I´ve said that already, but will say it again since probably no one had the patience to read it on the enormous post where I wrote it.
Thje way I see it, Bond Items (not James Bond´s stuff) don’t quite substitute a familiar; while the concept is very interesting, a familiar is still much superior. A familiar is not only a bonus feat for increasing a skill, and not only it gets many abilities as you level up; it is a character in game! A raven speaks a language, how awesome is that, it also makes for an excellent spy as has been proven in many games (at least in mines...); and so do all the flying familiars. Depending on where you are, who would suspect a rat? It can retrieve much information.
So I really think bond items should get a little pump. Giving just an extra low-level spell for a wizard to cast is not much, if we think in D&D (ok, Pathfinder) terms, what is “magical power”? Higher spell slots right?
So the bond item should work to provide this, maybe some uses of “Sudden” Metamagic; maybe at higher levels it could lower the penalty for applying metamagic feats.
|
I actaully like this idea. I was playing with it something similar a couple of years ago in a campaign I was running.
All the characters received a weapon from thier mentors (who were all connected as old adventurers). The wizard received a staff - the staff could cast burning hands and do a few other things. As the wizard progressed in levels (and all the other characters) the staff progressed and became stronger and more deadly. The wizard could use the staff to case touch spells (I would have to do reseach to find out what else it could do at this point). And the plan was if the wizard ever got sepearted from his staff then he would have reduced ability to cast certain spells. So, as it enhanced his spell casting and he could cast spells with it he also became dependent upon it.
To build these weapons I developed a spell Lomax' Evolving Weapon. Nice spell. The weapons were bonded and no one else could just pick them up. They were also intelligent and they would have to be stored away for a year to clear from the previous owner when he died or lost it. There was much more and it is buried in the archives.
I don't have a whole lot to add, but I think I can clarify one point.
2) The Replacement Ritual. Let's say you had a bonded dagger that was a +1, Defending, Spell Storing dagger... and you lost it. The Replacement Ritual, would this return you the exact dagger you lost (or an exact duplicate of it?) or does it merely give you a new dagger w/o enchantments that you are bonded to?
I don't believe the Replacement Ritual gives you a replacement. I think the Replacement Ritual allows you to bond with another object.
lol.... My experiences with familiar are incredibly different, a player in my group is a Sorc/Dragon Disc., he´s got a raven familiar... damn that thing is useful, he knows how to use it at its best. Spying, delivering messages, diverting the atention of people (i mean, in a tavern with lots of people drinking and listening to music, how amusing wouldnt be a talking crow.. a very friendly talking crow by the way). The animal is well trained to stay out of combat by the way. Twice, they went to an undergroud cavern, the crow didnt go, it stayed outside watching, and since they didnt go a mile deep (which is veeeery deep), they stayed connected... The bird was like an sms for instant messages to all the people outside.
As to the bond items advancing more, if you don´t stay in your wiz class the bond item won´t advace either. In Pathfinder you´ll probably stay in your base class a lot longer, your familiar would advance considerably. So, I talk from my experiences: They way they did the bond items, there´s no reason for a wiz to take it, a familiar is much more useful and at later levels, much more powerful.
I never liked the idea of staves being an item that could cast a spell; i´d rather it gave you extra slots to spend. Instead of Burning Hands 3x/day, why not 2 extra 2nd level spells or an extra 3rd level one. Or even a pool of 3 spell slots you could use any way you want (a 1st level would spend 1 slot, a 2nd lv spell 2 slots, etc...).
One of my npcs (not an enemy), is a pure sorcerer. She has no other magical stuff other than a staff that is almost part of her, so, at 14th level that thing is powerful. It reduces the penalty for metamagic feats by one (but never to zero), it can use Sudden Empower 3x/day, has 10 spell slots per day to be used any way you want and can shoot fire bolts (2d6 fire damage, ranged touch)... For the only magical item at 14th level it is not overpowering; but it is very versatile and with it I can have that feeling "This staff gives me more power".
I don't know, the bonded item looks fine as is power wise, but I do agree that the replacement ritual might need to adjust for all stacking arcane caster levels. If its not altered in that manner, I'd probably still treat it that way.
What I like about it is that you can replicate a lot of classic wizards from fiction without losing the D&D version of the wizard. Some wizards need their staff to be fully effective, but some wizards might have a ring, or a belt, or whatever.
Also, it ads an interesting RP element, if the PCs decide to try and figure out what bonded item a wizard has. He wears lots of jewelry, is it one of those?
