger loots it off of your corpse it isn't a functional bow anymore? Vendors would see an ex-bonded item as Decorative Trash? Sounds kinda odd to me as well.
I mentioned this elsewhere:
The rules indicate that the Wizard only has one BONDED Item at a time,
and that the Enchanted Bonded Items won't function for anyone else,
(and thus would only count as a non-magical MW Item for anyone else)
but is the Wizard himself still able to use the ENCHANTED properties of the old Bonded Items?
(Enchanted via use of the Bonded Item "free Feat" benefit, not normally)
Also a good question! I second it! An example might be in order... Does the Ring of Protection +1 (formerly bonded) still function for the Wizard if he "RE-BONDS" with something new, say Bracers of Armor +4 and continues wearing both. Does he receive the Deflection bonus from the ring, or is it inert?
|
|
Ooh, I kinda hate that 'free MW weapon becomes junk' thing, unless it is textually stated out that the weapon is actually created from the wizards own life-force / magic / whatever, and dissipates back into nothingness if it is abandoned.
Options;
1) On the one hand, having a MW weapon be an extension of the Wizards will would be neat, and save the potential problem of it ever being sold. In fact, it might even vanish if it leaves the casters immediate vicinity, and the Wizard could resummon it as a standard action (or move action, or whatever, perhaps even as a free action, allowing him to 'Quick-Draw' his bonded weapon!). This would be neat, and allow for a Wizard to travel apparently unarmed, calling his staff into existence with a flick of his wrist!
2) On the other hand, having the MW weapon be a necessary component for the Bonded Item process might force some Wizards to wait a level before being able to afford that MW Quarterstaff (600 gp to make both ends MW!) or Composite Longbow, but then being able to upgrade it, or even sell it (as a normal MW item of it's kind) later if replacing it with another Bonded Object or a Familiar.
On the gripping hand, I think I'd rather have a Familiar remain an actual creature, and not a magical construct of the wizards will and power, because there is a lot of story potential in calling to service pre-existing animals or encountering 'ex-familiars' or whatever. To be consistent with this, if the Familiar is a real-world creature, called to service, then a Bonded Item / Weapon should also be a real-world item, magically connected to the wizard.
Eh.
I kind of love the idea of real-world animals becoming Familiars *and* I kind of love the idea of a Wizard creating a weapon (or other item) from his will and power, and being able to summon and dismiss it at will (and never being able to sell it for scrap).
To hell with consistency. I vote for real Familiars and imaginary Bonded Items!
I looked at this and thought that it just counted as masterwork for the wizard. Kind of like the familiar gives its master alertness. It's because you are so "in tune" with the tool you know exactly how to use it (granting the masterwork + 1) and can enchant it even though it may normally not be up to standard requirements (as an extension of you, you're kind of enchanting yourself!).
My current wizard has an arcane bond on his ring that his long lost love gave to him before leaving for an expedition to some old ruins. He uses it becuase it's dear to him and has a special place in his heart (plus the fact he has it enchanted as a ring of telekensis plus a ring of blink).
The Bonded weapon, IMO, should just count as a Masterwork weapon *in the wizards hands*, but not be resellable for more than it's normal cost.
I like this suggestion quite a bit and it fixes all of the problems I have with the Bonded Items. Not only that, but doing it this way makes the whole bonded weapon thing feel more like where they took the ARCANE STRIKE Feat in Pahtfinder.
On the gripping hand, I think I'd rather have a Familiar remain an actual creature, and not a magical construct of the wizards will and power, because there is a lot of story potential in calling to service pre-existing animals or encountering 'ex-familiars' or whatever. To be consistent with this, if the Familiar is a real-world creature, called to service, then a Bonded Item / Weapon should also be a real-world item, magically connected to the wizard.
I would like to see various special familiar feats get redesigned (insert RENAMED) for Pathfinder allowing odd creatures and such, but I suppose that would fall under IMPROVED FAMILIAR. I was thinking more along the lines of SPELL-STITCHED(Undead) and CLOCKWORK though.
Mind you that is slightly off subject, but I felt the need to reply to it anyway.
