Post/Author/DateTime	Post
aljergensen 02-04-06, 03:04 PM	This may be a restricted topic, but what would people think of changing wand access to that similar to potions and oils? It would be nice to be able to purchase a wand of up to 750 gp value as core items. There have been many adventures where we have had to burn through numerous charges of Cure Light Wounds wand to keep the party going. This is an unfair financial burden to those who happen to have access (or can craft) the item. In other cases, the ability to purchase level 1 wands would help lower-level wizards feel like they can contribute more than just a few spells. Wands at this level are still low-enough power that it should not have a great impact on play balance.
Munkwunk 02-04-06, 03:46 PM	I've always wondered why we don't have access to sub-750gp wands, myself. At the very least, I think Wands of CLW should be Core access. They're common enough on ARs, sure, but the type of access (regional, adventure, any) varies, and it can be difficult for low-level characters to get access early on. For instance, I have a 2nd-level Cleric who has been burning through Scrolls of CLW like crazy because nobody has found wand access yet, and scrolls cost 10gp more *per use* than a charge from a wand. That really adds up, and it's not like I have a lot of money as a 2nd level Cleric to begin with.
Mortepierre 02-04-06, 04:55 PM	I think the root of the problem is deeper than that. Sure, most people will buy a few potions/scrolls of CLW and hand over the scrolls to the divine spellcasters of the party for the duration of the adventure (with the understanding that, normally, these are to be used for their sole benefit). The trouble begins at low APL when ONE team member obtains a wand of CLW. Once the scrolls are depleted (assuming they had any to begin with) and team members are wounded, all eyes turn to the guy with the wand. If he allows the cleric (/ranger/paladin/..) to use his wand on the others, he is essentially giving away his own item. If he doesn't, he'll be blamed if the adventure ends in TPK. It's a no-win situation, mainly because the other team members can't refund him because of the current rules. I move that if team members can share money to bring back one of their companion to life, then they should be able to share money to refund the guy who had to deplete his magic item(s) to keep them all alive.
Timlagor 02-04-06, 06:03 PM	It also makes no sense in-game: Temples should be selling these things by the barrow-full to make cash. I agree wholeheartedly that Wands should be available up to 750gp (or more). I would go further and say that we should abandon the DMG tables (which were only ever meant to provide an easy method of choosing random loot!) and use the formulae given, granting access to all "CORE" spells. This would also solve the rather silly issue of "CORE" spells being semi-limitted. * Any Cleric can cast Lesser Vigor but strangely only PCs and a very very few NPCs think it's worth making into a Scroll or Wand. * Wizards can get spells when they level up but not at any other time * You can't buy anything ata higher-than-base CL even when it's blatantly advantageous None of it makes sense IC and none of it helps OOC.
rook1138 02-06-06, 07:34 PM	I agree that certain wands should pretty much be open access, like the potions and scrolls are. Another proposal: Make certain items core access past a certain level. base potions/scrolls/wands/stat bumps/resist/etc, core at 1st lvl (almost like now, but with wands included) After lvl 7 or whatever, add a few more things, like +4 stat items, +2 rings/cloaks/armor/weapons/2nd lvl wands/etc After 11th lvl, add +6 stat items, +3 rings/cloaks/armor/weapons/3rd lvl wands/etc. I know most people have access to those items by that level, but since they are ditching them from the meta-orgs, and it is possible to get to that level and not have access, they should have a staged progression. And I'm not proposing things that would be a lot for the level, since most people would have access to a +4 stat item by 6th or whatever. This is more like a "just in case you can't find them, there is a store over there that you must be *this high* to enter" type thing... Matt Thompson Ps: this would also make the dumb holdover of ogre gauntlets and giants belt not such a big pain in the patoot.
Timlagor 02-06-06, 08:43 PM	The access you are proposing is much better than I've had. I like the idea but it doesn't make much sense IC: merchants should be willing to take anyone's gold.
