Jeff Wilder
First Post
So my dwarven cleric just leveled up to 9th, and after our last big battle it's become very clear that he needs a way to carry more utility spells. Scribe Scroll, right? Cheap, effective, flexible ... yeah, but boring. He's from the Spine of the World, and I remembered reading about rune magic in the FRCS, so I looked it up. (It's on page 58. There's not much more about it in Magic of Faerun, if anybody's wondering.)
Here's what I understand about rune magic.
(1) It costs 100 gp x Spell Level x Caster Level to create a rune, using the Inscribe Rune feat. This is as opposed to Scribe Scroll and Brew Potion, which are one-eighth and one-quarter as expensive to create, respectively.
(2) It takes a Craft check of DC 20 + Spell Level to create a rune. This is as opposed to Scribe Scroll and Brew Potion, neither of which requires a check of any sort.
(3) It takes 10 minutes (plus spell casting time) to create a rune. This is as opposed to one day per 1000 gp for Scribe Scroll and one day flat for Brew Potion.
(4) Anyone can use an inscribed rune, simply by touching it. This is as opposed to Scribe Scroll, which can only be used by a caster of the same tradition (arcane versus divine) with the spell on his or her spell list. There are minor issues when using a scroll above one's caster level, also. A potion, like a rune, can be used by anyone.
(5) One can only reasonably have two or three runes about one's person. Each rune requires a Medium items for inscription. This is as opposed to scrolls and potions, of which one can carry pretty much any reasonable number.
(6) It is unclear what sort of action it takes to trigger a rune, and whether doing so provokes an attack of opportunity. Both a scroll and a potion require standard actions, provoking attacks of opportunity, in addition to any actions required to retrieve the item.
(7) The triggerer of a rune becomes the target of the effect, significantly limiting what sorts of spells will be used. Same goes for potions, but scrolls can be any spell.
(8) Runes have no apparent maximum spell level. Potions are limited to third-level effects. Scrolls also have no maximum level.
Okay, my question is this:
Assuming one's goal is a reasonable trade-off of cost (both in gp and in mechanical character development) and effectiveness, what kind of utter bonehead would choose the Inscribe Rune feat? Am I missing something? Even if you assume that triggering a rune is a free action -- a reasonable assumption, but certainly not definite -- a lesser restoration potion costs 150 gp to make, compared to 600 gp for the same rune. 12 XP versus 24 XP.
I realize that rune magic is a 3.0 system, only implicitly updated for 3.5, but man. What a hose.
Assuming any agreement, how can it be fixed? I'd really like to give my dwarf something with more flavor than Scribe Scroll, and I don't mind trade-offs and slightly less effectiveness, but I just can't swallow rune magic as written, even if one assumes triggering runes is a free action.
Here's what I understand about rune magic.
(1) It costs 100 gp x Spell Level x Caster Level to create a rune, using the Inscribe Rune feat. This is as opposed to Scribe Scroll and Brew Potion, which are one-eighth and one-quarter as expensive to create, respectively.
(2) It takes a Craft check of DC 20 + Spell Level to create a rune. This is as opposed to Scribe Scroll and Brew Potion, neither of which requires a check of any sort.
(3) It takes 10 minutes (plus spell casting time) to create a rune. This is as opposed to one day per 1000 gp for Scribe Scroll and one day flat for Brew Potion.
(4) Anyone can use an inscribed rune, simply by touching it. This is as opposed to Scribe Scroll, which can only be used by a caster of the same tradition (arcane versus divine) with the spell on his or her spell list. There are minor issues when using a scroll above one's caster level, also. A potion, like a rune, can be used by anyone.
(5) One can only reasonably have two or three runes about one's person. Each rune requires a Medium items for inscription. This is as opposed to scrolls and potions, of which one can carry pretty much any reasonable number.
(6) It is unclear what sort of action it takes to trigger a rune, and whether doing so provokes an attack of opportunity. Both a scroll and a potion require standard actions, provoking attacks of opportunity, in addition to any actions required to retrieve the item.
(7) The triggerer of a rune becomes the target of the effect, significantly limiting what sorts of spells will be used. Same goes for potions, but scrolls can be any spell.
(8) Runes have no apparent maximum spell level. Potions are limited to third-level effects. Scrolls also have no maximum level.
Okay, my question is this:
Assuming one's goal is a reasonable trade-off of cost (both in gp and in mechanical character development) and effectiveness, what kind of utter bonehead would choose the Inscribe Rune feat? Am I missing something? Even if you assume that triggering a rune is a free action -- a reasonable assumption, but certainly not definite -- a lesser restoration potion costs 150 gp to make, compared to 600 gp for the same rune. 12 XP versus 24 XP.
I realize that rune magic is a 3.0 system, only implicitly updated for 3.5, but man. What a hose.
Assuming any agreement, how can it be fixed? I'd really like to give my dwarf something with more flavor than Scribe Scroll, and I don't mind trade-offs and slightly less effectiveness, but I just can't swallow rune magic as written, even if one assumes triggering runes is a free action.
