A rechargeable staff? [Archive] - Wizards Community

A rechargeable staff? [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
calypso
11-02-04, 03:13 PM Hey guys,

If you were going to make a staff that would allow the bearer to add charges to it, without knowing the requisite spells, what would you do?

I keep thinking along the lines of: "The wielder may channel energy into the staff in order to replenish it. For every 10 spell levels that are channeled into the staff, 1 charge is regained."

Except, that's broken. Any ideas on making it less so?

Calypso
tarkin
11-02-04, 03:32 PM WoTC has published two ways to recharge items.

1) Use an artifact called Dwarven Glowstones. They come with upto 100 charges, which be given to any charged item. They have other powers and are very cool. Once they use up their 100 charges, they become worthless.

2) In Unearthed Arcana, they suggest letting people do it at a 10% penalty. I.E. If you want to recharge a staff from 20 charges left to 30 charges left then you pay gold and xp equal to (30-20)/50 * amount it would take to make a new staff * 110%.
Beamup
11-02-04, 03:46 PM Personally I'd allow people to do it as in the UA rule Tarkin cited, except at a 10% discount. IMO recharging should be cheaper than making a new item, so if I were DM and a player wanted to do this, that's what I'd rule.

This is, however, totally a house rule and is not supported by any published rules.
Wolf72
11-02-04, 05:02 PM divide the overall price by the maximum amount of charges ...

use that answer as price guide for recharging ... (or less ... or more depending on how much you want the PC's to spend)

since there isn't a recharge rule (not in 3.0 at least), make recharging the item the same as creating a new one ... only you're paying a lot less (but need item creation feat craft staff and the required spells).

.
calypso
11-02-04, 05:17 PM What do you guys think of this?

The Twilight Staff

This staff allows use of the following spells:
Doomwail (1 charge)
Grimwald's Greymantle (1 charge)
Magic Jar (2 charges)
Teleport (2 charges)

In addition, the wielder may add charges to the staff under certain circumstances. The night before, during, or after a full moon, the wielder may perform an hour-long ritual to replenish the staff. For each charge to be added, the ritual requires the expenditure of 25 xp, 100 gp worth of moonstone dust, and a drop of the wielder's blood, which causes 1 hp of damage. The moonstone dust and blood are mixed into a glass of wine, which the wielder drinks. The wielder must then channel into the staff a number of necromancy spell levels equal to the number of charges to be added. Any charges that are not added by the end of the hour are lost. The number of charges in the staff may not exceed 50.
malykoth
11-02-04, 06:11 PM I seem to recall reading somewhere about automatically recharging items. Something like a wand that only casts it's spell once or twice per day, or once every 6 hours, or something like that, but never ran out. Unfortunately, I can't name a source. This sound familiar to anyone? I'll take a crack at finding it...
ClementWillowbreaker
11-02-04, 09:41 PM Yeah, that's called a command word item.
calypso
11-02-04, 09:44 PM Yeah, that's called a command word item.

Hehe :D
Zathyr
11-03-04, 03:17 PM I seem to recall reading somewhere about automatically recharging items. Something like a wand that only casts it's spell once or twice per day, or once every 6 hours, or something like that, but never ran out. Unfortunately, I can't name a source. This sound familiar to anyone? I'll take a crack at finding it...

Eberron campaign setting. Um *rummages around and flips through book* pg 265 - Eternal Wand. I think I prefer normal ones, myself.
tarkin
11-03-04, 03:26 PM To the people that want to give it at a discount:

OK, WOTC says that normally this takes an artifact. I repeat, an ARTIFACT. Then, out of pity, they offer a variant rule that says you can do it at a 10% above market cost.

So obviously, you want to make it a discount. Why? Because you want it cheaper. No other reason. Totally ignoring how much this radically changes the pricing structure. Effectively you are reducing the cost of all magic wands by 9% (would be 10%, but hey, someone has to make the first one).

There is a word for that kind of game. It involves creatures that normally live in the Emerald City.

As for making it cost exactly the same, no increase or discount, that at least might make sense for a High Magic game.