Also, the enhancement... the wizard can enhance the item for 1/2 price. No other limits are imposed. So a Wizard 1/Fighter 10 can enhance the bonded sword, making it a +5 defending sword for 1/2 price... so long as the fighter can afford the gold cost. How is that not improving as the character advances?
But I never said it doesn´t improve, I must have written in a very unclear way then. All I said is that; in my gaming experiences, a familiar would prove to be a lot better than a bond item (at least the way they are designed up 'till now).
My biggest gripe with magic implements in 3.5 is that they can be exhausted. A magic staff is only a magic staff until you use it 5 times, and then it's just a stick.
In that I support you 100%
The Runestaffs in the Magic Items Compendium took a big step towards fixing that
I am not familiar with those, so I really can´t tell.
I am talking about magic itens but I must say I only use the "basic stuff" by the book (ring of protections, an elven chainmail, bracelets of armor, etc..); I prefer to design my own magic item, so that it suits me better. I would never include a magic staff the way they are designed.
Ledgabriel - Sorry about the misunderstanding then... I was responding to your comment:
As to the bond items advancing more, if you don´t stay in your wiz class the bond item won´t advace either.
I thought you were sayin' that the bonded item was limited to wizard levels only... and I didn't see that in its wording.
As interesting as the bonded item v. familiar discussion is... I was really hoping for a bit more of an explanation for how far the bonded item could go.
A staff can be both a magic weapon and a magic staff... and in the case of the staff of power, it has both properties (along with a couple extras). Is a bonded object limited in the ways it can be enhanced? Can I essentially make a staff of power, eventually?
And as far as making a bonded item... if the cost is 1/2 the normal cost... is that normal cost to make, or normal cost to buy? Are there any other prerequisites?
I'm asking these questions because my group has decided to convert our ongoing game to the Alpha rules and see how it goes... and I'm playing a 9th (almost 10th) level Wizard who has decided to give his familiar the boot to try a magic staff. So far, it's just a +1 Defending Staff (all I could afford), but I'd like to take full advantage of this ability as I can afford it. (Which is to say, if I can turn this into a Runestaff of Power for 19,000g... well, I will).
|
Wizards can bond with the following objects:
* amulets - Okay, makes sense I guess.
* rings - Huh? Does anyone have any idea where the idea of rings as bonded items comes from?
* staffs - Naturally
* wands - Naturally
* weapons - Wouldn't have been on my top-5 list but I can see it.
So why rings?
And how about these for other potential bonded objects:
* orbs - I know, I know, it's so 4E, but there is some tradition of wizards being tied to their magic spheres. I'm also thinking of the Tarot with wands, orbs, swords and cups, which leads me to ...
* cups, or scrying devices in general like mirrors, water basins, crystal balls, etc. Probably not so good for adventuring wizards, but not all wizards tromp around dungeons.
* totems or trophies (like a shrunken head or a straw doll) - I'm just trying to think of something other than a European-style wizard, something more Voodoo
* masks
* bells or chimes
I guess the nice thing is that, even if these didn't make it into the official rules, an individual DM could come up with his or her own special bonded items to reflect the cultures of his/her wizards.
I also want to toss my vote in for one extra spell per day just isn't enough. I'd rather see something like meta-magic effects that increase with the wizards level or a bump to the DC of spells cast using the bonded object, something that really makes going to the trouble (and risk) of bonding with an object worthwhile.
Director of Games
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Wizards can bond with the following objects:
* amulets - Okay, makes sense I guess.
* rings - Huh? Does anyone have any idea where the idea of rings as bonded items comes from?
* staffs - Naturally
* wands - Naturally
* weapons - Wouldn't have been on my top-5 list but I can see it.So why rings?
The One Ring... pretty much is your iconic ring in fantasy. While this is not much of a wizard item in the books (or movies for that matter), it still has a similar association. As for why these items... each one takes up a valuable slot or takes up a spot in hand. Not that the other items you listed could not also fill that roll, but I want to avoid the item being buried in one of the less used slots so as to still gain all of its advantages.
Remember, you can enchant your bonded object as if you had the requisite feats and can do so for half the normal price (or 1/4 the enchantment's total price). This is a pretty big bonus if fully utilized.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Remember, you can enchant your bonded object as if you had the requisite feats and can do so for half the normal price (or 1/4 the enchantment's total price). This is a pretty big bonus if fully utilized.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Thanks for chiming in here.
So, from the 1/4 the enchantment's total price, I'm assuming that the 1/2 price means 1/2 the cost to make. What about the exp. cost? Do you pay 1/2 of that as well?
And, with staves in particular, can they be enchanted as both a weapon and a magic staff, or only one (and if only one, which one?).
