Legal, reasonable way to make permanency, well, permanent

[rushlight]

Actually, my issue with the XP cost is simple: A wizard or sorcerer should not pay experience point costs that high for a spell to be made permanent, but that gives the dispeller two caster level checks to dispel the permanent spell.

That's why my interpretation of the Permanency fixes this. Actually, Permanency never makes it clear that both spells are in effect at the same time, or if only one spell is. You could interpret that once Permanency is cast, the other spell is replaced with a new spell - a Permanency [whatever]. The rules do not contradict this, although I still prefer my revision. It makes clear what spells are still active.

Consider, an 18th level caster makes enlarge person permanent on himself. Then, a 14th level caster comes along and chooses to get rid of the effect. He casts, and by all rights has a 30% shot at dispelling either the permanency spell or the enlarge person spell. If he succeeds at either, the spell effect is gone forever. What this means is the chance to resist the dispel is 70% for each. 70% x 70% = 49%. The 18th level caster's spell is only 49% likely to resist being dispelled.
Or a caster 4 levels lower has a 51% chance of dispelling the spell effect that offends him.
Anyone else find this a bit unbalanced, at a price of 500 XP to the caster of permanency? One thought-Can only hit a permanency spell itself if you are willing to pay the same XP cost.

First, there are some uses of Permanency that cannot be dispelled by a lower level caster. Second, if you are concerned about dispelling, get a Craft Wonderous Item feat, spend some time, Gp (and the XP) and make an item. If, however, you desire a quick and cheap way to achieve the same results... well then, quick and cheap has it's downside. For these effects, quick and cheap means that the effect is at higher risk of being lost. It seems a fair tradeoff to me. You can't always get something for nothing - that's what game balance is for.

 

[Artoomis]

That's why my interpretation of the Permanency fixes this. Actually, Permanency never makes it clear that both spells are in effect at the same time, or if only one spell is. You could interpret that once Permanency is cast, the other spell is replaced with a new spell - a Permanency [whatever]. The rules do not contradict this, although I still prefer my revision. It makes clear what spells are still active.



First, there are some uses of Permanency that cannot be dispelled by a lower level caster. Second, if you are concerned about dispelling, get a Craft Wondrous Item feat, spend some time, [GP] (and the XP) and make an item. If, however, you desire a quick and cheap way to achieve the same results... well then, quick and cheap has it's downside. For these effects, quick and cheap means that the effect is at higher risk of being lost. It seems a fair [trade off] to me. You can't always get something for nothing - that's what game balance is for.

First, I think Permanency makes it fairly clear that only one spell is in effect ("This application of permanency can be dispelled only by a caster of higher level than you were when you cast the spell."). If you could dispel the underlying spell, what would be the point of the Permanency - especially the note about it being able to be dispelled only by a caster of higher level?

As far as "quick and cheap," the personal uses of Permanency are not cheap enough to be a fair trade off - at least that's what many folks think.

Finally, what about "TENACIOUS MAGIC?" I think it works with Permanency, because the spell itself talks about dispelling the "Permanency," not the underlying spell. I think this means that the underlying spell cannot be dispelled, only the Permanency. Allowing for the underlying spell to be dispellable does not seem to fit within the description of Permanency.

For "TENACIOUS MAGIC " with Miracle the logic is a bit less strong. What does it mean to "duplicate" a spell? It looks to me like you get the spell effects from the spell, but it's Miracle that's actually cast. In which case, you get a Tenacious Miracle - which means all your Miracles cannot be dispelled. Since Miracle is a 9th level spell, this hardly seems unbalancing, especially for an Epic feat.

 

[Kem]

Why cast Permanency on a Regular Spell when you can METAMAGIC it

Just to add to the Miracle vs. Permanency, does Miracle says it acts as the lower level spell though it uses its own level for DCs? Or is that another spell?

 

[Artoomis]

Why cast Permanency on a Regular Spell when you can METAMAGIC it

Just to add to the Miracle vs. Permanency, does Miracle says it acts as the lower level spell though it uses its own level for DCs? Or is that another spell?

Miracle says is "duplicates" the lower level spell with a 9th level spell DC.

 

[Hypersmurf]

First, I think Permanency makes it fairly clear that only one spell is in effect ("This application of permanency can be dispelled only by a caster of higher level than you were when you cast the spell.").

Which interpretation would make the Dweomerkept Permanency via Supernatural Limited Wish a viable option again...

-Hyp.

 

[Artoomis]

Which interpretation would make the Dweomerkept Permanency via Supernatural Limited Wish a viable option again...

-Hyp.

Yep - I think that is a viable option. I don't remember how that whole logic chain went, but I started out this thread agreeing that it was one option, and I was looking for another.

 

[Caliban]

Yep - I think that is a viable option. I don;t remember how that whole logic chain went, but I started out this thread agreeing that it was one option, and I was looking for another.

I'm leaning toward simply not using Dweomer keepers.

 

[AuraSeer]

I'm leaning toward simply not using Dweomer keepers.

You said it. I'm leaning so far in that direction, I'm about to fall over.

 

[kirinke]

well in anycase if you read the Monster manual alot of the supernatural abilities that mimic spells are only supressed for a round or 2 if you use something like break enchantment or dispell magic. they can be reactivated in the next round.

such supernatural abilities include tongues, the various detect spells, true sight and the like. and i suppose if you have a nice dm, the permanency spell would work something like that.

 

[Artoomis]

well in anycase if you read the Monster manual alot of the supernatural abilities that mimic spells are only supressed for a round or 2 if you use something like break enchantment or dispell magic. they can be reactivated in the next round.

such supernatural abilities include tongues, the various detect spells, true sight and the like. and i suppose if you have a nice dm, the permanency spell would work something like that.

Okay, here's my final(?) thoughts:

1. Personal of uses of permanency should be permanent - but requiring a feat for this is reasonable.

2. The Tenancous Magic feat (epic) is a great way to do this - you could apply it to Permanency, Limited Wish, Wish (though this gets expensive) or Miracle, all with equal effect for permament spells.

3. Without a way to make the effects truly permanent, the XP costs are too high for the low level spells and too low for 4th-level and above spells. This really could use a fix - I suggest, perhaps, a method-dependent cost, XP = the standard formula for items if made truly permanent, otherwise 1/2 the cost.