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32
|
Here's another question:
A Wizard can Enchant/Enhance their own Bonded Weapon on the cheap, but it only works for them.
What would happen if they had someone else do the Enchanting/Enhancing? Obviously it would cost them the full cost of the job being done, but then would anyone be able to pick up the item and use just that Enchntment/Enhancement?
Also, if the item in question is a Weapon, can other people pick it up and use it as just a non-MW, non-magical Weapon of it's type?
Also, if the item in question is a Weapon, can other people pick it up and use it as just a non-MW, non-magical Weapon of it's type?
I’ve been asking that for about 2-3 days, the answer was...
- Bonded items cannot be sold and do not properly function for anyone other than their owner.
Yes, I know it does not address the matter of simple functionality, such as "Is a Wizard's MW Bonded Sword, still a sword for someone else?".
According to the above quote (which was earlier in this thread) the sword ceases to function as a sword. That may be taking things literal, but if the rules do not state otherwise, that is how a lot of DMs will likely rule it.
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32
|
Yes, I know it does not address the matter of simple functionality, such as "Is a Wizard's MW Bonded Sword, still a sword for someone else?".
According to the above quote (which was earlier in this thread) the sword ceases to function as a sword. That may be taking things literal, but if the rules do not state otherwise, that is how a lot of DMs will likely rule it.
Yeah I saw that as well, but to me it just seems strange. Why would an obvious Sword not function like a Sword if someone else picks it up. Other items, maybe I could see just not working for someone else, but a Weapon is pretty hard to do in this instance as it is always "on".
That's why I sort of wanted some clarification on the whole Weapon angle.|
RPG Superstar 2008 Top 32, 2011 Top 16
|
It could be that a bonded item that's a weapon simply wouldn't work for anyone else, even just as a standard weapon. I think it would be pretty cool if someone captures a wizard, takes their shiny cool looking sword, and tried using it in combat, only to find that it jumps out of their hands, pulls away from whatever they try to attack with it, etc. You can still allow bonded items to be carried by someone else, but when they try to use it, the item simply refuses to work for them.
The same principle could apply to rings, wands, etc. The ring would be okay to hold in your hand or stow in a backpack, but would constantly slip off someone's finger, etc.
|
|
Why would an obvious Sword not function like a Sword if someone else picks it up. Other items, maybe I could see just not working for someone else, but a Weapon is pretty hard to do in this instance as it is always "on".
Oh, it's even weirder for *non*-Weapons.
"Hey, the evil wizard had a ring! Maybe it's magic!"
[pulls Bonded Ring off of Wizard's hand and tries repeatedly to put it on his own hand]
"What the hell? This ring is busted or something. I can't even put it on! It's like it's fighting me!"
A sword that stops working as a sword? Funky. An item of jewelry or clothing that *can't even be used as jewelry or clothing?* Bordering on very, very silly.
I would imagine this is a case where logic has to overcome rule as worded. There have been many instances of this kind of foolishness in rpgs. I would hope your dm would say its just a mundane version of itself in the hands of any other...no magic, no masterwork. Though I will admit DM's who insist an RAW are going to have a field day with the poor wording.
|
|
Hiya All
Figuring out why a master work Item works for one but not another:
From the move “Nerds” the javelin throw competition, for the Nerds they have the limp hand(arm) be the thrower, he has a special limp javelin that fits his style of throwing, but anyone else who throws it would be at great minuses.
So for us it would be a bow warped slightly to how you shoot, a sword off balance but to you its great. This is how you can make a MW item for one person. It looks Great but when you try to use it, it is off.
I have a Sorcerer in a campaign at this time; yes he uses the composite Strength Longbow. In order to enchant, you need the craft arms/armor this requires you to be 5th level. So in order to craft the bow I need to be 5th level to enchant. Then to add a special feature say such as Holy, the DMG says you need to be 7th level.
I can always pay the full price and have another enchant. In this you still always have to go back to the fact that the bonded Item is unique to the user and special to him.
To answer a person earlier who suggested get the Composite Longbow and then sell it, well 400GP would be initial cost , now take that selling is at 50% cost that’s 200 gp. Where is your making money? In RPGA and most games this is the standard.
