Does a wizard who wishes to "recharge" or store a spell in a spell storing weapon need to be holding the weapon to do so? Or just needs to touch the weapon? Or just need to be in spell range of the weapon?
Does it take a standard action to "recharge" or store a spell in a spell storing weapon?
Does a wizard who wishes to "recharge" or store a spell in a spell storing weapon need to be holding the weapon to do so? Or just needs to touch the weapon? Or just need to be in spell range of the weapon?
Does it take a standard action to "recharge" or store a spell in a spell storing weapon?
Looks like I'll need to explain some thingies about it.
Here is the page for the Magic Items property list; primarily Spell Storing.
Unless there are errata's listed, the RAW states that the character can only store up to 3rd level spells in a Spell Storing weapon, and that the spells must take a Standard Action to cast. (Whether that's in Base, or cam be altered with something else like a Quicken Metamagic, I don't know.)
As far as it referring to requiring the capability to hold the weapon to recharge it, it does not say specifically. Personally, I find that it functions the same as creating a magic item (in the sense that you are imbuing magical powers into the item), meaning the item must be in your possession to store magic into it.
So if I have a +2 Scimitar of Spell Storing, and I want to put a Lightning Bolt spell into it, I must cast the spell into it as a Standard Action; on a successful attack, I can discharge the spell stored into it (that is, cast it on the target) as a free action. If I don't have possession of it (I got it disarmed and taken away by some big bad guy infront of me), I can't exactly store the spell into it.
I agree I could not find anything specifically in the rules about how to recharge it.
I do think (or guess) that we'd play it as a standard action to recharge or store a spell in it.
I don't think it's accurate to say storing a spell in it is the same as crafting a magic item. i.e. there's no "craft" check to do it, no skill check at all in fact, and it takes significantly more time than a standard action to craft even the simplest magic item.
I'm not sure just touching the weapon wouldn't be enough - e.g. a non-caster character, like a fighter, is holding the spell storing weapon while the wizard touches it and stores a spell in it.
I agree I could not find anything specifically in the rules about how to recharge it.
I do think (or guess) that we'd play it as a standard action to recharge or store a spell in it.
I don't think it's accurate to say storing a spell in it is the same as crafting a magic item. i.e. there's no "craft" check to do it, no skill check at all in fact, and it takes significantly more time than a standard action to craft even the simplest magic item.
I'm not sure just touching the weapon wouldn't be enough - e.g. a non-caster character, like a fighter, is holding the spell storing weapon while the wizard touches it and stores a spell in it.
The RAW says you can store a spell into it up to third level, and the spell must be a Standard Action. It also says it's a Standard Action to cast the spell into the Spell Storing weapon. My question is whether spells stored into the weapon can be affected by Metamagics (such as a Maximized/Empowered Lightning Bolt), but that's a question meant for another thread.
I didn't say that it was exactly the same as crafting a magic item. The thing about crafting magic items is that it requires spells to be imbued into the item. It's a little difficult to imbue a spell into an item you don't have possession of.
Something like that would make sense, since you can cast the Blade of Blood spell (a 3.5 spell) onto the weapons of other characters. But of course, the example I gave involves an unfriendly target, which would be stupid to cast a spell on in the first place (on top of which, wouldn't even allow you to do so, resulting in the caster making a touch attack).
....Just to pile on your metamagics question...I think it's pretty straightforward that metamagics from feats would be legal if they don't violate the level 3rd spell limit... but how about metamagics from rods? (as a DM I'd say metamagics from rods on stored spells is cheese).
|
RAW isn't clear or at least not restrictive on the matter.
So I would rule that the caster just has to hold the weapon.
Regarding metamagic, the ring of spell storing actually has a sentence about that, so I would suggest using that rule:
http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic-items/rings/ring-of-spell-storing-minor
hmm
does that mean an empowered/maxi bombad shocking grasp isnt legal?
Maybe, since the spell level with metamagic feats appield is higher than 3. And let`s face it, a spell storing weapon is good enough already.
And since the weapon actually casts the spell using a metamagic rod with that spell might not be an option.
I would agree, though the only thing it states in regards to Metamagics is that it takes up a spell slot 2 levels higher. It is otherwise still considered a third level spell.
it says "a 3rd level or lower spell" but a metamagic feat does NOT change the spell level. so yes you can technically.
