Shared Spells Adjudication

SongCoyote · Aug 17, 2004

Greetings, and thanks for your attention!

I'm running a long-term campaign and have just come upon a question that I wish help adjudicating. One of my players has gained a special mount, much like a Paladin's, due to reaching sufficient level in the Holy Liberator prestige class. My question is this:

A preliminary reading of the Shared Spells ability would seem to indicate that any spell the character casts on themself can, at the character's option, also affect the mount. Does this mean that:

A Cure Light Wounds spell will be "doubled" and heal them both? What about a Heal spell?
A Stoneskin spell will give them both equal amounts of protection?
Similarly, a Protection from Elements spell will give them both "ablative armor" against the selected element?

...and does this include any spell the character technically casts, including those from Spell Storing items?

I think the answer is "Yes" to all of the above, but I'm trying to feel more comfortable about it both so that I can give clear answers to my players and so that I can have NPCs use similar tactics

Thanks for your help. Pleasant day to you!

Light and laughter,
SongCoyote

Hypersmurf · Aug 17, 2004

Whatever you do, don't look these questions up in Tome and Blood.

The Tome and Blood Share Spells rules are awful, make no sense, and (fortunately) contradict the 3.5 wording, so are now obsolete.

If we're completely ignoring the Tome and Blood rules and pretending they were never written*, then I'd agree with your three bulleted points.

The Spell Storing question is a trickier one, given that there's debate as to whether that's more like casting a spell, or activating a power from an item.

-Hyp.

* Recommended

SongCoyote · Aug 17, 2004

Hi Hyp, and thanks for the response!

On your (anti-)recommendation, I looked at Tome and Blood, and what's there is indeed a pile of over-complicated hooey (no offense to the author - it's just hard to use). Unfortunately the real purpose - now revealed! - for my question remains unanswered, as it is a spell storing item that is my primary concern.

The character in question has an item that lets her store a spell of up to 4th level, and she typically has the party's wizard put Stoneskin in it.

Let me guess the two sides of the debate of which you speak:

The Ring of Spell Storing description repeatedly uses the word "cast", which means that the user of the ring casts the spell (which means that it can be shared).
The use of the word "cast" in the decsription is misleading; using the ring is activating a magic item's power, not casting a spell (which means it cannot be shared).

Assuming my guess is accurate, it seems to me that one of the big differences between casting and activating is how easy it is to do in combat. Being able to simply take a standard action with no AoO to put Stoneskin on yourself is pretty nasty - being able to spread it to your mount as well may be a bit much.

Of course, I like to let my players get away with a fair amount of unusual stuff; I just want to get a more "official" idea of how to adjudicate this as it may make a significant difference in this player's tactics.

Thanks again for your time. Have fun!

Light and laughter,
SongCoyote

Hypersmurf · Aug 17, 2004

SongCoyote said:
I looked at Tome and Blood...

Hey! What did I say? Hmm?

Let me guess the two sides of the debate of which you speak:

That's it exactly

In fact, it just came up this week in this thread...

-Hyp.

Lord Pendragon · Aug 17, 2004

If the item is a spell trigger or spell completion item, I'd rule that it counts as having been "cast" by the PC.

If the item is use-activated, or command-word activated, then I'd rule it doesn't count.

Just another DM's take on it.