
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |

Does anyone know of any type of magic item that would act as a Death Ward (prevent a successful spell/SLA/SU that could be used unprepared? I'm thinking along the lines of the Hex Nail (which would only give a +2 to your save, though).
I vaguely remember there being a Soulfire armor enhancement in 3.5 that the first time each day you were hit with a negative energy effect it would cast death ward on you reactively.

![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |

Prethen wrote:Does anyone know of any type of magic item that would act as a Death Ward (prevent a successful spell/SLA/SU that could be used unprepared? I'm thinking along the lines of the Hex Nail (which would only give a +2 to your save, though).I vaguely remember there being a Soulfire armor enhancement in 3.5 that the first time each day you were hit with a negative energy effect it would cast death ward on you reactively.
Deathless armor is close to what you're looking for. 25% chance to stop Negative Levels, plus some resistance to negative energy.
I might get this for my cleric. He was almost killed by a Negative level at first level, so he might be paranoid.

![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |

actually, this spell does not let you prepare more than your normal limit of spells a day.
It just reduces the number of hours of rest you need to recover spells...
In other words, it lets you prepare your daily alotment of spells after only 2 hours rest -...
and Drake Roberts - thanks for pointing that out. I'd completely got the wrong end of the stick with it. Ah, well, it's still not a bad spell :)

Jason Wu |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |

Wand of Silent Image.
Opponents don't get a save unless they directly interact with the illusion.
Depending on your GM, that can mean instant concealment, or distraction, or many other useful effects.
Hell, be mean, cast Air Walk and run across a Silent Image bridge while being chased. By the time your pursuer gets that save to realize it's an illusion it will be too late.
-j

![]() ![]() |
I still want to build a 5 CON Dhampir Necromancer Wizard. Use FC bonuses for skill points. Wonder how long I could make it...
Would you use Toughness or just straight class die?
(I actually have a Human Abjurer with a 7 CON built, but I use both toughness and Tribal Scars. Unfortunately I have not played the character yet)On topic: I do not recall seeing this mentioned, I would suggest keeping in mind Snorkels. They are fairly cheap(5sp for common, 5gp for masterwork).

jhpace1 |

From the APG: Smelling Salts.
"These sharply scented gray crystals cause people inhaling them to regain consciousness. Smelling salts grant you a new saving throw to resist any spell or effect that has already rendered you unconscious or staggered. If exposed to smelling salts while dying, you immediately become conscious and staggered, but must still make stabilization checks each round; if you perform any standard action (or any other strenuous action) you take 1 point of damage after completing the act and fall unconscious again. A container of smelling salts has dozens of uses if stoppered after each use, but depletes in a matter of hours if left opened."
This recently saved my character's life when he fell to -8 hp too far away from the party for others to get to him, but he had a psicrystal (psion familiar, change as needed per your situation) that could get this to him in order to wake him up and get the healing needed. Also works if you can only heal to -1 hp on a person and they still won't wake up. The best part? Smelling salts are reusable; buy once for 25 gp, use forever.

![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |

Metamagic Gems are interesting ones, since they can apply to spells of any level. In general, it's better to buy a rod, but when you absolutely need that Silent Greater Dispel Magic or Dimension Door, having a one time use of it is worth it.

![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |

On a more thread appropriate topic: Casting defensively.
I know that I wound up killing a first level Witch PC because he decided to cast cure light wounds while adjacent to an enemy. Then again, it was a Witch (d6 HD), Con 8 (Why?), and I am confident the FCB was not in a hit point, standing next to a creature whose damage on a normal hit was 1d6+4, which proceeded to crit on the AoO, doing 2d6+8, on a PC with 5 hit points, and an 8 Con. Ugly. Yet, if he had cast defensively, it wouldn't have gotten the AoO.
Fighting Defensively or using Total Defense with 3 or more ranks in Acrobatics. Worth the expense of 3 skill ranks, even in a 2 skill point per level class.
Combine it with Combat Expertise, and your AC can go through the roof.
Another tidbit: While some weapons, even though counted as one-handed, don't get the 1.5 Str modifier when used two-handed, that modifier still applies to power attack when done with that weapon.

![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
2 people marked this as a favorite. |

Circlet of persuasion
Its a bit pricey at 4,500 but its +3 to all your charisma based skills and checks. ALL of them. The year of the diplomat may be coming to a close, but not ticking people off is usually good for that second PP.
It also has some minor benefits like being a +3 to push a charmed critter and wild empathy checks.
I think people still think this is a headband slot item, not a head slot item, so they think its a choice between this and the charisma boosting item.

