green slime
First Post
Interesting Plane Sailing. Where does it state that you cannot counterspell a wand?
Last edited:
-
NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.
Sharing Spells cast from wand with animal companion?
- Thread starter green slime
- Start date
green slime
First Post
Gez said:
Hello Gez
Are you suggesting that a staff can be counterspelled? Or that it would be ok to share spells cast from a staff and not a wand?
Patryn of Elvenshae
First Post
He's just saying that staves have an added benefit over wands, even though they're both spell trigger items.
Lord Pendragon
First Post
I have always ruled that the spell must be personally cast. Nothing from a magic item can be shared with an animal companion, familiar, or special mount. This includes even the Ring of Spell Storing.
When the spellcaster casts a spell themselves, they have the ability to manipulate the magical energy in such a way that it affects both themselves, and their companion creature. But a spell cast from a magic item is not so directly under the control of the caster, and therefore cannot be "tweaked" to affect both master and companion creature.
When the spellcaster casts a spell themselves, they have the ability to manipulate the magical energy in such a way that it affects both themselves, and their companion creature. But a spell cast from a magic item is not so directly under the control of the caster, and therefore cannot be "tweaked" to affect both master and companion creature.
green slime
First Post
OK, I'm reading alot of "IMO", and like. So what it basically boils down to, is that it is a flavour thing to be decided on by the DM, and will vary from campaign to campaign.
Because, specifically, this is not adequately descibed in the RAW.
The ability states you may share spells you cast with your familiar.
The section on scrolls talks consistently about "activating a scroll" (i.e. not casting)
The section on wands refers both to "casting a spell from a wand" and "activating a wand".
Which implies it shouldn't be allowed, but it is another case of which I wished they had been clearer.
And does anyone have a page for the ruling that you can't counterspell wands? I seem to recall something to that effect myself, but I'd like to see it in writing somewhere.
Because, specifically, this is not adequately descibed in the RAW.
The ability states you may share spells you cast with your familiar.
The section on scrolls talks consistently about "activating a scroll" (i.e. not casting)
The section on wands refers both to "casting a spell from a wand" and "activating a wand".
Which implies it shouldn't be allowed, but it is another case of which I wished they had been clearer.
And does anyone have a page for the ruling that you can't counterspell wands? I seem to recall something to that effect myself, but I'd like to see it in writing somewhere.
Ridley's Cohort
First Post
It is less ambiguous than that...
PHB page 142: "Activating a spell completion item, such as a scroll, is the equivalent of casting a spell."
I say that "equivalent" means "equivalent". Yes for scrolls. That is the plain reading of the PHB. The fact one can also speak of scrolls as being activated does not make something equivalent suddenly non-equivalent.
Wands are spell trigger items so No. The language is different.
PHB page 142: "Activating a spell completion item, such as a scroll, is the equivalent of casting a spell."
I say that "equivalent" means "equivalent". Yes for scrolls. That is the plain reading of the PHB. The fact one can also speak of scrolls as being activated does not make something equivalent suddenly non-equivalent.
Wands are spell trigger items so No. The language is different.
dragonmajesty
First Post
Actually, resting your decision on the word "equivalent" doesn't necessarily solve everything. You are using the word as meaning: identical in all respects. But equivalent often means: Having similar or identical effects.
If it is the latter, the reasoning doesn't hold. Similiar is not equal or identical. Also, something can have an identical effect while at the same time having a fundamentally different process in reaching that effect. That is, a scroll might create the same result as casting a spell, while not being the same as the character actually casting the spell.
If the authors meant using a scroll to be casting a spell they should have wrote: activating a scroll IS casting a spell.
This is parsing it a little thin. But unfortunately the authors haven't been clear, and have ultimately, I believe, left us with a gray area that can be interpreted either way. My gut reaction is to disallow scrolls/wands etc. for share spells.
If it is the latter, the reasoning doesn't hold. Similiar is not equal or identical. Also, something can have an identical effect while at the same time having a fundamentally different process in reaching that effect. That is, a scroll might create the same result as casting a spell, while not being the same as the character actually casting the spell.
If the authors meant using a scroll to be casting a spell they should have wrote: activating a scroll IS casting a spell.
This is parsing it a little thin. But unfortunately the authors haven't been clear, and have ultimately, I believe, left us with a gray area that can be interpreted either way. My gut reaction is to disallow scrolls/wands etc. for share spells.
Last edited:
Ridley's Cohort
First Post
dragonmajesty said:
Your way would actually be more confusing because of the caster level, casting stat for DC, and feat related issues. Identical would be a poor for the same reason.
Equivalent is a pretty strong word. IMHO if they meant it the way you indicate, they should have stuck with the word "similar" to suggest mechanical parallels without implying a strong relationship in detail.
If they had written "Activating a spell completion item, such as a scroll, is similar to casting a spell," I would agree with you.
YMMV.
Last edited:
Similar Threads
