Rod to add Spell Known

[ThirdWizard]

I'm trying to make an item that allows an extra spell known for a sorcerer/bard/etc that isn't too powerful. I'm definately not sure on the pricing of this either.


Rod of Spellweaving, Lesser: This rod can be used by a sorcerer, bard, or other spellcaster with a spells known list. In an event taking 8 hours, a single spell of third or lower level can be imbued within the rod. By holding this rod, the user may cast the spell imbued within it as if it were known, so long as the spell is on that user’s class spell list. For example, Hennet is a seventh level sorcerer who doesn’t have displacement on his list but has a Rod of Spellweaving imbued with displacement. When holding this rod, he can expend a third level spell slot (or a higher one with metamagic) just as if he had cast the spell himself. All components must be supplied just as if the spell were cast normally.

Strong (no school); CL 17th; Craft Rod; Price 7000 gp



A rod definately fits for type. I'm thinking of making it a full round action to use, which would mean that it would have to be pulled out in the previous round with a move action, making use a bit more problematic (but not much). Normal and greater varieties would exist for 6th and lower and 9th and lower level spells respectively, but I'm having enough trouble pricing this and I'm not expecting to see them in the campaign soon anyway.


It uses spells/day of the user, but at the same time it allows sorcerers to know more spells than normal, plus the spell inside can be exchanged, though it takes a bit of time. It also uses the DCs and caster level of the caster when used, which puts it above a wand, so I looked to the pricing for staves, which for a 3rd level sorcerer spell is 6750 gp (375x3x6). Because of the versitility of the rod, I rounded up to 7000 gp.


What do you think?

 

[Staffan]

I'm trying to make an item that allows an extra spell known for a sorcerer/bard/etc that isn't too powerful. I'm definately not sure on the pricing of this either.

Arcana Evolved has an item like this, the Amulet of Spell Knowledge. It's priced at spell level squared * 1,000 gp. I think it should cost more in D&D, because AE spellcasters tend to have larger selections of spells, and the spell only adds the spell to your spells known, not readied (short explanation: AE spellcasters work sort of like sorcerers that can swap out their spells known every day. The spells currently available to a caster are called "readied", while those they have potential access to are called "known"). In addition, a rod is a much more practical item for this kind of thing, since you can easily swap rods but swapping amulets would be a little more involved.

All things considered, I'd make the rod cost something like spell level squared * 3,000, considering both the greater relative utility of the item in D&D and the slotlessness. The spell would be chosen upon item creation. One that could swap out the spell would cost a lot more.

 

[Ogrork the Mighty]

I think Sean K. Reynolds' site has a magic item that does the same thing. Google it.

 

[ThirdWizard]

In addition, a rod is a much more practical item for this kind of thing, since you can easily swap rods but swapping amulets would be a little more involved.

Good call. I'll make it slotted. Probably a headband or a ring.

All things considered, I'd make the rod cost something like spell level squared * 3,000, considering both the greater relative utility of the item in D&D and the slotlessness. The spell would be chosen upon item creation. One that could swap out the spell would cost a lot more.

Spell level squared * 3,000 gp is too much, IMO. That would put an item that gave an extra known 3rd level spell at 27,000 gp, which would mean that it really wouldn't be aquirable until around 13th level when 6th level spells are already available. At that point, I don't think an extra 3rd level spell known is going to make much difference. Plus you could buy a wand or staff for half that price.

I do admit I priced it too low, however.

I think Sean K. Reynolds' site has a magic item that does the same thing. Google it.

Checked his site (havn't been there in forever!), and he priced the exact same as AE apparently. 9,000 gp for an extra 3rd level spell known (3*3*1000).

My item is most definately more powerful than either version, with more flexibility. I'll tone it down by making it slotted; I think I'll go with a ring. Spell level squared * 1500 sounds about right, I think. So I'll price it at 13,500 gp, with 4,500 added gp to be able to switch spells out from the base 9,000 gp cost. This would make it available around 10th level as a large portion of a character's wealth.

Thanks for the input, both of you. If it still sounds bad, go ahead and tell me, I'm flexible. If you can think of any abuses, point that out too.

 

[FireLance]

Thirdwizard, some comments:

Your cost for a staff is off for a couple of reasons. First, the minimum caster level for a staff is 8, not 6. Second, multiplying by 375 gets you the cost to create, not the market price (which is double the cost to create). The market price of a staff of one spell should be spell level x caster level (minimum 8) x 750. The market price for a staff with a 3rd-level spell should be 18,000 gp.