Let's say you want to have an amulet of troll disintigration that is a caster level 15 amulet and requires the spell disintigration. In order to make that item, would you need to be high enough level to have the Craft Wonderous Items Feat (even though you need not take it)? Would you need to be Caster Level 15? And do you have to be able to cast the disintigration spell?
Thanks
Remember, you can enchant your bonded object as if you had the requisite feats and can do so for half the normal price (or 1/4 the enchantment's total price). This is a pretty big bonus if fully utilized.
So, according to the alpha, a bonded item that is lost can be replaced within one week . . . but what isn't stipulated is whether or not this erases the powers of the lost object (I assume it would). If the powers don't disappear, then I can see wizards "losing" five cheap rings of protection and amulets of natural armour right off the bat in some campaigns ;).
On the other side, though . . . what if wizards couldn't just make new bonded objects? Then such things could be captured, held hostage, etc., and thereby create new adventure hooks.
* rings - Huh? Does anyone have any idea where the idea of rings as bonded items comes from?
I guess someone never saw "The Shadow" movie with Alec Baldwin. The Shadow was an illusionist (or maybe a psion) multiclassed with a fighter.
WHO KNOWS WHAT EVIL LURKS IN THE HEARTS OF MEN.... THE SHADOW KNOWS
The main problem I have with the bonded item concept is the following:
"If a wizard attempts to cast a spell without his bonded object worn or in hand, he must make a Spellcraft check or lose the spell. The DC for this check is equal to 20 + the spell’s level."
This seems more than a little steep for the advantages granted. Take away a wizard's bonded item and low levels and you take away a great deal of his spell casting prowess. Even at higher levels it would be inconvenient at best and crippling at worst.
The advantages themselves are not that much different from the Familiar Item feat in Unearthed Acana which anyone can take.
I would much rather see contact/possession of the bonded item granting a Caster Level bonus or a bonus to the Save DC of spells. Also perhaps the ability to deliver touch effect spells through the item (similar to that granted by familiars at higher level).
Another option is something similar to the ancestral daisho class ability of the samurai in Oriental Adventures. As a character goes up in level they can add powers to their bonded item.
My original post did not show up so i will repost it
The problem i have with the Bonded Item ability is mainly this:
"If a wizard attempts to cast a spell without his bonded object worn or in hand, he must make a Spellcraft check or lose the spell. The DC for this check is equal to 20 + the spell’s level."
As it is written this seems more than a little steep price to pay for an item that is essentially the same as the Familiar Item feat from Unearthed Arcana. In essence, at low level you can seriously cripple a wizard's spellcasting ability by taking away his bonded item, which as a magical item would not be hard to locate on their person. This become even steeper when you figure how much a wizard has invested in the item, where a familiar provides many benefits for essnetially room and board.
Personally, I would like to see something more along the lines of steadily increasing power (perhaps similar to the Ancestral Daisho class ability of the samurai from Oriental Adventures).
Some options I think would be interesting are: 1) ability to cast any touch range spell through the bonded item, 2) a bonus to either effective caster level or an increase in DC save for spells, 3) at higher levels the ability to summon the item from a distance.
Thoughts?
-Weylin Stormcrowe
My original post did not show up so i will repost it
I saw it and responded above. Basically, at it's hardest, it requires a roll of 14... so 30% chance of failure? Or, you use Mage hand at-will to bring your object back from where-ever you can't go to pick it up.
Personally, I would like to see something more along the lines of steadily increasing power (perhaps similar to the Ancestral Daisho class ability of the samurai from Oriental Adventures).Some options I think would be interesting are: 1) ability to cast any touch range spell through the bonded item, 2) a bonus to either effective caster level or an increase in DC save for spells, 3) at higher levels the ability to summon the item from a distance.
Thoughts?
-Weylin Stormcrowe
Steadily increasing power? The bonded object can be enhanced at 1/2 the cost to make (not sure if that includes and exp component or not)... so as you get more gold, you can enhance the object more. That allows for a steadily increasing power, while being completely customized for the needs of the wizard. Does it need to do more?
Ability to cast through the bonded item - I could see that being useful. The same with the bonus to caster level or increase on saves.
Perhaps a slight change to bonded objects giving those as options for the Wizard when creating the object. I don't think having all of those on the object at the same time is particularly balanced. If there was a way to make those enhancement options for the object and assign a cost to them, that could work.
As for the summon from a distance. Magic Items Compendium has a weapon crystal (500g and a 1000g version) which allow you to do this. I'm not sure it's necessary to make this a feature of the bonded object if there are other ways of doing it (mage hand at will also works).
