| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
It's only me or everyone here thinks the spell storing ability the best ever?
Spell Storing: A spell storing weapon allows a spellcaster to
store a single targeted spell of up to 3rd level in the weapon. (The
spell must have a casting time of 1 standard action.) Anytime the
weapon strikes a creature and the creature takes damage from
it, the weapon can immediately cast the spell on that creature
as a free action if the wielder desires. (This special ability is
an exception to the general rule that casting a spell from an
item takes at least as long as casting that spell normally.) Once
the spell has been cast from the weapon, a spellcaster can cast
any other targeted spell of up to 3rd level into it. The weapon
magically imparts to the wielder the name of the spell currently
stored within it. A randomly rolled spell storing weapon has a 50%
chance to have a spell stored in it already.
It's mean that the fighter of my group can store a spell in his sword with scoching ray every round with the mage, taths mean this ability is overpower. Or am I wrong? Please help me to balance my game...
|
Its an ok weapon. Just note the caster level drops to min. So those effects woth saves are unlikely to work well. At higher levels the mage gets more rays so its not overpowered on the blade. You also need the caster to keep restoring the spell...unlikely. its also negatively impacted by SR
There are some things i have wondered. Putting silence on a blade and hitting the ground with it. To stop casters. Or darkness if your foe lacks darkvision and you have it. Maybe ray of enfeeblement. Or perhaps CSW and target yourself with a nonleathal strike.
These sound interesting but I have not examined them yet.
It sounds to me like the OP thinks that once a spell is placed in the weapon it can be used over and over again. This is not the case.
The mage places the spell in the weapon. Once the fighter decides to use it, the spell is expended. The weapon is now "empty". Another spell must be placed in it before the weapon can use a spell.
But if you score a critical hit the spell is a critical hit too...
And its 3rd level of spell and not a spellcaster of 3rd level... So this mean that the wizard can cast magic as if he is in the 5th level ok?
Its an ok weapon. Just note the caster level drops to min. So those effects woth saves are unlikely to work well.
Eh? Where are you getting that from? I always assumed it went off at the original spell's CL.
And its 3rd level of spell and not a spellcaster of 3rd level... So this mean that the wizard can cast magic as if he is in the 5th level ok?
It can store spells with a spell level of up to 3rd level. Caster level is a different thing. Most 3rd level spells become available at 5th level for a straight preparation-based spellcasting class (ie wizard/cleric/druid).
I've always liked Vampiric Touch in a Spell Storing blade, that's what my orc magus used, since he didn't have to depend on anyone to cast it for him. He'd refill it at the end of the day if he still had arcane pool points or spell slots left.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
And its 3rd level of spell and not a spellcaster of 3rd level... So this mean that the wizard can cast magic as if he is in the 5th level ok?
It means the weapon can store any targeted spell of up to 3rd level. Someone still has to actually cast the spell into the weapon.
Phantasmal Killer is not a valid spell to store, because it's higher than 3rd level.
Burning Hands is not a valid spell to store, because it has no target.
Blindness/Deafness, however, is a valid spell to store, because it's not higher than 3rd level, and it has a target.
This means you must get someone to cast Blindness/Deafness into your weapon. Once that's done, you can use it when you hit someone. After you've done so, you need someone to cast Blindness/Deafness into your weapon again. The caster must be able to actually cast the spell, and it does expend the spell slot when he does so.
Well, even with the RAW as it stands, I personally still think spell storing is a great enchantment to have on a weapon, and it can indeed make a huge difference even if only used once in an encounter.
Some popular choices for Spell Storing:
Ghoul Touch, Shocking Grasp, Hold Person, Touch of Idiocy
Well, in my grou the bard has a wand of scorching ray, when the battle begins the paladin uses his sword with this enchantment with scorching ray on it, the damage I always use with the damage of the wand 3 ray of 4d6s. after this teh bard use the wand in the weapon of the paladin to him use again. they always do this in every turn. thi is unbalacing the game, this is my doubt....
Well, in my grou the bard has a wand of scorching ray, when the battle begins the paladin uses his sword with this enchantment with scorching ray on it, the damage I always use with the damage of the wand 3 ray of 4d6s. after this teh bard use the wand in the weapon of the paladin to him use again. they always do this in every turn. thi is unbalacing the game, this is my doubt....
