| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
Yes, but sadly manuals of the same type don't stack.
You can't read +2 Str and a +3 Str manual to get +5, you have to read +5.
But you can have +5 to every stat from manuals (given time/money).
Actually, I believe that NO inherent bonuses stack with others. Remember that a Wish spell can grant an inherent bonus to an ability score as well, but because of the way stacking works, you can't read a +3 stat book and then use a Wish for an extra +2 to reach to cap. Whatever the sources of your inherent bonuses may be, you only receive the benefits of the highest one to any single ability score.
Yes, but sadly manuals of the same type don't stack.
You can't read +2 Str and a +3 Str manual to get +5, you have to read +5.
But you can have +5 to every stat from manuals (given time/money).
Yes, this is true RAW. Although I have seen in other posts where others mention that they don't enforce the no stacking rule with the books. And my DM is the same way.
Does the cost for a +3 and a +2 manual add up to the equivalent of a +5 manual's cost?
If so, I see no reason why they couldn't stack. If NOT then only the highest bonus would apply, and a +3 would override a +2, so on and so forth.
Easily handled.
Does the cost for a +3 and a +2 manual add up to the equivalent of a +5 manual's cost?
If so, I see no reason why they couldn't stack. If NOT then only the highest bonus would apply, and a +3 would override a +2, so on and so forth.
Easily handled.
Any number of manuals cost exactly the same for the same total. Five +1 manuals and one +5 manual cost the same. If they don't stack, it's punishing to be given a manual of less than +4 or +5.
Does the cost for a +3 and a +2 manual add up to the equivalent of a +5 manual's cost?
If so, I see no reason why they couldn't stack. If NOT then only the highest bonus would apply, and a +3 would override a +2, so on and so forth.
Easily handled.
Agreed it should, but it never did. Although, most DMs might let it slide as it is a silly restriction.
Any number of manuals cost exactly the same for the same total. Five +1 manuals and one +5 manual cost the same. If they don't stack, it's punishing to be given a manual of less than +4 or +5.Does the cost for a +3 and a +2 manual add up to the equivalent of a +5 manual's cost?
If so, I see no reason why they couldn't stack. If NOT then only the highest bonus would apply, and a +3 would override a +2, so on and so forth.
Easily handled.
Not at all. You only count the highest bonus against wealth by level. Once you get a higher bonus the lower bonus book drops off. It's kind of like using a potion in that regard.
Not at all. You only count the highest bonus against wealth by level. Once you get a higher bonus the lower bonus book drops off. It's kind of like using a potion in that regard.Any number of manuals cost exactly the same for the same total. Five +1 manuals and one +5 manual cost the same. If they don't stack, it's punishing to be given a manual of less than +4 or +5.Does the cost for a +3 and a +2 manual add up to the equivalent of a +5 manual's cost?
If so, I see no reason why they couldn't stack. If NOT then only the highest bonus would apply, and a +3 would override a +2, so on and so forth.
Easily handled.
I don’t think he was referring to the ‘wealth by level’ in being punishing. What I think he was getting at, and I agree, is if you buy/receive a stat book of let’s say +2, then later you buy/find another stat book (of the same stat) of +3, it erases that earlier stat book and therefore the money you spent on the earlier book (or received as a treasure) is a loss. That’s what I think he meant as punishing, and I agree with him.
There is no reason not to stack the books in my opinion, considering the cost works out the same and each +1 requires a Wish (or Miracle) spell.
Really, did not know the growth was exponential like that (i.e. 3 more wishes to get to +3, 4 more to get to +4, etc.).
I really don’t think that is necessary, either. I mean so what if the Wizard could get +5 in every stat at 17th level? That is one of the perks of being a Wizard and it isn’t like it was easy. He had to pay both a large sum of money and experience (even at only 5 wishes for a +5). If he was willing to pay both the money and experience for it, all the more power to him.
Aura strong evocation (if miracle is used); CL 17th
Slot —; Price 27,500 gp (+1), 55,000 gp (+2), 82,500 gp (+3), 110,000 gp (+4), 137,500 gp (+5); Weight 5 lbs.
DESCRIPTION
This thick tome contains tips on health and fitness, but entwined within the words is a powerful magical effect. If anyone reads this book, which takes a total of 48 hours over a minimum of 6 days, he gains an inherent bonus from +1 to +5 (depending on the type of manual) to his Constitution score. Once the book is read, the magic disappears from the pages and it becomes a normal book.
