Post/Author/DateTime	Post
thedafan 01-03-06, 12:32 PM	Although I have pretty much decided about minor schema. At the request of my rules lawyer I am looking for some feedback or clearification from the message boards. It seems to have some missing parts as it is written in MoE.
DragonWatcher 01-03-06, 12:38 PM	Perhaps if you elaborated about what seems to be missing to you, somebody here might be of more help. So, what do you see as being a problem?
Edymnion 01-03-06, 01:39 PM	Yes, if you could be a bit more specific about what you're looking for, we could help you better.
thedafan 01-03-06, 03:10 PM	It is to my understanding that schemas are used mostly as ether a more durable way of keeping spell knowledge (scrolls burn, fade, ect…) or as “keys/ triggers” to more powerful magic items. In the description you can’t make one with a spell that has an expensive material, xp, or focus cost. That eliminates a lot of spells, especially any ancient undiscovered spells that some adventurer might come across. The example used in the text is a Continual Flame spell that spells uses 50gp of ruby dust per casting. The description really does not cover the part about using them for more powerful magic items ether. But the first time they are mentioned in the campaign material is to activate a larger device. I don’t have a problem with the one use a day; I would probably do the same. But, the overall effect as described in the text makes them not worth the feat even for campaign flavor.
DragonWatcher 01-03-06, 03:30 PM	From what I understand about schemas in the setting, there are actually two different types. There are Schemas, which are part of a creation pattern that are used to create items, and then there are Minor Schemas (which are the ones introduced in Magic of Eberron), which are basically 1/day scrolls that never destroy themselves. They are two different things (albeit with tragically similar names). Now, as for not being able to etch minor schemas with expensive material components. Well, apparently they didn't bother to check the components required for Continual Flame when they wrote MoE. :P It is very unfortunate that many of the Eberron sourcebooks seem to contradict themselves or other Eberron books on a regular basis. Personally, I write it off as the authors trying to get out of the "Forgotten Realms" style of thinking, and move into an Eberron mindset. Every now and again, the familiar rises up in the wrong place and creates a paradox in Eberron source material. It's unfortunate, and hopefully one day we will have Eberron material free of paradoxes, and containing Indices. Until then, we have the forums. :)
Pei-Pe 01-03-06, 03:43 PM	It is also possible that they do not consider the 50gp to be "costly". What would clarify this is if they listed a gp limit on component necessary for the spell within the minor schema. Which if the 50 is not considered costly, i think I'll snag a Bless Water Schema before my next game starts. Nothing like busting out gallons of holy water when needed.
DragonWatcher 01-03-06, 03:54 PM	It is also possible that they do not consider the 50gp to be "costly". Possible, though normally when they make statements like this it means that any spell that uses components with a cost (of any kind) associated with them are not allowed. Since most spells have components that are effectively free.
thedafan 01-03-06, 04:06 PM	Unfortunately, you are probably right. This still makes it unworthy of a feat. It might be able to redeem itself if you could use it to copy to a spell book like a regular scroll, without self destructing.
igotsmeakabob!! 01-03-06, 04:47 PM	I'm pretty sure they can be scribed into a spellbook without being destroyed.
cuhullen 01-03-06, 06:25 PM	It's major benefit is to artificers. It can store an infusion. Scrolls can't do that. Scrolls can store the pseudo-spell effects that artificers can emulate but they can't store infusions. So not only is it a scroll that can be used once a day but it can also store infusions that can be used once a day. That's great for the artificer in the party.
Pei-Pe 01-04-06, 12:04 PM	Very true. For some gold you get a standard action activation of a 10 minute infusion. I'd call that darned useful, and it explains why they stop at 6th level spells.
Armorlord 01-04-06, 01:13 PM	Indeed, though I do recall that previously schema had been described as making it easier, faster, and cheaper to mass produce certain items, which was one of the ways the House Cannith undercut costs for a better profit margin than Joe Mage making and selling independantly. Perhaps that is a mystery wrapped up in the patterns that they, probably wisely, didn't print any information about constructing, mainly a Xen'Drik and House Cannith secret I suppose. One could easily imagine the headaches players could cause trying to string their own patterns together. Otherwise I'll have to worry about them trying to build their own Teleporting Airship (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=557695) and getting themselves all teleported to Xoriat when they muck it up horribly, .. Hmm. Heh. Would serve them right too. Of course then I'd have to worry about Xoriatians(new word invention!) reversing it and sending fresh insanity back to Eberron.. but now I'm wandering off topic. :nonono:
thedafan 01-04-06, 03:22 PM	I got a reply from the writer Bruce Cordell. I am impressed how quickly of a response I got. There is a difference between the Minor Schemas and the Schemas that were used to trigger/key the more powerful world effecting magic items. He also suggested allowing the minor schemas to use costly material, xp, and foci when necessary. Well that means a rewrite on my storyline. As soon as people discover that "Schemas" can't be made by the bad guys all they have to do make sure that the silver flame church has paladins at the big X' and catch anyone evil coming out of the jungle with a stick. Or would that be to easy? :D
Logophylia 01-04-06, 05:40 PM	Would you mind terribly re-posting Bruce's reply ? Maybe iwth your inquiry to him as well ? It might help many of us out :)
Obezageip 01-04-06, 05:59 PM	I got a reply from the writer Bruce Cordell. I am impressed how quickly of a response I got. There is a difference between the Minor Schemas and the Schemas that were used to trigger/key the more powerful world effecting magic items. He also suggested allowing the minor schemas to use costly material, xp, and foci when necessary. Well that means a rewrite on my storyline. As soon as people discover that "Schemas" can't be made by the bad guys all they have to do make sure that the silver flame church has paladins at the big X' and catch anyone evil coming out of the jungle with a stick. Or would that be to easy? :D Pssh, the bad guys can do ALMOST anything. It's the players that are stuck following the RAW completely :P Technically the bad guys just whip out their eldritch machine kit whenever they need an evil magic thing, ignoring such trivial things as schemas.
thedafan 01-05-06, 11:56 AM	Here is Bruce Cordell's last reply to my inquirey: Ah! The difference is that these are 'minor' schema. We haven't described what 'regular' schema might be like in this book, especially those that might be used as part of more powerful items, I'm afraid. Probably not something PCs can master, at least that was our thinking at the time of writing. As far as using them for spells with an expensive component--I suppose the price of that component could be added to the base cost, and then spent again each time the daily spell was called upon, but that would be a pain. Another way would be to add the component cost 10 times or some-such, then get 10 uses of the daily spell, until the added component cost is paid again (as part of some recharging ceremony). Take care, brc On 1/3/06, Michael Hastings <m_hastin36@hotmail.com> wrote: > Thanks for taking the time to answer, I should have been more clear about my > question. It is to my understanding that schemas are used mostly as ether a > more durable way of keeping spell knowledge (scrolls burn, fade, ect…) or as > "keys/ triggers" to more powerful magic items. In the description you can't > make one with a spell that has an expensive material, xp, or focus cost. > That eliminates a lot of spells, especially any ancient undiscovered spells > that some adventurer might come across. The example used in the text is a > Continual Flame spell, that spell uses 50gp of ruby dust per casting. The > description really does not cover the part about using them for more > powerful magic items ether. But the first time they are mentioned in the > campaign material is to activate a larger device. Also, can they be used to > copy to a spell book without self destructing like a regular scroll? Any > input would be helpful. > > Thanks, Michael