![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
3 people marked this as a favorite. |

With the Noble Scion (war) feat it also adds to initiative. And it's good for necromancers and binders too.
I'd like to contribute:
Spiritbane spike(Undead Slayer's Handbook pg. 13)
When you slash this alchemically treated iron spike against your flesh — a move action that deals 1d6 points of damage — the spike extends and becomes a short sword with the ghost touch weapon special ability. The spike reverts to its old form after 10 minutes, corroded and useless. Should a spiritbane spike rematerialize within a corporeal body, it is shunted to the nearest empty space without effect. Crafting this item requires a successful DC 25 Craft (alchemy) check.
Seriously a great item and such flavor! No need to spend 8 grand on a specialized weapon in case you happen to meet a specter or too. Just buy one or two of these beauties. They work as shortswords to boot, so the only classes incapable of using them(full casters) don't really need to, anyhow.

![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |

Circlet of persuasion
Its a bit pricey at 4,500 but its +3 to all your charisma based skills and checks. ALL of them. The year of the diplomat may be coming to a close, but not ticking people off is usually good for that second PP.
It also has some minor benefits like being a +3 to push a charmed critter and wild empathy checks.
I think people still think this is a headband slot item, not a head slot item, so they think its a choice between this and the charisma boosting item.
And for the charisma based casters who think they don't need this, because their social skills are already through the roof, just remember that your concentration checks are charisma based, so this gives +3 on those, too.

![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
BigNorseWolf wrote:And for the charisma based casters who think they don't need this, because their social skills are already through the roof, just remember that your concentration checks are charisma based, so this gives +3 on those, too.Circlet of persuasion
Its a bit pricey at 4,500 but its +3 to all your charisma based skills and checks. ALL of them. The year of the diplomat may be coming to a close, but not ticking people off is usually good for that second PP.
It also has some minor benefits like being a +3 to push a charmed critter and wild empathy checks.
I think people still think this is a headband slot item, not a head slot item, so they think its a choice between this and the charisma boosting item.
actually I do not think this is true....
from the CircletThis delicately engraved silver headband grants its wearer a +3 competence bonus on Charisma-based checks."
from Concentration (Casting Defensively):
"To cast a spell, you must concentrate. If something interrupts your concentration while you're casting, you must make a concentration check or lose the spell. When you make a concentration check, you roll d20 and add your caster level and the ability score modifier used to determine bonus spells of the same type. Clerics, druids, and rangers add their Wisdom modifier. Bards, paladins, and sorcerers add their Charisma modifier. Finally, wizards add their Intelligence modifier. The more distracting the interruption and the higher the level of the spell you are trying to cast, the higher the DC (see Table: Concentration Check DCs). If you fail the check, you lose the spell just as if you had cast it to no effect."
While it is possible some judges would rule that Concentration checks are an INT/WIS/CHA based check, many others would not... is there an FAQ or anything which would help resolve this question?

![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
While it is possible some judges would rule that Concentration checks are an INT/WIS/CHA based check, many others would not... is there an FAQ or anything which would help resolve this question?
Yes and no. SKR and Adam Daigle both weighed in here. Adam says straight-out that it is. SKR's response is rhetorical and perhaps pithy, but the implication from him too is that it is a charisma-based check. While there have been many rules forum discussions on the topic, I've accepted that with two developers in agreement on the issue, it's good enough for me (both as a player and a GM).

![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |

nosig wrote:While it is possible some judges would rule that Concentration checks are an INT/WIS/CHA based check, many others would not... is there an FAQ or anything which would help resolve this question?Yes and no. SKR and Adam Daigle both weighed in here. Adam says straight-out that it is. SKR's response is rhetorical and perhaps pithy, but the implication from him too is that it is a charisma-based check. While there have been many rules forum discussions on the topic, I've accepted that with two developers in agreement on the issue, it's good enough for me (both as a player and a GM).
Fantastic. Circlet of Persuasion can now serve as an Initiative booster. Neat!

![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
nosig wrote:While it is possible some judges would rule that Concentration checks are an INT/WIS/CHA based check, many others would not... is there an FAQ or anything which would help resolve this question?Yes and no. SKR and Adam Daigle both weighed in here. Adam says straight-out that it is. SKR's response is rhetorical and perhaps pithy, but the implication from him too is that it is a charisma-based check. While there have been many rules forum discussions on the topic, I've accepted that with two developers in agreement on the issue, it's good enough for me (both as a player and a GM).
thanks! just what I was looking for.
(though most of the posters there seem to also be saying it wouldn't count to Concentration checks... so still some YMMV on this one)

![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Kyle Baird wrote:edit: of course lore oracles don't matter now...What's wrong with lore oracles?
Pageant of the Peacock...
I played my Lore Oracle recently in Hall of Drunken Heroes with a pageant using Bard who routinely hit 50+ on any Int check. Just as well I have plenty of other things that the character could do.

