Rumors from Player's Guide to Faerun

[Elder-Basilisk]

At +6 levels, it's an utterly worthless feat.

Cleric:
0 - Detect Magic, Read Magic

Somehow I don't think these are worth making persistent.

1 - Bane, Bless, Comprehend Languages, Death Watch, Detect Good/Evil/Chaos/Law, Detect Undead, Divine Favor, Entropic Shield, Hide from Undead, Obscuring Mist

Persistent Bless at level 7 or Hero's Feast at level 6? Tough choice.
Persistent Death Watch? Maybe but still of dubious utility.
Persistent Detect Undead, Detect etc, Comprehend Languages, Entropic Shield, Hide From Undead, Obscuring Mist? Are you nuts?
Persistent Divine Favor? About the only spell it's worth using on.

2 - Find Traps

Since the spell is very rarely worth a 2nd level slot now, I doubt it's ever worth an 8th level slot.

3 - Helping Hand, Invisibility Purge, Meld into Stone, Prayer

Helping Hand already has a duration nearly that long (and it's pretty weak at 3rd level), Invisibility Purge's area isn't actually fixed (5'/level emanation) so it's ineligibile, and neither Meld into Stone or Prayer are worth 9th level slots.

Wizard:
0 - Detect Magic, Prestidigitation, Read Magic

Not likely.

1 - Comprehend Languages, Detect Secret Doors, Detect Undead, Disguise Self, Expeditious Retreat, Obscuring Mist, Shield

Again, nothing here worth a 7th level spell. (In 3.0 Shield MIGHT have been but only on very rare occasions).

2 - Alter Self, Detect Thoughts, False Life, Gust of Wind, See Invisibility, Whispering Wind

Of these, Alter Self, Invisibility, False Life, and Whispering Wind already have fairly long durations (at least 5 hours if extended at the first level that persistent spells would be castable). And does anyone seriously think that a 24 hour Gust of Wind could ever justify an 8th level slot?

3 - Arcane Sight, Blink, Leomund's Tiny Hut, Phantom Steed

Arcane Sight might be useful here but probably isn't. Blink COULD potentially justify itself with combat utility but a 20% miss chance would be really darn annoying when trying to eat your breakfast cereal in the morning. A good DM would make it clear that 24 hour blink is more trouble than it's worth most of the time. Leomund's Tiny Hut and Phantom Steed already last longer than 24 hours by the time you could make them persistent.

So, Divine Favor, Blink, and Arcane Sight. Not a very long list of spells. And none of them are really THAT good. (Except maybe Divine Favor but even that probably isn't really worth a Holy Word or Destruction slot).

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

Why don't they simply leave it out, if it's such a problematic feat...

And yes, Quicken Spell is under many circumstances equally powerful (while often costing more than a single spell slot, however), even more powerful under many other circumstances where Persistent Spell doesn't work at all, while only being less powerful in one very specific case (which is having several encounters during one day without getting dispelled all the time).

There is absolutely no reason to pick Persistant Spell at +6, besides the single benefit of having Divine Favor up all day long.

Bye
Thanee

Let's suppose your wizard wants to cast Quickened See Invisibility compared to Persistent See Invisibility. He has to give up 4 6th-level spell slots to do so, assuming he's facing four spread-out encounter. On the other hand, two 8th-level spell slots taken up by Persistent See Invisibility should do the trick (I assume here you get hit by dispel magic every other encounter, and half the time it strips off see invisibility).

WotC was under no obligation to re-write Persistent Spell; they are not required to rewrite semi-broken things and have a checkered track record when they do that (look at the new Frenzied Berserker )

 

[Ferret]

Persistant alter self, persistant hide/detect undead etc is all good.

 

[jgsugden]

The problem is that persistant spell is broken as a concept. Some spells are not meant to be persistant, yet persistant spell allows them to be so. Spells with durations in rds should not be allowed to be made into all day suckers, period.

