Wand of CLW - who has one and when / how did you buy it?

[TwilightKnight]

Painlord wrote:

spoiler

Spoiler:

I agree with you to a point. The only two questions I have for another player regarding their character is...
(1) What level are you? Important
This is an OOC concern so I can play a character that fits within the appropriate sub-tier.
(2) Can you use Wands of Cure spells? Less important
Again, this is, to me, an OOC concern so I know if I need to purchase a different mix of consumables. Sure this could be dealt with in character, but often the scenario starts well after the Venture-Captain briefing and in route to the task. Some GM's have been unwilling to allow, "flashback" shopping. IMO, that is a jerky decision, but it exists nonetheless. I want to be pragmatic.

Of course, YMMV.

[Scribbling Rambler]

Nosig, Matthew (even tho you've bowed out):
I think the concern is not so much whether the cleric should use whatever healing they have, but whether they should be the only one responsible for purchasing consumables to supplement it.

[Jiggy]

K Neil Shackleton wrote:

Nosig, Matthew (even tho you've bowed out):

I think the concern is not so much whether the cleric should use whatever healing they have, but whether they should be the only one responsible for purchasing consumables to supplement it.

I personally think it's just as bad to assume you have access to the cleric's healing spells as to his purchased items. Try this statement on for size:

"I think the concern is not so much whether the wizard should use whatever spell slots of infernal healing they have, but whether they should be the only one responsible for purchasing consumables to supplement it."

If the statement about clerics feels more right/justified than the above statement about wizards, then a prejudice needs addressing. The cleric has just as much right to spend his non-purchased consumables (such as spell slots) on non-healing things as the wizard does - especially since the wizard's healing recovers more HP per spell!

People can do whatever they want with their own resources (purchased or not), whether that's healing or not. If a cleric wants to use all his spells offensively and save his channels for undead, that's his prerogative and I have no right to assume he'll change those plans in order to heal me.

[nosig]

what about if before the game I ask - "Is there anyone in the group who will play the part of a healer? I can play a healing cleric if there isn't - oh and please don't say 'Play what you want to'. Oh! and I have a bard that can use CLW wands and one of she has one of her own that she'll often heal party members with." Is that ok? and if someone says - "oh, I got the party healing covered." should I be able to expect him to cast a CLW on my PC later or maybe heal my PC of a small amount of damage some other way?

If my PC has a Swarm suit - is it ok if I ignore the Swarms that attack us? I have an Alchemist who ALWAYS wairs Vermin repelent - relizing that he is often not in danger from swarms, is it ok for me to save my bombs and let the rest of you handle them? or would you expect me to help your character out and fry the little bastards? (lol - he really hates bugs!)

[Jiggy]

nosig wrote:

what about if before the game I ask - "Is there anyone in the group who will play the part of a healer? I can play a healing cleric if there isn't

Jiggy at the table wrote:

Don't worry about it; just play what you want! :)

nosig wrote:

oh and please don't say 'Play what you want to'.

Jiggy at the table wrote:

Oh! So "what you want to" is "what's not already here" instead of a specific character? In that case... *surveys the table* ...looks like we don't have X. How would that sound?

nosig wrote:

Oh! and I have a bard that can use CLW wands and one of she has one of her own that she'll often heal party members with."

Jiggy at the table wrote:

Oh, actually, I've got my own wand. I'd feel better if you would use my own charges to heal me. (If you insist: "Oh, you really like being the healer? Okay, well, whatever floats your boat. Just feel free to switch to my wand if you change your mind.")

Was that helpful? ;)

Quote:

Is that ok? and if someone says - "oh, I got the party healing covered." should I be able to expect him to cast a CLW on my PC later or maybe heal my PC of a small amount of damage some other way?

If someone says they've got X covered, I think it's reasonable to expect them to act on that statement (for them not to would, in my mind, qualify as a jerk move). Even so, I'd personally try to have a backup plan (such as my own wand/potions) in case they've overestimated their abilities or underestimated the need (some scenarios are deadlier than others).

Quote:

If my PC has a Swarm suit - is it ok if I ignore the Swarms that attack us? I have an Alchemist who ALWAYS wairs Vermin repelent - relizing that he is often not in danger from swarms, is it ok for me to save my bombs and let the rest of you handle them? or would you expect me to help your character out and fry the little bastards? (lol - he really hates bugs!)

I've been in a party that ran away from a swarm before. If you say you're saving your bombs for a later fight and we're able to proceed with the scenario without said bombs (by killing the swarm by other means, or running away if the swarm isn't really blocking us, or somehow distracting the swarm, etc) then hey, your call.

I have two requirements of other people's characters:
1. That I don't have to be responsible for them, and
2. That they contribute to the success of the mission.
If you choose to use your own resources differently than I would prefer, but you still contribute, that's up to you. I might even not like how you allocate your resources (like saving the bombs for later), but I won't presume to tell you to allocate them differently as long as you do use them to further the mission.