CONSTRUCTION
Requirements Craft Wondrous Item, wish or miracle; Cost 26,250 gp (+1), 52,500 gp (+2), 78,750 gp (+3), 105,000 gp (+4), 131,250 gp (+5)
Wish
School universal; Level sorcerer/wizard 9
Casting Time 1 standard action
Components V, S, M (diamond worth 25,000 gp)
Range, Target, Effect, Area, Duration: see text
Saving Throw none, see text; Spell Resistance yes
Wish is the mightiest spell a wizard or sorcerer can cast. By simply speaking aloud, you can alter reality to better suit you. Even wish, however, has its limits. A wish can produce any one of the following effects.
* Duplicate any sorcerer/wizard spell of 8th level or lower, provided the spell does not belong to one of your opposition schools.
* Duplicate any non-sorcerer/wizard spell of 7th level or lower, provided the spell does not belong to one of your opposition schools.
* Duplicate any sorcerer/wizard spell of 7th level or lower, even if it belongs to one of your opposition schools.
* Duplicate any non-sorcerer/wizard spell of 6th level or lower, even if it belongs to one of your opposition schools.
* Undo the harmful effects of many other spells, such as geas/quest or insanity.
* Grant a creature a +1 inherent bonus to an ability score. Two to five wish spells cast in immediate succession can grant a creature a +2 to +5 inherent bonus to an ability score (two wishes for a +2 inherent bonus, three wishes for a +3 inherent bonus, and so on). Inherent bonuses are instantaneous, so they cannot be dispelled. Note: An inherent bonus may not exceed +5 for a single ability score, and inherent bonuses to a particular ability score do not stack, so only the best one applies.
* Remove injuries and afflictions. A single wish can aid one creature per caster level, and all subjects are cured of the same kind of affliction. For example, you could heal all the damage you and your companions have taken, or remove all poison effects from everyone in the party, but not do both with the same wish.
* Revive the dead. A wish can bring a dead creature back to life by duplicating a resurrection spell. A wish can revive a dead creature whose body has been destroyed, but the task takes two wishes: one to recreate the body and another to infuse the body with life again. A wish cannot prevent a character who was brought back to life from gaining a permanent negative level.
* Transport travelers. A wish can lift one creature per caster level from anywhere on any plane and place those creatures anywhere else on any plane regardless of local conditions. An unwilling target gets a Will save to negate the effect, and spell resistance (if any) applies.
* Undo misfortune. A wish can undo a single recent event. The wish forces a reroll of any roll made within the last round (including your last turn). Reality reshapes itself to accommodate the new result. For example, a wish could undo an opponent's successful save, a foe's successful critical hit (either the attack roll or the critical roll), a friend's failed save, and so on. The re-roll, however, may be as bad as or worse than the original roll. An unwilling target gets a Will save to negate the effect, and spell resistance (if any) applies.
You may try to use a wish to produce greater effects than these, but doing so is dangerous. (The wish may pervert your intent into a literal but undesirable fulfillment or only a partial fulfillment, at the GM's discretion.)
Duplicated spells allow saves and spell resistance as normal (but save DCs are for 9th-level spells).
When a wish duplicates a spell with a material component that costs more than 10,000 gp, you must provide that component (in addition to the 25,000 gp diamond component for this spell).
Relevant part of Wish:
Grant a creature a +1 inherent bonus to an ability score. Two to five wish spells cast in immediate succession can grant a creature a +2 to +5 inherent bonus to an ability score (two wishes for a +2 inherent bonus, three wishes for a +3 inherent bonus, and so on). Inherent bonuses are instantaneous, so they cannot be dispelled. Note: An inherent bonus may not exceed +5 for a single ability score, and inherent bonuses to a particular ability score do not stack, so only the best one applies.
RAW:
Wishes don't stack (unless cast in immediate succession, up to +5.)
Manuals don't stack.
Wishes don't stack with Manuals.
The way I do it:
Everything stacks to a maximum of +5.
First, because stat increases are fun, and expensive, and the high cost plus the +5 maximum keep them from being overpowered, so the game isn't broken by letting them stack.
