Ilja if the item that was transformed was destroyed fabricate would be useless.
Trying to turn wood into a spoon would mean the spoon was destroyed so you could not ever use the spoon. That may be RAW, but I think its better to go RAI since we are trying to decide how the rules work in an actual game.
Ilja if the item that was transformed was destroyed fabricate would be useless.
Trying to turn wood into a spoon would mean the spoon was destroyed so you could not ever use the spoon. That may be RAW, but I think its better to go RAI since we are trying to decide how the rules work in an actual game.
Yes, which is why under that interpretation you'd have to have a different target and component. The spell doesn't state the component has to be the same item as the target, just of the same material. Like if enlarge person had a person that you killed as a material component, enlarge person wouldn't have you target that person with the spell just because it's a component! xD
That said, I share Drachasors view on what the intent of the spell is. I'm not saying "this is how fabricate should be run".
The discussion was as follows (i cut it short but you could reread for context):
Permanency states you cast it immediately after the spell you want to permanent. Say you want to permanent tongues. The way you have to cast it is Tongues>Permanency. Now, blood money is cast before the spell you need the components for, so before permanency. But you can't cast it directly before, because then Permanency will apply to Blood Money (which isn't viable), so you have to cast it before Tongues. So you have to cast Blood Money>Tongues>Permanency, which would make blood money affect Tongues instead of permanency and you have to pay it anyway.
I don't get this to work, or am I missing something?
RAW is actually quite unclear. If it bothers you, then we'll have Blood Money used with Fabricate first. Because that's 100% rules legal!
My fabricate counter-argument was because of the claim that it is "unclear" whether or not permanency+blood money works by RAW - I think it's very clear it does not work. Drach added that Fabricate is 100% rules legal, so I said that Fabricate is far more vague and interpretable in the RAW than Permanency+Blood Money is and showed why.
I never meant to say that that interpretation is the right one, just that fabricate is a gray area while permanency+blood money clearly do not work by RAW, when Drach claimed permanency+blood money was a grey area and that fabricate clearly works by RAW.
My preferred method* is to purchase a scroll of it at a high caster level, as high as you can get and still cast it from the scroll without fail, and then do that. It can't be dispelled except by casters of higher than your level when you cast it (i.e. the scroll's level; though the text can be interpreted ambiguously, so maybe it's the target spell that should be done at the higher level, same approach either way), so it's pretty safe, probably until you get to high levels, unless the campaign is caster-heavy. It's mainly good for See Invisibility and Arcane Sight. That said, it's only practical when you have pretty good wealth.
* Only done on one character so far, a sorcerer. But I'd probably do it again if the conditions were right.
another method is keeping it one level below yourself. As the dispel affects first the things with higher caster level, it will dispell your mage armor/false life/overland flight first.
Only problem is if you are dispelled with enough level to take out permannrncy but not your other spells
It's not unclear. There are two requirements, one you didn't bold:
You cast blood money just before casting another spell. As part of this spell's casting, you must cut one of your hands, releasing a stream of blood that causes you to take 1d6 points of damage. When you cast another spell in that same round,
Regardless of how a FAQ would rule on the above debate. just using Blood Money + Wish duplicating Permanency make this a moot issue at least for Permanency effects that cost 10,000 gp or less.
That being said I don't see how casting Blood Money as a swift action before casting Permanency on the spell you wish to make permanent makes the casting of Permanency any less "immediately".
I hate to break it to you, but 51 STR is very possible and I'll outline how below. (By the way I find it odd that you think I haven't read the spells considering how many references I made to fairly specific things like the 10k limit on a Wish duplicating permanency....)
12 Base STR*
+10 Form of the Dragon 3
+10 Blood Rage
+2 Succubus Boon (Ideally off a Simulacrum, but a quick summon works to).
+6 enhancement (Belt of Physical Perfection, make it yourself on the cheap.)
+5 Inherent (You now only need to buy a Manual of Gainful Exercise to get +5 Inherent to all your scores.)