[Lou Diamond]

All of my charcters have bought WCLW's with their first PA. It is just the smartest thing to do you don't have to rely on a cleric for your first few levels. after el5 WCLW's are mostly useless for combat healing.

[nosig]

actually Jiggy, I don't see us to be that far apart. when I'm running my Cleric (who is all about healing and keeping the fighters in the fight) I consider it my job to keep PCs able to do thier job. To do that, I have a backup wand - but I also channel. If you have a want you want me to use, that works to.
So for example I'll cast Shield Other on the low AC cannon (Glass Cannon). I then cast healing spells on myself to keep him in the combat. I'll point out that he might want to invest in something to help his AC - in character and in voice (deep dwarf voice with a french accent - picture Pepe La Phue as a dwarf). But I keep him up and swinging and heal myself then him (sometimes I'll channel to heal both of us). I figure the wizard (or sorcerer) is likely to spend his first 2 PA on a wand of Magic Missile, the Paladin to spend it on a wand of bless weapon, etc. I've seen a wizard with a wand of Mage Armor (home game) and we were very happy to see it when we got hit by Shadows. And was very happy to have him to use it on us. (in character we even screamed something about "me next me next!").

I've had people tell me that they don't like PFS (or any Living Campaign) "cause it fosters playing by yourself" and "breaks the feeling of the adventurers band - the Fellowship". Not that I am saying they are right, but think about it for a few minutes.

[Ninjaiguana]

As to 'why use expendable wands when a cleric has rechargeable spells?' my answer is as follows: Versatility.

Personally, I expect my cure wands to be called upon. I'm happy for the cleric/healer guy to use them to cure me, himself, or other party members or NPCs. If he prefers to use his spells, that's his call.

If, however, I say 'Can you heal me?' and the cleric says 'Well, I guess I could burn protection from evil for it..' I will always, always tell him to save it. I'd rather the cleric had useful spells prepped just in case, than have them convert everything for cures. That protection from evil can save lives in the right circumstances. Sure, it might not come in - but there's 50, or 40, or whatever cures right here in my hand. There's only one or two protection from evil on the cleric's memorised spells today.

Now I'm not saying that a cleric should be twisting the arms of other players to use their cure wands when he has healing available. On the other hand, I also think that if a player has bought a cure wand, they should expect it to be used, and the more it's used, the less versatility the cleric has to sacrifice. Both sides need to find a middle ground that everyone is happy with.

[Coraith]

WalterGM wrote:

Over the last few sessions other PCs have decided that they're crew on my recently purchased ship (the 10 PP vanity), so now I have a barbarian, cavalier, inquisitor, alchemist, and cleric that call my boat home.

WOOT! Confirmation my inquisitor is in! lol

Also 3 characters 2 w/ CLW wands
Inquisitor level 1
Cleric level 1
Fighter- No wand

[Pirate Rob]

Ninjaiguana wrote:

.

If, however, I say 'Can you heal me?' and the cleric says 'Well, I guess I could burn protection from evil for it..' I will always, always tell him to save it. I'd rather the cleric had useful spells prepped just in case, than have them convert everything for cures.

What's funny is I have the frequently see the problem from the opposite side on my cleric; when I realize I have a spell that I won't need and try to burn it on a cure on somebody, they beg and plead with me to use charges off their wand instead.

[Calibrate]

I thought I'd comment on the wand vs. asking cleric to heal vs. jerkiness wizard not using fireball string :)

I'm the cleric and healer for our party. I do most of my healing through the wand and channels, mostly channel. I use my spell slots to cast buff or utility spells. I've maybe used spontaneous casting for a cure once.

I chose to take this role and built my character around it. I wouldn't like it if someone told me how to heal (ie cast X on me whenever Y happens) without talking through it with me. However, when the party dynamic suggests that what I'm doing wont work, I EXPECT someone to talk to me about how I'm going to do my role. IE telling me to get a wand of cure light to supplement healing, use prot vs evil, etc.

I think it is situational but I agree that willingness to change roles or adjust strategy, etc because it advances group goals is a must have for all at the table. It doesn't mean the neutral smiling cleric is the best to heal, it might mean Infernal Healing Wizard is the best (or high UMD rogue for all I care).

Likewise I am willing to tank if it looks like the high AC, buffed, Longsword wielding Cleric of Iomedae is actually expected to do Iomedae-ish things. Just don't expect unrealistic stuff (Barbarian healer FTW?)

[Dennis Baker]

Matthew Morris wrote:

Agreed, but to me expecting to drop spell X for cure X is akin to expecting the guy with the lock pics and ranks to, well, try to open the lock. Or the guy with the bow to use his arrows. But then I'm a sharing guy*. Heck, Rey carries a potion of mage armor (and really wishes for a potion of shield) in case the party needs him in melee. (for a flanking buddy, with STR 10 he's not hitting much.)

The same can be said of any casting class, just because the cleric has the ability to change out the spell on the fly doesn't mean he is obligated* to do so any more than a wizard player is obligated to prep specific spells.

