D&D (2024) Thief Rogue / True Strike

[abirdcall]

You cannot use a spell scroll without a magic action, it is an item that requires you to use a magic action which it casts a spell and causes it to disappear, this is not the same thing as “modifying” a spell if it can cast spells you cannot even cast

There is no action involved with a wand, it is a constant +1 if you are holding it

You cannot use the wand without a magic action, it is an item that requires you to use a magic action.

The only difference is that the scroll disintegrates after use, while the wand does not. Fast Hands makes no mention of the magic item needing to disintegrate.

If you use a spell scroll to cast a spell that is prepared and you have slots available does it no longer benefit from Fast Hands because you are casting a spell you could cast without the magic item (scroll)?

There is no +1 with the wand if you do not use an action.

 

[Oofta]

Wait, here's a great consequence of this line of thinking.

If I open a door that is magical during my magic action to cast a spell, that magic action now involves a magical object so Fast Hands will allow me to cast the spell as a bonus action.

You're thinking too small. As I just stated above, the real exploit is to take 3 levels of rogue to get fast hands and then switch over to wizard. Higher level scrolls are expensive, but depending on the campaign you may not have anything else to spend your money on anyway. Cast any spell you scribed a scroll for as a bonus action and then ready to cast whatever other spell you want.

If you really want to exploit things, point out that the limit to 1 spell per round is dependent on casting a spell with a spell slot. Since you aren't using a spell slot when casting the spell off a scroll, it doesn't qualify.

One Spell with a Spell Slot per Turn​

On a turn, you can expend only one spell slot to cast a spell. This rule means you can’t, for example, cast a spell with a spell slot using the Magic action and another one using a Bonus Action on the same turn.​

​

Also something I would just say "no" to, but I'm sure some people will argue it's allowed.

 

[StitchedSpartan]

You cannot use the wand without a magic action, it is an item that requires you to use a magic action.

The only difference is that the scroll disintegrates after use, while the wand does not. Fast Hands makes no mention of the magic item needing to disintegrate.

If you use a spell scroll to cast a spell that is prepared and you have slots available does it no longer benefit from Fast Hands because you are casting a spell you could cast without the magic item (scroll)?

There is no +1 with the wand if you do not use an action.

There is no action built into the wand they work the same way Bracers of Archery work, there is an inherent magic action associated with the scribed spell if it is 1 action long that occurs when it is used

 

[Oofta]

There is no action built into the wand they work the same way Bracers of Archery work, there is an inherent magic action associated with the scribed spell if it is 1 action long that occurs when it is used

There is no action built into a spell scroll either, the only action is associated to the spell you are casting.

 

[StitchedSpartan]

You're thinking too small. As I just stated above, the real exploit is to take 3 levels of rogue to get fast hands and then switch over to wizard. Higher level scrolls are expensive, but depending on the campaign you may not have anything else to spend your money on anyway. Cast any spell you scribed a scroll for as a bonus action and then ready to cast whatever other spell you want.

If you really want to exploit things, point out that the limit to 1 spell per round is dependent on casting a spell with a spell slot. Since you aren't using a spell slot when casting the spell off a scroll, it doesn't qualify.

One Spell with a Spell Slot per Turn​

On a turn, you can expend only one spell slot to cast a spell. This rule means you can’t, for example, cast a spell with a spell slot using the Magic action and another one using a Bonus Action on the same turn.​

​

Also something I would just say "no" to, but I'm sure some people will argue it's allowed.

You are correct the main overpowered aspect of this is 17 wizard/3 rogue or other full caster equivalents

I think it is reasonable to not allow this at a table

 

[StitchedSpartan]

There is no action built into a spell scroll either, the only action is associated to the spell you are casting.

The spell is scribed into the scroll, it is essentially a wand of magic missiles with only 1 charge

 

[abirdcall]

There is no action built into the wand they work the same way Bracers of Archery work, there is an inherent magic action associated with the scribed spell if it is 1 action long that occurs when it is used

How do you use the wand without a magic action?

 

[abirdcall]

The spell is scribed into the scroll, it is essentially a wand of magic missiles with only 1 charge

Where does it say 'use a magic action'?

It says cast a spell and it provides benefits to casting that spell.

Casting a spell is 1 of 3 types of magic actions. Using a magic item is a separate type of magic action.

You seem to be stuck on the theme of the spell scroll being different because it 'contains the spell'.

If we are talking about the theme how does having fast hands that help with manipulating objects speed up the casting of a spell? Casting a spell from a scroll does not influence the casting time of the spell at all. So how does having fast hands allow the caster to say magical words faster?

 

[ECMO3]

It's the same question, same proposal worded slightly differently that's been asked multiple times.

My answer is the same. There is no action, magic or otherwise associated to the object "spell scroll". The casting time is associated to the spell. Since the spell is not an item, fast hands does not apply.

It is not. I never previously pointed out that you are distinguishing between thematics and mechanics and arguing that the thematics about an object (reading and casting or swinging a sword) is different than the mechanics of using it (magic action or attack action).

 

[Oofta]

It is not. I never previously pointed out that you are distinguishing between thematics and mechanics and arguing that the thematics about an object (reading and casting or swinging a sword) is different than the mechanics of using it (magic action or attack action).

I've explained my stance and reasoning, most recently here and have nothing else to add.