Curtain of light and permenancy [Archive] - Wizards Community

Curtain of light and permenancy [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
radioactiveman
10-31-03, 03:16 AM curtain of light is a sanctified spell with a sacrifice component.

the spell discription says it can be made permenant through the permancy spell..

problem.

1) the book says no santified spell can be made permenant, although it can be argued that this is a special case

2) how would you deal with the sacrifice component if the spell was made permenant?

being the sacrifice cost is only applicable after the spell duration is completed.... if you have a permenant version of the spell, it will never run out (unless dispelled etc) at which point you take the damage?

that doesnt make a lot of sense to me.

any thoughts?
ikki
10-31-03, 11:19 PM 1. Specific overrules the general. Thus permanency would be ok :)

2. Trickier. In a sense the spell "ends" when it runs out of time, and another spell takes over. Permanency takes over, that is.

The other possible way, yet possibly very unfair, is to make the loss permanent aswell. Id not take that, especially if xp would have to be paid too..
Bloodtide_the_Red
11-01-03, 02:52 AM 1. I don't see 'no sanctified spell can be made permanent', it says 'none have a permanent duration', but that's it.
2.I'd say casting permanency 'ends' the spells 'normal run', so just before the spell is made permenant you would pay the sacrifice cost. I would never let you get away with making it permenant to never pay the cost.

BT
sparkster4242
11-01-03, 03:38 AM This same question came up concerning Corrupt Spells in BoVD. Basically, the writers goofed, _again_. In both cases, the corruption/sacrifice cost should have been a cost, not an effect.

This would side-step the entire question of 'What if i make myself immune to that effect,' since its a cost instead. Just like every other spell component, if ya dont spend it ... ya dont cast the spell. It would also get around that pesky 'none of these spells are permanent' problem. Am i the only one who has realized the non-permanent clause (if its even there in BoED) exists solely to prevent casters from deferring the corruption/sacrifice costs indefinitely (until the end of the spell)?

Bah, this goof was almost as bad, and almost as easy to avoid, as the whole shield/armor bonus foul-up.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
radioactiveman 10-31-03, 03:16 AM	curtain of light is a sanctified spell with a sacrifice component. the spell discription says it can be made permenant through the permancy spell.. problem. 1) the book says no santified spell can be made permenant, although it can be argued that this is a special case 2) how would you deal with the sacrifice component if the spell was made permenant? being the sacrifice cost is only applicable after the spell duration is completed.... if you have a permenant version of the spell, it will never run out (unless dispelled etc) at which point you take the damage? that doesnt make a lot of sense to me. any thoughts?
ikki 10-31-03, 11:19 PM	1. Specific overrules the general. Thus permanency would be ok :) 2. Trickier. In a sense the spell "ends" when it runs out of time, and another spell takes over. Permanency takes over, that is. The other possible way, yet possibly very unfair, is to make the loss permanent aswell. Id not take that, especially if xp would have to be paid too..
Bloodtide_the_Red 11-01-03, 02:52 AM	1. I don't see 'no sanctified spell can be made permanent', it says 'none have a permanent duration', but that's it. 2.I'd say casting permanency 'ends' the spells 'normal run', so just before the spell is made permenant you would pay the sacrifice cost. I would never let you get away with making it permenant to never pay the cost. BT
sparkster4242 11-01-03, 03:38 AM	This same question came up concerning Corrupt Spells in BoVD. Basically, the writers goofed, _again_. In both cases, the corruption/sacrifice cost should have been a cost, not an effect. This would side-step the entire question of 'What if i make myself immune to that effect,' since its a cost instead. Just like every other spell component, if ya dont spend it ... ya dont cast the spell. It would also get around that pesky 'none of these spells are permanent' problem. Am i the only one who has realized the non-permanent clause (if its even there in BoED) exists solely to prevent casters from deferring the corruption/sacrifice costs indefinitely (until the end of the spell)? Bah, this goof was almost as bad, and almost as easy to avoid, as the whole shield/armor bonus foul-up.