Wand!


Magic Items

Dark Archive

7 people marked this as a favorite.

So I was and am very much against resonance for wands or consumables (I will be using resonance during my playtesting). But wanted to Call attention to the Spell Dueling Wand. It is a wand that is not just a spell in a can. It gives you a bonus to ranged touch attacks for your spells. I very much like this is the way I think wands should go. Focusing your power as you cast spells.

I hope we get more interesting wands in the future that adjust your spells as you cast them!


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Brad,
I saw that about wands also! A bit closer to the Harry Potter (or Ancient Magus Bride) approach. Staves look a lot more interesting than in P1e.


I agree with consumables and resonance, especially for alchamests.


I have three simple house rules I am going present with my group

1st is resonance used on a consumable activates it for the scene/combat/hour to be used as many times possible.

2nd is resonance used on a consumable item is refunded at the end of scene/combat/hour.

3rd is a single resonance can be used up to 10 times on consumable items before it is considered to be spent.

these options seem more flexible to the players and don't break the system.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I think wands should be reusable with a fixed number of charges. Investing resonance recharges the wand. Spells loaded into the wand cost 1 charge per spell level. Allow potency and property runes at a cost of additional investment equal to the rune level.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

I too was very happy to see the Spell Duelist's Wand/Gloves, and that Wands and Staves in general can be used to perform Somatic Casting Actions for other spells.

On the other hand, A Spell Duelists Wand or Gloves appears to be one of the only ways to leverage an Item Bonus on direct-attack spells and cantrips. Which effectively means Blaster Casters need one or both of them as Invested Pseudo-Weapons... On second thought I'm not so happy the Spell Duelist's Wand and Gloves require Investment, and they can only be activated once per day.

I would prefer the Spell-Duelist's Wand & Gloves either not require Investment (on the grounds that superior quality weapons and weapon potency runes don't require Investment, and these are functionally similar) or not be limited to a single use per day (given that it's usage is still naturally limited by the character's maximum resonance). Note that doing both would assuredly be overpowered, and that of the two I prefer the latter, despite there being a better argument for the former. It just feels like it better fulfills the 'fantasy' of being a wand-wielder.


Was not the purpose of the resonance so that the party would be likely to buy higher level/effets items instead of a bunch of lower level stuff? I think the example given from PF1 was the ole buy a bunch of cure light wound wands and just max out HP between encounters.

If you allow that to happen with a house rule, why use resonance at all?

K-Ray

Dark Archive

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Cantriped wrote:

I too was very happy to see the Spell Duelist's Wand/Gloves, and that Wands and Staves in general can be used to perform Somatic Casting Actions for other spells.

On the other hand, A Spell Duelists Wand or Gloves appears to be one of the only ways to leverage an Item Bonus on direct-attack spells and cantrips. Which effectively means Blaster Casters need one or both of them as Invested Pseudo-Weapons... On second thought I'm not so happy the Spell Duelist's Wand and Gloves require Investment, and they can only be activated once per day.

I would prefer the Spell-Duelist's Wand & Gloves either not require Investment (on the grounds that superior quality weapons and weapon potency runes don't require Investment, and these are functionally similar) or not be limited to a single use per day (given that it's usage is still naturally limited by the character's maximum resonance). Note that doing both would assuredly be overpowered, and that of the two I prefer the latter, despite there being a better argument for the former. It just feels like it better fulfills the 'fantasy' of being a wand-wielder.

\

I could be wrong but I thought the 1/day was for the spell not the + to attack. But yeah the + to attack should not cost a resonance point.


Yes, the 1/day limit is on the 'Activated' effect of the duelist's wand (casting a given spell), The item bonus is its Invested benefit.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

This kinda thing is what I wanna see from my magic wands and staves. I was greatly disappointed to discover that wands and staves were just glorified scrolls when I was first introduced to 3.5 in college.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Same^

RPG Superstar 2009 Top 16, 2012 Top 32

5 people marked this as a favorite.

All wands should be spell dueling wands. Those are way more thematic than boring PF1 wands.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Wands as attack/DC enhancers is not what I want to see. If I attack with my magic wand and I get a +2 item bonus and deal 3d4+4 have I attacked with a dagger or a spell

It's just another way to make all characters feel the same with everyone wanting the same type of items and use those items in the same way. I'd rather enhance casters spellcasting abilities in other ways that don't involve giving them a +2 wand/sword.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

I like the idea of using resonance for wands. I dislike the fact that they still have charges on them. Since they previewed the idea of using resonance for wands and staves I've thought of them as follows:

A wand that cast a specific spell has that spell engraved into it. You are literally channeling your personal magic field into that wand to cast the spell. Knowing the spell / having it on your spell list means you are more familiar with the engraving and know how to send the energy through the wand, otherwise you are just guessing at how to do so.

Staves are a bigger version of a wand that has more of those engravings and has some way of actually holding the energy, thus why they can cast spells by using power from the staff itself. This also explains why they are rechargeable.

Wands having charges and not being rechargeable bothers me because based on my above reasoning, how is the wand breaking down? Does the engraving for the spell slowly wear away? If so then that should also happen on a staff. Then you have the spell dueling wand which has no charges and breaks the rules for the rest of the system. It even states it has a focus that you invest in to, which works wonderfully thematically. It would be as if it had a special set of engravings just to give any spell passed through it a boost.

I understand all of this is thematics and my way of trying to make sense / rules for a fantasy world but if we could lay down base rules and stick to them then it becomes easier to define everything else.


Not trying to hijack this thread. But since we are on wands. The rules state "Any physical material components and cost were provided when the wand was crafted, but you must spend a Somatic Casting action in place of each Material Casting action required to cast the spell." So for a wand of magic missile you must use a somatic casting action in place of the material component which gives you one missile and counts as the casting action. Could a player then use another somatic casting action to give it two missiles and then the verbal casting action to give it the third missile as described in the magic missile spells entry? I guess the short question is can you use multiple casting actions of the same in this case the somatic casting action that takes place of the material casting action and then another somatic casting action for the somatic casting action? Just is a bit confusing to me.

Grand Lodge

UltimateDM wrote:
Not trying to hijack this thread. But since we are on wands. The rules state "Any physical material components and cost were provided when the wand was crafted, but you must spend a Somatic Casting action in place of each Material Casting action required to cast the spell." So for a wand of magic missile you must use a somatic casting action in place of the material component which gives you one missile and counts as the casting action. Could a player then use another somatic casting action to give it two missiles and then the verbal casting action to give it the third missile as described in the magic missile spells entry? I guess the short question is can you use multiple casting actions of the same in this case the somatic casting action that takes place of the material casting action and then another somatic casting action for the somatic casting action? Just is a bit confusing to me.

You use as many actions as the spell requires (that being up to 3 for a magic missile). If any of those actions are somatic, you wave the wand. If any of those were material, you wave the wand! Verbal stuff you intone ominously, of course.


Thanks I figured that was what it meant but needed some clarification.

Community / Forums / Archive / Pathfinder / Playtests & Prerelease Discussions / Pathfinder Playtest / Game Master Rules / Magic Items / Wand! All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in Magic Items