| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
(a) It takes an action to use a Pearl of Power; not so with a Ring of Wizardry.
(b) In theory, you could be a multi-classed wizard/witch, or witch/sorcerer, or some such malarkey, in which case you would get double use out of the Ring of Wizardry.
(c) I agree that Rings of Wizardry are too expensive.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
IIRC, Pearls of power only allow you to recall a spell already cast. Rings of Wizardry give you more slots. This means you have access to more different spells with the ring.
Rings of Wizardry double your base spell slots, so you have more room for preparing spells ahead of time, or for leaving open to fill later. For spontaneous casters, it gives more flexibility on what spells to spend uses per day on, since more are available.
On the other hand, Pearls of Power can only restore spells that have already been cast.
For a magus that will need little asides from shocking grasp and frigid touch, the pearls may seem more practical, but for more dedicated casters, the rings are invaluable.
Keep in mind that Pearls of Power are useless to the spontaneous casters, too.
(Although I agree that the Ring of Wizardry is generally overpriced.)
|
If you are playing core only and you are a spontaneous caster, a ring of wizardry is the only way to use an item to get extra spells per day. If your DM allows the Pathfinder Society Field Guide, then you don't even need to do that since it has runestones of power which are spontaneous pearls of power at double the cost.
I consider the Ring of Wizardry to be fairly priced, especially when you consider that it's an item that gets better as you do.
There is something that exists an item that is basically a pearl of power for spontaneous casters, but I do not know what it is called or the cost. Anyone know? I believe it was in one of the pathfinder field guides or something like that
Edit: Found it
Runestone of Power
Source Pathfinder Society Field Guide
Aura strong transmutation; CL 17th
Slot none; Price 2,000 gp (1st), 8,000 gp (2nd), 18,000 gp (3rd), 32,000 gp (4th), 50,000 gp (5th), 72,000 gp (6th), 98,000 gp (7th), 128,000 gp (8th), 162,000 gp (9th); Weight -
DESCRIPTION
A runestone of power is a small chip of polished stone etched with a rune. Traditionally, this rune is one of many Thassilonian runes for magic, but more recently created runestones of power often substitute runes from other cultures—the nature of the rune itself has no effect on the runestone’s actual powers. These objects are potent aids to all spellcasters who cast spells spontaneously (bards, inquisitors, oracles, sorcerers, and summoners, but not to spellcasters like clerics who have the option to spontaneously cast certain spells). Once per day, a spontaneous caster can draw upon a runestone of power to cast a spell—doing so is part of the spellcasting action, and expends that runestone’s power for the day rather than one of the spellcaster’s actual spell slots for the day. An expended runestone of power recharges its capacity after 24 hours. The spell must be of a particular level, depending on the runestone.
CONSTRUCTION REQUIREMENTS
Craft Wondrous Item, creator must be able to spontaneously cast spells of the appropriate spell level; Cost 1,000 gp (1st), 4,000 gp (2nd), 9,000 gp (3rd), 16,000 gp (4th), 25,000 gp (5th), 36,000 gp (6th), 49,000 gp (7th), 64,000 gp (8th), 81,000 gp (9th).
Ring of Wizardry for a sorcerer is a better investment. First, because they can't use Pearls of Power, and second, because they get 6 base spells per level rather than 4.
L1 - 20,000 gp - 3,333 gold/spell vs pearl is 1,000 gold/spell
L2 - 40,000 gp - 6,666 gold/spell vs pearl is 4,000 gold/spell
L3 - 70,000 gp - 11,666 gold/spell vs pearl is 9,000 gold/spell
L4 - 100,000 g - 16,666 gold/spell vs pearl is 16,000 gold/spell
Rings start to look pretty good for sorcerers.
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I kind of think the Ring is priced fine, mainly because it stacks with the pearls to give a wizard a ton more versatility. With the ring you get 8 possible spell choices per day, then you can have a handful of pearls to cast those choices multiple times. So you can have Shocking Grasp memorized three times (so you can use it multiple times in an encounter) plus five other spells.
You buy the pearls if you just want to cast the same spell more.
Buy the ring if you want more spell choices in a day (plus more castings).
I suspect dual casters were a consideration in the pricing of the rings of wizardry. An appropriate level wizard/sorcerer will net 10 spells of the ring's level. Reading into the OP's generously provided numbers, you can see that makes it overpriced for the Ring I compared to a 10 pearls, but that the Ring II and 10 pearls of power 2nd level match up exactly.
