What's to stop someone...

[werk]

My staff can cast.. get this.
magic missile, magic missile, and magic missile.
Does it really violate the rule?

When your only tool is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail.

 

[KarinsDad]

And that would be: "A staff ....stores several spells."

I'd hardly consider this a tightly written rule. There's enough room to charge a Tarrasque through it, fer gawds sake.

For example: If your wizard casts four magic missile spells, has he cast "several spells"? What if he cast 50 such spells?

"A staff is a long shaft of wood that stores several spells."
"Staffs: A staff has a number of different (but often related) spell effects."

Casting multiple Magic Missiles is not casting multiple spell effects (it is casting the same spell effect), nor is a Staff of Magic Missiles a staff that has several spells stored in it (it has many charges, but only a single spell). Charges are not spells.


This is like people saying that a multiple spell effect potion is still a potion. We can evision a multiple spell effect potion (just like we can evision a single spell effect Staff of Magic Missiles), but that does not mean the rules allow for the creation of such an item without a house rule.


There's not as much room here as people are trying to make it appear.

 

[Wish]

Worst case scenario, you have to put two spells in the staff:

Magic Missile (8th caster level): 6000gp
Ray of Frost (8th caster level, 2 charges): 1125gp

Total cost 7125 for a magic missile staff with 50 charges (that uses your actual caster level). Nothing says the second spell can't be a throw-away designed to be as low cost as possible. For the corner case of a 1st level spell, the throw-away is still a decent chunk of the total cost, but for higher level staves, it's really not (see below).

Another example:

Mind Blank (16th* level): 96,000 gp
Resistance (16th level, 2 charges): 2250 gp
total cost: 98,250

*Created by a sorcerer, to make the math easier.

 

[Deset Gled]

If you are determined to play semantics, I cannot stop you.

Sounds good to me. This is the rules forum, after all. I came here for an arguement!

Spell effects has a specific meaning in the game system.

It does? Could you please point me in the direction of the game definition of "spell effect"? I checked the SRD and the PHB Glossary and couldn't find it.

Casting multiple Magic Missiles is not casting multiple spell effects (it is casting the same spell effect)...

So, you're saying that "multiple spell effects" and "effects of multiple spells" are mutually exclusive? Who's playing semantics now?

...nor is a Staff of Magic Missiles a staff that has several spells stored in it (it has many charges, but only a single spell). Charges are not spells.

I'm not so sure about that. According to the SRD:

Staffs use the spell trigger activation method, so casting a spell from a staff is usually a standard action that doesn’t provoke attacks of opportunity. (If the spell being cast, however, has a longer casting time than 1 standard action, it takes that long to cast the spell from a staff.) To activate a staff, a character must hold it forth in at least one hand (or whatever passes for a hand, for nonhumanoid creatures).

Emphasis mine.

Of course, if you're going to rule that charges are not spells, it would follow that a staff can't have any "spell effects", wouldn't it?

We can evision a multiple spell effect potion (just like we can evision a single spell effect Staff of Magic Missiles), but that does not mean the rules allow for the creation of such an item without a house rule.

We can't create any new staff that's not in the core rules without a house rule.

We both know what the rule is.

...

There's not as much room here as people are trying to make it appear.

This isn't an arguement, it's just a contradiction!

Edit: Hmm, I think this post might get me a ticket for excessive use of the QUOTE tags. Oh well.

 

[KarinsDad]

It does? Could you please point me in the direction of the game definition of "spell effect"? I checked the SRD and the PHB Glossary and couldn't find it.

Sure.

PHB page 171 "Special Spell Effects" section will give you examples of different types of spell effects.

Also, glossary page 312: "Spell: A one time magical effect."

"A staff is a long shaft of wood that stores several spells. Unlike wands, which can contain a wide variety of spells, each staff is of a certain kind and holds specific spells."

Note the last word of the second sentence, "spells" plural, not "one or more spells".

Of course, if you're going to rule that charges are not spells, it would follow that a staff can't have any "spell effects", wouldn't it?

I have not said that you do not cast a spell when using a staff.

I said that a charge is not a spell.

Two different things.

A charge is used to cast a spell from the staff, just like activation is used to cast a spell from a staff, but activation is not the spell either.

You are the one claiming that a charge is a spell. Course, you posted no rules to support this claim.

 

[Saeviomagy]

Magic Missile (8th caster level): 6000gp
Ray of Frost (8th caster level, 2 charges): 1125gp

Given that the rules are already rubbish in this respect, there's nothing to stop you making that ray of frost take all 50 charges from the staff.

Or from making that ray of frost a scorching ray, thus a second level spell, thus the primary power of the staff. Add another 50-charge 2nd level spell to be the secondary power of the staff. Now add in your magic missile.

The magic missile gets a 50% price break, and the first two spells are at some 1/50th of their normal price, leaving your staff cheaper than an equivalent level magic missile staff, which IMHO is just wrong. If we're being really strict, you can always just put two 1st level powers that take 2 charges each alongside the MM, leaving you with a minor price break.

Which kinda sums up the problem with staves all round - they're either mostly worthless (if you assume that the given staves are all that exist), or there are basically no sensible rules to construct them (because you can always end up with a staff that is cheaper than the equivalent wand, and at the same time more powerful).

My suggestion? Throw out all the rules for constructing staves, then rewrite them as follows:

A staff may have 1 or more spells.
The minimum caster level of a spell in a staff is 8th.
The price of each spell is determined as 375gp x caster level x spell level/charges required
The most expensive spell is the primary spell. The second most expensive spellis the secondary spell. All other spellare tertiary powers.
The price of (constructing) the whole staff is primary spell price + 0.75 x secondary spell price + 0.5 x all tertiary spells prices

That leaves us with staves as a higher level wand that will always cost as much or more than an equivalent wand. It has the minor side effect of making high caster level wands redundant, but then they were always a bit cruddy: typically if a spell isn't to be used at minimum caster level with no stat bonus, you don't bother with a wand of it anyway. This just means that using a staff of it is viable.

For those really irked that a staff might prove less expensive than an equivalent wand, you can simply bump up the minimum spells on a staff to 2. Even if the guy puts the same spell in twice, he can't end up reducing the price of his staff, so he may as well put in a different spell the second time.

 

[calypso15]

Given that the rules are already rubbish in this respect, there's nothing to stop you making that ray of frost take all 50 charges from the staff.

*snip*

For those really irked that a staff might prove less expensive than an equivalent wand, you can simply bump up the minimum spells on a staff to 2. Even if the guy puts the same spell in twice, he can't end up reducing the price of his staff, so he may as well put in a different spell the second time.

According to the rules, the most charges that a spell can use is 2. So no, you can't get really cheap powers by making useless higher level ones take 50 charges.

Calypso

 

[Hypersmurf]

According to the rules, the most charges that a spell can use is 2.

Although half the staffs in the DMG have 3-charge spells, and the Staff of Life has a 5-charge spell...

-Hyp.

 

[Crothian]

Although half the staffs in the DMG have 3-charge spells, and the Staff of Life has a 5-charge spell...

-Hyp.

ya, at times it almost seems like the ruiles are optional in the core books

 

[calypso15]

Although half the staffs in the DMG have 3-charge spells, and the Staff of Life has a 5-charge spell...

-Hyp.

Heh, it's not my fault that they don't follow their own rules.