I suppose from my view a 30% spell failure chance (which is what requiring a 9 to succeed amounts to and is on par with the spell failure chance of many heavier armors) is just to steep even for the other abilities a bonded item would have. Especially if they operate exactly as magic item of that type ( a rod and staff 'burning out' and needing to be rebuilt).
If there is going to be a penalty for not having the bonded item i would rather see it as a penalty to either effective caster level (drop one or two levels) or a reduction in the Save DC of spells without the item.
In general i am a big fan of the Familiar Item feat/bonded item feature being included not just the wizard. Itis easy to see clerics with a similar item or a martial character with an ancestral weapon that 'awakens to its full power' as the character level increases.
At 5th level, you're supposed to have about 9000g. Spend 1/2 that on, say, a staff.
4,300g will buy a +2/+2 staff (at 1/4 the price). So, is +1 Defending/+1 Spellstriking Staff that grants an extra spell slot (for any spell you know) worth the risk of being disarmed and needing to make a DC 23 Spellcraft check (Int. + Other bonuses v. DC 15; assuming an Int. of 3, that's a DC 12... 60% chance to make the check). Lower the DC to 15+SL, and it becomes almost too easy at higher levels. Lvl 15, casting an 8th lvl spell would be a DC 23, with a spellcraft of 18+Int (which could easily be +4 by then). The Wizard can't fail the check.
But, how often is the wizard going to be without the bonded object? I suppose a wizard's bonded ring might get stolen once... but more than that, and that's pretty suspect on the part of the DM. A Wizard's staff could be disarmed in combat... but that's the risk of getting into combat.
Just a little question... Staffs, ok. Wands, ok. But, why not rods ? A wizard with a rod of wonder - half price ! What's else ?
|
This seems more than a little steep for the advantages granted. Take away a wizard's bonded item and low levels and you take away a great deal of his spell casting prowess. Even at higher levels it would be inconvenient at best and crippling at worst.
Much less steep than losing experience if it gets destroyed which is what happens if your familiar gets killed. And the familiar would be much easier to target as far as that goes.
I would much rather see contact/possession of the bonded item granting a Caster Level bonus or a bonus to the Save DC of spells. Also perhaps the ability to deliver touch effect spells through the item (similar to that granted by familiars at higher level).
The idea is to keep the caster at roughly the same power level he currently is. This replacement ability should be roughly in line with the powers gained by the familiar.
I like the bonded item mechanic. It give the wizard a little flexibility without too much extra power and makes it a nice option for large parties which really don't need yet another mini on the board.
After some further thought and debate with some friends regarding this class ability i came up with the following. This is a little more what i was thinking of this replacing instead of adding to the ability to embue magic item powers at a discount. Please review it and see what you all think.
Master Class Level Hardness Adj. Hit Points Special
1st-2nd 2 2 Sense Item
Potent Casting
3rd-4th 4 4 Deliver Touch spells
5th-6th 6 6 +1 Effective caster level (first school)
7th-8th 8 8
9th-10th 10 10 +1 Effective caster level (second school)
11th-12th 12 12 Spell Resistance
13th-14th 14 14 Scry on item
15th-16th 16 16
17th-18th 18 18
19th-20th 20 20
Bonding Ritual: A wizard can obtain a bonded. The wizard begins with a masterwork item of the type they wish to use (rings, rods, staves and weapons have all been used). Doing so takes 24 hours and uses up magical materials that cost 100 gp.
Hardness: The hardness of the item increases by 2 point for every two levels of wizard.
Hit Points: the hit points of the item increase by 2 for every two levels of the wizard.
Sense Item: The wizard can sense the state of the bonded item if he is within 1 mile of it. This allows the wizard to sense if it has been damaged or not, if someone is tampering or has tampered with it. It also reveals the general direction and a rough estimation of distance to the item if it is separated from the wizard.
Deliver Touch Spells: the wizard may deliver any of his non-ranged touch spells through the item. This includes cases of an enemy holding the item. Directly holding a wizard’s bonded item is a very bad idea, especially with higher level evokers.
Scry on Item: If the master is 13th level or higher, he may scry on his familiar (as if casting the scrying spell) once per day.
Potent Casting: When in contact with the bonded item, the save against the spells of the wizard are increased by +2. This increases every 4 levels.
Spell Resistance: If the master is 11th level or higher, a bonded item gains spell resistance equal to the master’s level + 5. To affect the bonded item with a spell, another spellcaster must get a result on a caster level check (1d20 + caster level) that equals or exceeds the bonded item’s spell resistance.