You actually end up saving money as a double caster on the 3rd and 4th level versions, but they were probably priced as they are because if set at the proper value compared to pearls they'd be virtually impossible to acquire, and not worth their contribution to your wealth (as it stands, the problem still exists).
Just a thought. I know my Sorc/Wizard is a fan of her Ring of Wizardry II.
Ring of Wizardry for a sorcerer is a better investment. First, because they can't use Pearls of Power, and second, because they get 6 base spells per level rather than 4.
L1 - 20,000 gp - 3,333 gold/spell vs pearl is 1,000 gold/spell
L2 - 40,000 gp - 6,666 gold/spell vs pearl is 4,000 gold/spell
L3 - 70,000 gp - 11,666 gold/spell vs pearl is 9,000 gold/spell
L4 - 100,000 g - 16,666 gold/spell vs pearl is 16,000 gold/spellRings start to look pretty good for sorcerers.
Rings of Wizardry don't work for Spontaneous Spellcasters. RoW double prepared spells. Spontaneous casters don't prepare spells.
Unless you're playing with 3.5 feats, that is.
==Aelryinth
Dual casters generally suck in terms of party utility. Gee, I've got 2nd level spells from the same list, and I'm facing opponents with 4th level spells.
Oh, hey, I have 6d6 fireballs and am facing opponents with 6th level spells...good thing I won't run out of those fireballs...
No, the Ring of Wizardry is overpriced, and its price dates back to D&D 3.0, and was not changed...because nobody used it it wasn't seen as broken.
If I were to reprice these items, it would be as follows:
Ring of Wizardry I: Spell level^1.5 * 5,000 = 5,000
Ring of Wizardry II: Spell Level^1.5 * 5,000 = 14,200
Ring of Wizardry III: Spell level^1.5 * 5,000 = 26,000
Ring of Wizardry IV: Spell level^1.5 * 5,000 = 40,000
Regularizing these to 5K, 15K, 25K and 40K would probably work just fine.
As it is, by the time someone has a ring of Wizardry, they're generally swimming in 1st and 2nd level spell slots that aren't terribly effective.
I suspect dual casters were a consideration in the pricing of the rings of wizardry.Remember that the ring is a 1st edition relic when casters were practically all multi-classed. It wasn't a cheap item back then either.
FTFY :)
Rings of Wizardry don't work for Spontaneous Spellcasters. RoW double prepared spells. Spontaneous casters don't prepare spells.
Unless you're playing with 3.5 feats, that is.
==Aelryinth
Please show me where in the descriptive text below, taken from the SRD, it excludes spontaneous spellcasters?
This special ring comes in four kinds (ring of wizardry I, ring of wizardry II, ring of wizardry III, and ring of wizardry IV), all of them useful only to arcane spellcasters. The wearer's arcane spells per day are doubled for one specific spell level. A ring of wizardry I doubles 1st-level spells, a ring of wizardry II doubles 2nd-level spells, a ring of wizardry III doubles 3rd-level spells, and a ring of wizardry IV doubles 4th-level spells. Bonus spells from high ability scores or school specialization are not doubled.
FTFY :)I suspect dual casters were a consideration in the pricing of the rings of wizardry.Remember that the ring is a 1st edition relic when casters were practically all multi-classed. It wasn't a cheap item back then either.
Depended what level you were going to end at, really. Being a half-elven Cleric 5/Magic-User 4 at 27,000 XP when the humans are a Cleric 5 and a Magic User 5 was cool. But level limits made being a half-elven Cleric 5/Magic-User 8 really suck at 3,000,000 XP, when the humans are a Cleric 21 and a Magic-User 18.
Hopefully it was taken from the PRD, the SRD is for 3.5.
In the time it took to post this you could have probably checked instead. It would seem obvious that I would cite the PSRD, since it's a Pathfinder forum. That said, it doesn't matter at all because the text of the item hasn't change even a single word in the swap from 3.5/Pathfinder.
Pathfinder SRD
This special ring comes in four kinds (ring of wizardry I, ring of wizardry II, ring of wizardry III, and ring of wizardry IV), all of them useful only to arcane spellcasters. The wearer’s arcane spells per day are doubled for one specific spell level. A ring of wizardry I doubles 1st-level spells, a ring of wizardry II doubles 2nd-level spells, a ring of wizardry III doubles 3rd-level spells, and a ring of wizardry IV doubles 4th-level spells. Bonus spells from high ability scores or school specialization are not doubled.
