|
Ok, so I've read the threads back and forth regarding spell storing and whether they take a touch attack roll. I'm off the opinion they do. Not only because a "free hit" seems bogus, ignores the crit chance for touch spells, and basically breaks the game, BUT ALSO because "what about SR?"
I mean you still have to penetrate SR. So if you already hit, you roll to hit SR. So NOW it takes another roll?
No, it was always as if the wielder had cast the spell. Their touch attack. Their SR penetration. The items spell. I don't see why that's so hard to grasp.
Thoughts? Anyone have a link to a FAQ on this?
|
I suspect that a spell storing weapon work as a spell storing ring, so it will have the minimum caster level needed for the spell. And the minimum stat value for casting it.
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. Each spell has a caster level equal to the minimum level needed to cast that spell. 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.
The spell storing ability for weapons say:
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.
The spell is cast by the weapon, it is not the spell cast by the original caster, so it works like all other spells cast by magic items (barring specific text in the item): minimum caster level, the casting stat is the minimum for a spell of that level and none of the caster or wielder feats or abilities affect it, with the possible exceptions of metamagics and feats/abilities with specific text superseding the general rule.
|
|
i believe the default for magic items casting spells is to use the CL for the item. Ring of Spell Storing does explicitly work differently.I suspect that a spell storing weapon work as a spell storing ring, so it will have the minimum caster level needed for the spell. And the minimum stat value for casting it.
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. Each spell has a caster level equal to the minimum level needed to cast that spell. 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.The spell storing ability for weapons say:
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.The spell is cast by the weapon, it is not the spell cast by the original caster, so it works like all other spells cast by magic items (barring specific text in the item): minimum caster level, the casting stat is the minimum for a spell of that level and none of the caster or wielder feats or abilities affect it, with the possible exceptions of metamagics and feats/abilities with specific text superseding the general rule.
Not for weapons or armor that cast spell effects, as the CL needed to add a weapon enhancement or other abilities is unrelated to the CL of the spell cast by the item. Adding brilliant energy, a CL 15 enhancement, don't increase the level of the spell stored in the weapon.
The ring of spell storing say that explicitly because in earlier edition it worked differetly and the original caster CL mattered.Magic items produce spells or spell-like effects. For a saving throw against a spell or spell-like effect from a magic item,the DC is 10 + the level of the spell or effect + the ability modifier of the minimum ability score needed to cast that level of spell.
So the default rule is that a item use the minimum casting stat score needed to cast the spell.
Some individual items, notably those that just store spells, don’t get full-blown descriptions. Reference the spell’s description for details, modified by the form of the item (potion, scroll, wand, and so on). Assume that the spell is cast at the minimum level required to cast it.
"Assume" isn't a strong term, rule wise, so it is possible to argue that a spell storing weapon maintain the original caster CL, but it is improbable. As there is a general rule and there isn't a specific rule that say something different the general rule should be applied.
YMMV|
|
Minimum caster level means the enhancement is practically a waste of time for weapons.
CL 12 means the player charges the item up with 15gp wand charges to get one 5d6 Shocking Grasp per fight.
Having the spell storing item store the spell that was cast means the players can now bank one spell. This is a useful ability, but doesn't get used every fight.
You are arguing that if you charge the sword with a Shocking Grasp from a CL 1 wand you get a CL 12 Shocking Grasp when the spell stored is discharged?
I. e. that storing the spell increases its Caster Level?
You are arguing that if you charge the sword with a Shocking Grasp from a CL 1 wand you get a CL 12 Shocking Grasp when the spell stored is discharged? I. e. that storing the spell increases its Caster Level?I'm saying that there have been three options presented for CL: minimum CL, CL12, and CL-as-cast. Each has consequences for play. For the second, if the item casts the spell and the item casts at CL12, then a logical consequence is that any spell becomes CL12 no matter what CL it was to start with, which would include CL<12 becoming 12. As a player under that interpretation I would use wands to charge the item after every fight.