Replacing a lost or destroyed bonded item: The ritual to bond to a new bonded item requires a masterwork item of its type and 200 gp/effective arcane spellcaster level. Levels from different arcane casters such as Arch-mage, Mystic Theurge etc stack for this expense.
-Weylin Stormcrowe
The reason I started this thread was primarily to get an explanation for how the Alpha rules work. I think it's better to understand how the proposed rules are intended to work before looking at replacing them. As is, there are a lot of unanswered questions.
That being said, a couple of the ideas you give are interesting:
1) bump to CL when casting with the bonded object.
2) bump to DCs when casting with the bonded object.
However... I think both of those things should come through enhancements to the bonded object or as a power to the Wizard class, rather than the bonded object gets this no matter what.
As for the other suggestions...
SR for an object... o.k., why? My understanding is if you cast a spell that has SR on an object that is held or worn, that you use the holder's SR. Am I wrong? Or is this to protect the bonded object from being destroyed when used as a spy?
Scrying... again, why? Bonded objects aren't likely to be sent on espionage missions. Perhaps a Wizard with a bonded object should get a bonus to "locate object" spells cast to locate the object in case someone steals it?
Deliver Touch Spells - Not sure how this ability is going to be useful for the amulets or rings. for weapons, sure... but I thought there were other ways to do that. Like a familiar (same with scrying).
Personally, I think the enhancements proposed in the rules could be great as is... plenty of room to customize the object to suit the needs of individual wizards with a sort of built in limit on how powerful they can get. But, before we can really begin to evaluate those rules, we need to know what changes, if any, to craft are being made and how those rules are being bent for Wizards and bonded objects.
I think i would also be more comfortable with the bonded item as they appear in the Alpha Test if there were a GP limit based upon level that a wizard could invest into the item. Something like perhaps 200 or 500 gold piece value per level (based on market cost not the reduced cost). This would avoid things such as a party pooling resources to buff the wizard's staff to seriously out of level powers.
-Weylin Stormcrowe
I think i would also be more comfortable with the bonded item as they appear in the Alpha Test if there were a GP limit based upon level that a wizard could invest into the item. Something like perhaps 200 or 500 gold piece value per level (based on market cost not the reduced cost). This would avoid things such as a party pooling resources to buff the wizard's staff to seriously out of level powers.
-Weylin Stormcrowe
Why do you think that would happen? It's not something I've ever seen in a D&D session, with all of the characters pitching in their gold to equip only 1 member. If it doesn't happen now, why would it happen with this system?
Would you sacrifice all your character's gear for the following:
Staff of Power (per SRD):
It has the following powers:
* Magic missile (1 charge)
* Ray of enfeeblement (heightened to 5th level) (1 charge)
* Continual flame (1 charge)
* Levitate (1 charge)
* Lightning bolt (heightened to 5th level) (1 charge)
* Fireball (heightened to 5th level) (1 charge)
* Cone of cold (2 charges)
* Hold monster (2 charges)
* Wall of force (in a 10-ft.-diameter hemisphere around the caster only) (2 charges)
* Globe of invulnerability (2 charges)
The wielder of a staff of power gains a +2 luck bonus to AC and saving throws. The staff is also a +2 quarterstaff, and its wielder may use it to smite opponents. If 1 charge is expended (as a free action), the staff causes double damage (×3 on a critical hit) for 1 round.
That's 211,000 gp... or, 53,000 gp to make (not counting any potential xp cost).
So... party of 4, each contribute 1/4 the cost... 13,250g each.
That's 1 pair of a boots of speed (w/ money left over), a Ring of Prot. +2 (and over 5,000g in change), +3 Armor (w/ 4,000 g in change), or a +2 weapon w/ 5,000g in change.
Sure, that staff could come in handy.. but is it really worth all of that to the entire party? Would the fighter want to give up +3 Armor or a +2 enhancement to his weapon of choice so the Wizard can use Cone of Cold?
Seen that very thing happen in many games...ones i have played in, ones i have just observed and ones i have heard about second hand. Most often it was equipping one character first with a high power item improved survivability of the group as a whole and then it would trade off to another character getting a seriously buffed up item.
-Weylin Stormcrowe
Sounds like your issue is not unique to the bonded item. If the bonded item is balanced for the game, then I guess it shouldn't matter.
This tactic doesn't sound particularly sensible to me... it seems that a DM could easily take the fight to the lesser equipped members thereby avoiding the big threat until the rest of the party is down.
Do we have clarification yet on the following:
When enhancing the bonded item, does it cost the usual 1/2 item price or 1/4(half of half)?