If I am understanding this (which is debatable) you are saying that the paladin begins the encounter with scorching ray already stored in his sword, then after he attacks and uses scorching ray, the bard, on his turn, recharges the sword so that on the paladin's next turn he can use it again.
Is that correct?
If so I probably would rule differently, just based on my understanding of the game mechanics, but regardless of how I would rule, that puts the bard smack in the middle of combat doing nothing but using his wand to recharge a sword. That doesn't sound unbalancing to me. The bard could be using scorching ray directly himself instead of recharging the sword, and now he's probably in melee range of my monsters.
yes, but the damage is correct?
I don't know, the paladin with his smite evil hit so easely...
Can you use a wand to store a spell? I was under the impression that a caster must store it and that a wand could only cast the spell.
it's another doubt of mine...
Its an ok weapon. Just note the caster level drops to min. So those effects woth saves are unlikely to work well.Eh? Where are you getting that from? I always assumed it went off at the original spell's CL.
Why would the caster level drop to minimum?
noboby?
yes, but the damage is correct?
Yes, Scorching Ray deals 4d6 points of fire damage per ray.
Since there's a bard, don't forget that the ray itself is a weapon, so it'll get bonus damage from things like Inspire Courage and Prayer.
However, there may be a problem in that Scorching Ray doesn't have a Target line. You target someone with the weapon, yes, but that may or may not qualify as a "targeted spell."
I don't know, the paladin with his smite evil hit so easely...
Charisma to attack against regular AC might, in some cases, be more likely to land than a ranged attack against touch AC (especially if there's cover or shooting into combat to deal with).
Can you use a wand to store a spell? I was under the impression that a caster must store it and that a wand could only cast the spell.
Spell Storing: "A spell storing weapon allows a spellcaster to store a single targeted spell of up to 3rd level in the weapon. (The spell must have a casting time of 1 standard action.) Anytime the weapon strikes a creature and the creature takes damage from it, the weapon can immediately cast the spell on that creature as a free action if the wielder desires. (This special ability is an exception to the general rule that casting a spell from an item takes at least as long as casting that spell normally.) Once the spell has been cast from the weapon, a spellcaster can cast any other targeted spell of up to 3rd level into it. The weapon magically imparts to the wielder the name of the spell currently stored within it. A randomly rolled spell storing weapon has a 50% chance to have a spell stored in it already."
So sentence 1 just says "store" not cast. Sentence 3 (not counting parenthesis) says "a spellcaster can cast" a spell into it.
We know (from this FAQ) that activating a wand is not considered spellcasting. However, that FAQ was referring to "feats and abilities that modify spells" and it's not really clear if the spell storing enchantment would qualify.
Why would the caster level drop to minimum?Its an ok weapon. Just note the caster level drops to min. So those effects woth saves are unlikely to work well.Eh? Where are you getting that from? I always assumed it went off at the original spell's CL.
Same question.
yes but I was asking if the attack hits and the paladin release the spell, the wand been created by a wizard of the 9th level the 3 rays will hit and he will cause more 12 d6s of damage???
1. the ground is not a valid target for silence or darkness, even delivered this way.
Darkness: "Target object touched"
You are correct, however, in that Silence has no target. The spell can be cast on an object, but it has no Target line in the spell description.
(However, if you allow a ray to work in a spell storing weapon due to needing to target a creature with the ray, you should also probably allow silence to do the same)
2. The Cure Serious Wounds I would allow but the sword has to strike for real damage, not a slap of the flat of the blade.
"Anytime the weapon strikes a creature and the creature takes damage from it..." that doesn't specify lethal damage (nor even HP damage if you had a weapon that deals ability damage).
It's a good house rule to prevent weirdness like tiny spell-storing syringe-spears full of cure potions. (unless your table likes that sort of thing)
yes but I was asking if the attack hits and the paladin release the spell, the wand been created by a wizard of the 9th level the 3 rays will hit and he will cause more 12 d6s of damage???
No.