This is exactly right, with the addition that while I can see arguments for CL12 and CL-as-cast, I can't think of any rules support for minimum CL.
The enchantment's Caster Level being used as the spell-being-casted's level seems like the most obvious and simple solution. Although, like many other things, the wording is not explicit and leaves room for debate.
Options presented thusfar:
A) stored and used at minimum level...
This is a complete waste, but it fits with everything else in that martial characters are not allowed to have nice things.
B) stored and used at the enchantment's Caster Level...
This makes sense and also makes the enchantment worthwhile, however it is probably too nice to give to a martial character.
C) stored and used at the level it was cast into the weapon...
This also makes sense, and requires cooperation from the party's casters to load the martial's weapons with decent spells each day. Mileage may vary.
If you look at the Spell Storing Rogue Talent, it uses option "C". While the Ring of Spell Storing uses option "A". So there is little in the way of consistency when comparing other methods of Spell Storing throughout Pathfinder content.
I have always assume that the language in Ring of Spell storing was only related to what was in it when found randomly (i.e. when you find it, it will have fireball at caster level 5) but wasn't a limitation on what could be stored in it.
I have always thought that what you stored (caster level, DCs etc.) was what you got out for all spell storing items.
|
|
This is exactly right, with the addition that while I can see arguments for CL12 and CL-as-cast, I can't think of any rules support for minimum CL.
As cited:
Some individual items, notably those that just store spells, don’t get full-blown descriptions. Reference the spell’s description for details, modified by the form of the item (potion, scroll, wand, and so on). Assume that the spell is cast at the minimum level required to cast it.
|
|
I have always assume that the language in Ring of Spell storing was only related to what was in it when found randomly (i.e. when you find it, it will have fireball at caster level 5) but wasn't a limitation on what could be stored in it.
I have always thought that what you stored (caster level, DCs etc.) was what you got out for all spell storing items.
That was the rule in earlier versions of the game.
The current text doesn't support that interpretation.|
|
| 5 people marked this as FAQ candidate. |
Let's make it a FAQ question.
1) What is the Caster Level of a spell stored in a weapon with the Spell Storing quality?
a) The original caster level
b) the caster level of the caster of the spell
c) the caster level of the highest CL ability of the weapon
d) the caster level of the spell storing ability (12).
2) The stored spell is arcane, divine or neither of the two?
Yes.
Ask them what the CL for the spell a Spell Storing weapon/armor casts...
Then ask them why it is, or is not, the same as the Spell Storing ring...
Then ask them why it is, or is not, the same as the Spell Storing Rogue Talent...
Then ask them why there is no consistency in any of these similar abilities, or any of the writing for any feat or ability anywhere in the game...
Let's make it a FAQ question.
Why waste your time? The last FAQ answered was 26 months ago. They've moved onto PF2, this is an orphaned game.
This is an interesting question and I think I may have been doing it wrong this whole time.
I've always done it as the spell inside the weapon (or armor) is the CL at the point of casting the spell. Like, if you temporarily boost your CL and then cast the spell into the weapon, the spell retains the boosted CL until the spell is eventually discharged.
An FAQ probably won't come out because final 2E rules are coming out in August, but I'd be interested to see what they'd say about this.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Can we all agree on the following?:
NOBODY WANTS IT TO ACT LIKE THE RING!
That being said, the Spell Storing Rogue Talent works exactly as when the spell was cast... requiring the actual caster's stats and Caster Levels to determine its affects.
This is a Paizo written and clarified Spell Storing ability that does exactly what we want, right?
Wand charging a CL12 sword with Shocking Grasp is obviously way too nice for a martial character, in accordance to the Paizo hates martials prophecy...
Well, a 6d6 (3rd) Vampiric Touch is nice, as you get the same as temp hit points. It does have SR.
A 9d6 (2nd) Boneshaker is nice, and you can move the target 5'. It does have saves and SR.
/cevdh