Does it reduce xp cost as well?
Is the extra spell cast from current memorized spells or anything in spellbook?
Do we have clarification yet on the following:
When enhancing the bonded item, does it cost the usual 1/2 item price or 1/4(half of half)?
Does it reduce xp cost as well?
Is the extra spell cast from current memorized spells or anything in spellbook?
Rules-as-written:
--Half of the halved cost from enchanting, as it costs half what the normal cost would be, and you can enchant things for half of their store value.
--XP cost is reduced because XP cost is based on gold expenditure.
Rules-as-intended:
--From current memorized spells.
What I like about it is that you can replicate a lot of classic wizards from fiction without losing the D&D version of the wizard. Some wizards need their staff to be fully effective, but some wizards might have a ring, or a belt, or whatever.
Yes! My group loved this - we can't wait to see if the sorcerer is going to get something similar but more innately themed.
Also, the enhancement... the wizard can enhance the item for 1/2 price. No other limits are imposed. So a Wizard 1/Fighter 10 can enhance the bonded sword, making it a +5 defending sword for 1/2 price... so long as the fighter can afford the gold cost.
I could be wrong but I thought that the total weapon bonus, including any enhancements like defending (a personal favourite!), is limited by caster level. I mean to say that you have to be level X to enchant something with a bonus of Y - so a wizard 1/anything noncaster is not going to enchant a +5 anything.
We need a ruling! Stat! ;D
Peace,
tfad
I dont think the bonded item should be required (or make life difficult because you lost it). I think it should a repersentation of a wizards arcane prowess, developing into a stronger magical item as levels advance gain enhancements every so many levels (they should make a spell slot enhancement that characters can gain items that grant bonus slots). Also it should be Wizrd only or everyone will cherry pick a level of wizard, and this way people will see it through to the end. Im not saying force people to take 20 levels of something but it should be a reasonable option.
From what I read bonded item is still being worked on so I dont think this is anything near what it will be.
* weapons - Wouldn't have been on my top-5 list but I can see it.
To me, a Weapon is Technomage-y (Babylon 5/Crusade reference). In the commentary to Crusade, JMS talked about how one of the character's was going to undergo the Technomage innitiation during season 2 or 3 of the show (had it made it that long). As Galen had a staff that was "apart" of him, Durena would have had a sword. Her personality was wild and uncontrollable. She wanted to lash out at those that hurt her.
To me, a wizard with a bound sword says an attack mage. It says Evoker. So my suggestion would be 7 core bound items, one resembling each school with none for universal (or maybe an 8th). While there should be no rule saying that they HAVE to have an item that follows their chosen school, the basic fluff should encourage it.
(or make life difficult because you lost it)
While at a certain level I agree with you on this, my disagreement wins out this.
Agree: Its not in 3.5.
Disagree: It's pathfinder's own specific take on it. Its a wizard that helped get the party to safety but stays behind as the world collapses around them because "I'M GOING BACK FOR MY STAFF!" It's how a wizard is not "whole" until they have their Ring back. (It's "Pee Wee's Big Adventure" where he's looking for his bike.)
I could agree with that but then the staff is going to have to be worth the penalty when it is lost. Right now it doesnt really do anything but I think we will see some changes soon.
Rules-as-written:
--Half of the halved cost from enchanting, as it costs half what the normal cost would be, and you can enchant things for half of their store value.
--XP cost is reduced because XP cost is based on gold expenditure.
Rules-as-intended:
--From current memorized spells.
I know Jason posted in this thread that the cost is 1/4 the cost to buy brand spankin' new. But I haven't seen anything on an XP cost - do you have a reference for that?
Also, where did you get the "Rules-as-intended" bit? RAW says any spell you know... which refers to spells in your spell book. If they intended only spells prepared, then they could have worded it that way. Is there a reference on this one?
A pair of insights that haven't seemed to be emphasized yet:
1) Page 16/17: "If the subject of an arcane bond is lost or destroyed, it can be replaced after 1 week's time with a special ritual that costs 200 gp per wizard level...."
Since this says arcane bond and not bonded object, we assume this means that a familiar can be replaced after one week rather than WotC's "a year and a day". This is an improvement we're in favor of, as a year and a day in our games basically equals forever.
Also, there's no mention in the Alpha Release of a XP loss due to a familiar dying or being dismissed. We assume this means that the special costly ritual replaces that potential loss. Also a change from 3.5 we're in favor of. It makes having a familiar less of a liability and more of an option - the gold cost to replace still hurts, but the potential XP loss associated with the 3.5 version often is too much to bear in our games.
