About spells that seem useless because of duration

[Nail]

..... I was under the assumption that wizards had to prep all spells at one time (no leaving spell slots open). Is this a 3.5 addition?

Hers's the rules text:

Spell Selection and Preparation: Until she prepares spells from her spellbook, the only spells a wizard has available to cast are the ones that she already had prepared from the previous day and has not yet used. During the study period, she chooses which spells to prepare. If a wizard already has spells prepared (from the previous day) that she has not cast, she can abandon some or all of them to make room for new spells.

When preparing spells for the day, a wizard can leave some of these spell slots open. Later during that day, she can repeat the preparation process as often as she likes, time and circumstances permitting. During these extra sessions of preparation, the wizard can fill these unused spell slots. She cannot, however, abandon a previously prepared spell to replace it with another one or fill a slot that is empty because she has cast a spell in the meantime. That sort of preparation requires a mind fresh from rest. Like the first session of the day, this preparation takes at least 15 minutes, and it takes longer if the wizard prepares more than one-quarter of her spells.

 

[Lord Pendragon]

But druidas are supposed to be able to speak with animals...otherwise they should give me the ability as they give them to the paladin...Later
I am supposed to be one with Nature but I can not communicate with it...

As I noted in my previous post, you can. At 20th-level, a six-second hand-wave allows you to speak with animals for twenty minutes. And a use of wildshape allows you to speak with a particular type of animal for twenty hours. Even at 5th-level, that's five minutes of animal communication for a 1st-level spell, and 5 hours of communication if you use your wildshape.

How, exactly, does this translate into "I am supposed to be one with Nature but I can not communicate with it"? You can.

Maybe 1min/lvl is ok if you make animals to react as a sentient being but they have an inteligence of 2...Is hard for me to believe that in 1 min I can get all the info I need...I dont see why that spell cant last for 10min/lvls

For the record:

1. You're never going to get detailed info out of an animal. It's not smart enough. At best, you're going to get very simple, general information. "Humans to the north" or "they live by the tree split by lightning." 1/min per level is plenty to get this kind of info.

2. I agree that it wouldn't be unbalancing to make Speak with Animals 10min/level. If a druid player of mine wanted that, I'd allow it. I don't think it's necessary, but it's not significant enough for me to not let a druid player have it, if it makes the game more fun for him.

Maybe is just my feeling but I feel that everything is twisted toward combat more than anything else...For instance I have a great distasted for Evocation and I like Illusion but some spells from Illusion are hard to use because of duration

You are correct, that spells and class abilities are largely geared toward combat. I'm not sure Illusions are any less so, though.

I know there are feats I could get but that is just partching.

Partching? I don't know this word. I tried to look it up at dictionary.com, but got nothing. Could you explain?

We did a house rule..actually we separated druids spells into categories, changed some spells durations, etc...and we came with something quite interesting because now you have different kinds of druids...but is all House rules.

Great, then you and your DM worked out something that makes you happy as a player.

 

[Storyteller01]

You're never going to get detailed info out of an animal. It's not smart enough. At best, you're going to get very simple, general information. "Humans to the north" or "they live by the tree split by lightning."

I'll have to disagree an this, even if 'm going off topic (sorry 'bout that).

Wolves uses ambush tactics, and some humans learned their use by watching them. There are a species of wild dog that use abush and co-ordinated attackes so well that they take down a target 95% of the time. Most human groups don't have that kind of success in ANY endeavor...

Orangatangs (hope I spelled that right) are known for their ability to break out of zoo habitats. One held a wire between its lip and gum, then used the wire to lift the locking latch while keepers weren't looking. This had actually been done repeatedly, and was stopped when a keeper noticed the beasty's lip jutting at an odd angle. They "dropped" the wire in front of said orangatang (so he could retrieve it and think they didn't know) and watched the show...

Dolphins have been known to move objects around when humans may be looking for them. It was just playing, but it shows some analytical thought and a means of assessing both a situation and inherent human weaknesses (like how far the humans could see)...

Spiders all have the same ability (web spinning) but use that ability in thousands of ways (ant fishing, safety lines, nets to catch bugs, nets to THROW on bugs...). It may be instinct, but some spider somewhere had to come up with the idea first...

And these are just observed examples. Animals may not process information the same as humans, but they are no less observant.

I always thought that the speak with animals ability was based on seeing the world through nature's eyes, so to speak. A permannet change in perception could mean a permanent ability. Just my interpretation though.

 

[Lord Pendragon]

And these are just observed examples. Animals may not process information the same as humans, but they are no less observant.

Observant and intelligent are two different things. I suppose we agree to disagree here, because barring animal geniuses (I read an amazing story about a dog that can understand 200 or so words, and even more signficantly, can deduce the meaning of words it doesn't know based on words it does,) most animals are simply not that intelligent.

I always thought that the speak with animals ability was based on seeing the world through nature's eyes, so to speak. A permannet change in perception could mean a permanent ability. Just my interpretation though.