+6 Ring of Inner Fortitude (effectively) =
51 or 25,000 worth of material components and 1 STR left (cause it would suck to fall to 0 while casting).
Honestly that wasn't all that hard to figure out.
* Don't forget Magic Jar can make this much higher.
That ring is nice..:)
Or you could, you know, use Limited Wish to cast Permanency, and loose the 1500 equivalent on the limited wish, and the permanency cost, however save that additional 15k of diamond on the Wish. Because spending 25k to get a 10k benefit doesn't make more sense then spending 10k and 1.5k for a total of 11.5... Oh and the limited wish route doesn't require 2 craft feats and 182,250gp worth of crafting costs -that being the belt, ring and tome at creation cost... Cheaper overall, no? And available long before 17th level, unlike Wish?
I applaud your knowledge of individual spells and items. However it is a far more complicated route then it needs to be. *shrug* (Blood Rage is a new one to me, personally, as we don't have that particular book at our table. Another spell to reference now, and also does mean one can get into the 50's for strength, unlike what I previously knew, which was in the 40's). Although that ring is a nifty idea if the Blood Money + Permanency idea does in fact work...
Perhaps I come across as far more irritable then I mean. I probably shouldn't post while ill, I'm told I get rather short-tempered. *bows apologetically*
Um... you realize I'm casting Wish for free yes? Why would I use limited wish to cast permanency when there is no cost associated? It won't even eat a spell slot since this should be done during the free day of extra time you get your Demiplane...
As to the cost issue, there's virtually no downside and all upside to getting 51 STR. It saves you several 100,000 G on getting free +5 inherent ability bonuses to all your scores. Not to mention free wishes allows you to start stealing the Clerics spells for utility. Keep in mind Blood Money works with Limited Wish as well and the monetary costs of getting the +6 Enhancement Bonus and +5 Inherent bonus can be overcome by using Magic Jar to obtain a form with a 23 Base STR. The important function of doing it for "free" is to avoid taking a hit to your Wealth by Level.
That ring is nice..:)
But doesn't work with Blood Money. You HAVE to pay the blood. Creatures that are inmune to ability drain can't cast the spell. And in any case it's a very corner case (you need 12 starting str to begin with), and not needed, since there are easier ways.
But doesn't work with Blood Money. You HAVE to pay the blood. Creatures that are inmune to ability drain can't cast the spell. And in any case it's a very corner case (you need 12 starting str to begin with), and not needed, since there are easier ways.That ring is nice..:)
The ring doesn't actually make you immune, it just reduces the damage. So it works.
But it is easy enough for someone that can cast Limited Wish or Wish to grab 30+ base strength with Monster Summoning. So it is true that the ring really isn't needed.
I don't think it does. I don't think you can use the ring to produce up to 3000gp free, taking 0 damage. You create 500gp for every ability damage you take. If you take 0 ability damage, you create 0gp.
It's not unclear. There are two requirements, one you didn't bold:
You cast blood money just before casting another spell. As part of this spell's casting, you must cut one of your hands, releasing a stream of blood that causes you to take 1d6 points of damage. When you cast another spell in that same round,I don't see your point in bolding that. If I got dressed just before I went to the store at noon, that doesn't mean I arrived at the store by noon.
The point is that the language does not make clear at all whether the spell must be COMPLETED in the same round. It definitely has to be started in the same round that you cast Blood Money.
Rounds aren't the issue here. If you got dressed, then watched the Simpsons, and then went to the store, then you didn't get dressed just before you went to the store - you got dressed right before you watched the Simpsons.
Both blood money and the spell you want to permanent have to be cast right before Permanency. The language "just before" (and in permanency's text, "following"), prevents you from doing anything in between.
Rounds doesn't matter here, I agree you can finish another round. That part could be considered unclear but it's not what prevents you from blood money+permanency.
I really don't see how "following" mean anything here.
Turn 1: I cast Arcane Sight.