2) Page 16: "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."
This sentence has caused a bit of gnashing of teeth, for a few reasons. The first is the multi-classing bit that has already been mentioned; the second is a little more troubling. If a wizard gains a spell of higher level than he can cast (say, through copying a scroll into their spellbook) does the bonded object allow the casting of the spell through it? As stated, the answer seems to be yes. However, as has been demonstrated in our games, a 3rd level wizard being able to cast Summon Monster IV once per day is a bit unbalancing, even for Pathfinder.
Late to the party here, but some issues came up during our character creation that I don't see mentioned here.
1) "If a wizard attempts to cast a spell without his bonded object worn or in hand, he must make a Spellcraft check or lose the spell. The DC for this check is equal to 20 + the spell’s level."
So if I were a wizard, I'd want something that would be hard to lose. Right off the bat, I'd cross out weapons, staffs, and wands, because every fighter who ever wanted to render me less powerful would try to separate me from my bonded item. Conversely, every wizard the party ever meets should be disarmed (or diswanded, or distaffed) ASAP. It's the same thing if you see a wizard with a raven on his shoulder, you put an arrow into the raven.
So that leaves rings and amulets. My player asked what the minimum gp value of a bonded item was, and, as far as I can tell, there is no minimum gp value. Does it make sense at first level to pour your money into jewelry? No. Especially since jewelry is the first thing taken by nasty rogues when wizards are asleep or unconscious. Also, rings are harder to remove than amulets, so a ring it is.
A ring worth 1 sp, and hopefully tarnished. Then later, the wizard buys more expensive, gaudy jewelry for rogues to take (should he ever be unconscious) while leaving the crappy 1 sp, tarnished ring behind.
The big question is, would the ring show up as magic for a detect magic? I would think so, but what aura would it show, since it can help the wizard cast any spell he knows?
So if I were a wizard, I'd want something that would be hard to lose. Right off the bat, I'd cross out weapons, staffs, and wands, because every fighter who ever wanted to render me less powerful would try to separate me from my bonded item. Conversely, every wizard the party ever meets should be disarmed (or diswanded, or distaffed) ASAP. It's the same thing if you see a wizard with a raven on his shoulder, you put an arrow into the raven.
A fighter sees a Wizard holding a staff, a wand in his belt, 2 rings, and wearing an amulet. Which is the bonded item? Which do you try to take? And why do that and risk the Wizard casting lightning bolt or some other fun big damage spell at point blank range (in case you guess wrong).
I've played a lot of wizards, and I've used the bonded staff for several sessions now... never once have I had a wizard disarmed. Beat down and killed, sure, but no one ever bothered taking the time to try and remove all magic items.
The big question is, would the ring show up as magic for a detect magic? I would think so, but what aura would it show, since it can help the wizard cast any spell he knows?
Seems to me that until it has been enchanted with some sort of magic property, it wouldn't be magical. It'd be a focus. So, it's as magical as any spell component or other focus would be.
A fighter sees a Wizard holding a staff, a wand in his belt, 2 rings, and wearing an amulet. Which is the bonded item? Which do you try to take? And why do that and risk the Wizard casting lightning bolt or some other fun big damage spell at point blank range (in case you guess wrong).
You go for the staff that he's holding because, as it says on page 11, "If a wizard attempts to cast a spell without his bonded object worn or in hand, he must make a Spellcraft check or lose the spell."
So it's either the staff, or something he's wearing (like the rings or amulet). If it's the staff, you've substantially reduced his power. If it's the rings or amulet, then you can't easily get them off him in battle (which would mean he's a smart wizard), and he's using the staff for whatever it does. By removing it from his possession, you have again substantially reduced his power.
I've played a lot of wizards, and I've used the bonded staff for several sessions now... never once have I had a wizard disarmed. Beat down and killed, sure, but no one ever bothered taking the time to try and remove all magic items.
That's because your players and/or DM aren't thinking the way anyone who has lived and adventured in a world with spell focuses would be thinking. It's new to everybody. It's a trick that people will figure out and start using like a ten-foot pole on a dungeon floor.
Seems to me that until it has been enchanted with some sort of magic property, it wouldn't be magical. It'd be a focus. So, it's as magical as any spell component or other focus would be.
Then what makes it different from any other ring, amulet, wand, or weapon? A cleric can just pick up and use any holy symbol of his god. The wizard must use this one particular object. At the very least, it's worth a sentence in the rules to clarify, because you're speculating just like I am.