There is no other class in the game where people feel so entitled to mucking around with what you do with your character does. If a cleric player wants to play the part of a healer then that is fine, if the player is playing a cleric for other reasons there is no obligation that he does so.

If a guy is playing a sorcerer with haste or heroism on his list is he expected to spam haste and heroism for the party instead of casting fireball?

[Scribbling Rambler]

Jiggy, perhaps I phrased my response incorrectly.
I was not implying that I would assume a cleric would focus on healing, but that if they did have prepared healing spells, or convertible spells at the end of a game day, or positive channeling which was not needed for undead, that it would be reasonable to expect them to contribute to the party in that way.
More importantly, that it is unreasonable to expect the cleric (or other healer) to always foot the bill for healing consumables.

It's a philosophy we use in my home games: CLW wands are usually considered party treasure, and not part of a healer's WBL.

[Jack-of-Blades]

My first PFS character, my witch (Khet), had purchased 3 (lvls 1 [first adventure], 2, and 4)wands of CLW by the time he was level 4, two through PA, one through gold due to the fact that he was the party's only "Healer" and nobody else would spend resources to get them 'cause they wanted other stuff.

My second character, my gunslinger (Flynn), got one at level 1 with PA after his first adventure.

And my third, my wizard (Sullivan), played through Master of the Fallen Fortress and retired immediately after.

At my location, it seems to be that the more regular/senior players tend to get the wands at early levels on most (if not all) characters, where the newer ones don't tend to think of it until someone mentions it to them.

[Dennis Baker]

About the only reasonable expectation you should bring to the table about other characters is that they should pull their weight in some way.

Pushing your expectations of how someone should play a specific class fails the "don't be a jerk" clause.

[Dennis Baker]

Jack-of-Blades wrote:

My first PFS character, my witch (Khet), had purchased 3 (lvls 1 [first adventure], 2, and 4)wands of CLW by the time he was level 4, two through PA, one through gold due to the fact that he was the party's only "Healer" and nobody else would spend resources to get them 'cause they wanted other stuff.

This is exactly why many players get grumpy about using consumables to heal other people. After donating 15 charges out of a wand in one day I started checking if other players have their own wands at the beginning of sessions and recommending they buy them *before* the action starts. Most of my characters are self sufficient without wands so buying healing sticks is not a priority.

[Jack-of-Blades]

Dennis Baker wrote:

About the only reasonable expectation you should bring to the table about other characters is that they should pull their weight in some way.

Pushing your expectations of how someone should play a specific class fails the "don't be a jerk" clause.

I'm not saying we expect people to get them, we only suggest that it's not a bad idea. By no means does anyone I know of at our location push anyone to do anything specific with their characters. How the players wanna play is up to them, we just pass on our two coppers worth of opinions when people ask or are new.

[Jack-of-Blades]

Dennis Baker wrote:

Jack-of-Blades wrote:

My first PFS character, my witch (Khet), had purchased 3 (lvls 1 [first adventure], 2, and 4)wands of CLW by the time he was level 4, two through PA, one through gold due to the fact that he was the party's only "Healer" and nobody else would spend resources to get them 'cause they wanted other stuff.

This is exactly why many players get grumpy about using consumables to heal other people. After donating 15 charges out of a wand in one day I started checking if other players have their own wands at the beginning of sessions and recommending they buy them *before* the action starts. Most of my characters are self sufficient without wands so buying healing sticks is not a priority.

I'll admit, I'm none to pleased to have had to be the one responsible for healing and restorative consumables for the party, but I didn't feel I had a choice in the matter at the time. It was either that, or tell other players they needed to buy stuff or I wouldn't help them, then we'd all end up dieing otherwise. I was new, so I was a bit of a doormat and I've suffered for that, but what can ya do?

Anyways, contributing to party healing is greatly encouraged by our groups, but, by no means, mandatory for being allowed to play.

[Dennis Baker]

Jack-of-Blades wrote:

I'll admit, I'm none to pleased to have had to be the one responsible for healing and restorative consumables for the party, but I didn't feel I had a choice in the matter at the time. It was either that, or tell other players they needed to buy stuff or I wouldn't help them, then we'd all end up dieing otherwise. I was new, so I was a bit of a doormat and I've suffered for that, but what can ya do?

I guess I'm a firm believer in tough love. If I burned a bunch of healing consumables keeping folks operating there will be a serious meeting of the minds when the GM passes out the chronicles. "My wand is getting a bit low, I'd hate to run out. You are buying a wand with that 2 PA so we have healing next week right? "

[Jack-of-Blades]

Dennis Baker wrote:

Jack-of-Blades wrote:

I'll admit, I'm none to pleased to have had to be the one responsible for healing and restorative consumables for the party, but I didn't feel I had a choice in the matter at the time. It was either that, or tell other players they needed to buy stuff or I wouldn't help them, then we'd all end up dieing otherwise. I was new, so I was a bit of a doormat and I've suffered for that, but what can ya do?

