Creative use of a wand.... [Archive] - Wizards Community

Creative use of a wand.... [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Galeigh
12-20-06, 10:18 PM Ok, here's an interesting incident that came up in a campaign I'm playing in, We had an arcane archer with a pretty bad attack bonus, so he bought a wand of true strike. Unfortunately you cannot use a wand and a bow at the same time, so the arcane archer tied the wand to the arm that he draws the arrow back with and set it so the tip of the wand is pointed towards the arrow. By doing this, with the DM's permission, he was able to use the wand by saying the key word with his free action, and get a +20 to every attack as long as the wand had charges....making him the most accurate character in the game...

opinions?
The Commoner
12-20-06, 10:35 PM It is a standard action to use a wand.

If your DM allows such a house rule for this then they must be okay with that boost of power. It is very powerful IMO. At least make the archer take a feat for that, but even then that is powerful.

The archer could also use the same tactic with Fireball, lightning Bolt, False Life (so it is hard to take hp damage), etc. I think you can see where this would get out of control.
OneWinged4ngel
12-20-06, 10:40 PM That's not creative at all, it's just ignoring the rules and making something broken... free action true strike from a level 1 wand is ridiculous. :rolleyes:
Galeigh
12-20-06, 10:43 PM I kinda agree, but I think the DM allowed it because the Archer was in a game with a bunch of lvl 16 characters and was way behind in attack bonus due to his wizard levels. What happened was we were in a place where if you were challenged to a fight you had accept (unless you wore a special amulet) and he got challenged by our groups meat stick (I call him a meat stick because he isn't much of a meat Shield the guy playing isn't very good at playing a fighter) but the meat stick's AC way far beyond his hitting capabilities (barring a nat 20).
BW0222
12-21-06, 12:49 AM Galeigh,

So... not only is he able to use the wand as a free action, he is able to use it multiple times per round?

Let me ask you a question... are you willing to allow the buy guys to use the same tactic?

Say, you go into an encounter with five first level wizards each with wands of magic missiles attached to their arms? They gain surprise and each decide to take five free actions to active their wands. How about five clerics with wands of hold person? Anyone try for 25 will saves per round? How about wands of poison, cause serious wounds, etc.

There is a reason why wands are a standard action to cast. Even quicken spells can not be used multiple times per round or can not be placed in wands.
Galeigh
12-21-06, 04:35 AM This is true, however, the DM stated that it was only possible because when the archer drew back his bow it placed the wand close to his mouth allowing him to activate it. The effects of the wand of true strike do not stack so that much isn't a problem...in this situation.
SiouLubb
12-21-06, 08:51 AM My vote goes to "Broken".

So, to expand BW0222's example, all the baddies have to do is hold the wands close to their face in order to activate their wands for free?

You made your character and are responsible for your choices and the results. Expecting a semi-wizard to hit as often as straight men-at-arms classes is flat out wrong. Are you gaining any benefit out of your wizard levels? Benefit that the men at arms in the party don't have access to? If you do, then stop complaining. You made your choices and now you expect to have your wizard abilities and not pay any price for them.

If your really want to hit as often as a man-at-arms class- you should play one.

Aside: I really won't be surprised if True Strike is one of the spells to disappear in 4.0 whenever that comes out.
risner
12-21-06, 09:35 AM opinions?

Major violations:
1) Converting Wand activation from 1 standard action to 1 free action.
2) Requires Wand of Quicken True Strike as a 5th level wand 5*9*750=33,750
3) Requires the free action Wand otherwise the spell would expire before being used except for AoO's.

In short, it is a royally bad idea. If I were playing in a game like this, I would walk out and never return.
Nifft
12-21-06, 10:09 AM Seriously, why even bother with archery when fighting a poorly made meat stick? Target his will save.

Cheers, -- N
tarkin
12-21-06, 11:35 AM Also, True Strike is the most obviously WRONG spell to do it with.

True Strike was intentionally designed so that it was NOT a free action. That is, you are supposed to "take two rounds to get one 'almost definite' hit". That is fair, in large part because you are expected to normally hit every other round anyway. The advantage is the ability to do things like Power Attack, etc.

