Researching additional permanency uses


Advice


Basically, a wizard wants to expand the list of things that can be made permanent.
Anyone have any experience with this?
Reasonable? What cost(s) would you require? Would it be like memorizing a new spell?


bump


Nope. I'd rule you have to research a new version of the spell you want to make permanent and add at least a level depending on how nasty a permanent version would be.


There is no rule; it's GM discretion beyond the normal list. Rather than guessing at it, what spell or spells do you have in mind and then we might be able to speculate if any GM would permit it and, if so, what it would cost.


I've always wondered what the criteria for a spell to be made permanent are.


Yeah, I had a guy who wanted additional evolutions made permanent, but I ruled that was too powerful.


I know there's no rule. I was wondering what DM's have allowed and how.


DungeonmasterCal wrote:
I've always wondered what the criteria for a spell to be made permanent are.

Me too. Seems pretty arbitrary.


The Indescribable wrote:
Nope. I'd rule you have to research a new version of the spell you want to make permanent and add at least a level depending on how nasty a permanent version would be.

So if I wanted permanent Burning Gaze (Wiz 2) permanent I could research a "new version" as a 3rd level spell that was Permanency-able?

Fyi: Burning Gaze was just the first to come to mind and would probably be a bad idea to have permanent. The spell itself it not the point. I'm just asking about the method.


Given the spell I'd probably say no or add a couple of levels.


in 2nd ed the following spells could be made permanent that are not on the current list:
protect from (alignment)
protect from arrows (called prot from normal missiles back then)
unseen servant

fear could also be made perm on other people, objects or areas

none are particularly overpowered and I would prob allow them in a game


other spells i'd prob allow

detect charm, metal, radiation, undead
endure elements
floating disc
ant haul
rope trick
jump (might cost more than 2500 gp)
youthful appearance
silk to steel
fins to feet
darkness/daylight (on area only)
web shelter
magic circle against (area only)
tiny hut
wind wall -really prob any of the wall spells

possibles- these might cost more than the usual price maybe?:
detect secret doors
mage armor (prob cost more)
animate rope
levitate
spider climb
water breathing

and thats just a quick partial run through levels 1-3


Just spit-balling here, but if there's a spell they want made permanent and you think it's a little OP but you're on the cusp, you could rule that the spell only stays permanent while they have it memorised.

This means they still have to take up a spell slot for it, but the duration/use-per-day is increased, and they're never going to need to waste a round casting it in battle or something.

Any suggestions to improve on this would be welcome.


Moto Muck wrote:

other spells i'd prob allow

detect charm, metal, radiation, undead
endure elements
floating disc
ant haul
rope trick
jump (might cost more than 2500 gp)
youthful appearance
silk to steel
fins to feet
darkness/daylight (on area only)
web shelter
magic circle against (area only)
tiny hut
wind wall -really prob any of the wall spells

possibles- these might cost more than the usual price maybe?:
detect secret doors
mage armor (prob cost more)
animate rope
levitate
spider climb
water breathing

and thats just a quick partial run through levels 1-3

Floating disk could be tricky. if you move to fast it'll wink out of existence.

the Jump spell scales pretty hard. You may need to level the cost based on caster level.


Honestly, you have to just use your judgement. Tabletop games, especially complex systems like pathfinder, always come around to GM call. If you want to stay safe, simply say "No, only that list is allowed" but I'm not a proponent of the GM not tweaking and altering the game to suit his table.

Some of the things Moto Muck is okay with, I wouldn't allow.

Mage armor? No. There are items that already do that and they cost much more than a permanent level 1 spell. Ultimately, just run with what you think is appropriate, but if you are going to allow very powerful spells to be made permanent, change your game world to compensate. If powerful wizards can cast a permanent form of the dragon III, why don't all powerful wizards do so? They can just change shape right back to their normal form, and it drastically increases their escape options and survivability. A lot of powerful buff spells, if made permanent, can result in some pretty crazy shenanigans with clerics - if that's an option then your game world should have NPC clerics who wade onto the battlefield plowing over the enemy troops Sauron style. There are also major balance concerns.

Ultimately, the list allowed by permanency isn't arbitrary - it's just not based around what is logical, but instead what isn't too powerful.


I would probably be more flexible with permanent spells on an area and less flexible with permanent spells on a person. Especially since many would free up slots and replace magic items.

Partially this is on the theory that PC's investing in areas drains wealth and creates story opportunities. It also opens up the same for NPCs (which is often already the case in published modules that have traps and permanent effects in old wizards lairs as a common trope.


HowFortuitous wrote:
Mage armor? No. There are items that already do that and they cost much more than a permanent level 1 spell.

Which just means that you should price Mage Armor comparable to that item, with variances for Mage Armor being slotless but permanently dispellable.

Personally, the list of spells that I am okay with is probably far larger than the list of those I'm not okay with. That doesn't mean that they won't get very expensive.

Though I'm highly tempted to handle Permanency differently than it is by the RAW. I'm toying around with costing it akin to a slotless magical item, but altering Dispel to suppress it instead of outright dispel it.

HowFortuitous wrote:
powerful wizards can cast a permanent form of the dragon III, why don't all powerful wizards do so? They can just change shape right back to their normal form, and it drastically increases their escape options and survivability.

While I realize it's more of an example than your point, the short answer is "because Form of the Dragon doesn't work that way". The Wizard wouldn't get the Change Shape ability, so he's stuck that way unless the GM was willing to allow him to use Permanency on a Mythic Form of the Dragon.


certainly perm spells would cost approp when compard to their magic item counterparts

ie mage armor would cost similar to slotless +4 armor bracers-
-upside is its slotless
-downside is it can be dispelled and can't be sold or upgraded later

jump would only be as effective as its CL- it would cost similar (but no quite) the same as a slotless acrobatics +10, 20 or 30 magic item
--alternatively you could just cap it at +10

SimplyFortuitous has the right of it- you just have to use your judgement- campaigns I play in often go to very high levels where powerful magic items become very common for the players- spells like perm mage armor would end up being a waste of money because it can't be upgraded or sold back. In other players' games it might end up being very OP. To each their own. I just want to give players more choices.

If my (co)players break it then we just get (politely) get rid of it- there are plenty of spells, items feats etc which are already legal which are far more broken than a perm levitate or water breathing

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Advice / Researching additional permanency uses All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.