I guess I'm a firm believer in tough love. If I burned a bunch of healing consumables keeping folks operating there will be a serious meeting of the minds when the GM passes out the chronicles. "My wand is getting a bit low, I'd hate to run out. You are buying a wand with that 2 PA so we have healing next week right? "

By the time I did start speaking up about it, I was faced with a bit of resentment by some of the others, hence why I was loathe to even bring it up. On the other hand, this is all in the past and now others have started to contribute some, so I'm content enough with that.

[DigitalMage]

My main PFS character is a Druid (half orc), currently level 4. He does not have a Wand of CLW and never has.

I had a Cleric who died on his second adventure and he didn't get a wand either.

My other PFS character is a Fighter who again doesn't have a wand.

For all my characters though I at least try to buy a Potion of CLW so that I can be healed myself to some degree. With my Druid I also have a number of sets of spells I can quickly choose and one set is for healing:

Detect Poison
Resistance
Stabilise
Virtue

CLW x2
Goodberry

Delay Poison
Restoration, Lesser x2

He also has a Heal skill of +9 and a healer's kit and so able to heal a few points that way. he also has a couple of Potions of CLW in case he goes down - the other PCs can hopefully administer them to get him back on his feet and then able to use his magic and skills.

[TwilightKnight]

I think this is all a cause and effect discussion...

Fighter A arrives to play and does not have a Wand of CLW. He is expecting the group Cleric to tend to his wounds. Why? Because every session he has played in, there has been a cleric to do just that. He is surprised when the Cleric says, "I'm not using my Wand on you. It's my resource, I spend my money on it. I am happy to use my limited spells, but you should have your own wand for me to use on you."

Fighter B arrives to play and does have a Wand of CLW. There is a Cleric at the table who says he is willing to use his own wand on anyone who wants it, saving their own wands for future use. The Fighter is very surprised because, in his 'normal' local game, the clerics refuse to use their wealth-based resources for other characters.

[Jiggy]

Bob Jonquet wrote:

I think this is all a cause and effect discussion...

Fighter A arrives to play and does not have a Wand of CLW. He is expecting the group Cleric to tend to his wounds. Why? Because every session he has played in, there has been a cleric to do just that. He is surprised when the Cleric says, "I'm not using my Wand on you. It's my resource, I spend my money on it. I am happy to use my limited spells, but you should have your own wand for me to use on you."

Fighter B arrives to play and does have a Wand of CLW. There is a Cleric at the table who says he is willing to use his own wand on anyone who wants it, saving their own wands for future use. The Fighter is very surprised because, in his 'normal' local game, the clerics refuse to use their wealth-based resources for other characters.

Fighters A and B then both throw up their hands and say "Screw it! This is too complicated! I'm taking a level of cleric and not telling anyone!"

;)

[nosig]

Jiggy wrote:

Bob Jonquet wrote:

I think this is all a cause and effect discussion...

Fighter A arrives to play and does not have a Wand of CLW. He is expecting the group Cleric to tend to his wounds. Why? Because every session he has played in, there has been a cleric to do just that. He is surprised when the Cleric says, "I'm not using my Wand on you. It's my resource, I spend my money on it. I am happy to use my limited spells, but you should have your own wand for me to use on you."

Fighter B arrives to play and does have a Wand of CLW. There is a Cleric at the table who says he is willing to use his own wand on anyone who wants it, saving their own wands for future use. The Fighter is very surprised because, in his 'normal' local game, the clerics refuse to use their wealth-based resources for other characters.

Fighters A and B then both throw up their hands and say "Screw it! This is too complicated! I'm taking a level of cleric and not telling anyone!"

;)

funny you should say that. did that in a different campaign.

[Dennis Baker]

Bob Jonquet wrote:

Fighter A...

Fighter B...

Fighter C buys his wand of CLW, takes ranks in UMD, takes care of himself, and is pleasantly surprised whenever he doesn't need to spend gold to heal himself. Sometimes Fighter C sits down at a table with Fighter A and B and laughs because there is no cleric.

[nosig]

Dennis Baker wrote:

Bob Jonquet wrote:

Fighter A...

Fighter B...

Fighter C buys his wand of CLW, takes ranks in UMD, takes care of himself, and is pleasantly surprised whenever he doesn't need to spend gold to heal himself. Sometimes Fighter C sits down at a table with Fighter A and B and laughs because there is no cleric.

Fighters A & B laugh at C when he rolls a "1" - and locks up his wand for the day.

[Dennis Baker]

nosig wrote:

Fighters A & B laugh at C when he rolls a "1" - and locks up his wand for the day.

Then cry when they realize that they are all in the same leaking boat together and no-one has a bucket to bail with.

[Jiggy]

nosig wrote:

Fighters A & B laugh at C when he rolls a "1" - and locks up his wand for the day.

Then Fighter C gets his UMD bonus high enough to not fail on a 1, and has the last laugh.

