Level Up (A5E) So. Permanency, the spell.

[Faolyn]

Those of us who have had experience with earlier editions of D&D should remember the spell permanency. I have no idea if they made a version of this spell for 4th edition, but it certainly isn't in 5th. Thus, I've decided to recreate it. The 2nd edition version can be found here, and the 3rd edition version can be found here.

This spell could be seen as contentious, which is why I didn't just wait to stick it in a revamped version of my (In)Complete Tome of Spells. What do you guys think? Is it potentially too powerful? Is it actually too weak? Is it completely unnecessary? AD&D cost you a point of Constitution to cast this spell; 3e cost you XP. I just have it inflicting fatigue and strife. And unlike the earlier versions of the spell, I didn't list what spells could be made permanent, since between the AG, all of the 3pp material, and with attempting to future-proof it, there are literally hundreds of spells.

Final draft!


Permanency
3rd-level (evocation; arcane, divine, utility)
Classes: Artificer, Cleric, Wizard
Casting Time: 1 hour, plus 1 hour per level of the spell to be made permanent.
Range: Special
Target: One spell
Components: V, S, M (The target spell's material components, plus additional components)
Duration: Permanent

You cause a spell you can cast (the target spell) to be permanently active.

The following types of spells cannot be made permanent:

• Spells with a duration of Instantaneous.
• Spells that directly deal damage, requiring an attack roll or saving throw. (Spells that deal damage but require a creature to act in some way in order to take the damage, such as wall of fire, can be made permanent.)
• Spells that reduce a creature's hit point maximum or inflict levels of strife or fatigue.
• Spells that cause a creature to regain hit points or gain temporary hit points.
• Spells that summon creatures.
• Spells that already let you make them permanent by casting them in the same location for a period of time, such as teleportation circle. At the Narrator's discretion, those spells may no longer have that ability, in which case permanency works on them normally.

A spell that normally requires concentration no longer needs concentration upon being made permanent. Likewise, artificers do not have to roll fizzle dice on a permanent spell.

To make a spell permanent, you must cast this spell and expend the slot for the target spell. You must cast permanency with a spell slot level of at least one higher than the slot needed to cast the target spell. E.g., to permanently cast polymorph (a 4th-level spell) on a creature, you must cast permanency with a 5th-level spell slot.

You may also cast this spell on a spell cast from a scroll. Doing so destroys the scroll, as normal.

You must supply the all material components required by the target spell. You must also additional material components in the form of gemstones, rare herbs, and other exotic materials. The cost of these components depends on the slot level you cast permanency with, and is doubled if your target is a creature:

Cantrip: 250 gp
1st- or 2nd-level: 500 gp per level
3rd- or 4th-level: 2,500 gp per level
5th- or 6th-level: 5,000 gp per level
7th- or 8th-level: 10,000 gp

You must be within the range specified in the target spell's description.

If the target spell allows a saving throw, the creature may attempt that save, ending both the target spell and the permanency spell on a success.

If the spell is cast on a creature, it takes up an attunement slot. If the permanent spell is ever dispelled, the attunement slot is freed. If the creature has no available attunement slots because the creature is attuned to three magic items already, the creature must end its attunement to one of those items. Or, you may make a contested check with your spellcasting ability against its Charisma. On a success, it ends its attunement with one item of your choice. (At the Narrator's discretion, curses and other detrimental spells do not take up an attunement slot.)

Casting permanency is taxing, both mentally and physically. When you cast this spell with a 2nd- or 3rd-level slot, you take 1 level each of strife and fatigue. When you use a 4th- or 5th-level slot, you take 2 levels of each. With a 6th- or 7th-level slot, you take 3 levels of each. With an 8th- or 9th-level slot, you take 4 levels of fatigue. Additionally, until you complete a long rest, each time you cast a spell you take 1d10 necrotic damage per level of that spell. This damage can’t be reduced or prevented.

Casting dispel magic on a permanent spell always requires a spellcasting ability check, even if you are the one to attempt to dispel it. If you roll a 20 or above the spell is dispelled. Otherwise, the magic is suppressed for 1 hour per slot level with which the dispel magic was cast. Permanent spells are suppressed, but not dispelled, in anti-magic areas. If the target spell's description states that it can be dispelled by remove curse, then that is also true of the permanent version.

Finally, you may choose to include a special condition that, when met, will end the permanency spell. Such a condition could include a task the target must complete or a command word that must be spoken.

Narrator's note: At the Narrator's discretion, these spells may slowly erode over time. After each century, there is a 5% chance that the spell will fail. Additionally, this spell is not intended to be used to make magic items--use the Crafting rules for that.