Bob_the_Theurge 02-06-06, 08:54 PM	This may be a restricted topic, but what would people think of changing wand access to that similar to potions and oils? It would be nice to be able to purchase a wand of up to 750 gp value as core items. There have been many adventures where we have had to burn through numerous charges of Cure Light Wounds wand to keep the party going. This is an unfair financial burden to those who happen to have access (or can craft) the item. In other cases, the ability to purchase level 1 wands would help lower-level wizards feel like they can contribute more than just a few spells. Wands at this level are still low-enough power that it should not have a great impact on play balance. Anyone can buy those scrolls, or those wands. If you're worried about financially imposing on your cleric, why not buy a stock of them up before your next mod, and loan them out to the cleric? That way he's spending your GP, rather than his. Mike P.S. I'm not stingy. I play a Theurge who owns a Helm of Glorious Recovery, an Adamantine weapon, and a Belt of 1 Mighty Blow just to loan out to the fighter-types.
Timlagor 02-06-06, 11:26 PM	Mike/Bob-the-theurge: You need AR access to buy wands at present. That is the point of the thread.
kegdrainer 02-07-06, 07:57 AM	How about allowing allowing wands ( 750gp or less) to be purchased. If you want to craft them, then you need an AR. How does that sound?
Bob_the_Theurge 02-07-06, 09:05 AM	How about allowing allowing wands ( 750gp or less) to be purchased. If you want to craft them, then you need an AR. How does that sound? If you want to craft, all you need is to know the spell and have the feat...
kegdrainer 02-07-06, 09:18 AM	Oops, sorry. I though you needed access to make anything.
wagnert 02-07-06, 11:48 AM	Oops, sorry. I though you needed access to make anything. Nope - In fact, my Cleric has scribe scroll and often takes an extra TU to scribe 5 scrolls, most recently scribing 5 scrolls of Restoration, which are not available to buy normally because they exceed 750 gp in value. Often, this is the only way to gain certain scrolls.
The_Voice_Of_Reason 02-07-06, 04:18 PM	The access you are proposing is much better than I've had. I like the idea but it doesn't make much sense IC: merchants should be willing to take anyone's gold. I like this level-dependent progresion of core access too, and to me it makes alot of IC sense. More experienced characters have simply made the contacts necessary to buy more advanced merchandise. Remember, this is a quasi medieval world, where there are any number of magical and mundane ways to cheat a merchant. It seams very reasonable to me that they might be a bit leary of doing major transaction until they've had a few years to get to know their customer. After-all, we see the same sort of thing in our world... the higher the price of an item, the more hoops you have to jump through to prove your identity, to establish your credit, etc. (And if you think we have problems with Identity Theft, think about a world with Detect Thoughts, Disguise Self, and Brendigan selling his returning necklass!) --Michael Montague
GreySector 02-07-06, 04:34 PM	I like this level-dependent progresion of core access too, and to me it makes alot of IC sense. I hated this sort of thing in Year 2, and think its a bad idea to reinstitute it. -Michael Eshleman
Bob_the_Theurge 02-07-06, 05:38 PM	I agree that certain wands should pretty much be open access, like the potions and scrolls are. Another proposal: Make certain items core access past a certain level. base potions/scrolls/wands/stat bumps/resist/etc, core at 1st lvl (almost like now, but with wands included) After lvl 7 or whatever, add a few more things, like +4 stat items, +2 rings/cloaks/armor/weapons/2nd lvl wands/etc After 11th lvl, add +6 stat items, +3 rings/cloaks/armor/weapons/3rd lvl wands/etc. I know most people have access to those items by that level, but since they are ditching them from the meta-orgs, and it is possible to get to that level and not have access, they should have a staged progression. And I'm not proposing things that would be a lot for the level, since most people would have access to a +4 stat item by 6th or whatever. This is more like a "just in case you can't find them, there is a store over there that you must be *this high* to enter" type thing... Matt Thompson Ps: this would also make the dumb holdover of ogre gauntlets and giants belt not such a big pain in the patoot. I really agree with this idea. What most people may not be considering right now is that modules are designed with the assumption that the players have access to certain things. For example, I had a conversation with a mod writer whose considered opinion is that Golems/constructs are "no big deal", because by APL 8 every fighter or tank ought to have found access to Adamantine. While the law of averages might favor it, it's no certainty. The vast majority of item access these days is Adventure, not Regional or Core or All. All you have to do is spend your money at the wrong time, and buying items can be hard. In addition, with multiple characters, the chances of "missing" the access improve greatly. My theurge (level 12) has seen Adamantine access five times, but only bought it when he could actually use the weapon in question. By contrast, my 9th level Rogue has never seen Adamantine access. I know one player who by random luck managed to get his fighter all the way to either 13th or 14th level without encountering it. If mod writers are writing modules assuming we have this, that, or the other thing in the modules, they ought to be readily available to players.