P.S. Keep in mind that players can and do sell partially charged wands/staves so that they therefore can and do buy partially charged wands/staves.
Zathyr
11-03-04, 03:36 PM Making it cost more is sort of pointless though. It'd be cheaper to make a new one from scratch.

Unless that variant UA rule allows you to recharge it without meeting the prerequisites?
Beamup
11-04-04, 10:17 AM OK, WOTC says that normally this takes an artifact. I repeat, an ARTIFACT. Then, out of pity, they offer a variant rule that says you can do it at a 10% above market cost.
And implementing it that way is utterly ridiculous. Allowing recharging at no discount, for example, is virtually MECHANICALLY IDENTICAL to the current system. The ONLY difference it makes EVER is that, if in the current system, you're blasting away repeatedly with one wand, you might just have to get out another one. Wow. One move action saved for every few hundred charges spent. Trivial.

So obviously, you want to make it a discount. Why? Because you want it cheaper. No other reason. Totally ignoring how much this radically changes the pricing structure. Effectively you are reducing the cost of all magic wands by 9% (would be 10%, but hey, someone has to make the first one).
The effect of the Magical Artisan feat is MUCH greater, just to give one example. ALL magical items cost 25% less than the standard prices, since most certainly nobody but Magical Artisans will be able to compete and so they don't craft anything at all... yet nobody really talks about that as being a problem. It's just not a big deal.

There is a word for that kind of game. It involves creatures that normally live in the Emerald City.
Besides the fact that you're throwing totally unfounded insults just because people might DARE to disagree with your knee-jerk reactions, they didn't live in the Emerald City.

As for making it cost exactly the same, no increase or discount, that at least might make sense for a High Magic game.
It has no mechanical impact - it's pure flavor. You're just flat-out wrong, there are no balance implications whatsoever to this implementation.

P.S. Keep in mind that players can and do sell partially charged wands/staves so that they therefore can and do buy partially charged wands/staves.
Whoop-de-do.
CruelDM
11-04-04, 10:48 AM Couldnt you divide the full charges held by the item by its total cost and get the "per charge" cost of said item and then charge the PCs the per charge cost + 10% ? (is that what WotC is suggesting?)

(Ex. hypothetical): A wand with 30 charges left (max 50) and costs 5000gp when new. PC wants to fully recharge the wand (add 20 charges). The wand costs 5000 gp when full so thats a cost of 100gp "per charge", it would cost 2200gp (2000 +10%) and 88XP (2200/25) to recharge it to full. Clearly less expensive than buying a full wand outright, but more costly in the long run.

The PC that is to recharge the item must meet the creation requirements to make the item (or, as another option, not need Craft Item feats, but otherwise meet all requiremets). Maybe allow the PC to pay 1/2 gold but full XP expenses if he does have the creation feat needed.

(Ex 2 hypothetical): A staff with 20 total charges and only 1 remains, the owner cannot find an identical staff to replace it with, but dreads losing the item. The cost is 54000 gp for the new staff. The "per charge" cost of this staff is 2700 gp (54000/20 charges), he needs to recharge 19 charges so he has to pay 56430 gp (19charges*2700per charge +10%) and 2258 XP (56430/25) to recharge the staff- more than it would cost to buy it outright. But its either that or lose the item after its next charge is spent (or not using the item until he can find a replacement).

Note that he could opt to forego a full recharge and only add 5 charges because of budget or XP limitations: He would pay 14850 (2700 per charge*5 charges +10%) gold and 594 XP (14850/25) and now have a staff with 6 charges. Hopefully he can find a satisfactory replacement soon, or he can continue to add charges until he does.
Ruinous
11-04-04, 10:55 AM why not do it as many of the above have said, just with a penalty of loosing 5% off the max charge number?
Ishlyn
11-04-04, 10:57 AM We have a house rule that allows the possessor of an item to recharge it, they have to have the feats needed to craft it in the first place, prereq level and so forth. If you meet the prereqs to build the item you can recharge the item fully by paying 80% of the cost of the item. Its 80% due to not needing all of the material costs to build it from scratch since you have some of the material pieces and not needing to do a few other things. It works good for us and is pretty flavorfull, one guy had this staff that his great grandfather completed and has passed down throughout the family.
calypso
11-04-04, 10:58 AM Yeah, I'm basically doing the cost of the staff new / 50 per charge. So, not much has changed except it now reads:

"The Twilight Staff

This staff allows use of the following spells:
Doomwail (1 charge)
Grimwald's Greymantle (1 charge)
Magic Jar (2 charges)
Teleport (2 charges)

In addition, the wielder may add charges to the staff under certain circumstances. The night before, during, or after a full moon, the wielder may perform an hour-long ritual to replenish the staff. For each charge to be added, the ritual requires the expenditure of 25 xp, 100 gp worth of moonstone dust, and a drop of the wielder's blood, which causes 1 point of temporary Constitution damage. The moonstone dust and blood are mixed into a glass of wine, which the wielder drinks. The wielder must then channel into the staff a number of necromancy spell levels equal to the number of charges to be added. Any charges that are not added by the end of the hour are lost. The number of charges in the staff may not exceed 50."

Thanks for the input everyone :)

Calypso
Krelios
11-04-04, 11:07 AM I have to agree with those that say allowing a recharge at an increase of 10% in cost is stupid. You should just make a new one, it's cheaper. Heck, you can make a "new" one with less than maximum charges anyway, so that rule is even MORE pointless. At the very least recharging should cost 1/50 the total cost per charge, but since some of that is the actual item itself, a discount of some sort (probably 5% or 10%) seems reasonable. It would hardly unbalance things, and it would make sense (which, in the end, is the most important rule).
Dreaming_in_the_void
11-04-04, 11:16 AM I'm not sure I would bother with a one-size-fits-all deduction based on a percentile. I might let my players recycle the old staff as the basic materials (i.e. total gold piece requirement - gp/spell components for the spells to be recharged) for a new staff. They would have to pay for the spells, spell components, and any xp costs as normal.