Trying to do True Strike as a Free Action is one of the things that make people start laughing at players and saying they are over-powered.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Galeigh 12-20-06, 10:18 PM	Ok, here's an interesting incident that came up in a campaign I'm playing in, We had an arcane archer with a pretty bad attack bonus, so he bought a wand of true strike. Unfortunately you cannot use a wand and a bow at the same time, so the arcane archer tied the wand to the arm that he draws the arrow back with and set it so the tip of the wand is pointed towards the arrow. By doing this, with the DM's permission, he was able to use the wand by saying the key word with his free action, and get a +20 to every attack as long as the wand had charges....making him the most accurate character in the game... opinions?
The Commoner 12-20-06, 10:35 PM	It is a standard action to use a wand. If your DM allows such a house rule for this then they must be okay with that boost of power. It is very powerful IMO. At least make the archer take a feat for that, but even then that is powerful. The archer could also use the same tactic with Fireball, lightning Bolt, False Life (so it is hard to take hp damage), etc. I think you can see where this would get out of control.
OneWinged4ngel 12-20-06, 10:40 PM	That's not creative at all, it's just ignoring the rules and making something broken... free action true strike from a level 1 wand is ridiculous. :rolleyes:
Galeigh 12-20-06, 10:43 PM	I kinda agree, but I think the DM allowed it because the Archer was in a game with a bunch of lvl 16 characters and was way behind in attack bonus due to his wizard levels. What happened was we were in a place where if you were challenged to a fight you had accept (unless you wore a special amulet) and he got challenged by our groups meat stick (I call him a meat stick because he isn't much of a meat Shield the guy playing isn't very good at playing a fighter) but the meat stick's AC way far beyond his hitting capabilities (barring a nat 20).
BW0222 12-21-06, 12:49 AM	Galeigh, So... not only is he able to use the wand as a free action, he is able to use it multiple times per round? Let me ask you a question... are you willing to allow the buy guys to use the same tactic? Say, you go into an encounter with five first level wizards each with wands of magic missiles attached to their arms? They gain surprise and each decide to take five free actions to active their wands. How about five clerics with wands of hold person? Anyone try for 25 will saves per round? How about wands of poison, cause serious wounds, etc. There is a reason why wands are a standard action to cast. Even quicken spells can not be used multiple times per round or can not be placed in wands.
Galeigh 12-21-06, 04:35 AM	This is true, however, the DM stated that it was only possible because when the archer drew back his bow it placed the wand close to his mouth allowing him to activate it. The effects of the wand of true strike do not stack so that much isn't a problem...in this situation.
SiouLubb 12-21-06, 08:51 AM	My vote goes to "Broken". So, to expand BW0222's example, all the baddies have to do is hold the wands close to their face in order to activate their wands for free? You made your character and are responsible for your choices and the results. Expecting a semi-wizard to hit as often as straight men-at-arms classes is flat out wrong. Are you gaining any benefit out of your wizard levels? Benefit that the men at arms in the party don't have access to? If you do, then stop complaining. You made your choices and now you expect to have your wizard abilities and not pay any price for them. If your really want to hit as often as a man-at-arms class- you should play one. Aside: I really won't be surprised if True Strike is one of the spells to disappear in 4.0 whenever that comes out.
risner 12-21-06, 09:35 AM	opinions? Major violations: 1) Converting Wand activation from 1 standard action to 1 free action. 2) Requires Wand of Quicken True Strike as a 5th level wand 59750=33,750 3) Requires the free action Wand otherwise the spell would expire before being used except for AoO's. In short, it is a royally bad idea. If I were playing in a game like this, I would walk out and never return.
Nifft 12-21-06, 10:09 AM	Seriously, why even bother with archery when fighting a poorly made meat stick? Target his will save. Cheers, -- N
tarkin 12-21-06, 11:35 AM	Also, True Strike is the most obviously WRONG spell to do it with. True Strike was intentionally designed so that it was NOT a free action. That is, you are supposed to "take two rounds to get one 'almost definite' hit". That is fair, in large part because you are expected to normally hit every other round anyway. The advantage is the ability to do things like Power Attack, etc. Trying to do True Strike as a Free Action is one of the things that make people start laughing at players and saying they are over-powered.