 

[evildmguy]

I appreciate having a permanency spell instead of the casting it every day for a year. I would get rid of that in favor of this.

Is this defined as a ritual? I find the one minute casting time too low. I would think at least an hour. I'm also not a fan of the casting it over ten days but I can't say why. Maybe a number of days equal to 1 + spell level of the spell to be made permanent?

I know this isn't typical, but what if permanency was second level but has to be heightened to a spell slot one higher than the spell to be made permanent? That would stop ninth level spells from being made permanent in this manner, if desired.

I think the dispel is too easy, given the potential cost of making a spell permanent. Maybe it just suppresses the magic instead for a number of (rounds) equal to the difference of the dispel casters spellcasting check against the permanency casters DC when it was made?

I suggest the suppressing as I think of Stoneskin on a character or Symbol on a wall. The dispel gives a bypass for a while but allows it to come back. Thinking of dispel magic, what about spells like Anti-Magic Field or Prismatic Wall that are immune to Dispel attempts?

Just a few coppers worth of thoughts for you.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Those of us who have had experience with earlier editions of D&D should remember the spell permanency. I have no idea if they made a version of this spell for 4th edition, but it certainly isn't in 5th. Thus, I've decided to recreate it. The 2nd edition version can be found here, and the 3rd edition version can be found here.

This spell could be seen as contentious, which is why I didn't just wait to stick it in a revamped version of my (In)Complete Tome of Spells. What do you guys think? Is it potentially too powerful? Is it actually too weak? Is it completely unnecessary? AD&D cost you a point of Constitution to cast this spell; 3e cost you XP. I just have it inflicting fatigue and strife. And unlike the earlier versions of the spell, I didn't list what spells could be made permanent, since between the AG, all of the 3pp material, and with attempting to future-proof it, there are literally hundreds of spells.

Permanency
5th-level (evocation; arcane, divine, utility)
Classes: Artificer, Cleric, Wizard
Casting Time: 1 minute
Range: Self
Components: V, S
Duration: Concentration (1 minute)

You cause a spell you can or have cast to be permanently active. In order to make the spell permanent, you must be able to cast the spell (you may have it on scrolls), and have all required material components.

Spells that directly deal damage (requiring an attack roll or saving throw) cannot be made permanent. Spells that indirectly deal damage but require a creature to interact with it in order to be harmed, such as wall of fire, can be made permanent. Likewise, spells that reduce a creature's hit point maximum or inflict levels of strife and fatigue can't be made permanent.

Spells that are cast on creatures and have a range of Self and Touch can't be made permanent (but see "Cast at Higher Levels" below).

Spells that summon creatures can't be made permanent.

Spells that already let you make them permanent by casting them in the same location for a period of time can't be made permanent using this spell.

To make a spell permanent, you must cast this spell and the spell you wish to affect once each day for ten days. Each time you do so, you expend the spell slot for the both this spell and the spell you are making permanent, you must maintain concentration for the entire spell and make a spellcasting ability check (DC equals 10 + the spell's level). On a success, you take one level each of fatigue and strife. On a failure, or if your concentration is disrupted, you take 1d4 levels each of fatigue and strife, and you must start the ten days over again.

The permanent spell can be dispelled only if dispel magic is cast with a spell slot level that is higher than the one permanency was cast with, not the one the spell-made-permanent is cast with.

Narrator's note: At the Narrator's discretion, even spells made permanent are not truly permanent. After each century, there is a 5% chance that the spell will fail.

Cast at Higher Levels: When you cast this spell with an 8th-level spell slot, you can make permanent spells that have a range of Self or Touch.

I was just thinking of Permanency while I was reading the Planestrider's Journal. Several spells in that book would benefit from becoming permanent. Fantastic!

 

[Micah Sweet]

I appreciate having a permanency spell instead of the casting it every day for a year. I would get rid of that in favor of this.

Is this defined as a ritual? I find the one minute casting time too low. I would think at least an hour. I'm also not a fan of the casting it over ten days but I can't say why. Maybe a number of days equal to 1 + spell level of the spell to be made permanent?

I know this isn't typical, but what if permanency was second level but has to be heightened to a spell slot one higher than the spell to be made permanent? That would stop ninth level spells from being made permanent in this manner, if desired.

I think the dispel is too easy, given the potential cost of making a spell permanent. Maybe it just suppresses the magic instead for a number of (rounds) equal to the difference of the dispel casters spellcasting check against the permanency casters DC when it was made?

I suggest the suppressing as I think of Stoneskin on a character or Symbol on a wall. The dispel gives a bypass for a while but allows it to come back. Thinking of dispel magic, what about spells like Anti-Magic Field or Prismatic Wall that are immune to Dispel attempts?