Second, because there are certain kinds of character management that I dislike, and "It's better to get it later" is one of them. For the same reason, I allow magic items to be upgraded/re-enchanted in any logical sequence. (e.g. A ring of Vanish CL 2, 1 use/day can be upgraded by added to uses per day, or to caster level, or to Invisibility rather than Vanish, then to Improved Invisibility, etc.)
I don’t think he was referring to the ‘wealth by level’ in being punishing. What I think he was getting at, and I agree, is if you buy/receive a stat book of let’s say +2, then later you buy/find another stat book (of the same stat) of +3, it erases that earlier stat book and therefore the money you spent on the earlier book (or received as a treasure) is a loss. That’s what I think he meant as punishing, and I agree with him.
There is no reason not to stack the books in my opinion, considering the cost works out the same and each +1 requires a Wish (or Miracle) spell.
And what I'm saying is he's wrong. It's like using a scroll -- the money isn't "lost" because it's not counted against your wealth by level any more -- the only way for wealth to be "lost" is if it was still counted against your wealth by level.
Wealth is a dynamic stat -- it's constantly in flux, you gain something it goes up you use something (like a scroll) it goes down -- something gets broke it goes down more, however it should fluctuate around a point, called your wealth by level -- if your wealth is above that point you'll either get less, or lose stuff until you are even again (ish) if your wealth is below that point you'll gain stuff until you are even again (ish).
You can't "lose" wealth in the fashion of which you speak.
Once the higher bonus is in place the smaller one basically disappears off your wealth by level since it's no longer effective -- and ineffective things do not affect your wealth by level (which only comprises the wealth you that affects your ability to adventure.
Honestly you shouldn't even look at it as "the value of the book" but instead look at it as "the value of this bonus" since the book does go away after use (remember it is a single shot item) -- the value of the boost is what stays on your wealth by level -- not the book.
You can't "lose" wealth in the fashion of which you speak.
In some games, you do, but I wish people would label their weirdo organized play rules as such:)
And what I'm saying is he's wrong. It's like using a scroll -- the money isn't "lost" because it's not counted against your wealth by level any more -- the only way for wealth to be "lost" is if it was still counted against your wealth by level.Wealth is a dynamic stat -- it's constantly in flux, you gain something it goes up you use something (like a scroll) it goes down -- something gets broke it goes down more, however it should fluctuate around a point, called your wealth by level -- if your wealth is above that point you'll either get less, or lose stuff until you are even again (ish) if your wealth is below that point you'll gain stuff until you are even again (ish).
You can't "lose" wealth in the fashion of which you speak.
Once the higher bonus is in place the smaller one basically disappears off your wealth by level since it's no longer effective -- and ineffective things do not affect your wealth by level (which only comprises the wealth you that affects your ability to adventure.
Honestly you shouldn't even look at it as "the value of the book" but instead look at it as "the value of this bonus" since the book does go away after use (remember it is a single shot item) -- the value of the boost is what stays on your wealth by level -- not the book.
We are just looking at it from two different perspectives. You are correct in that it does not affect the character’s total wealth level. It isn’t like you permanently lose 25,000 gp (or whatever the book was worth) off your total possible wealth.
But what I am getting at, and I am guessing he was saying as well, is you are spending more money than you should. Why should I spend 50,000 gp to attain a +2 Str. book and then spend another 75,000 later on to raise that +2 to a +3? This is where the rules are punishing you. You should be able to just spend a total of 75,000 to attain that +3, with prior books in that stat or not.
But what I am getting at, and I am guessing he was saying as well, is you are spending more money than you should. Why should I spend 50,000 gp to attain a +2 Str. book and then spend another 75,000 later on to raise that +2 to a +3? This is where the rules are punishing you. You should be able to just spend a total of 75,000 to attain that +3, with prior books in that stat or not.
I would disagree that it's the rules punishing you. It's lack of forethought or discipline in the face of opportunity that's punishing you. Sure, you could spend less to get that +5 than if you used a +2 book and then bought a +5 one later on. But that +2 book might have come in a hoard. Or perhaps it was what you could afford when it was available on the magic market in a town that couldn't support having the more expensive manual.
Sure, you could have held off and gotten the +5 a bit cheaper in the end, but it may have made sense, at the time, to invest in something earlier even if it means you're not the most frugal of shoppers.
|
I'd let them stack as well. It ends up the same total cost, and these things are in the game by DM fiat and dumb luck (read: never) only.