[deusvult]

nosig wrote:

Dennis Baker wrote:

Bob Jonquet wrote:

Fighter A...

Fighter B...

Fighter C buys his wand of CLW, takes ranks in UMD, takes care of himself, and is pleasantly surprised whenever he doesn't need to spend gold to heal himself. Sometimes Fighter C sits down at a table with Fighter A and B and laughs because there is no cleric.

Fighters A & B laugh at C when he rolls a "1" - and locks up his wand for the day.

With all the bonuses available out there, doesn't take many levels before someone serious about their UMD can still roll a 1 and successfully use their wand... only locked up on a nat "1" and still fails to activate.

[nosig]

And "Fighter" A is actually a Fighter/Cleric who doesn't admit to being a cleric of Norgorber - so he actually has a wand that he doesn't mention to the other players, but uses when he can't get healing elsewhere.

[Jiggy]

nosig wrote:

And "Fighter" A is actually a Fighter/Cleric who doesn't admit to being a cleric of Norgorber - so he actually has a wand that he doesn't mention to the other players, but uses when he can't get healing elsewhere.

"Alright guys, let's go... wait, Fighter A, what are you doing hunched in the corner?"

"Huh?" *scrambles around with something in front of him while his back is to the party* "Um, er, nothing..." *straightens up and tries to look casual* "I was just, uh, taking care of something. Um, yeah, let's go!"

[Dennis Baker]

nosig wrote:

And "Fighter" A is actually a Fighter/Cleric who doesn't admit to being a cleric of Norgorber - so he actually has a wand that he doesn't mention to the other players, but uses when he can't get healing elsewhere.

I think that's fighter E.

But he burns up half the charges healing himself from 'cutting' his forearm.

[nosig]

deusvult wrote:

nosig wrote:

Dennis Baker wrote:

Bob Jonquet wrote:

Fighter A...

Fighter B...

Fighter C buys his wand of CLW, takes ranks in UMD, takes care of himself, and is pleasantly surprised whenever he doesn't need to spend gold to heal himself. Sometimes Fighter C sits down at a table with Fighter A and B and laughs because there is no cleric.

Fighters A & B laugh at C when he rolls a "1" - and locks up his wand for the day.

With all the bonuses available out there, doesn't take many levels before someone serious about their UMD can still roll a 1 and successfully use their wand... only locked up on a nat "1" and still fails to activate.

I figured someone would mention this. I've given it a lot of thought.

If I take a trait I get it as a class skill and a +1

I'm a fighter - so maybe a CHA of 10? or 12? say +1

one rank (of my thin skill points - after all I put points in CHA not INT) nets me a +4 so I'm up to +6

... I'm 5th level so another 4 of my skill points (in other words half the skills I get for being a figher) next me up to a 10.

ah... what else? Skill focus? sounds good - got extra skills, after all I didn't really need weapon specialization. so a +3 gets me up to a +13

ah... what else? not sure but it still needs +6 more to get to an assured roll - and this is with a 5th level character that has invested a trait, a feat, and half his class skill points.

[nosig]

Jiggy wrote:

nosig wrote:

And "Fighter" A is actually a Fighter/Cleric who doesn't admit to being a cleric of Norgorber - so he actually has a wand that he doesn't mention to the other players, but uses when he can't get healing elsewhere.

"Alright guys, let's go... wait, Fighter A, what are you doing hunched in the corner?"

"Huh?" *scrambles around with something in front of him while his back is to the party* "Um, er, nothing..." *straightens up and tries to look casual* "I was just, uh, taking care of something. Um, yeah, let's go!"

Wizard has a detect magic up - "Fighter A... why does your crotch radiate magic? No- I didn't actually say that did I?"

[deusvult]

nosig wrote:

I figured someone would mention this. I've given it a lot of thought.

If I take a trait I get it as a class skill and a +1

I'm a fighter - so maybe a CHA of 10? or 12? say +1

one rank (of my thin skill points - after all I put points in CHA not INT) nets me a +4 so I'm up to +6

... I'm 5th level so another 4 of my skill points (in other words half the skills I get for being a figher) next me up to a 10.

ah... what else? Skill focus? sounds good - got extra skills, after all I didn't really need weapon specialization. so a +3 gets me up to a +13

ah... what else? not sure but it still needs +6 more to get to an assured roll - and this is with a 5th level character that has invested a trait, a feat, and half his class skill points.

A trait to make UMD a class skill (+3)

The cheapy flawed Ioun Stone for +3 to any one cha skill.. +6
A masterwork tool for another +2, +8 so far
+1 cha bonus, +9
Circlet of Persuasion (not totally unreasonable, also relevant to Intimidate) for +3 more, +12
Activated that same wand previously before, ever.. +2, +14 total
level 5 can get auto-success with 5 skill ranks. Even faster with Skill focus, but then you probably couldn't have afforded the 4.5K magic item.