Just a few coppers worth of thoughts for you.

I do think, with the requirement to make 10 consecutive successful checks, there's going to be a pretty chance of failure. Might be your intent though.

 

[lichmaster]

This is an interesting topic! This spell is fundamental IMO for world building: in 2e it was how magic items were created in the first place! Using it to make individual spells (not magic items) permanent was probably more of a niche use. 3E allowed to have permanent buffs this way, but it did cost XP. Paying in XP is messy IMO, first because it doesn't work for groups using milestones, and second because the same number of XP means very different things depending on current level, so the cost would be high for low-ish level characters and very low for high level characters

I'd rather maintain an aspect of personal sacrifice but remove failure chances altogether.
What if one simply sacrificed a spell slot of the same level of the spell being made permanent?
This way it's as if the spell was cast every day in the morning and it lasted the whole day without concentration, but other than that there's no power creep.

Edit: to clarify, the sacrifice would be permanent. I.e. a permanent fly spell would reduce by one the number of available 3rd level spell slots

 

[Micah Sweet]

This is an interesting topic! This spell is fundamental IMO for world building: in 2e it was how magic items were created in the first place! Using it to make individual spells (not magic items) permanent was probably more of a niche use. 3E allowed to have permanent buffs this way, but it did cost XP. Paying in XP is messy IMO, first because it doesn't work for groups using milestones, and second because the same number of XP means very different things depending on current level, so the cost would be high for low-ish level characters and very low for high level characters

I'd rather maintain an aspect of personal sacrifice but remove failure chances altogether.
What if one simply sacrificed a spell slot of the same level of the spell being made permanent?
This way it's as if the spell was cast every day in the morning and it lasted the whole day without concentration, but other than that there's no power creep.

Edit: to clarify, the sacrifice would be permanent. I.e. a permanent fly spell would reduce by one the number of available 3rd level spell slots

See, while that might work for balance, I don't like it for worldbuilding. If Permanency is indeed used for magic item creation, every caster would be damaging their own magic potential forever when they make anything. The court magician loses power forever when they make a magic sword for the prince, or set up the castle's security. That seems unrealistic to me.

 

[lichmaster]

See, while that might work for balance, I don't like it for worldbuilding. If Permanency is indeed used for magic item creation, every caster would be damaging their own magic potential forever when they make anything. The court magician loses power forever when they make a magic sword for the prince, or set up the castle's security. That seems unrealistic to me.

You are right, and I think it's a matter of taste as well.
If magic items are also to be at a personal cost for the creator this kind of sacrifice makes sense to me.
However, if this is not something you may like, one could say that the process of creating a magic item (with expensive and rare materials and rituals, etc) supplies the "raw energy" for the magic, so the spell slot is not sacrificed in that case.

 

[Micah Sweet]

You are right, and I think it's a matter of taste as well.
If magic items are also to be at a personal cost for the creator this kind of sacrifice makes sense to me.
However, if this is not something you may like, one could say that the process of creating a magic item (with expensive and rare materials and rituals, etc) supplies the "raw energy" for the magic, so the spell slot is not sacrificed in that case.

I like that for items, but would replace the spell slot for permanent spells with the old Con loss; you become less robust physically (a sort of life-force drain), but no less powerful. Since a lot of permanent spells are in fixed locations anyway (it's not like having a permanent Wall of Fire at home is helping you in the Tomb of Unspeakable Corruption), losing a spell slot forever isn't IMO a fair trade-off. Bonus: losing too much Con to this sort of thing runs the risk of exciting magical side effects! Think of the tables we could roll on!

(Despite my attempt at humor at the end there, I'm serious about the idea).

 

[Stalker0]

One thing you need to specify, what happens with spells taht require concentration? My assumption is they no longer require concentration once permanent but probably want to note that specifically.

 

[lichmaster]

I like that for items, but would replace the spell slot for permanent spells with the old Con loss; you become less robust physically (a sort of life-force drain), but no less powerful. Since a lot of permanent spells are in fixed locations anyway (it's not like having a permanent Wall of Fire at home is helping you in the Tomb of Unspeakable Corruption), losing a spell slot forever isn't IMO a fair trade-off. Bonus: losing too much Con to this sort of thing runs the risk of exciting magical side effects! Think of the tables we could roll on!

I don't like the idea of losing Con: there are magic items that set your Con score (amulet of health). You'd need to rule that this drain happens despite the magic item for the penalty to be effective, and that creates another can of worms.
If the effect is not on a creature but on a position or a structure, IMO it's not different from the creation of a magic item.