So I have had a few questions about personal spells recently brought up by both my players and by some of my own reading. I have read up as best I can on the subject but I would like some clarification on things. Below are my questions and if I have answers I have found I will have them accompany the questions.
Q. Can you make Personal spells into potions?
A. No. (Though occasionally I ran across a mention of some way with alchemist. Not sure if this is true.)
Q. Can you make personal spells into wands?
A. I have seen nothing saying you cant it just always casts itself on the user of the wand.
Q. Do personal spells "target one or more creatures"? this is specifically in relation to abilities which can only be used on abilities which use spells which "target one or more creatures".
A. None found.
Q. Can personal spells be cast from an intelligent item on the wielder of the item or is it cast on the item itself?
A. None found but from the looks of it the Item would cast it on itself not on the wielder as the item can count as a target if it is intelligent.
Any help would be greatly appreciated I am solely hoping for official paizo stuff and if certain things need to have some abilities or something to work I would like to know how it would work.
DaPenguins wrote: Q. Can you make personal spells into wands?
A. I have seen nothing saying you cant it just always casts itself on the user of the wand.
Any spell (of 4th level or lower) can be put in a wand.
Pathfinder Maps Subscriber
DaPenguins wrote:
Q. Do personal spells "target one or more creatures"? this is specifically in relation to abilities which can only be used on abilities which use spells which "target one or more creatures".
A. None found.
What abilities are those ?
Otherwise, might this thread be useful ?
DaPenguins wrote: Q. Can you make Personal spells into potions?
A. No. (Though occasionally I ran across a mention of some way with alchemist. Not sure if this is true.)
Personal spells cannot be made potions. This is from the item creation section on potions. I suspect the Alchemist thing you heard about was making extracts of a personal spell and using the Infusion discovery to let someone else use it. Those aren't potions, and they continue to take up one of the alchemist's daily extract slots until someone drinks them.
DaPenguins wrote: Q. Can you make personal spells into wands?
A. I have seen nothing saying you cant it just always casts itself on the user of the wand.
There is no text in the wand creation rules regarding personal spells, unlike with potions. Furthermore, the random treasure tables in the back of Ultimate Equipment list several Personal-range wands. They're legal.
DaPenguins wrote: Q. Do personal spells "target one or more creatures"? this is specifically in relation to abilities which can only be used on abilities which use spells which "target one or more creatures".
A. None found.
I don't have any firm sources for this one, but it seems reasonable to me that the caster is indeed a person. Also, the "Target" entry for personal spells is "You", meaning it does actually have a target. Contrast this to spells like Identify, which have no target and only an effect. My reading would be that stuff like True Strike targets (one) creature, while Identify and the like do not.
It is the intelligent item that casts the spell, not the wielder. This implies a few things:
1. Personal spells will affect the wielder, not the user.
2. The wielder does not use an action to cast, the weapon does.
3. The wielder can still make a full attack after having the sword cast spells like Dimension Door or Teleport.
Volkard Abendroth wrote: It is the intelligent item that casts the spell, not the wielder. This implies a few things:
1. Personal spells will affect the wielder, not the user.
2. The wielder does not use an action to cast, the weapon does.
3. The wielder can still make a full attack after having the sword cast spells like Dimension Door or Teleport.
For point 1, you're assuming a personal spell cast by the sword works on the wielder, and using to prove the same.
For point 3, minor quibble - both of the listed spells also teleport touched creatures, and so don't really apply to the argument. Also, again, you're first assuming that personal spells affect the wielder, rather than showing that they do.
SlimGauge wrote: DaPenguins wrote:
Q. Do personal spells "target one or more creatures"? this is specifically in relation to abilities which can only be used on abilities which use spells which "target one or more creatures".
A. None found.
What abilities are those ?
Otherwise, might this thread be useful ? One such ability I am reffering to is the the Stone Warder Archetype of the sorcerer. It has an ability which allows you to make a ward similar to Glyph of Warding except it can be any spell which "targets one or more creatures". Glyph of Warding itself might be another such ability/spell. One such use would be using Glyph of warding with the old Skinsend trick alchemist's can due though both ways would give saves now.
I've found two examples of intelligent first-party magic items that deal with True Strike, and they both do so in a unique manner.
Lightning Bow - as a swift action, the wielder can cast True Strike.
Helm of the Golden General - the helm affects the wearer or someone else with True Strike.
So, there's precedent for allowing an intelligent item to use personal spells on anyone, not just the wielder. Intelligent items just tend to break the rules.
shaventalz wrote: DaPenguins wrote: Q. Can you make Personal spells into potions?
A. No. (Though occasionally I ran across a mention of some way with alchemist. Not sure if this is true.)
Personal spells cannot be made potions. This is from the item creation section on potions. I suspect the Alchemist thing you heard about was making extracts of a personal spell and using the Infusion discovery to let someone else use it. Those aren't potions, and they continue to take up one of the alchemist's daily extract slots until someone drinks them.
DaPenguins wrote: Q. Can you make personal spells into wands?
A. I have seen nothing saying you cant it just always casts itself on the user of the wand.
There is no text in the wand creation rules regarding personal spells, unlike with potions. Furthermore, the random treasure tables in the back of Ultimate Equipment list several Personal-range wands. They're legal.
DaPenguins wrote: Q. Do personal spells "target one or more creatures"? this is specifically in relation to abilities which can only be used on abilities which use spells which "target one or more creatures".
A. None found.
I don't have any firm sources for this one, but it seems reasonable to me that the caster is indeed a person. Also, the "Target" entry for personal spells is "You", meaning it does actually have a target. Contrast this to spells like Identify, which have no target and only an effect. My reading would be that stuff like True Strike targets (one) creature, while Identify and the like do not. 1. Thank you this was likely what I was seeing about alchemists passing off their extracts of personal spells for others to use.