As a 9th level spell, a semi-permanent +6 luck bonus to attack and damage would be pretty nice. Making it 7th is still too strong, even if it costs 2 feats.

 

[rangerjohn]

The problem is that persistant spell is broken as a concept. Some spells are not meant to be persistant, yet persistant spell allows them to be so. Spells with durations in rds should not be allowed to be made into all day suckers, period.

As a 9th level spell, a semi-permanent +6 luck bonus to attack and damage would be pretty nice. Making it 7th is still too strong, even if it costs 2 feats.

Then it would diffanitely be better to make a no slot item. 4,000 gp at 18th level and one feat. Vs. two feats and a 9th level slot. Which do you have more laying around at 18th level? Gold and I realize miniscule xp or feats and 9th level spell slots. Not to mention craft wonderous item is actually useful for something else, unlike persistant spell.

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

Then it would diffanitely be better to make a no slot item. 4,000 gp at 18th level and one feat. Vs. two feats and a 9th level slot. Which do you have more laying around at 18th level? Gold and I realize miniscule xp or feats and 9th level spell slots. Not to mention craft wonderous item is actually useful for something else, unlike persistant spell.

No, the item wouldn't cost only 4,000 gp. It would cost 8,640,000 gp. (A luck bonus costs bonus squared times 2,500 gp, plus double the bonus for slotless, then double again because you're giving two bonuses.)

Why should a 7th-level spell give out 8,640,000 gp worth of bonuses?

 

[Scion]

They probably should've made a list like they did with permanency and then let it go from there. That way they could pick and choose from the core spells and give guidelines for non-core.

There are a lot of spells that would be interesting to be persistant, so long as the cost wasnt too high, but the way the list will be right now it will still either be too good or so incredibly not worth it as to be a waste of ink.

Even at the +4 levels I've only seen one person take it, and that was a cleric who was trying to fill the roll of both a tank and a healer.. so there were other strange feats and powers the dm made up just for that guy to do both. Worked out all right, but even then the persistant never really seemed all that great. (note, this last paragraph has no bearing on anything)

 

[DM_Matt]

Then it would diffanitely be better to make a no slot item. 4,000 gp at 18th level and one feat. Vs. two feats and a 9th level slot. Which do you have more laying around at 18th level? Gold and I realize miniscule xp or feats and 9th level spell slots. Not to mention craft wonderous item is actually useful for something else, unlike persistant spell.

Well, it would be a lot more expensive than that. (2k*18*1*2)/2 = 36k for a slotless, half price for a slotted. As an 18th-level Cleric, esp one with CWI (wich, as has already been stated, if useful for lots more tihngs). I;d MUCH rather spend the money and the XP than the feat and the spell slot.

Besides, for a lot of potential persistant spells that are not level-dependant (enlarge person, expeditios retreat, kauper's skittish nerves, jump (level-dep, but you still get good stuff at L1) etc, items are dirt-cheap.

{dcollins} All item creation prices are suggestions, and it is not explicitly stated that PCs can make items not listed in the DMG. Thus, by the rules, none of these items are possible {/dcollins}

 

[James McMurray]

Yep, that's much more cost effective. But if you follow the item crafting rules you'll find its likely a bit more costly. With the standard formula you need 288,000 (1 * 18 * 2000 * 2 * 4).

A campaign can spiral out of control if the DM doesn't realize that the guidelines are simply guidelines, and that an item that grants a constant bonus from a low level spell shouldn't be priced at spell level * caster level * 2000 * durational modifier, but rather by bonus squared * multiplier (x10 in this case because +6 is epic).

Do you also allow items of unslotted continuous Mage Armor to grant +4 armor bonus for 4000gp?

 

[DM_Matt]

Do you also allow items of unslotted continuous Mage Armor to grant +4 armor bonus for 4000gp?

As a DM, no, but while my players can buy items pretty easily, they don't ask for such things beucase A) they know they have it good on that front, B ) they care about balance just as much as I do. and C ) Any rule they abuse the monsters will abuse worse.