Waste not, want not I suppose.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
calypso 11-02-04, 03:13 PM	Hey guys, If you were going to make a staff that would allow the bearer to add charges to it, without knowing the requisite spells, what would you do? I keep thinking along the lines of: "The wielder may channel energy into the staff in order to replenish it. For every 10 spell levels that are channeled into the staff, 1 charge is regained." Except, that's broken. Any ideas on making it less so? Calypso
tarkin 11-02-04, 03:32 PM	WoTC has published two ways to recharge items. 1) Use an artifact called Dwarven Glowstones. They come with upto 100 charges, which be given to any charged item. They have other powers and are very cool. Once they use up their 100 charges, they become worthless. 2) In Unearthed Arcana, they suggest letting people do it at a 10% penalty. I.E. If you want to recharge a staff from 20 charges left to 30 charges left then you pay gold and xp equal to (30-20)/50 * amount it would take to make a new staff * 110%.
Beamup 11-02-04, 03:46 PM	Personally I'd allow people to do it as in the UA rule Tarkin cited, except at a 10% discount. IMO recharging should be cheaper than making a new item, so if I were DM and a player wanted to do this, that's what I'd rule. This is, however, totally a house rule and is not supported by any published rules.
Wolf72 11-02-04, 05:02 PM	divide the overall price by the maximum amount of charges ... use that answer as price guide for recharging ... (or less ... or more depending on how much you want the PC's to spend) since there isn't a recharge rule (not in 3.0 at least), make recharging the item the same as creating a new one ... only you're paying a lot less (but need item creation feat craft staff and the required spells). .
calypso 11-02-04, 05:17 PM	What do you guys think of this? The Twilight Staff This staff allows use of the following spells: Doomwail (1 charge) Grimwald's Greymantle (1 charge) Magic Jar (2 charges) Teleport (2 charges) In addition, the wielder may add charges to the staff under certain circumstances. The night before, during, or after a full moon, the wielder may perform an hour-long ritual to replenish the staff. For each charge to be added, the ritual requires the expenditure of 25 xp, 100 gp worth of moonstone dust, and a drop of the wielder's blood, which causes 1 hp of damage. The moonstone dust and blood are mixed into a glass of wine, which the wielder drinks. The wielder must then channel into the staff a number of necromancy spell levels equal to the number of charges to be added. Any charges that are not added by the end of the hour are lost. The number of charges in the staff may not exceed 50.
malykoth 11-02-04, 06:11 PM	I seem to recall reading somewhere about automatically recharging items. Something like a wand that only casts it's spell once or twice per day, or once every 6 hours, or something like that, but never ran out. Unfortunately, I can't name a source. This sound familiar to anyone? I'll take a crack at finding it...
ClementWillowbreaker 11-02-04, 09:41 PM	Yeah, that's called a command word item.
calypso 11-02-04, 09:44 PM	Yeah, that's called a command word item. Hehe :D
Zathyr 11-03-04, 03:17 PM	I seem to recall reading somewhere about automatically recharging items. Something like a wand that only casts it's spell once or twice per day, or once every 6 hours, or something like that, but never ran out. Unfortunately, I can't name a source. This sound familiar to anyone? I'll take a crack at finding it... Eberron campaign setting. Um rummages around and flips through book pg 265 - Eternal Wand. I think I prefer normal ones, myself.
tarkin 11-03-04, 03:26 PM	To the people that want to give it at a discount: OK, WOTC says that normally this takes an artifact. I repeat, an ARTIFACT. Then, out of pity, they offer a variant rule that says you can do it at a 10% above market cost. So obviously, you want to make it a discount. Why? Because you want it cheaper. No other reason. Totally ignoring how much this radically changes the pricing structure. Effectively you are reducing the cost of all magic wands by 9% (would be 10%, but hey, someone has to make the first one). There is a word for that kind of game. It involves creatures that normally live in the Emerald City. As for making it cost exactly the same, no increase or discount, that at least might make sense for a High Magic game. P.S. Keep in mind that players can and do sell partially charged wands/staves so that they therefore can and do buy partially charged wands/staves.
Zathyr 11-03-04, 03:36 PM	Making it cost more is sort of pointless though. It'd be cheaper to make a new one from scratch. Unless that variant UA rule allows you to recharge it without meeting the prerequisites?