Disclaimer: No I haven't bothered doublechecking that all of the bonuses are not duplicates of non-stacking type. That's no fun. My point is you can succeed on a 1 'quickly', if you really want to. Not that you can necessarily do it by level 3, or 1, or 5 :D

[thejeff]

deusvult wrote:

Activated that same wand previously before, ever.. +2,

Does that apply? I thought that bonus only applied to "Activate Blindly" which is different than "Use a Wand".

Not nitpicking your calculation, I just want to know if I've been reading it wrong.

[Dennis Baker]

I look at it this way, even if you only have a 1 in 20 chance of activating it you have a 50% chance of being successful, a 2 in 20 chance increases it to 66% and it keeps getting better. If you have a party of 4 guys and they all have wands and a 1 in 20 chance of activating them then your odds are even better. If you don't have any ranks your chance is zero.

Now your GM might roll his eyes watching you roll your d20 until you hit a 20 or a 1 but you could always offer to flip a coin instead.

Strangely enough, the +2 for have activated previously means you only have a 1 in 20 chance to activate the item the first time you use it, after that it's 3 in 20 chance (75% chance of hitting it each time).

[nosig]

I do not beleave a masterwork tool will give you +2 on a skill other than Craft... or maybe Profession.

masterwork tools or items:

It does say in the Core book (Chapter 6, pg 161) "Tool, Masterwork: this well-made item is the perfect tool for the job. It grants a +2 cirucmstance bonus on a related skill check (if any). Bonuses provided by multiple masterwork items do not stack."
If it could be aplied to any skill, I would like to use this gimmick (which costs 50gp) for the following skills:
Alchemy (Alchemist's Lab costs 200gp and weighs 39 lbs more)
Craft painting: (Artisan's tools, Master work - 55 gp, and 5 times as heavy))
Climbing (Climbers kit - 80gp, 5 times the weight)
Disguise (Disguise Kit - same cost, but 8 times the weight)
Heal (hay, what do you know same cost and same weight!)
Appraise (Magnifing Glass is 100 gp)
and the big one, Disable Device (Thieves' tools, master work, double the cost, 2x the weight.

the +2 for previously activating the wand only applies to Activate Blindly - which has a DC of 25, and gives a possibility of a mishaps if you fail badly (not likely for this character) - by using this bonus you have effectively gained a net -3.

The flawed Ioun Stone is? the only one listed that I can find is Pink & Green Sphere (cracked) and it only gives a +1 competence bonus. it's cheap thou, at only 200 gp. (I need to look into this - This is a great bonus for my Face characters - Thanks!) The Flawed Pink & Green would help, as it does boost CHA (+2) for only 6,000 gold, but it does cut your CON by a -2. Not something I want to do to my fighter.

Circlet of Persuasion, for 4,500 gp (Access after 18PA - so after 4th level I think) you get a +3 competence bonus - which doesn't stack with the Ioun Stone. (sarcasm alert!) I do fear that 4,500 might be a bit out of the fighters price range... but maybe he can just not buy some of his fighter things - say the belt of strength, and 500 gp of potions. (end sarcasm alert) I think we can skip this one.

Ah - I think that puts us back to only a +1 from your suggestions (above the ones I already suggested) Unless you really want to go for the Activate Blindly +2 breviously activated which would give you a -2 final to my earlier total)

so I stand by my first figures - and I'd also like to note this is a wand that he is buying with his first 2 PA, right? at 1st level?

[nosig]

Dennis Baker wrote:

I look at it this way, even if you only have a 1 in 20 chance of activating it you have a 50% chance of being successful, a 2 in 20 chance increases it to 66% and it keeps getting better. If you have a party of 4 guys and they all have wands and a 1 in 20 chance of activating them then your odds are even better. If you don't have any ranks your chance is zero.

Now your GM might roll his eyes watching you roll your d20 until you hit a 20 or a 1 but you could always offer to flip a coin instead.

Strangely enough, the +2 for have activated previously means you only have a 1 in 20 chance to activate the item the first time you use it, after that it's 3 in 20 chance (75% chance of hitting it each time).

if you are using the +2, you are in the Activate Blindly section and the DC is 25 AND if you miss the roll by 10 (say u have a UMD of 5 and roll a 10 or less) you suffer a Mishap (that would be a "Boom" - "ARRRRG". And it says "This mishap is in addition to the chance for a mishp that you normally risk whn you cast a spell from a scroll that you could not otherwise cast yourself - so some Judges will read this as an EXTRA mishap roll, which it isn't)

[nosig]

So, let's figure it for that 1st level fighter with his new wand.

He used one of his two traits, so it is a class skill and has +1.

A CHA of 12 'cause he's a Face kind of fighter so +1

one rank (half he class skill ranks) nets a +4 so it's up to +6

the Cracked Ioun stone (cost 200gp, or half the money from his first adventure, or about what chain shirt armor and a Long comp bow (Str 10) would cost. gives him another +1.