3.5 SRD
This special ring comes in four kinds (ring of wizardry I, ring of wizardry II, ring of wizardry III, and ring of wizardry IV), all of them useful only to arcane spellcasters. The wearer's arcane spells per day are doubled for one specific spell level. A ring of wizardry I doubles 1st-level spells, a ring of wizardry II doubles 2nd-level spells, a ring of wizardry III doubles 3rd-level spells, and a ring of wizardry IV doubles 4th-level spells. Bonus spells from high ability scores or school specialization are not doubled.
|
If I were to reprice these items, it would be as follows:
Ring of Wizardry I: Spell level^1.5 * 5,000 = 5,000
Ring of Wizardry II: Spell Level^1.5 * 5,000 = 14,200
Ring of Wizardry III: Spell level^1.5 * 5,000 = 26,000
Ring of Wizardry IV: Spell level^1.5 * 5,000 = 40,000Regularizing these to 5K, 15K, 25K and 40K would probably work just fine.
Looks about the right multiplier. I would make it 6-8K base price to reflect 1.5 or 2 multiplier over pearl of power for the added flexibility of different spells. I would also add an extra half to one spell at 3rd level (for sorcerors-wizards average) and an extra one to two at 4th (for sorcerors-wizards average).
However the ring price looks to be based off the staff costing with a 1.5 multiplier for its flexibility. Makes sense as this ring spell slots scale with caster level too like staves. A staff for a single spell costs: spell level * caster level 8 * 400
1st level spell staff = 1*8*400 = 3200 per spell
2nd level = 6400 per spell
3rd level = 9600 per spell
4th level = 12800 per spell
So a 1st level ring (4 spell slots) = 4* 3200 * 1.5 = 19200
2nd (4 spell slots) = 4 * 6400 * 1.5 = 38400
3rd (4.5 spell slots - 4 Wiz, 5 Sorc) = 4.5 * 9600 * 1.5 = 64800
4th (5 spell slots - 4 Wiz, 6 Sorc) = 5 * 12800 * 1.5 = 96000
Rounded to:
20K
40K
70K
100K
As it is, by the time someone has a ring of Wizardry, they're generally swimming in 1st and 2nd level spell slots that aren't terribly effective.
That's the main issue. It's too expensive to be a must have purchase at a level when it would count. Unless you are multi-arcane-class and your DM lets you apply the bonus to both sets of slots.
As it is, by the time someone has a ring of Wizardry, they're generally swimming in 1st and 2nd level spell slots that aren't terribly effective.
Th'at's right, but there's a lot of 3rd level spells that are still useful, even when you can cast 9th level spells. If Ring of Wizardry I & II are not so great, Ring of Wizardry III is a must have to every wizard/witch/sorcerer.
|
|
Th'at's right, but there's a lot of 3rd level spells that are still useful, even when you can cast 9th level spells. If Ring of Wizardry I & II are not so great, Ring of Wizardry III is a must have to every wizard/witch/sorcerer.
It's tempting to go with your lesser quicken or lesser persistent rod. But its just too large a percentage of your total wealth to justify until very late in the game. And its too big a single item to put on an NPC until really high levels.
The answer is both.
However, Pearls of power do allow wizards to behave like sorcerers who get to choose their spell load out every morning.
Pearls are basically 'extra spell slots.'
You have 6 level 3 spells, and 3 PoP III. You aren't quite a sorceror, but you've 6 spells, but can cast 9 level III's...so you can memorize 6 different spells instead of 2 fireballs, since you know you can always PoP your Fireball back. If you need Dispel magic, fly or Haste instead, you're covered.
It's not quite as good as a natural sorceror, but it's close.
==Aelryinth
Hopefully it was taken from the PRD, the SRD is for 3.5.In the time it took to post this you could have probably checked instead. It would seem obvious that I would cite the PSRD, since it's a Pathfinder forum. That said, it doesn't matter at all because the text of the item hasn't change even a single word in the swap from 3.5/Pathfinder.