2. Thank you I was looking for something confirming that they can be made and wands with personal spells on them clearly means that they are able to be made.
3. I can see your point here though I am hoping to look for a rules as written proof if possible. I have talked it over with a couple different groups and have had mixed results. I know of atleast one character who is interested in doing this with Glyph of Warding and basically using it as a way to make items to hand out to the party that are self use scrolls for 200gp. They have bought a variety of small toy boxes and books and they label them. Then they are warding them on down days to create things they can hand out to their party as healing and buff items that are one use. It is cheaper than crafting 3rd level scrolls and everyone can use it easily. He wants to add personal spells to it but some people are saying the fact that it does not target a creature it targets you that you cant do it. I have allowed the player to do it as all he is doing is shield or a couple other minor buffs but it is still something I would like to have a more official ruling on or atleast text to back up any position.
shaventalz wrote: I've found two examples of intelligent first-party magic items that deal with True Strike, and they both do so in a unique manner.
Lightning Bow - as a swift action, the wielder can cast True Strike.
Helm of the Golden General - the helm affects the wearer or someone else with True Strike.
So, there's precedent for allowing an intelligent item to use personal spells on anyone, not just the wielder. Intelligent items just tend to break the rules.
Thank you for the precedent. I do notice though both of these have specific things calling out that it either cast by the wielder and thus uses the wielders actions or the spell is cast by the weapon with text stating otherwise. I do think this sets the precedent in favor of the wielder.
DaPenguins wrote: 3. I can see your point here though I am hoping to look for a rules as written proof if possible. I have talked it over with a couple different groups and have had mixed results. I know of atleast one character who is interested in doing this with Glyph of Warding and basically using it as a way to make items to hand out to the party that are self use scrolls for 200gp. They have bought a variety of small toy boxes and books and they label them. Then they are warding them on down days to create things they can hand out to their party as healing and buff items that are one use. It is cheaper than crafting 3rd level scrolls and everyone can use it easily. He wants to add personal spells to it but some people are saying the fact that it does not target a creature it targets you that you cant do it. I have allowed the player to do it as all he is doing is shield or a couple other minor buffs but it is still something I would like to have a more official ruling on or atleast text to back up any position. Fair enough.
However, as to that specific examples... if it does work, it's not as bad as it could be. Read the archetype more closely. The class ability doesn't last long enough to "stock up" on downtime days. And the Glyph of Warding spell specifies harmful spells. The worst they could do there would be cheap Fireball grenades that have to touch someone of a different race than the intended user.
shaventalz wrote: Volkard Abendroth wrote: It is the intelligent item that casts the spell, not the wielder. This implies a few things:
1. Personal spells will affect the wielder, not the user.
2. The wielder does not use an action to cast, the weapon does.
3. The wielder can still make a full attack after having the sword cast spells like Dimension Door or Teleport.
For point 1, you're assuming a personal spell cast by the sword works on the wielder, and using to prove the same.
For point 3, minor quibble - both of the listed spells also teleport touched creatures, and so don't really apply to the argument. Also, again, you're first assuming that personal spells affect the wielder, rather than showing that they do. Casting a personal spell that would have no effect on the caster just results in a failed or ineffective spell. It does not change the spells target. For example, a Shield spell on an intelligent weapon would have no effect. Weapons are attacked by rolling against the wielder's CMD, not by rolling against the weapon's AC.
Point 3 is an extension of the fact that the intelligent weapon is casting, not the wielder. This confers the benefit of action economy and, in the case of DD, it is only the caster that looses all remaining actions for the round.
If the opposite is ruled, that the wielder is the one casting the spell, personal spells would affect the wielder and action economy would be lost.
shaventalz wrote: I've found two examples of intelligent first-party magic items that deal with True Strike, and they both do so in a unique manner.
Lightning Bow - as a swift action, the wielder can cast True Strike.
Helm of the Golden General - the helm affects the wearer or someone else with True Strike.
So, there's precedent for allowing an intelligent item to use personal spells on anyone, not just the wielder. Intelligent items just tend to break the rules.
Both are examples of specific > general. The exemptions on these items are specific to the items.
shaventalz wrote: DaPenguins wrote: 3. I can see your point here though I am hoping to look for a rules as written proof if possible. I have talked it over with a couple different groups and have had mixed results. I know of atleast one character who is interested in doing this with Glyph of Warding and basically using it as a way to make items to hand out to the party that are self use scrolls for 200gp. They have bought a variety of small toy boxes and books and they label them. Then they are warding them on down days to create things they can hand out to their party as healing and buff items that are one use. It is cheaper than crafting 3rd level scrolls and everyone can use it easily. He wants to add personal spells to it but some people are saying the fact that it does not target a creature it targets you that you cant do it. I have allowed the player to do it as all he is doing is shield or a couple other minor buffs but it is still something I would like to have a more official ruling on or atleast text to back up any position. Fair enough.
However, as to that specific examples... if it does work, it's not as bad as it could be. Read the archetype more closely. The class ability doesn't last long enough to "stock up" on downtime days. And the Glyph of Warding spell specifies harmful spells. The worst they could do there would be cheap Fireball grenades that have to touch someone of a different race than the intended user. Good catch I didn't see the harmful thing though the question then comes to be what is considered harmful. Could Cure spells be considered harmful because they can harm undead? If not then would Inflict spells beconsidered harmless because they can heal undead? It brings up an important question on if certain things would be considered harmful or not. For instances would anything that imposes a penalty be harmful such as the Rage spell even though it is generally thought of as a buff.
Recent threads in Rules Questions
|