His 1st level feat for spell focus (if he's a half elf it could be his racial feat). gives another +3

And we have a total of +10 - so he activates it half the time, with a 5% chance of locking it up for the day (then he could use the other fighters wands right?).

think about this thou:

It took half his feats, half his gold and his first 2 PA, and he had to be careful not to dump CHA.

[deusvult]

nosig wrote:

...party pooping...

Well first of all, RAW mwk tools are good for any skill. But since they give a circumstance bonus, they don't stack with say an alchemist's lab. But they're 50g instead of 200.. but that's another issue. My own cavalier's mwk UMD tool is a mood ring with a crystal that helps focus mental energy. Whatever, if sorcerers can cast spells by force of charisma, I don't see why some hippie mystical flea market trinket couldn't help a charisma based magic skill check :D

My bad on the Ioun stone. Yep, it's +1 not +3.

Previous use: Hrm. Mebbe its the guys I game with. Always seemed like a no brainer that +2 to your own permanent/semi-expendable magic items seemed RAI.

Circlet of Persuasion: Definately not for every fighter. But, if he's going the dazzling display/shatter defenses route (and mebbe even level dipping into Rogue for sneak attack) why the hell not? I was talking about what's possible, not what every fighter should do :D Of course, such a fighter might have sprung the points to even get a +2 cha bonus.

But still. A fighter getting auto-success on a 1, it's something you'd have to be building the character around. Possible, but it's not something you're going to incidentally do. But it's potentially worthwhile... having wands/scrolls of any and all spells from arcane and divine schools that interest you.. it's like multiclassing with far less efficiency cost.. and without the pesky armor check penalty!

But as mentioned by Mr Dennis Baker, you hardly need that +19/autosuccess to make use of your 1st level 2PA Wand of CLW.

Besides, in most situations.. so long as noone is bleeding out and time is not a crucial factor... a GM is just going to make you just keep track of charges spent on in-betweeen-battles-healing. The GM who's got the time to waste making sure each and every charge is rolled for is either rarely ahead of the curve on the time-slot, or poor at prioritizing his time management.

[nosig]

deusvult wrote:

nosig wrote:

...party pooping...

Well first of all, RAW mwk tools are good for any skill. But since they give a circumstance bonus, they don't stack with say an alchemist's lab. But they're 50g instead of 200.. but that's another issue. My own cavalier's mwk UMD tool is a mood ring with a crystal that helps focus mental energy. Whatever, if sorcerers can cast spells by force of charisma, I don't see why some hippie mystical flea market trinket couldn't help a charisma based magic skill check :D

My bad on the Ioun stone. Yep, it's +1 not +3.

Previous use: Hrm. Mebbe its the guys I game with. Always seemed like a no brainer that +2 to your own permanent/semi-expendable magic items seemed RAI.

Circlet of Persuasion: Definately not for every fighter. But, if he's going the dazzling display/shatter defenses route (and mebbe even level dipping into Rogue for sneak attack) why the hell not? I was talking about what's possible, not what every fighter should do :D Of course, such a fighter might have sprung the points to even get a +2 cha bonus.

But still. A fighter getting auto-success on a 1, it's something you'd have to be building the character around. Possible, but it's not something you're going to incidentally do. But it's potentially worthwhile... having wands/scrolls of any and all spells from arcane and divine schools that interest you.. it's like multiclassing with far less efficiency cost.. and without the pesky armor check penalty!

But as mentioned by Mr Dennis Baker, you hardly need that +19/autosuccess to make use of your 1st level 2PA Wand of CLW.

Besides, in most situations.. so long as noone is bleeding out and time is not a crucial factor... a GM is just going to make you just keep track of charges spent on in-betweeen-battles-healing. The GM who's got the time to waste making sure each and every charge is rolled for is either rarely ahead of the curve on the time-slot, or poor at prioritizing his time management.

Hay, the only reason I know the rules for UMP is cause I play a UMD monkey - and I like to play by the rules.

If I'm the judge, I'd let the PC roll a d20 to see which try he got the '1' on and jammed the wand (that's what I suggest to my Judges). Then we take the rounds before that to give us a percentage of successful rolls. One roll, a little math and presto I know I get X charges cast and dole them out as needed (whice is really not legal - but as you pointed out, much faster).
As to taking the dip into rogue - why not just dip to one of Paladin/Ranger/Bard/Witch/Cleric/Druid (did I miss any?) and just get the ability to use the wand. (if it's to Cleric you get free beer! - if you take Cayden his create water spells make beer or wine, as well as Travel domain bonus to movement of +10 feet. And what fighter doesn't want free beer?).
Truefully I have never as a PC been standing around down HP with a jammed wand and no healing available... but you see, if the party doesn't have a healer, I run one. I HAVE had players in that fix when I was judging, but only because the Iconic Cleric was the one down and Neg HP - and I told them she had Smelling Salts (which she doesn't but hay, I'm the Judge right?) so that they could get back into the mod and finish the mission.
Oh, and for the record, I still don't think that MWtools would work for any skill - otherwise why would they list the other kits? I guess it would work at my table - but I don't check where a player is getting their numbers from. Even then, it's still only a +12 at 1st level, so 60% chance of success... so if I roll an 11 on the d20 to see what round I jam it in... that gives me 6d8+6 healing - hay, that's pretty good at 1st level!