Pathfinder SRD
This special ring comes in four kinds (ring of wizardry I, ring of wizardry II, ring of wizardry III, and ring of wizardry IV), all of them useful only to arcane spellcasters. The wearer’s arcane spells per day are doubled for one specific spell level. A ring of wizardry I doubles 1st-level spells, a ring of wizardry II doubles 2nd-level spells, a ring of wizardry III doubles 3rd-level spells, and a ring of wizardry IV doubles 4th-level spells. Bonus spells from high ability scores or school specialization are not doubled.3.5 SRD
This special ring comes in four kinds (ring of wizardry I, ring of wizardry II, ring of wizardry III, and ring of wizardry IV), all of them useful only to arcane spellcasters. The wearer's arcane spells per day are doubled for one specific spell level. A ring of wizardry I doubles 1st-level spells, a ring of wizardry II doubles 2nd-level spells, a ring of wizardry III doubles 3rd-level spells, and a ring of wizardry IV doubles 4th-level spells. Bonus spells from high ability scores or school specialization are not doubled.
Read the second sentence in both of these carefully.
Sorcerors don't get 'spells per day'. They get spell SLOTS per day (i.e. casting slots). "Spells per day" are a class effect exclusive to prepared casters.
Rings of Wizardry are thus restricted to wizards. Yes, spontaneous casters are much put upon, but that's by design. There were some items put out in 3.5 to compensate for this, things like Knowstones, but not enough.
==Aelryinth
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
The answer is both.
However, Pearls of power do allow wizards to behave like sorcerers who get to choose their spell load out every morning.
Not exactly. It's a standard action to recall a spell then another standard to recast it, so if you prep fireball, stinking cloud, shrink item, and phantom steed, you aren't going to be able to cast fireball two or three times in an encounter. (unless you spend an action re-upping between each casting).
Woah... I hadn't even noticed that Ring of Wizardy types above IV are no longer in the books. Thanks for pointing that out to me guys... gonna have to put those back, since they actually feel worth purchasing.
For those unaware: There were rings that doubled up to 6th level spells, if I recall correctly, and then a pair of rings that would split all the available spells per day doubling between them - combined you would be the happiest Magic User in all the land.
Perhaps those were intentionally removed back when arcane casters became eligible for bonus spells?
This...i'm not familiar with what you are referring to with this. Which edition are you talking about?
This...i'm not familiar with what you are referring to with this. Which edition are you talking about?
AD&D, presumably.
From the 2E DMG, for instance:
01-50 doubles 1st-level spells
51-75 doubles 2nd-level spells
76-82 doubles 3rd-level spells
83-88 doubles 1st-and 2nd-level spells
89-92 doubles 4th-level spells
93-95 doubles 5th-level spells
96-99 doubles 1st- through 3rd-level spells
100 doubles 4th- and 5th-level spells
In 3.5 edition, you could double your numbers of slots for spell level 5 to 9 with rings of Epic Wizadry, which were as you may guess epic magic items.
And sorcerers like bards have spells per day, rings of wizardry work perfectly with them !!
Upon further review, I will concur...Paizo is definitely using SPells per Day language now. So, yes, a Sorceror would indeed get double his casting slots per day, and a bard.
This was not the case in 3.5, which adhered to the spell slots language. I believe there's even an errata on it in 3.5.
==Aelryinth
Upon further review, I will concur...Paizo is definitely using SPells per Day language now. So, yes, a Sorceror would indeed get double his casting slots per day, and a bard.
This was not the case in 3.5, which adhered to the spell slots language. I believe there's even an errata on it in 3.5.
==Aelryinth
No, you are wrong. Check the SRD or a 3.5 Players Handbook. The language has always been spells per day for both.
Upon further review, I will concur...Paizo is definitely using SPells per Day language now. So, yes, a Sorceror would indeed get double his casting slots per day, and a bard.
This was not the case in 3.5, which adhered to the spell slots language. I believe there's even an errata on it in 3.5.
==Aelryinth
As someone mentiooned, it's doesnt double bonus spells per day, so in the case of wizaards that maxes at 4 per day.
Th'at's right, but there's a lot of 3rd level spells that are still useful, even when you can cast 9th level spells. If Ring of Wizardry I & II are not so great, Ring of Wizardry III is a must have to every wizard/witch/sorcerer.
Eh... I don't agree with that.
You might convince me that a Ring of Wizardry III is worth a ring slot to every wizard/witch/sorcerer, but 70,000 gold? There are so many better ways to spend that much cash. To put it in perspective, that's basically what a Vorpal weapon or a Cube of Force costs. A couple extra third level spells just isn't on par with a chance to instantly slay most enemies each time you swing or the ability to keep out all things.