@Bill: You presume that the higher one is even available. The only difference in difficulty to acquire (they're all major) or difficulty to make is the cost. That's it. Not making them stack is only useful if you want to give more than one + to X book and not have it go to the same guy, which you could just as easily do by saying "this book is attuned to Y type of character."
[
I would disagree that it's the rules punishing you. It's lack of forethought or discipline in the face of opportunity that's punishing you. Sure, you could spend less to get that +5 than if you used a +2 book and then bought a +5 one later on. But that +2 book might have come in a hoard. Or perhaps it was what you could afford when it was available on the magic market in a town that couldn't support having the more expensive manual.
Sure, you could have held off and gotten the +5 a bit cheaper in the end, but it may have made sense, at the time, to invest in something earlier even if it means you're not the most frugal of shoppers.
Yes, I see your point. But going by RAW, it is forcing you to spend more money than you should, even if you do receive +2 book in a hoard earlier on.
Player-Fighter class: “Great, a +2 Str. book in the hoard! And that is 50,000 less I will need to spend later to max out my inherent bonus in strength.”
DM: “No, sorry. You will still need to make up that 50,000 gold later on as well. Unfortunately the books don’t stack.”
Player: “Oh…” :(
Now I can see in campaigns where DMs are more generous with funds the RAW could work. But our DM has always been quite stingy and having 50,000 gp as available funds at 17th level is a lot of cash.
Old school player and I don't have them stack at all. Inherent bonuses are expensive and rare and a +5 inherent should require a massive expenditure of resources in order to get.
It's still light years easier than wish boosting your stats in previous generations. I think that it's better game balance wise for the high levels of inherents to show up later rather than sooner in the game.
For the most part I don't really count Manuals against the party's WBL though but rather keep them in the "consumables/artifacts/mcguffin" pile so that if the fighter finds a wish granting item early on they don't have to worry about using the wish on +strength because it's inefficient because there is a good chance a level appropriate manual will show up later on in play.
You're all wrong. I'm not a 'him'. :(
And in most games I've played in, consumables come out of WBL permanently. Fortunately, the DMs I've played with usually allow tomes to stack.
We are just looking at it from two different perspectives. You are correct in that it does not affect the character’s total wealth level. It isn’t like you permanently lose 25,000 gp (or whatever the book was worth) off your total possible wealth.But what I am getting at, and I am guessing he was saying as well, is you are spending more money than you should. Why should I spend 50,000 gp to attain a +2 Str. book and then spend another 75,000 later on to raise that +2 to a +3? This is where the rules are punishing you. You should be able to just spend a total of 75,000 to attain that +3, with prior books in that stat or not.
You aren't punished -- in fact you are rewarded for being impatient. You got a bonus for all the levels you use the lower level book for before it gets replaced by the higher level bonus. As such it's no worse than selling an old magical weapon to buy a better one. Nothing is lost -- it's not like you have to go back and redo the levels you used the lesser book for without the book -- you got the bonus then, you get a larger bonus now and you lost nothing since the lesser book only impacts your wealth by level at the time you were using it.
So you got the use out of the lesser book -- you buy the bigger book and you basically get a "refund" on your wealth by level equal to the price of the lesser book.
Nothing lost everything gained.
That’s certainly an interesting take on it. I can’t say I agree. I feel you do lose out as you have already gained the +2 Inherent Bonus (spent that 50,000 GP, gained in treasure hoard, etc) but when upgrading to a higher plus, you still have to ‘rebuy’ the earlier pluses you already had.
In the example of the magical weapon, you can at least upgrade the weapon and only pay the difference in the price from a +2 to a +3. With the stat books, you cannot do that.
Besides, I don’t think it is unbalancing by any means to let the books stack. You are paying out a great deal of money (and spells if you are the spellcaster). There is no reason to ‘potentially’ pay up to 375,000 GP to get one stat up to a +5. Yes, that most likely would not happen, but as per RAW, that is what could happen.
In the example of the magical weapon, you can at least upgrade the weapon and only pay the difference in the price from a +2 to a +3. With the stat books, you cannot do that.
Why not? Got anywhere that it says you can't upgrade a magical thing into another one? You can upgrade weapons, enhancement stat boosters, cloaks of resistance, rings of protection, etc -- show me where it says you can't get a "refresher course 102 for strength boosting" to upgrade your inherent bonus. Show me where it says you can't increase it through the same general means you do your weapon. You aren't "rebuying" a thing if you don't -- you buy the new book just like buying a new sword -- if that's the path you want to go you can and since you basically get rid of the old bonus you aren't charged for it anymore. The "price" and "non-price" stays the same regardless.