Oh yeah - this
"But as mentioned by Mr Dennis Baker, you hardly need that +19/autosuccess to make use of your 1st level 2PA Wand of CLW. "
if he just spend a trait - which is really only half a feat after all - that, with half the fighters skill points will give the fighter a +4, +1 for Cha of 12 so a +5. yeah 5 in 20 good rolls, which is 25% so if you roll the jam on the #11 roll you get 2d8+2 and half another 1d8+1 or about 15 pts of healing. Pretty good for half a feat an half his skill points.

[Dennis Baker]

Well I'll be darned, if you aren't right on the +2 thing. I could have sworn it was in the global section not buried under activate blindly.

*shrug*

"One roll, a little math and presto I know I get X charges cast and dole them out as needed (whice is really not legal - but as you pointed out, much faster). "

Not legal, or statistically sound. Also, a big part of the success/ failure thing is the chanciness of it. If you *KNOW* you have 4 successes for the day that kind of spoils things.

A better way to do it is to simply take the chances of success plus the chance of killing the wand and rolling an appropriate die. For example if you have a +4 on your UMD you have 5 chances in 20 of success. That plus the one chance of failure is 6 options. Roll a d6 and on a 1 it blows up. If there are an odd number of possible outcomes you ignore the highest roll. So if your UMD is +5 you roll a d8, it blows up on a 1 and reroll on an 8. It retains the exact same probabilities but tosses out the null rolls (where you fail but aren't stuck for the day).

[nosig]

Dennis Baker wrote:

Well I'll be darned, if you aren't right on the +2 thing. I could have sworn it was in the global section not buried under activate blindly.

*shrug*

I think a big part of the success/ failure thing is the chanciness of it. If you *KNOW* you have 4 successes for the day that kind of spoils things. It's not statistically sound either.

If you have a 50% chance of using it once then your chances of using the wand 3 times in a day are pretty slim (50%*50%*50%=12.5%) .

A better way to do it is to simply take the chances of success plus the chance of killing the wand and rolling an appropriate die. For example if you have a +4 on your UMD you have 5 chances in 20 of success. That plus the one chance of failure is 6 options. Roll a d6 and on a 1 it blows up. If there are an odd number of possible outcomes you ignore the highest roll. So if your UMD is +5 you roll a d8, it blows up on a 1 and reroll on an 8. It retains the exact same probabilities but tosses out the null rolls (where you fail but aren't stuck for the day).

yeah, but I was trying to get a fast way for deusvolt - he seemed to feel the judge wouldn't want the PC to roll all those dice (for me I have 5 colored d20s and arrange them in color order (ROY G BIV) and roll 5 rolls at once. I used to have a take 20 box that had 20 clear cells each with a d20 in it... an old button box. But it was very loud.)

[Dennis Baker]

I was thinking of rolling 5 at a time and just reading them left to right.

My dice are in pairs for monster attacks :D

[nosig]

Dennis Baker wrote:

I was thinking of rolling 5 at a time and just reading them left to right.

My dice are in pairs for monster attacks :D

hay, but I like your success/failure numbers on a dice. that's cool. I'll remember it. thanks!

[Jason S]

All of my PCs (4 PCs: fighter, cleric, rogue, monk) have a wand of CLW or Infernal Healing, which are purchased as soon as I get 2 PA, unless I need another wand before that (for example, Mage Armor for my monk). So it's usually after the first scenario.

PFS scenarios are designed with the assumption that at least one party member owns one of these wands. I believe these wands are what makes it possible to have "healer-less" parties.

As a side note, I've used mine quite a bit. People who attend Gencon (and read the message boards) are usually quite prepared, but people who drop into local conventions and some home games usually don't buy them (or are aware than you can buy them). Sometimes there are leeches (they'll use your charges but can't be bothered to purchase themselves). So they're useful.

[Fromper]

In looking at the "always available" item list for PFS, I just noticed that wands aren't on it. Is that why everyone is using PA to buy their wands at low levels?

My only character's first chronicle sheet had the wand for 750 gp, which is why it never occurred to me earlier in this thread that not everyone could just buy one once they have the money.

[nosig]

Jason S wrote:

...

PFS scenarios are designed with the assumption that at least one party member owns one of these wands....

I do not beleave this. I will beleave that all scenarios assume the party of adventures have access to healing of some sort, be that a "healer" character in the party, or wands or potions or ... something. I have played a lot of scenarios without either of these wands owned by any character in the party. The happy sticks are just the cheapest form of healing available (second only to having a "healer" in the party).

[Jason S]

nosig wrote:

I do not beleave a masterwork tool will give you +2 on a skill other than Craft... or maybe Profession.

Masterwork tools can apply to any skill. See link.. I learned that earlier this year from these boards.