Looking at the differences, there are about three:
1) The staff uses charges, the rod uses up a spell slot from the caster.
2) The staff is a spell trigger item (no AOO or spell failure), the rod supplies knowledge of the spell, but the user must cast the spell himself. Presumably, he must supply any verbal, somatic and material components, attracts an AOO and suffers spell failure chances.
3) The staff's spell selection is fixed, but the spell contained in the rod may be changed.

I would not make any changes to the cost for (1), as it simply substitutes a limitation by charges for a limitation by spell slots.

I would reduce the cost of the rod by half because of (2), because activating it is harder than activating a staff.

For (3), it depends on how difficult it is to change the spell in the rod. If any spellcaster who knows the spell can change it by expending 8 hours, then I'd double the cost (with halving the cost for point 2, this brings the cost of the item back to 18,000 gp for a 3rd-level spell). If the requirements for changing the spell are more stringent, e.g. the spellcaster must have the Craft Rod feat, I would increase the cost by 50% (effectively, 13,500 gp for a 3rd-level spell). If the spellcaster had to spend xp to change the spell (say, 100 xp per spell level), I don't think there is a need to increase the price.

 

[ThirdWizard]

Thirdwizard, some comments:

Your cost for a staff is off for a couple of reasons. First, the minimum caster level for a staff is 8, not 6.

6th CL because the spell in question is a 3rd level spell, and 6th is the minimum level that sorcerers can get 3rd level spells. I'm not aware of any rules stating that the minimum caster level of a staff is 8th... If I'm wrong I'm perfectly willing to admit it, though.

Second, multiplying by 375 gets you the cost to create, not the market price (which is double the cost to create). The market price of a staff of one spell should be spell level x caster level (minimum 8) x 750. The market price for a staff with a 3rd-level spell should be 18,000 gp.

Now that is an embarrasing mistake. I still don't get the minimum 8th, though. Shouldn't it be 13,500 gp for the staff then? I can't believe I missed the creation cost thing! Thanks for pointing it out to me; now I'll never make that mistake again.

I would not make any changes to the cost for (1), as it simply substitutes a limitation by charges for a limitation by spell slots.

I would reduce the cost of the rod by half because of (2), because activating it is harder than activating a staff.

Sounds fair enough.

For (3), it depends on how difficult it is to change the spell in the rod. If any spellcaster who knows the spell can change it by expending 8 hours, then I'd double the cost (with halving the cost for point 2, this brings the cost of the item back to 18,000 gp for a 3rd-level spell). If the requirements for changing the spell are more stringent, e.g. the spellcaster must have the Craft Rod feat, I would increase the cost by 50% (effectively, 13,500 gp for a 3rd-level spell). If the spellcaster had to spend xp to change the spell (say, 100 xp per spell level), I don't think there is a need to increase the price.

I love the xp idea! 100 xp to change out the spell should work very nicely and be easy to remember. That would limit the exchanging while still giving it the versatility. As of now, I'll leave it at the 13,500 gp I had decided on previously, as well as leave it as a ring, and add in the xp cost as a deterant to constant flipping of spells.

 

[Jdvn1]

I think Sean K. Reynolds' site has a magic item that does the same thing. Google it.

Yep.

It's a pretty neat item.

 

[Shieldhaven]

In a couple of my campaigns, I've given out magic items with an additional pre-set Spell Known imbued into it. In each case it was a spell the character would not normally spend a precious Spell Known slot to purchase, but thematically appropriate to the character or the object in some way. I did not bother working out the price for these items, as they were unique creations of the angels who granted the casters their power.

Haven

 

[Li Shenron]

You might also look around for rules about pricing an item which grants a feat (which I don't know), if you make the rod work as the Extra Spell feat.

I like your idea, especially if you make it a Rod (just because Rods are still few), but I think that it is easier to price it if there are different versions each of which allows to store a specific max level of spells.

 

[Staffan]

I'm not aware of any rules stating that the minimum caster level of a staff is 8th... If I'm wrong I'm perfectly willing to admit it, though.

From the SRD section on creating staves: "The caster level of all spells in a staff must be the same, and no staff can have a caster level of less than 8th, even if all the spells in the staff are low-level spells." Should be the same in the DMG.

I think this is a 3.5 change, put there to sort-of increase the cost of a staff since you now use your own stats and caster level if those are higher than the staff's.