Scorching Ray fires one ray, plus one additional ray for every four levels beyond 3rd (to a maximum of three rays at 11th level). So the creator would need to craft the wand with a caster level of 11. The price for this wand would be 16,500 gold (level of the spell x the creator's caster level x 750 gp).
And this still assumes scorching ray is considered a targeted spell.
|
Also fun for clerics.
Bestow Curse is great on something like a whip with the deadly special ability.
Druids can get the "poison" spell to more distant targets this way also. Or Neutralize Poison (to stop some monster from poisoning the party, love the offensive ability for that spell).
Yeah, unfortunately by RAW, all ray spells do not have a "target." Even though they effectively do, because it's the guy you're shooting at.
So Scorching Ray does not work. Nor Ray of Exhaustion or (empowered) Enfeeblement, nor lots of other awesome rays.
It's actually a frustratingly small pool of spells that DO work and are nice choices to be put in a weapon. PF, by not capping Dispel Magic at +10 like 3E did, has that as a nice choice, though. Along with Vampiric Touch, Bestow Curse (cleric), and a tiny handful of others.
2. The Cure Serious Wounds I would allow but the sword has to strike for real damage, not a slap of the flat of the blade."Anytime the weapon strikes a creature and the creature takes damage from it..." that doesn't specify lethal damage (nor even HP damage if you had a weapon that deals ability damage).
Spell Storing, Merciful longbow in the hands of a cleric of Erastil works for zapping healing around the battlefield. Of course, Reach Spell makes this easier to do I guess.
I don't see how this is overpowering. They spend the actions of two characters AND a certain amount of gold EVERY ROUND to achieve this. This has to get really pricey after a while... (+ the bard is standing right there in combat. Diesn't he even trigger an Aoo every time he casts the spell into the weapon? And since the paladin isn't doing the spellcasting himself and is busy all round waving around his weapon, I would probably include some kind of roll to see if the bard even manages to touch the sword to refill it, but that is houseruling of course.
The ring of spell storing specifically states min caster level.
Interesting... I had always interpreted the description to mean that when you FIND a ring of spell storing, any spells in it were at minimum caster level. I have always assumed (and played) that any spells YOU cast into the ring are just like your normal spells.
I wonder how other people do it?
The blade specifically states creature so objects are out.
The ring of spell storing specifically states min caster level. I notice the sword does not in its description. Very interesting.
I didn't even realize that about the ring. I guess I never really looked into it. Thanks, another specific rule burnt into my brain!
Still haven't seen an answer to why the CL would drop. (Prob'ly 'cause it wouldn't.)
Spell Storing doesn't drop the CL. The Wand of Scorching Ray would have minimum caster level (unless you paid extra) rather than using the Bard's level.
My favorite use for a Spell Storing weapon is on an Oracle (Cleric is second best). Carry a +1 Longspear of Spell Storing; put Blindness or Bestow Curse in it; refresh it after every fight so it's always ready to go.
|
This is from the SRD.
A ring of spell storing contains up to 5 levels of spells (either divine or arcane, or even a mix of both spell types) that the wearer can cast. [b]Each spell has a caster level equal to the minimum level needed to cast that spell.]/b] The user need not provide any material components or focus to cast the spell, and there is no arcane spell failure chance for wearing armor (because the ring wearer need not gesture). The activation time for the ring is the same as the casting time for the relevant spell, with a minimum of 1 standard action.
I now think these items are WAY over priced.
So not exactly on topic but the rings are REALLY WAY over priced for minimum spell level spells. IMHO.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I now think these items are WAY over priced.
So not exactly on topic but the rings are REALLY WAY over priced for minimum spell level spells. IMHO.
Core 3.5 D&D vastly over-valued the price of letting the mundane classes have a little spell/magic access. It was later corrected with the Magic item Compendium's revolutionary changes in price/value assumptions and outlook. Unfortunately, PF has latched on to the core 3.5E (I feel the need to specify 3.5, as 3.0, if you check it out, actually had MASSIVELY lower prices on many magic items) pricing philosophy.
And for what it's worth, both the ring and weapon have the same text in 3E and PF as far as I recall. The ring has been a terrible ripoff for many, many years.