It seems pretty straight forward in the wording that if the Wizard has the spell in his book, and it is not a prohibited school, the Bonded Item can cast as if the Wizard cast the spell.
---Chas
AkA SagaWeaver
There definitely needs to be some clarification about the free bonded item at 1st level. How much can it be worth as a non-masterwork base price? If you get a longsword for 15 gp, it's not a big deal — but right now, I'm working on a wizard whose bonded object is a pistol. The wizard has a level adjustment of +1, so it's not a problem for her to purchase the pistol with her starting gold — but a character should definitely have to purchase something like that.
Another issue with this is drawing the weapon. Does a wizard who uses a weapon as a bonded object have to draw it first before she can cast spells? I say that since the bonded item is a kind of arcane focus, it can be drawn as part of the standard action used to cast a spell. If you want to use it to cast a quickened spell, though, you'd either need to have it in hand already or have the Quick Draw feat.
I know what you're thinking: How can a 1st-level wizard use a pistol when you need a BAB of +1 to get Exotic Weapon Proficiency (firearms)? It's because the wizard in question is an constructed elf (elf traits plus living construct traits) from the plane of Mechanus who gets proficiency in one-handed firearms instead of swords and bows. Since all of her kind get the +1 level adjustment, they can all buy a masterwork pistol at 1st level.
To answer a person earlier who suggested get the Composite Longbow and then sell it, well 400GP would be initial cost , now take that selling is at 50% cost that’s 200 gp. Where is your making money? In RPGA and most games this is the standard.
You don't pay for the bow, so selling it for 200gp is 200gp you didn't & wouldn't have to start with as a Wizard. But apparently the bonded items are functionless and can't be sold regardless.
The other example along this lines that I had mentioned was just up and deciding to have a familiar instead of a bonded item after cashing it in... Jason B. corrected this thought by stating (in a more specific context) that the choice of 'bonded item' or 'familiar' is once and done (permanent), no switching back and forth.
A NEW nightmarish thought...
All that said, I now have no envisioned the party who kills the big bad Wizard who has that really awesome... (insert COOL MAGIC 'BONDED' ITEM HERE) ...that is now completely worthless as treasure because it's functionless and cannot be sold. *sigh*
|
|
I love having my posts eaten. I offer the post eating monster some condiments of steel, "Would you like some sword with that post, beastie?"
ahem...
So I love the concept of the bonded item. I am very looking forward to the rewrite of it to clear up many of the ambiguities. Here is a little something I hope can fix some of them. (It is probably what I will insert into my Beta for play testing to clarify it for my players, at least for the short term)
Arcane Bond (Su): At 1st level, wizards forge a powerful bond with an object or creature. This bond can take one of two forms: The first is a familiar, following the standard rules for such creatures (see Familiars) and the second is a bond with an object, using it to cast spells and enchanting it with even greater powers.
Objects that are the subject of an arcane bond must fall into one of the following categories: amulet, ring, staff, wand, or weapon. These objects may be treated as masterwork for purposes of enchantment as well as bonding, if the item is not created as a masterwork item in the first place. If the object is not masterwork at time of creation it is treated only as its mundane equivalent in the hands of another character and loses its masterwork quality if the bond is transferred to another object. A Masterwork, or even magic item, that is bonded retains its enhancements but transfers none of the bonded abilities to another character that takes up the item.
Brute pretty much summed up what I think the intent was despite poor wording.
Naw, its b.s. to have a class be required to spend cash on an ability that is potentially so big to the class. What if you are playing with a DM that keeps cash low...you wont get what is a cornerstone ability to the class till later than intended. You dont make a ranger have to purchase a masterwork bow to get access to his archery bonus feat.
Naw, its b.s. to have a class be required to spend cash on an ability that is potentially so big to the class. ...
Nope, the item at 1st level should be free and that was the last ruling I saw from Jason. Now if you lose said 1st level bonded item, or wish to upgrade to something you found/bought, that's a different matter and should be paid for accordingly.
free MW paper-weights may be a 'solution', as well....?