Not that I'm saying that you shouldn't let the books stack (as a houserule it's rather tame as others pointed out) -- I'm just discussing the point of wealth return (since that's the specific point I'm disagreeing with you on) and cost effectiveness.
Indeed I feel the earlier books are a case of having your cake and eating it too -- you get the early bonus and don't get punished when you take a higher bonus later since you never lose any wealth. You got the boost at the lower levels that you wanted and could afford and it doesn't actually cost you at the higher levels in anyway.
It basically comes down to whether your GM subtracts consumables from suggested WBL and whether WBL is a strict guideline.
For the most part I don't think the party should be punished for stocking a few spare potions and scrolls for contingencies. Sure they have to pay for those items out of operating expenses (I typically encourage a equal share for contingencies like raise dead, scrolls, wands, potions) but if an item is single-shot then I generally don't factor it into assumed WBL.
Manuals are a bit of a strange mess because their impact is permanent yet they also function as very expensive consumables whose intrinsic value vis a vis other magic items is relatively low.
Basically a manual functions as a one time boon like a magical statue that grants a wish. Sure it's and for end game builds it's actually quite powerful but it's cost relative to other items prices out of the reach of low level adventurers.
IMHO Manuals should mainly show up about the same time ,or slightly earlier, than wish makes it's appearance as a "reliable" tool. Wishes showing up prior to high level games are rare and special (unless you want and allow extensive efreet calling) and manuals which simulate one of the most common uses of wishes should be rare and special as well.
As such I really don't mind that a manual of strength +1 is eventually superceded by a manual +4 or a series of wishes without stacking.
Basically it's like buying a house, if you can afford to buy the really nice +5 house in cash early on then you don't have to pay a ton of interest. Most people don't have that sort of cash, however they really like houses, so either they get a loan on the big house or they buy a smaller house early on and hope to trade up for a bigger house later on.
Why not? Got anywhere that it says you can't upgrade a magical thing into another one? You can upgrade weapons, enhancement stat boosters, cloaks of resistance, rings of protection, etc -- show me where it says you can't get a "refresher course 102 for strength boosting" to upgrade your inherent bonus. Show me where it says you can't increase it through the same general means you do your weapon.
Well, you aren’t upgrading the stat books for the fact that you are not able to pay the difference in price from a lower plus to a higher one, like you can do with a magic armor or sword. So yes, you are ‘rebuying’ the earlier pluses that you had, when you buyer a higher stat book.
Also, I think a large part of the issue I have, like with the magic weapon again, you can at least ‘sell’ your sword if you really want to and get at least some gold back. Once the stat book has been used, that’s it. As per description of the magic item, the text in the book disappears.
Not that I'm saying that you shouldn't let the books stack (as a houserule it's rather tame as others pointed out) -- I'm just discussing the point of wealth return (since that's the specific point I'm disagreeing with you on) and cost effectiveness.
My argument is not in regards to the overall Wealth Level of the character. I agree with you, you are by no means ‘losing’ permanent money out of your allowed wealth per level when your earlier stat book ‘goes away’ when getting a newer and better one. My issue is forcing you to pay for your earlier pluses ‘again’ when buying a new (and higher) stat book.
Also, stat books are different than magic items that you wear and which give you stat bonuses. Where RAW states these bonuses are ‘permanent’ if you wear the item for 24 hours, they truly aren’t, not like Inherent bonuses. A Dispel Magic, Anti-magic field, Mage's Disjunction or just taking the item off, your bonuses go away. But Inherent bonuses are truly permanent, the only way to lose them is through the same means your base stats are reduced. This is also why I feel once you’ve paid for that stat book to give you ‘x’ pluses, you should not have to pay for them again when wanting to raise your Inherent bonus even higher.
I was pointing out how cheap a one use item with a level 9 spell is: 9x17x50= 7,650 gp (3,825 gp for the actual creation)(I usually also make it good alignment specific in case it gets stolen). if you have a few days to craft and you happen to have a +2 manual, sell it for 25k and make wish items instead.one use items of wish or miracle are much more cost effective. you can buy 5 for about 40k (see candle of invocation), then use them in successive rounds.I'm sorry if I sound obtuse, but I think I am missing how candles of invocation allows 5 casts of wish. It allows Gate to be used, but I thought there was a blurb that when you call creatures to you they won't cast wish anymore?