![]() |

Vrog Skyreaver wrote:Kyle Baird wrote:edit: of course lore oracles don't matter now...What's wrong with lore oracles?Pageant of the Peacock...
I played my Lore Oracle recently in Hall of Drunken Heroes with a pageant using Bard who routinely hit 50+ on any Int check. Just as well I have plenty of other things that the character could do.
I have an optimized Pageant bard, and routinely hitting 50 is very unlikely, particularly pre level 10. My level 9 Bard makes 50 on a 20 exactly. While there are ways to squeeze out another 5-6, doing any more than that would severely hinder a character, and this is investing two feats, a trait, and a 20+ in charisma, along with a semi-expensive item early, something many would already consider crippling in terms build.
Anyway, one of my favorite items to buy on my martial characters is the Sheathe of Vigor. Great for nova-ing a combat, and pretty cheap at 1800g. My paladin carries one and has since low levels, because when that one guy really needs to die, adding a +8 to hit and a +12 to damage as a swift+non action+non action/move is a big deal.

![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |

Anyway, one of my favorite items to buy on my martial characters is the Sheathe of Vigor. Great for nova-ing a combat, and pretty cheap at 1800g. My paladin carries one and has since low levels, because when that one guy really needs to die, adding a +8 to hit and a +12 to damage as a swift+non action+non action/move is a big deal.
I've looked at the Scabbard of Vigor before, and at first it seems interesting, but the more I think about it the less useful it feels. It's 1,800gp. For 200 gp more, you can just enchant your weapon to +1 (assuming it's already masterwork). Once you have a +1 weapon, the 10 round of a +1 enhancement bonus from the scabbard is useless, because it won't stack with the existing enhancement bonus.
So you could make the weapon +2 for an effective +1/+1 for 5 rounds a day, +3 for an effective +2/+2 for 3 rounds/day, or +4 for an effective +3/+3 for 1 round per day. I suppose I can see how that would be useful when you can boost your enhancement bony through other means, but it just such a limited period.

![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |

I never knew about the Scabbard of Vigor. Just looked it up, and I really like it.
I think the key is that it could be great for overcoming DR if you don't have the perfect weapon already for what you're facing. Remember, a +3 enhancement bonus is the same as silver or cold iron for overcoming DR. So this way, you don't have to put down the magic weapon to pull out a non-magic cold iron backup when facing a demon. Just use the scabbard to make your existing weapon +3 for 3 rounds, and not only do you overcome DR, but you have a better chance to hit and do more damage.
Maybe not the best magic item in the game, but I could see picking one up for some characters.

![]() ![]() |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |

My personal favorite item is Seducer's Bane.
Seducer's BanePrice 9,900 gp; Aura moderate abjuration; CL 6th; Weight —
This slender silver bracelet is worked in an intertwined design of three flowers. A DC 20 Knowledge (nature) check identifies the flowers as acacia, apocynum, and bilberry, symbolizing concealment, treachery, and falsehood.
The bracelet grants the wearer a +5 competence bonus on Sense Motive checks, and a +5 resistance bonus on Will saves against enchantment effects. If the wearer makes a successful Will save against an enchantment, the caster of that spell incorrectly senses the effect has succeeded. Additionally, the bracelet's wearer knows an enchantment targeted him and the enchantment's source. Seducer's bane creates an aura on its wearer, visible to detect magic, matching the failed enchantment spell or effect, and lasting as long as the intended enchantment's duration. However, if the bracelet's wearer attacks the caster or its allies, or otherwise acts in a way that's contradictory to the failed spell's effect, the caster of that spell immediately realizes the enchantment was ineffective.
Construction Requirements
Cost 4,950 gp
Craft Wondrous Item, detect magic, magic aura, resistance, creator must have 3 ranks in Sense Motive

![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |

nosig wrote:While it is possible some judges would rule that Concentration checks are an INT/WIS/CHA based check, many others would not... is there an FAQ or anything which would help resolve this question?Yes and no. SKR and Adam Daigle both weighed in here. Adam says straight-out that it is. SKR's response is rhetorical and perhaps pithy, but the implication from him too is that it is a charisma-based check. While there have been many rules forum discussions on the topic, I've accepted that with two developers in agreement on the issue, it's good enough for me (both as a player and a GM).
So all this time I've been missing out on an additional +3 when I grapple foes with telekinesis...