Fair enough. I don't believe animals are as intelligent as people, only with a different perception. I believe they are both less intelligent, and have a different perception.

Now a wizard's familiar is another story.

 

[Storyteller01]

Observant and intelligent are two different things. I suppose we agree to disagree here, because barring animal geniuses (I read an amazing story about a dog that can understand 200 or so words, and even more signficantly, can deduce the meaning of words it doesn't know based on words it does,) most animals are simply not that intelligent.Fair enough. I don't believe animals are as intelligent as people, only with a different perception. I believe they are both less intelligent, and have a different perception.

Now a wizard's familiar is another story.

Agreed on the intelligence. Animals don't make the same cognitive choices humans do, but they do know more than we give them credit for. If asked the right questions, druids can glean more than just general info. It would be a case of the Intelligent druid using the animals perceptions & observations.

Scary thought: The book 'Ishmeal' gives a theory that humans may nbot be the only intelligent beings, just the first. So what if the animals do catch up?

 

[Lord Pendragon]

Scary thought: The book 'Ishmeal' gives a theory that humans may nbot be the only intelligent beings, just the first. So what if the animals do catch up?

Very interesting. I suppose there'd be war. A lot of religious fundamentalists wouldn't be able to accept a world wherein a dog holds equal standing to a human being.

The article I mentioned claimed that the dog had the cognitive intelligence of a 3 year old human child.

That "catching up" may not be as far off as one might think.

 

[Apuglisi]

As I noted in my previous post, you can. At 20th-level, a six-second hand-wave allows you to speak with animals for twenty minutes. And a use of wildshape allows you to speak with a particular type of animal for twenty hours. Even at 5th-level, that's five minutes of animal communication for a 1st-level spell, and 5 hours of communication if you use your wildshape.

How, exactly, does this translate into "I am supposed to be one with Nature but I can not communicate with it"? You can.

Thta is the description you get about druids...I still dont think that talking to animals is something I have to wait for lvl 20 to use or 5 with wildshape...Why then do I get a spell at lvl 1? I think they put it there because at lvl 1 they thought you should be able to talk with animals...They even made it lvl 1 in 3.5

[/QUOTE]2. I agree that it wouldn't be unbalancing to make Speak with Animals 10min/level. [/QUOTE].

Nod, I thought that as well...Not sure why they didnt think about it though

[/QUOTE]Partching? I don't know this word. I tried to look it up at dictionary.com, but got nothing. Could you explain?[/QUOTE]

Ups...sorry...I meant patching (English is not my home language so you will find many typos like that one)

 

[sfedi]

1. You're never going to get detailed info out of an animal. It's not smart enough. At best, you're going to get very simple, general information. "Humans to the north" or "they live by the tree split by lightning." 1/min per level is plenty to get this kind of info.

Unfortuately this could be heaviliy debated.
Since the rules don't give any kind of guidelines.
This is definetly in the realm of GM adjudicating.

Partching? I don't know this word. I tried to look it up at dictionary.com, but got nothing. Could you explain?Great, then you and your DM worked out something that makes you happy as a player.

He meant patching.

 

[Lord Pendragon]

Unfortuately this could be heaviliy debated.
Since the rules don't give any kind of guidelines.
This is definetly in the realm of GM adjudicating.

This is very true. And I can imagine some DMs being really jerks about it the way some DMs are jerks about Wish. But that's how I adjudicate it.

He meant patching.

Ah. Cool. On another message board, I might have assumed it was some kind of typo, but here at ENWorld I tend to assume that it's a word I don't know.

 

[Lord Pendragon]

Thta is the description you get about druids...I still dont think that talking to animals is something I have to wait for lvl 20 to use or 5 with wildshape...Why then do I get a spell at lvl 1? I think they put it there because at lvl 1 they thought you should be able to talk with animals...They even made it lvl 1 in 3.5

You can use Speak with Animals at level 1, as a 1st-level spell, to speak with a chipmunk for 1 minute. It is my belief that this is plenty of time. Sure, you'll have to talk fast. But that's level 1. At level 1 the wizard is playing with a Magic Missile that only deals 1d4+1 damage. It's not much. The druid may have to work fast, but the ability is there from the outset, and gets stronger as the druid levels.

I understand that you disagree with this. But it's my stance that the druid's animal communication progression is sufficient.

2. I agree that it wouldn't be unbalancing to make Speak with Animals 10min/level.

Nod, I thought that as well...Not sure why they didnt think about it though

They may have believed, as I do, that 1/minute per level is enough. Note that I said it wouldn't be unbalancing to bump the duration. I didn't say I thought it was necessary.

Ups...sorry...I meant patching (English is not my home language so you will find many typos like that one)

No problem. I wasn't picking on you, I just thought it might be a word I was unfamiliar with. I like to ask, rather than remain ignorant.