You forgot you have to include the cost of the material components in each such item you create.
I find it interesting that people actually play with Wealth by Level as an actual resource. In all the games I have played in you get the money you get and if you spend it, it is gone.
So let's say I spent 55,000 gold on a +2 to Str and have 315,000 in items and cash. Then I level from 16th to 17th level and gain 95,000 more gold from my adventures to bring me to 410,000, the appropriate number for 17th level. If I spend 82,500 gp to raise my inherent Str bonus to +3 I now have a total wealth of 355,000 gold. The 55,000 gold I previously spent has just disappeared. Is the GM supposed to just give me another 55,000 gold because I decided to by a book? What about the other guy who spent his money on his sword? Does he get another 55,000 gold too? That would give him too much!
In my opinion it is just better to let them stack and not worry about it.
|
|
I find it interesting that people actually play with Wealth by Level as an actual resource. In all the games I have played in you get the money you get and if you spend it, it is gone.
So let's say I spent 55,000 gold on a +2 to Str and have 315,000 in items and cash. Then I level from 16th to 17th level and gain 95,000 more gold from my adventures to bring me to 410,000, the appropriate number for 17th level. If I spend 82,500 gp to raise my inherent Str bonus to +3 I now have a total wealth of 355,000 gold. The 55,000 gold I previously spent has just disappeared. Is the GM supposed to just give me another 55,000 gold because I decided to by a book? What about the other guy who spent his money on his sword? Does he get another 55,000 gold too? That would give him too much!
In my opinion it is just better to let them stack and not worry about it.
So in your opinion it's perfectly okay to have a party member fall prey to a sundering opponent to the tune of two +10 weapons and a +10 armor and just be screwed from then on?
In my view this is closer to upgrading a weapon from +3 to +5 or something similar. You don't really get any more benefit than the +2 difference, so the game doesn't require you to pay more than the difference.
You forgot you have to include the cost of the material components in each such item you create.when you create a wondrous item you do not have to provide any of the material components. in the candle of invocation example, there is no 10k of rare herbs and offerings in the price.
Incorrect as per the estimating magic item gold piece value, If a spell has a material component cost that is factored into the value of the item.
The clause that the material focus is not required does not change the base value of the item but rather does not force you to have the focus or component in your possession.
For example the magic weapon category has the same clause but if you examine the luck blade you can see that the cost of the material component is factored into the items costs.
Wish granting items (particularly 5 wishes) would be exceedingly expensive to create.
Incorrect as per the estimating magic item gold piece value, If a spell has a material component cost that is factored into the value of the item.The clause that the material focus is not required does not change the base value of the item but rather does not force you to have the focus or component in your possession.
For example the magic weapon category has the same clause but if you examine the luck blade you can see that the cost of the material component is factored into the items costs.
Wish granting items (particularly 5 wishes) would be exceedingly expensive to create.
What our DM has always made us do is even though there are technically no required components to create Wonderous Items (besides any needed for the spells) he does require us to have the masterworked equipment that is being enchanted, just like you need the masterworked sword to make it magical.
For example with a Bag of Holding, he requires a masterworked leather bag. Now, attaining the masterwork leather bag is not added on top of the listed cost of making the item, we just need to have one. Same idea in if we want to forge a ring, we need to have the masterworked ring. With completion/spell trigger magic items (potions, scrolls, wands, etc) he doesn't enforce the masterworked item.
I guess the candle of invocation an exception then.
back to the manuals... by the time I would find one as treasure or be able to buy one, I find the campaign does not allow for the 48 hours of study over 6 days.
In our campaign, we almost have downtime between each adventure (gaming session). How our DM works it is each gaming session usually takes one in-game month. Whatever time we have left after our adventure for that session, is our downtime in that month. If the session takes the whole month, we usually just fast forward another month. But it really depends on what kind of campaign storyline is happening. If we are in a timed mission of some sort, we of course won't do that.
Go to the astral plane, it has the timeless trait, then teleport baxk to your plane... Essentially, you read the book in 1 round.