Bump
That's my thinking too; a Metamagic Feat (or Rod) does not change the level of the spell, it only adjusts the properties of the spell by increasing the spell slot cost. It is otherwise still considered a third level spell.
My question is if this is legal or not. (And yes, using a Metamagic Rod in hand with a 2h Weapon, not even using both hands to hold it, would make sense to be possible to cast the spell into the weapon.)
With the Metamagics not adjusting the level of the spell (only the spell slot cost), and it being viable to use Metamagic Rods in conjunction with Spell Storing weapons (since you can still hold a 2h Weapon in one hand, and a Metamagic Rod in the other upon casting the spell into the weapon), I wouldn't see why not.
But there might be some clarification of this in the RAW; if not, would that technically be a legal move, if I were to cast an Empowered, Maximized, Intensified Lightning Bolt into a Spellstoring weapon?
|
|
it says "a 3rd level or lower spell" but a metamagic feat does NOT change the spell level. so yes you can technically.Bump
That's my thinking too; a Metamagic Feat (or Rod) does not change the level of the spell, it only adjusts the properties of the spell by increasing the spell slot cost. It is otherwise still considered a third level spell.
My question is if this is legal or not. (And yes, using a Metamagic Rod in hand with a 2h Weapon, not even using both hands to hold it, would make sense to be possible to cast the spell into the weapon.)
With the Metamagics not adjusting the level of the spell (only the spell slot cost), and it being viable to use Metamagic Rods in conjunction with Spell Storing weapons (since you can still hold a 2h Weapon in one hand, and a Metamagic Rod in the other upon casting the spell into the weapon), I wouldn't see why not.
But there might be some clarification of this in the RAW; if not, would that technically be a legal move, if I were to cast an Empowered, Maximized, Intensified Lightning Bolt into a Spellstoring weapon?
Well if spell storing weapons have no limit like the ring of spell storing, why limit yourself. Of course considering how dirt cheap +1 spell storing weapons are (even more so if can craft them yourself)
The characters can pretty much spend some days using their metamagic rods and go into battle with 4-5 weapons each.And yeah Lighning Bolt isn't a single target spell you can't cast it into your spell storing weapon.
Oh and from the description of metamagic rods:
A caster may only use one metamagic rod on any given spell, but it is permissible to combine a rod with metamagic feats possessed by the rod's wielder.
source: http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic-items/rods/metamagic-rods
So a magus with the trait could cast his intensfied shocking grasp with his empower arcana and use a metamgaic rod of maximize spell.
Nasty.
it says "a 3rd level or lower spell" but a metamagic feat does NOT change the spell level. so yes you can technically.Bump
That's my thinking too; a Metamagic Feat (or Rod) does not change the level of the spell, it only adjusts the properties of the spell by increasing the spell slot cost. It is otherwise still considered a third level spell.
My question is if this is legal or not. (And yes, using a Metamagic Rod in hand with a 2h Weapon, not even using both hands to hold it, would make sense to be possible to cast the spell into the weapon.)
With the Metamagics not adjusting the level of the spell (only the spell slot cost), and it being viable to use Metamagic Rods in conjunction with Spell Storing weapons (since you can still hold a 2h Weapon in one hand, and a Metamagic Rod in the other upon casting the spell into the weapon), I wouldn't see why not.
But there might be some clarification of this in the RAW; if not, would that technically be a legal move, if I were to cast an Empowered, Maximized, Intensified Lightning Bolt into a Spellstoring weapon?
Well if spell storing weapons have no limit like the ring of spell storing, why limit yourself. Of course considering how dirt cheap +1 spell storing weapons are (even more so if can craft them yourself)
The characters can pretty much spend some days using their metamagic rods and go into battle with 4-5 weapons each.And yeah Lighning Bolt isn't a single target spell you can't cast it into your spell storing weapon.
Oh and from the description of metamagic rods:
A caster may only use one metamagic rod on any given spell, but it is permissible to combine a rod with metamagic feats possessed by the rod's wielder.
source: http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic-items/rods/metamagic-rods
So a magus with the trait could cast his intensfied shocking grasp with his empower arcana and use a metamgaic rod of maximize spell.
Nasty.
This does bring up another question; does the casting time refer to its base casting time, or the concurrent casting time from the Quicken Metamagic feat or other class features?
Also on a side note, I think it would be pretty funny to have a Blindness/Deafness spell stored into the weapon.