Turn 2: I cast Blood Money, then Permanency.
Blood Money was still cast just before Permanency, and Permanency is still following the casting of Arcane Sight. The fact that it also follows the casting of Blood Money doesn't change that fact.
I don't believe the word "following" is as preventative as your argument suggests. In regular English, I would not presume the term "following" excludes something from happening in between. If the language used was "immediately following" I would agree with your argument Ilja.
I really don't see how "following" mean anything here.
Turn 1: I cast Arcane Sight.
Turn 2: I cast Blood Money, then Permanency.Blood Money was still cast just before Permanency, and Permanency is still following the casting of Arcane Sight. The fact that it also follows the casting of Blood Money doesn't change that fact.
Either "following" usually means "right after" and only rarely "any time after". Since it doesn't carry a specified time limit, unless it means "right after" it would mean I can cast enlarge person and a week later cast permanency.
n.
1. a body of followers, attendants, adherents, etc.
2. the body of admirers, attendants, patrons, etc., of someone or something.
3. the following, that which comes immediately after, as pages or lines: See the following for a list of exceptions.
adj.
4. that comes after or next in order or time; ensuing: the following day.
5. that is now to follow.
A. This is following last sentence. The following sentence will be bulletpoint B; after that there is bulletpoint C. This is following bulletpoint B."Following" generally only means something that isn't directly after if it's made part of a group that is referenced to.
B. This is following bulletpoint A. The following bulletpoints will be labeled C and D.
C. This follows bulletpoint B and after this bulletpoint, D will follow.
D. This is the end of the example.
So it's not only unusual to use "following" like not in the meaning of "directly after" (when refering to a single thing), it'd also make for some really really weird rules.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Apologies for the minor thread necro, but a search for the specifics on how Magic Jar and Permanency work together led me here.
You are dealt 1 ability damage for every 500gp you take, not the other way around. You are still dealt the damage, even if then another effect reduces that damage to 0. You could make an argument that if you take no damage, then it shouldn't work (based off how DR works with stuff added on to attacks), but that's not RAW. It rather explicitly requires immunity to ability damage to not work, and the ring does not give immunity -- immunity isn't some vague term, but a well-defined one.
I'm not saying a DM should allow this, but like Blood Money + Fabricate it works.
Actually, Blood Money seems to state otherwise.
You cast blood money just before casting another spell. As part of this spell's casting, you must cut one of your hands, releasing a stream of blood that causes you to take 1d6 points of damage. When you cast another spell in that same round, your blood transforms into one material component of your choice required by that second spell. Even valuable components worth more than 1 gp can be created, but creating such material components requires an additional cost of 1 point of Strength damage, plus a further point of damage for every full 500 gp of the component's value
Notice the wording, specifically that it 'requires' Strength damage. It's seems clear that lost blood = Strength damage. It's also clear that lost blood = valuable component substitute via this spell. So, Strength damage would equal the amount of valuable components the spell creates.
Ring of Inner Fortitude prevents ability damage at all times for all reasons. There's nothing in the description about partially protecting the wearer or discriminate between losing it for a willing positive purpose versus an unwilling negative one. This means that for amounts of ability damage <= 6, you simply would not lose any blood, so Blood Money wouldn't have anything to work with. Effectively, the item makes you immune to ability damage or penalties up to its listed value.I wouldn't bring all this up except that this all seems like it's stretching the rules here a bit too much. You wouldn't say that a vampire that grapples you and starts draining your blood would get any sustenance if you had this ring equipped. Ergo, they wouldn't get the temporary hit points and/or heal the hit point damage. As such, I'm kind of lost as to how this item supposedly lets Blood Money make money out of nothing when the spell quite clearly states it needs something with which to work.
Seems reasonable Cerberus Seven, especially considering the wording of "cost". An ability that said "you are immune to others taking your money", that would prevent pick-pockets, and potentially prevents you from trading - what it doesn't do is allow you to buy stuff without paying.