You go for the staff that he's holding because, as it says on page 11, "If a wizard attempts to cast a spell without his bonded object worn or in hand, he must make a Spellcraft check or lose the spell."
....
By removing it from his possession, you have again substantially reduced his power.
Actually, with the spellcraft check, you may not have impacted the wizard much at all. A universalist would still be able to use the Hand of the Apprentice just fine; cantrips are all likely usable (which is why I keep Mage Hand always prepared... on the off chance I do end up losing my staff, summoning it back is relatively easy). There seem to be enough ways of getting the spellcraft check high enough (skill focus, high Int., Precocious Apprentice, and I'm sure there is equipment available).
I've played a lot of wizards, and I've used the bonded staff for several sessions now... never once have I had a wizard disarmed. Beat down and killed, sure, but no one ever bothered taking the time to try and remove all magic items.That's because your players and/or DM aren't thinking the way anyone who has lived and adventured in a world with spell focuses would be thinking. It's new to everybody. It's a trick that people will figure out and start using like a ten-foot pole on a dungeon floor.
And here I thought it was because the choice was either killing me outright or stealing my staff, letting me get another round of spell casting and a chance to run away... and the death to wizard option won.
But, I also play in a group that has hardly ever used disarm against the party's tank or against NPCs with big weapons.
Then what makes it different from any other ring, amulet, wand, or weapon? A cleric can just pick up and use any holy symbol of his god. The wizard must use this one particular object. At the very least, it's worth a sentence in the rules to clarify, because you're speculating just like I am.
Seems to me that until it has been enchanted with some sort of magic property, it wouldn't be magical. It'd be a focus. So, it's as magical as any spell component or other focus would be.
Is a Wizard's familiar in 3.5 magical? To the point of glowing with a magical aura? Or does it look like a normal animal, even with detect magic? I thought it looked like a normal animal. Yet, it grants certain specific benefits to the wizard connected to it.
What makes a bonded object different than any other object? The wizard has spent time bonding to it. At higher levels, once the Wizard can afford to enhance it, it will definitely have the magical aura associated with that enhancement. But does a masterwork ring have a magic aura? No.
But, you're right, I'm speculating... because there the bonded object as presented in the rules thus far is nothing more than a neat idea without any clear guidance on how it works.
Actually, with the spellcraft check, you may not have impacted the wizard much at all. A universalist would still be able to use the Hand of the Apprentice just fine; cantrips are all likely usable (which is why I keep Mage Hand always prepared... on the off chance I do end up losing my staff, summoning it back is relatively easy). There seem to be enough ways of getting the spellcraft check high enough (skill focus, high Int., Precocious Apprentice, and I'm sure there is equipment available).
Yup, but you're using feats for a contingency instead of making your character more powerful. You'd be better off choosing a ring or amulet and not spending the feat. Once disarmed, your wizard now has access to much lower level spells and possible access to his higher level spells, so I've effectively given him some negative levels.
I suppose your wizard could have a locking gauntlet. That would be cool. :-)
And here I thought it was because the choice was either killing me outright or stealing my staff, letting me get another round of spell casting and a chance to run away... and the death to wizard option won.
You've never had a fighter with Improved Sunder whacking at everyone's weapons just to see the surprised look on their faces? I had a player who did just that for an entire campaign. What does the villain who put all his feats into wielding a greatsword do when his greatsword breaks?
Or how about a wizard with Telekinesis? That just became a much more useful spell.
My party won against the Erinyes in SCAP by casting Shatter on the buckle holding her quiver of arrows. Her entire build was devoted to making her the most badass flying archer she could be, but without arrows, she went down in two rounds.
But, I also play in a group that has hardly ever used disarm against the party's tank or against NPCs with big weapons.
Bottom line is, you don't seem to think it's a useful tactic, and in plain vanilla 3.5 it's questionable whether or not it is. In Pathfinder I think it's a more useful tactic that players will pick up on. Part of playtesting is pointing out possible unintended consequences to the designer, so that's what I'm doing.
Is a Wizard's familiar in 3.5 magical? To the point of glowing with a magical aura? Or does it look like a normal animal, even with detect magic? I thought it looked like a normal animal. Yet, it grants certain specific benefits to the wizard connected to it.
According to the PHB, "A familiar is a normal animal that gains new powers and becomes a magical beast when summoned to service by a sorcerer or wizard."
So if my players were looking at a murder of crows wondering if a wizard was using his familiar to spy on them and the mage of the party cast detect magic and looked at them all sitting there in a tree staring at him, then yeah, I'd rule that the one that was a familiar would glow with a magical aura. It's no longer a crow, it's a magical beast that looks like a crow.