Lol, i'm pretty sure a rules lawyer could shoot that reasoning to pieces by the time i look on here tomorrow, but thats what i allow my players to do. This way they are not penalized by not having time to use their crafting feats or read their books. Usually, the only penalty this method applies, is that it would soak up a spell slot or cost 2 scrolls to pull off, not a significant cost at any level where you have access to this stuff to begin with.
The Astral Plane hasn't worked like that in a couple of editions.
Timeless means things don't age, you don't need to eat, you don't heal naturally, etc.
The trait you are looking for is erratic time but only at it's most favorable does it provide the massive time line multiplier that Astral travel provided back in 1e-2e.
For the most part what you would need to do that sort of stunt is a demiplane.
I guess the candle of invocation an exception then.
back to the manuals... by the time I would find one as treasure or be able to buy one, I find the campaign does not allow for the 48 hours of study over 6 days.
Go to the astral plane, it has the timeless trait, then teleport baxk to your plane... Essentially, you read the book in 1 round.
Lol, i'm pretty sure a rules lawyer could shoot that reasoning to pieces by the time i look on here tomorrow, but thats what i allow my players to do. This way they are not penalized by not having time to use their crafting feats or read their books. Usually, the only penalty this method applies, is that it would soak up a spell slot or cost 2 scrolls to pull off, not a significant cost at any level where you have access to this stuff to begin with.
Yeah you have it kind of backwards -- time doesn't flow on the astral plane -- but it does still continue on the prime material -- basically you're stuck stasis while everything else moves on -- this also means you can't heal or regain spells. Not a good place to spend a lot of time (pun intended).
Also that's not rules lawyering -- it's understanding what the trait means.
You aren't punished -- in fact you are rewarded for being impatient. You got a bonus for all the levels you use the lower level book for before it gets replaced by the higher level bonus. As such it's no worse than selling an old magical weapon to buy a better one. Nothing is lost -- it's not like you have to go back and redo the levels you used the lesser book for without the book -- you got the bonus then, you get a larger bonus now and you lost nothing since the lesser book only impacts your wealth by level at the time you were using it.So you got the use out of the lesser book -- you buy the bigger book and you basically get a "refund" on your wealth by level equal to the price of the lesser book.
Nothing lost everything gained.
Sadly this kind of thought is dumb. DMs are creating a world for you and forcing situations that require a DM to do pointless things to balance out the wealth is silly. Let me explain more clearly. At an earlier level you get a +2 tome and use it. It is still counted toward your wealth per level. Several levels later, you get a +3 tome because it matches up with your wbl. Now if you use it, your current wbl drops below usual. You are at a loss and a DM must take further action to alleviate this issue if he wants to keep you close to the necessary wbl. If your dm doesn't take further action, then the best action for players is to sell lesser tomes and make the most efficient use of wealth. This is why not allowing stacking is silly. Tomes aren't resellable and thus you are just loading more wealth management onto a DM. Stacking(up to 5) allows a DM to slowly hand out improvements in a balanced manner.
Waste of character wealth and waste of DM time will always be an inferior choice.
doesn't change the way it's set up -- as it stands things should get used up/broken -- such is taken into account with the differences between the encounter reward chart and the wealth by level chart.
If the GM keeps giving wealth beyond the WBL chart then he will have issues -- if he doesn't fix the lowered amount the players will have issues.
The assumption of such is built in.
+1 Puregamer, thats how my group has always done it.
I think the spirit of the rules here was to prevent certain abuses of other rules or spells. Specifically, i think the main abuse would be summoning things that can cast wish.
I cast summon monster 9, and summon magic wish granting monster named sully. He casts wish on me to raise my ability. Ok, now i summon sully's brother, Sammie. He also casts wish on me, to further increase my bonus.....
*Sigh* It would help if you kept up with the rules -- you cannot summon something to cast wish for you in anyway shape or form.
I think I'm just going to ban inherent bonuses from my games. They're boring and hardly ever come up anyway.
Don't forget abyssal sorcerers.
I think I'm just going to ban inherent bonuses from my games. They're boring and hardly ever come up anyway.
It's also useful in lowering maximum Spell DC which is a significant issue in the end game when inherents become more commonplace.
One thing I have been tempted to go with is that level bonuses are actually inherent, so that you can boost a stat 5 times with natural level progression or with magical inherents but not both.
I dislike manuals for the most part but I'm okay with wish based stat increases though.