![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
DrakeRoberts wrote:So all this time I've been missing out on an additional +3 when I grapple foes with telekinesis...nosig wrote:While it is possible some judges would rule that Concentration checks are an INT/WIS/CHA based check, many others would not... is there an FAQ or anything which would help resolve this question?Yes and no. SKR and Adam Daigle both weighed in here. Adam says straight-out that it is. SKR's response is rhetorical and perhaps pithy, but the implication from him too is that it is a charisma-based check. While there have been many rules forum discussions on the topic, I've accepted that with two developers in agreement on the issue, it's good enough for me (both as a player and a GM).
I'd have to look into that. SKR does specify attack rolls not being checks, iirc.

![]() |

Vrog Skyreaver wrote:Kyle Baird wrote:edit: of course lore oracles don't matter now...What's wrong with lore oracles?Pageant of the Peacock...
I played my Lore Oracle recently in Hall of Drunken Heroes with a pageant using Bard who routinely hit 50+ on any Int check. Just as well I have plenty of other things that the character could do.
You should read the current thread on Pageant of the Peacock - there's some serious debate over how broad of a power it is. A designer even stepped in and seemed to weigh in on the narrow view of the ability.
Basically - the idea is that Pageant of the Peacock allows you to use bluff for Int checks in bluff based situations. Ex: Convince someone that you're a noble without negatives to your check when you know nothing about nobility (normally knowledge:nobility). Ex: Convince someone the random filled out sheet of paper you're holding is totally an introduction from the king without them actually reading it. (normally linguistics to forge) etc.

![]() |

andreww wrote:Vrog Skyreaver wrote:Kyle Baird wrote:edit: of course lore oracles don't matter now...What's wrong with lore oracles?Pageant of the Peacock...
I played my Lore Oracle recently in Hall of Drunken Heroes with a pageant using Bard who routinely hit 50+ on any Int check. Just as well I have plenty of other things that the character could do.
You should read the current thread on Pageant of the Peacock - there's some serious debate over how broad of a power it is. A designer even stepped in and seemed to weigh in on the narrow view of the ability.
Basically - the idea is that Pageant of the Peacock allows you to use bluff for Int checks in bluff based situations. Ex: Convince someone that you're a noble without negatives to your check when you know nothing about nobility (normally knowledge:nobility). Ex: Convince someone the random filled out sheet of paper you're holding is totally an introduction from the king without them actually reading it. (normally linguistics to forge) etc.
If that's what was intended, the authors and editors have a terrible grasp of the English language because there is nothing to suggest any kind of situational limitation in the text of the ability.

![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
You should read the current thread on Pageant of the Peacock - there's some serious debate over how broad of a power it is. A designer even stepped in and seemed to weigh in on the narrow view of the ability.
Basically - the idea is that Pageant of the Peacock allows you to use bluff for Int checks in bluff based situations. Ex: Convince someone that you're a noble without negatives to your check when you know nothing about nobility (normally knowledge:nobility). Ex: Convince someone the random filled out sheet of paper you're holding is totally an introduction from the king without them actually reading it. (normally linguistics to forge) etc.
I am familiar with the thread and have participated in both of them. I don't agree with those various interpretations, much as I might prefer it if it was true it isn't.

![]() ![]() |

Charon's Little Helper wrote:If that's what was intended, the authors and editors have a terrible grasp of the English language because there is nothing to suggest any kind of situational limitation in the text of the ability.andreww wrote:Vrog Skyreaver wrote:Kyle Baird wrote:edit: of course lore oracles don't matter now...What's wrong with lore oracles?Pageant of the Peacock...
I played my Lore Oracle recently in Hall of Drunken Heroes with a pageant using Bard who routinely hit 50+ on any Int check. Just as well I have plenty of other things that the character could do.
You should read the current thread on Pageant of the Peacock - there's some serious debate over how broad of a power it is. A designer even stepped in and seemed to weigh in on the narrow view of the ability.
Basically - the idea is that Pageant of the Peacock allows you to use bluff for Int checks in bluff based situations. Ex: Convince someone that you're a noble without negatives to your check when you know nothing about nobility (normally knowledge:nobility). Ex: Convince someone the random filled out sheet of paper you're holding is totally an introduction from the king without them actually reading it. (normally linguistics to forge) etc.
I will refer you to the thread (Though you have to get a ways into it before the actual rules discussion starts.) There is a...non-tortured interpretation which gets you there. I haven't made up my mind how I would interpret it yet, but I went from thinking it was straightforward and broken to being able to appreciate the alternative interpretation. It really depends, from a rules theory perspective, how you approach interpretation of text.

![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |

I just posted about it elsewhere, but if you have money to spare and love improved familiars, homunculi are actually pretty cool! The Alchemy Manual gives them so many options, and they're just 1 HD away from having an additional feat! Sure, I had to dip a level in artifice domain cleric to ensure they survive, combined with the Construct Channel Brick, but overall, Minion III has been fun!