Which spells do you usually imagine linked to an orb, staff or wand? (Tome optional)

[Aust Diamondew]

I predict Quick Draw (or its equivalent) becoming the #1 wizard feat choice.

 

[Gundark]

wands: Things like magic missile
Staves: things like cone of cold/fireball
Tomes: summoning
orbs: Scry and divination spells

 

[Driddle]

Wands: things like magic missile
Staves: things like cone of cold/fireball

For the sake of discussion, why do you feel that a ball of fire or a cone of ice are more appropriately cast from a staff than a wand? Is it because the resulting effect is potentially larger and therefore it's implied that they would require a larger origination tool?

Because one could say that the origination point of a cone, for example, could just as legitimately be at the tip of a wand as the tip of a staff.

And on a related thought, pulled from another thread (in hopes that Stormy will notice the discussion here)...

with a wand ... the imagery of unleashing something nasty, expansive and point blank simply doesn't go well with it at all.

It doesn't?

 

[Stone Dog]

Regarding the lightning example, maybe the difference is between lightning bolt and call lightning?

I'm betting that the wand directs Call Lightning from the sky and the Staff blasts a Lightning bolt from the caster to fry anything in the area.

Wands seem to be "I need magic to happen over there" and staves seem to be "I need magic to start here and go over there." Staves also include flight and telekenisis though. I justify that by thinking that flight is a travel spell and staves are a travelers aid while telekenisis is basically getting things to go where you want them to go which is the traditional job of herders.

The last bit however brings the idea that a collie familiar enhances telekenisis too and I'm not sure how I feel about that.

 

[Greg K]

Well, I pretty much agree with everyone on wands, staves, and orbs.

Tomes: Ritual spells that take a long time to cast, conjuring/summoning creatures, ressurections, spells a wizard doesn't know but has a copy penned by another wizard. Oh, and UA style incantations that anyone cast

 

[reanjr]

Wand - apprentices use them to learn how to properly gesture. Real wizards don't use wands.

Orb - divination and enhancing the range/area of magic. Some of the most powerful magical effects (sending a storm to torment a kingdom) require orbs.

Tome - many spells requires tomes. The main aspect that makes tomes useful is long and complex spells, but little else groups them together. Obviously, this excludes those magical effects that are not useful if they take 25 minutes to cast. Summoning a demon, curing an ailment, imprisoning an entity, creating a mountain, forming many permanent effects - many of these types of spells require a tome.

Staff - staves are like a magical focus that increase the power of spells. They are especially useful for combative magic.

 

[Stormtalon]

And on a related thought, pulled from another thread (in hopes that Stormy will notice the discussion here)...

with a wand ... the imagery of unleashing something nasty, expansive and point blank simply doesn't go well with it at all.

It doesn't?

Hehe, was just about to copy that post over here for easier reference. Onward ho, however!

The reason a wand doesn't go well with a wide-spreading blast starting at the wizard stems from its apparent frailness. They're all usually slim, delicate items of wood, metal and/or gems (oftentimes a combination), and normally no longer than a foot or so. This would lead to a different mindset in the wizard than when he's holding a staff -- an item that's sturdy, rugged and as long as he is tall. A wand would inspire a state of mental precision and deftness, and lend itself more to the long-range magics that come from having a more relaxed attitude. I can see a mage lobbing fireballs at somthing 200' away doing that rather casually, as they're not an immediate threat.

Meanwhile, the staff functions as an outlet for a more aggressive mindset from the wizard. These guys are getting close and they're about to do something really unpleasant to you, and the adrenaline starts to really flow. For the sort of spells you're about to unleash on their presumptuous affront to yourself, you have a need to grasp something with more heft than a wand so you grab your staff in two hands, point one end in their general direction and let your wizardly rage scour them off of the face of the earth.

There's different mindsets to different spells, and each mindset may require a separate item to focus through.

 

[reanjr]

I don't see this as fun. However, I often see orbs as divination. Wands being used for instantaneous spells, often combative in nature. Tomes are where spells are stored, to be referenced by a spell caster. Staffs are items of power, often have multiple uses.

So basically you see them exactly as WotC has told you to see them

 

[reanjr]

I'm betting that the wand directs Call Lightning from the sky and the Staff blasts a Lightning bolt from the caster to fry anything in the area.

I totally think of that in reverse. A wand is small and easy to aim at a target. A staff is designed to raise up and then slam into the ground, creating an effect.

 

[Celebrim]

I predict Quick Draw (or its equivalent) becoming the #1 wizard feat choice.

QFT.

Answering the OP, I've always associated wands with animating, transporting, and rendering objects invisible. Why? No other reason that's what a stage magician is usually doing (or appearing to do). Also, stupid as it sounds, this is the way wands are used in Disney animation.

In my own games, the principle use of wands is allowing the delivery of a touch attack without drawing an AoO or touching something which would be painful to touch. (House rules borrowed in part from GURPS magic item mechanics.)

The notion of a staff I've always associated with a power battery of some sort, where a wizard can store and/or draw on power. In addition to weaponry, I strongly associate staves with the notion of 'channeling' power. In addition to the usual D&D functions, frequently staves in my campaign will raise your effective caster level when using certain spells.

Frankly, I don't see 'orbs' as being particularly wizardish except for the iconic crystal ball, and that metaphorically no more important than mirrors, polished stones, basins of water, censors. It seems pretty contrived to me.

As for tomes, I don't necessarily see a grimoire as being powerful except for the knowledge that it contains. While I subscribe to Terry Pratchett's 'leakage' theory (powerful magic is 'radioactive' and tends make everything around it magical), I don't really get the idea of a book as a channeling device of any sort, much less for a particular category of spells. I've lots of ways of making books powerful without having a 'tome +1'. I actually like spell books, and its the one aspect of the Vancian system which would be hardest for me to abandon.