solbergb 02-07-06, 09:34 PM	Re: Adamantium. It isn't that you expect every APL8 character to have adamantium. It is that it is a reasonable expectation that somebody at the table will have such a weapon, which will then be passed to whomever can make best use of it. And if nobody has such a weapon, odds are that the party has some SR=no spells to make up the difference. Or just a big pile of flaming oil and similar nonmagical alchemicals that burn up golems just fine. (hardness is worse than DR/adamantine, actually..because the nonmagical energy option isn't there..but then animated objects aren't spell immune so...*shrug*). Or in the last resort, there will be one guy with power attack and 3-5 other character to ensure he hits with it and stays on his feet. I've seen very few APL8+ tables that couldn't hurt golems. 4 person tables, by law of averages, are more at risk.
Bob_the_Theurge 02-08-06, 09:07 AM	Re: Adamantium. It isn't that you expect every APL8 character to have adamantium. It is that it is a reasonable expectation that somebody at the table will have such a weapon, which will then be passed to whomever can make best use of it. And if nobody has such a weapon, odds are that the party has some SR=no spells to make up the difference. Or just a big pile of flaming oil and similar nonmagical alchemicals that burn up golems just fine. (hardness is worse than DR/adamantine, actually..because the nonmagical energy option isn't there..but then animated objects aren't spell immune so...*shrug*). Or in the last resort, there will be one guy with power attack and 3-5 other character to ensure he hits with it and stays on his feet. I've seen very few APL8+ tables that couldn't hurt golems. 4 person tables, by law of averages, are more at risk. Expectations that party members will buy things, solely for handing to other party members in the event that someone doesn't have it, are a very bad thing. We've only got so much money to work with, here.
Simpi 02-08-06, 09:37 AM	If these wands were generally available, as well as with level progressing core access, what point would there be for authors to write access to anything in their module? I would certainly not start writing strange special favors such as 'Favor with Temple X grants one-time use of spell Y .' instead of 'Temple X grants access to CLW, etc.'. I would rather leave the AR blank than satisfy Monty Haul players with extra goodies. The core access is fine as it is but it could be rolled back a bit, along with PrCs, feats and spells. S.H, the guy from Naerie
Timlagor 02-09-06, 04:36 PM	If these wands were generally available, as well as with level progressing core access, what point would there be for authors to write access to anything in their module? I would certainly not start writing strange special favors such as 'Favor with Temple X grants one-time use of spell Y .' instead of 'Temple X grants access to CLW, etc.'. I would rather leave the AR blank than satisfy Monty Haul players with extra goodies. The core access is fine as it is but it could be rolled back a bit, along with PrCs, feats and spells. We're talking about CL1 Wands of 1st level spells here... Since the only 1st level wands I've ever had access to were CLW and Endure Elements I don't think module writers are going to be leaving much off the ARs as a result. (I also had access to a wand of Fireballs once) Ramping up the Core Access with level is a different proposal and I don't agree with it.