Beamup 11-04-04, 10:17 AM	OK, WOTC says that normally this takes an artifact. I repeat, an ARTIFACT. Then, out of pity, they offer a variant rule that says you can do it at a 10% above market cost. And implementing it that way is utterly ridiculous. Allowing recharging at no discount, for example, is virtually MECHANICALLY IDENTICAL to the current system. The ONLY difference it makes EVER is that, if in the current system, you're blasting away repeatedly with one wand, you might just have to get out another one. Wow. One move action saved for every few hundred charges spent. Trivial. So obviously, you want to make it a discount. Why? Because you want it cheaper. No other reason. Totally ignoring how much this radically changes the pricing structure. Effectively you are reducing the cost of all magic wands by 9% (would be 10%, but hey, someone has to make the first one). The effect of the Magical Artisan feat is MUCH greater, just to give one example. ALL magical items cost 25% less than the standard prices, since most certainly nobody but Magical Artisans will be able to compete and so they don't craft anything at all... yet nobody really talks about that as being a problem. It's just not a big deal. There is a word for that kind of game. It involves creatures that normally live in the Emerald City. Besides the fact that you're throwing totally unfounded insults just because people might DARE to disagree with your knee-jerk reactions, they didn't live in the Emerald City. As for making it cost exactly the same, no increase or discount, that at least might make sense for a High Magic game. It has no mechanical impact - it's pure flavor. You're just flat-out wrong, there are no balance implications whatsoever to this implementation. P.S. Keep in mind that players can and do sell partially charged wands/staves so that they therefore can and do buy partially charged wands/staves. Whoop-de-do.
CruelDM 11-04-04, 10:48 AM	Couldnt you divide the full charges held by the item by its total cost and get the "per charge" cost of said item and then charge the PCs the per charge cost + 10% ? (is that what WotC is suggesting?) (Ex. hypothetical): A wand with 30 charges left (max 50) and costs 5000gp when new. PC wants to fully recharge the wand (add 20 charges). The wand costs 5000 gp when full so thats a cost of 100gp "per charge", it would cost 2200gp (2000 +10%) and 88XP (2200/25) to recharge it to full. Clearly less expensive than buying a full wand outright, but more costly in the long run. The PC that is to recharge the item must meet the creation requirements to make the item (or, as another option, not need Craft Item feats, but otherwise meet all requiremets). Maybe allow the PC to pay 1/2 gold but full XP expenses if he does have the creation feat needed. (Ex 2 hypothetical): A staff with 20 total charges and only 1 remains, the owner cannot find an identical staff to replace it with, but dreads losing the item. The cost is 54000 gp for the new staff. The "per charge" cost of this staff is 2700 gp (54000/20 charges), he needs to recharge 19 charges so he has to pay 56430 gp (19charges2700per charge +10%) and 2258 XP (56430/25) to recharge the staff- more than it would cost to buy it outright. But its either that or lose the item after its next charge is spent (or not using the item until he can find a replacement). Note that he could opt to forego a full recharge and only add 5 charges because of budget or XP limitations: He would pay 14850 (2700 per charge5 charges +10%) gold and 594 XP (14850/25) and now have a staff with 6 charges. Hopefully he can find a satisfactory replacement soon, or he can continue to add charges until he does.
Ruinous 11-04-04, 10:55 AM	why not do it as many of the above have said, just with a penalty of loosing 5% off the max charge number?
Ishlyn 11-04-04, 10:57 AM	We have a house rule that allows the possessor of an item to recharge it, they have to have the feats needed to craft it in the first place, prereq level and so forth. If you meet the prereqs to build the item you can recharge the item fully by paying 80% of the cost of the item. Its 80% due to not needing all of the material costs to build it from scratch since you have some of the material pieces and not needing to do a few other things. It works good for us and is pretty flavorfull, one guy had this staff that his great grandfather completed and has passed down throughout the family.
calypso 11-04-04, 10:58 AM	Yeah, I'm basically doing the cost of the staff new / 50 per charge. So, not much has changed except it now reads: "The Twilight Staff This staff allows use of the following spells: Doomwail (1 charge) Grimwald's Greymantle (1 charge) Magic Jar (2 charges) Teleport (2 charges) In addition, the wielder may add charges to the staff under certain circumstances. The night before, during, or after a full moon, the wielder may perform an hour-long ritual to replenish the staff. For each charge to be added, the ritual requires the expenditure of 25 xp, 100 gp worth of moonstone dust, and a drop of the wielder's blood, which causes 1 point of temporary Constitution damage. The moonstone dust and blood are mixed into a glass of wine, which the wielder drinks. The wielder must then channel into the staff a number of necromancy spell levels equal to the number of charges to be added. Any charges that are not added by the end of the hour are lost. The number of charges in the staff may not exceed 50." Thanks for the input everyone :) Calypso
Krelios 11-04-04, 11:07 AM	I have to agree with those that say allowing a recharge at an increase of 10% in cost is stupid. You should just make a new one, it's cheaper. Heck, you can make a "new" one with less than maximum charges anyway, so that rule is even MORE pointless. At the very least recharging should cost 1/50 the total cost per charge, but since some of that is the actual item itself, a discount of some sort (probably 5% or 10%) seems reasonable. It would hardly unbalance things, and it would make sense (which, in the end, is the most important rule).
Dreaming_in_the_void 11-04-04, 11:16 AM	I'm not sure I would bother with a one-size-fits-all deduction based on a percentile. I might let my players recycle the old staff as the basic materials (i.e. total gold piece requirement - gp/spell components for the spells to be recharged) for a new staff. They would have to pay for the spells, spell components, and any xp costs as normal. Waste not, want not I suppose.