Here's my thing, concerning bonded weapons.
The description is as follows: The wizard can enchant the bonded item as if he had the required feats.
So, does that mean that the bonded weapon is a MW weapon until 5th level (the minimum level for Craft Magical Arms and Armor) and then the wizard has to pay at least 1,000 gp to enhance it? Or does she get to do it for free? Or does it advance like a familar and they don't have to pay anything? Or am I just dumb and not reading this right at all?
So confused.
|
|
Something else I would like to know:
The extra spell that the item lets you cast. Is it one of the spells that you have memorized for the day, or is it one that can be from your Spellbook as well? The wording of "known" in the description is a bit ambiguous.
This is a good point. In my group we are all in agreement that it is like a pearl of power, and treating it like one, with the advantage that it is a pearl of power that can be used for any level. In that it would have to be a spell you memorized. But it hadn't really occured to us, yet, that the wording does leave it a bit ambigious there.
|
|
Here's my thing, concerning bonded weapons.
The description is as follows: The wizard can enchant the bonded item as if he had the required feats.
So, does that mean that the bonded weapon is a MW weapon until 5th level (the minimum level for Craft Magical Arms and Armor) and then the wizard has to pay at least 1,000 gp to enhance it? Or does she get to do it for free? Or does it advance like a familar and they don't have to pay anything? Or am I just dumb and not reading this right at all?
So confused.
Honestly, I would rather the whole bit about the wizard can enchant it go to the wayside anyway. The bonded object without that ability is still head and shoulders above the familiar. It means that players are going to start crafting a lot earlier. I have a player who chose a ring for his bonded item, is he going to start making it some uber cool ring? Probably not for a while due to the CL of most of the rings and the fact that he isn't that much of a rules jockey, but in the hands of a true Rules Lawyer it could get ugly fast.
I like players crafing magic items, but I would rather they did it at the levels the feats are set at. I worry it may get way to powerful way to fast otherwise.
And that's if you want a weapon. If you use an amulet, ring, wand, staff (not quarterstaff?)
I think the staff they refer to is one of a magical nature using buttons or command words such as a "Staff of Reincarnation", a large wand of sorts. Usually beating someone with a highly magical Staff or Wand results in bad things for the user and the recipient. A 'Quarter Staff' is a weapon, and is only magically enhanced to be a better weapon.
Another comparison might be a Wand vs. a Club. While whacking someone with a slender piece of wood (aka Wand) might sting and be a potentially dangerous explosion, it is not a weapon as far as enchanting is concerned. (at least not in the existing D&D world)
Honestly, I would rather the whole bit about the wizard can enchant it go to the wayside anyway. The bonded object without that ability is still head and shoulders above the familiar.Here's my thing, concerning bonded weapons.
The description is as follows: The wizard can enchant the bonded item as if he had the required feats.
So, does that mean that the bonded weapon is a MW weapon until 5th level (the minimum level for Craft Magical Arms and Armor) and then the wizard has to pay at least 1,000 gp to enhance it? Or does she get to do it for free? Or does it advance like a familar and they don't have to pay anything? Or am I just dumb and not reading this right at all?
So confused.
How is it better without the ability to enchant it? Without that, it's an item the PC must have to cast spells, is useless for anyone else to use, and can be used to cast one spell per day. Whereas the familiar grants skill check bonuses, can deliver touch spells, helps in combat (if necessary, assists and what not) and adds a lot of flavor.
I really like the idea of being able to specially enchant the bonded weapon but I was just confused on how it works.
|
|
How is it better without the ability to enchant it? Without that, it's an item the PC must have to cast spells, is useless for anyone else to use, and can be used to cast one spell per day. Whereas the familiar grants skill check bonuses, can deliver touch spells, helps in combat (if necessary, assists and what not) and adds a lot of flavor.
I really like the idea of being able to specially enchant the bonded weapon but I was just confused on how it works.
I am saying that it is overpowered with being able to enchant it as a regular magical item above and beyond the bonded abilities without the normaly required feats. I believe the item should be able to be enchanted, I just want them to do it normally at the appropriate levels and have the character have to take the feat to do it.
