• NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.

Wands and Staffs: Impliment or Spell Containers

What should wands and staffs do in 5e?

  • Hold charges to cast certain spells (Like in 3e)

    Votes: 16 13.8%
  • Help caster cast better (Like in 4e)

    Votes: 74 63.8%
  • Other

    Votes: 26 22.4%

MatthewJHanson

Registered Ninja
Publisher
In the most recent L&L article, Mike mentions that wands will only be able to hold certain spells, implying that they will be charged items to hold spells similar to 3e. Personally I prefer the 4e style of wands and staffs as implements because that's what they are in just about every work of fantasy fiction from the Hobbit to Harry Potter. I'm curious to hear what other people think though.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

I don't know how the 4e implementation works, but in principle, it's better to have a staff that contributes to the wizard's power rather than one that stores a small number of spells at a crap caster level. It is more like what they represent in most fantasy fiction.
 

You can pry my wand +4 from my cold dead hands!

I really dont like the idea of wands only as spell containers. Aesthetically I like the fact casters can prize their wands and can seek better weapons like fighters et al. Practically I think wands as spell containers can lead to the abuse of some spells (depending upon magic item creation rules).
 

1000% implement or "spell enhancer"

Wands and staves as spell batteries is boring, often broken, and really not a fantasy concept at all.

Traditional fantasy (Harry Potter, Lord of the Rings) seems to treat wands and staves as tools to make spells "better" if not a necessary device to cast magic at all.
 

Implements.

Alternatively, I'd go for option c) A magical ranged weapon for casters, just like a longbow is for a martial character.

Just ANYTHING other than spell containers please.
 

I too love the idea of wands as implements rather than just spell containers, but can't it be both? Your average wand is an implement that improves your spellcasting, and all wizards have a couple. But rare and treasured are the wands that also hold vast reserves of magical energy, waiting to be unleashed.

I mean, a wand of magic missiles is kind of a legacy item that I wouldn't mind finding during a dungeon crawl, so long as I didn't have to give up my spell-aiding implement to do so.
 


Wands make magic better

When 4E was being developed, there was discussion of wands, orbs, daggers and tomes into implements to showcase the different paths of magic. A wand would mean something more than just a static bonus it would actually be needed to cast certain spells. This was quickly scrapped after it was discussed, but it still sounds so much more evocative to me.
I would like a wand to grow with a caster. Maybe the whole at-will damage cantrip is a wand technique. Or Evocation school spells need a wand as an implement while abjuration spells require a tome.

Wands could add riders to spells. A Blood Necromancer wand could turn Cone of Cold into Gout of Blood trading cold for necrotic and a Slow rider for Nauseous. Wands could grow and develop like Legacy Magic. Wands need to be a more flavorful bit of the Wizards kit than a arcane pez dispenser.
 

Is Both an option?

+2 Wand: Spell DC increases by 2

Wand of Accuracy: +2 to Ranged touch attacks from spells

Wand of Magic Missile: Spend one charge to cast magic missile

Staff of Fire: Spend one charge to cast burning hands or increase the damage of a fire spell by 1d10 fire damage
 

As I mentioned in the discussion thread for the L&L article, I think there's room in between the two ideas for different and distinct identities for the various types of magical doodads. In general, I dislike the 50-charge wand of repeatedly casting the same spell over and over again, but I'm also not interested in the mathematical implications of the +4 wand of every type of spell casting at once. (For equality's sake, I should point I also don't want +4 swords.)

So, as I see it we have four types of spell doodads. Potions, scrolls, wands and staves. There are rods too, but they're trickier and more varied, so I shall leave them aside for now.


Potions - I'd like to keep these as they were in 3.X and previous editions. Weaker magic, limited spell choice, fragile and clumsy to use. Best for emergencies.

Scrolls - I see two potential uses for these, which I think would work well together. One is the idea that other people have put forward (and I'm going to steal for this post) that a scroll allows you to cast whatever spell is inscribed upon it as a ritual, slower casting time, but no additional resource required. Yeah, the wizard might have a scroll of 'knock', but if the party has a thief, the lock will be picked before you get done casting from the scroll. So it's a sort of last ditch backup. But it does mean that a scroll of fireball is nigh useless in combat. So perhaps use two is more like the idea presented in the L&L article. Using the same casting time/ritual restriction as use one, you can swap a prepared spell for the scroll, basically a mid-day revision of your prepared spell list. Then you can cast it normally.

Wands - These are traditionally tied to a single spell. Wand of fireball/cure light wounds/magic missile. So, combined with the idea that spells only scale in higher level slots, perhaps these function somewhere in between container and implement, and enhance (scale) their namesake spell, but only that spell. They're tied to a specific spell, but act more like a boost than a battery, and are limited by the wizard's slots and prepared list.

Staves - These are usually more generally flavored. Staff of Fire/Earth/Force. I think these would work nicely as the on-the-fly spell exchange described for scrolls in the article. You supply the magical "oomph" in the form of a different prepared spell, and the staff transforms it into one of its signature spells. Again, not a container, but slightly more interesting (I feel) than just increasing all spells across the board.


Obviously all these ideas would need tweaking to work with non-wizards (namely sorcerers and "use magic device" type users), but I think it could be an interesting framework to start from.
 

Into the Woods

Remove ads

Top