D&D General How has D&D changed over the decades?

[Remathilis]

sometimes they has quite a few. Unlike a long or short rest however an NPC could simply declare "nope, all sold out, I sold you my last one not too long ago". Beyond that was the fact that players didn't want to use them because every 750gp wand of CLW was 750 gp they were not able to spend on awesome magic items in a system that expected them.

A wand of CLW was 50x 1d8+1, between short rest HD+con mod*level & long rest all PCs recover full HP+recover half HD the wand pales in power.

The DM could control it until someone took the craft wand feat. Then for 375 gold and 30 xp, (and not even that in Pathfinder) you make them whenever you need. Plus, your cleric, druid, bard, paladin, ranger, artificer, flavored soul, (etc) could all dump whatever healing spells you still had and get all spell slots back overnight if wands were too much of an investment. In Pathfinder, clerics could also use all their "turn undead" abilities as healing bursts.

 

[tetrasodium]

Umm, that's not the GM taking pity. That's straight up from the rules. You do not need to be able to cast the spell in order to craft the item - you just need someone who can. If you were playing differently, you were into house rule territory.
------

Here's on thing that has definitely changed over the years. It's now REALLY apparent when people don't bother looking up the rules when they make pronouncements. Back in the day, it was likely the players wouldn't actually know the rules and would not have anyone to ask. Now? It's a Google search away and it's far more likely the players will know the rules better than their DM's.

I know mine certainly do. I simply ask my players for rulings far more often than I make one.

Perhaps but that does not eliminate the gold experience & time costs to craft it. Those added up fast and made modern d&d style "and the bad guys drop" >let'stakealongrestrightnow fairly unthinkable if the party could continue & maybe not need the wand to be used for emergencies.

The DM could control it until someone took the craft wand feat. Then for 375 gold and 30 xp, (and not even that in Pathfinder) you make them whenever you need. Plus, your cleric, druid, bard, paladin, ranger, artificer, flavored soul, (etc) could all dump whatever healing spells you still had and get all spell slots back overnight if wands were too much of an investment. In Pathfinder, clerics could also use all their "turn undead" abilities as healing bursts.

Somewhere along the Line (magic item compendium or something of not core) there was some leeway added to require special components that could further limit it again iirc

 

[Cadence]

Umm, that's not the GM taking pity. That's straight up from the rules. You do not need to be able to cast the spell in order to craft the item - you just need someone who can. If you were playing differently, you were into house rule territory.
------

They could have written that more clearly!

The creating magic item section has a general note for all items "These prerequisites must be met for the item to be created. Most of the time, they take the form of spells that must be known by the item’s creator (although access through another magic item or spellcaster is allowed).'

The 'Craft Wand' feat says "You can create a wand of any 4th-level or lower spell that you know. " under benefit (not prerequisite). That doesn't occur for Rods or Staffs. And the individual sections on creating the different types don't mention the other caster at all.

 

[Fifth Element]

They don't get to act like its all the DM either.

No one is. This particular windmill has been tilted at plenty in this thread. Every comment about DMs is met with "but it's not just DMs!" which is irrelevant since we can talk about DMs if we like.

 

[Fifth Element]

So we assume the assertion is false? You can just say no and you're in the right?

It's the burden of evidence. You make an assertion, you support it. It's silly to suggest that he only two options are to believe it's right or believe it's wrong. That's a false dichotomy. The third option is to withhold judgment until it has been demonstrated. But that does mean provisionally rejecting the claim, because accepting such claims can result in you accepting multually-exclusive claims at the dame time. Basics of skepticism.

 

[Fifth Element]

You do if they refuse to explain why they disagree. That's not a discussion, that's name-calling. No matter what side it's coming from.

"I disagree" is name-calling now? What am I missing?

 

[Fifth Element]

Really?

The 4e art was glorious. It really was heads and shoulders above pretty much anything that came before it.

Let's not forget this:

was a 4e image.

Oops, you fooled me for a moment. That's not a 4E image, that's from the 3.5 Players Handbook II.

 

[Hussar]

Oops, you fooled me for a moment. That's not a 4E image, that's from the 3.5 Players Handbook II.

I thought that one was for 4e... Oh, you're right. Sorry, my bad. Very tail end of 3e.

 

[Hussar]

Perhaps but that does not eliminate the gold experience & time costs to craft it. Those added up fast and made modern d&d style "and the bad guys drop" >let'stakealongrestrightnow fairly unthinkable if the party could continue & maybe not need the wand to be used for emergencies.

Somewhere along the Line (magic item compendium or something of not core) there was some leeway added to require special components that could further limit it again iirc

Umm, it's 1 day and 350 gp. And, let's face it, you simply craft one for each PC before you leave town, and then replace as needed.

You used spells for emergencies. The wands you broke out after every encounter. Two to 5 charges basically covered any damage you were going to take in a typical encounter. It's not like the 5MWD was not a thing in 3e.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Really?

The 4e art was glorious. It really was heads and shoulders above pretty much anything that came before it.

Let's not forget this:

was a 4e image.

That's a great picture. The cover of the 4e PH...not so much.