I do believe the ability to cast one spell a day of any level of anything that you memorized (or depending on the final wording even just out of your book memorized or not) is head and shoulders above the familiar. Yes delivering touch spells looks great, until you remember that a familiar has half the wizards hps (ie a laughable amount) and must enter the square of any creature it wants to touch, thus provoking AOO's...The skill checks are nice, but I'd rather cast another spell, especially if I can just grab any spell out of my book instead of something I already memorized today...
I am saying that it is overpowered with being able to enchant it as a regular magical item above and beyond the bonded abilities without the normaly required feats. I believe the item should be able to be enchanted, I just want them to do it normally at the appropriate levels and have the character have to take the feat to do it.I do believe the ability to cast one spell a day of any level of anything that you memorized (or depending on the final wording even just out of your book memorized or not) is head and shoulders above the familiar. Yes delivering touch spells looks great, until you remember that a familiar has half the wizards hps (ie a laughable amount) and must enter the square of any creature it wants to touch, thus provoking AOO's...The skill checks are nice, but I'd rather cast another spell, especially if I can just grab any spell out of my book instead of something I already memorized today...
Oh ok, got ya. I just read your post wrong. I think I agree with you? The way I'm ruling it thus far is that to enchant the bonded item you have to be of the appropriate level to qualify for the feat and then have to pay the 1k+ gp price of crafting, plus the time.
Does a bonded item's function have to follow it's form? If a wizard chooses a quarterstaff, can the wizard enchant the quarterstaff as a wand at 5th level?
Can a wizard place more than one enhancement on a bonded item? Can a wizard enchant his bonded amulet with the powers of a brooch of shielding and then, later, a belt of physical perfection?
Can a wizard change the enchantments later on? And if so, with what cost difference, if any?
Inquiring minds want to know!
Inquiring minds want to know!
Read the book! LOL! Sadly that wouldn't answer any of your questions, I just couldn't resist shouting the corresponding phrase. I miss those commercials!
Of course those are my opinions, nothing more. :)
And that's if you want a weapon. If you use an amulet, ring, wand, staff (not quarterstaff?)I think the staff they refer to is one of a magical nature using buttons or command words such as a "Staff of Reincarnation", a large wand of sorts. Usually beating someone with a highly magical Staff or Wand results in bad things for the user and the recipient. A 'Quarter Staff' is a weapon, and is only magically enhanced to be a better weapon.
Although it's not a general observation, looks more like an exception, the staff of power both have the quaterstaff attributes (+2 weapon at that) and the staff abilities (spell charges). It requires both feats craft staff and craft magic arms and armor.
So i'd say it's possible to enhance your staff as both. +5 defending staff with some [insert favorite spell] charges, without *ever* selecting the appropriate feats?
Plus you get the wildcard to cast any spell you know once per day?
The familiar seems like a thing of the past to me.
And that's if you want a weapon. If you use an amulet, ring, wand, staff (not quarterstaff?)...<snip>...
A staff is typically a long, thick wooden pole. It weights MORE than a quarterstaff.
Although it's easy to imagine a staff being very fragile, it's just as easy to imagine it being tough and built like a quarterstaff. Or alternatively, a quarterstaff that is a staff.
It doesn't really matter to me if the official rules prohibit using a quarterstaff as a staff though.
Uh, it wasn't really an official ruling. I'm just another fan, player and occassional DM of the D&D we all know and love. Your original post seemed as though you were confused by the 'Staff' not being a 'Quarterstaff' and vice versa. It was my humble attempt to clarify what I believe was meant by the Pathfinder wording. I apologize, since it seems to have offended.
As Jellyfulfish pointed out, there is at least one exception, the 'Staff of Power'. Which expends charges to make stronger melee attacks, I believe there is also a 'Staff of Striking' which does something similar. Personally I would sell either of them quicker than it took us to dust it off and identify it, while hasted on horseback with horseshoes of speed. (Imagine those skill check negatives! LOL!)
After 5-8th level if your Wizard/Sorcerer is STILL making melee attacks and need a 'crutch' like this to deal extra damage, something drastically is wrong.
