Post/Author/DateTime	Post
NeueRegel 06-15-05, 08:17 PM	Okay, here's the premise: Character wants to be a member of the druidical heirarchy. He begins as a first level druid, learns druidic and such. But, his studies are truly in the direction of wizardry instead. However, he is careful not to actually do any adventuring with other druids, instead seeking other class types, as he progresses from 2cnd level on in wizard, reporting back to his superiors only during interrims. He uses wizard spells that duplicate the fire and lightning spells expected of his "druidry", as well as polymorph self and such to emulate wildshape, and whatever other spells that seem druidic-ey to the non-druid class associates, like control weather, etc; and carefully manages to be off adventuring during solstice rituals and such, avoiding lots of higher level druids observing him closely. He'd use the monster summons for animal types as best he could, and maybe some major images and such too. He has his reasons for this deception, neither good nor evil, but just a divergence in how he feels best suited to serve the cause, even though his actions would stymie advancement in the political machinations of the order. Now, arises the main glaring problem: His adventuring group are going to expect one thing of him as a druid that his wizardry can't directly emulate: Basic Healing. So, my question is this: Having a first level of Druid behind him, he can use wands of "cure xxx wounds". Seems like the answer; However, it would be odd to do so all the time; It should appear that he is casting the spells himself. So: Does a "wand" Have to be a stick? Is it permissible to say, commision a wand, exactly as RAW, but in the form of a ring? A "little round rod that fits the finger"... Same 50 charges, same limitations of minimum caster level, etc. And more to the point: The ability to use it as if "laying on hands" to effect the cure, along with some apropos druidic nonsensical syllables for effect. Aim being: "Look like a druid". And secondly, if so, would said item cost the same as a wand? Or would it be less, for taking a body affinity slot? Or would it not even count towards the affinity slot, not being a true ring? Or would it cost more, for being an unusual body slot? Admittedly, an expensive way to maintain the ruse, but with reason. Does any of this jive with the rules? I'm sure Tarkin will have something to say about it; How about the rest of your takes on this idea? P.S: Prolly a human or an elf; 3.5 core rules, of course. P.SS: I could have put this in Classes, but it's not really a new take on class, it's a spin on already existing ones, with the magic wand-ring twist. (Which I could also put in equipment, I suppose, but, meh...) I will of course be choosing feats, crossclass or not, to extend the illusion of druidry, like knowledge (nature),(religion), and survival, and probably carry a druid weapon like a sickle, spear, or scimitar to reinforce the impression. NeueRegel
Shadowfax7 06-15-05, 08:57 PM	First, why doesn't casting Cure Light Wounds offer the same ruse as a wand ?? He can use all his Druidic 1st level spell slots to cast Cure Light Wounds. Second, a wand in the shape of a ring is a ring (you can make it a wooden ring if you want, AC 13, hardness 5, HP 2, break DC 23). You will need the Item Creation feat, Forge Ring, to create one and there will be the extra cost associated with creating a ring (see 3.5 DMG pg. 282-288.
Rhadamanthus 06-15-05, 09:18 PM	Check out Complete Arcane , it's got information on alternate magical item construction.
NeueRegel 06-16-05, 12:31 AM	First, why doesn't casting Cure Light Wounds offer the same ruse as a wand ?? He can use all his Druidic 1st level spell slots to cast Cure Light Wounds. Second, a wand in the shape of a ring is a ring (you can make it a wooden ring if you want, AC 13, hardness 5, HP 2, break DC 23). You will need the Item Creation feat, Forge Ring, to create one and there will be the extra cost associated with creating a ring (see 3.5 DMG pg. 282-288. This character cannot maintain the ruse of a mid-high level druid with a "couple of CLW's" after a pretty serious battle of mid-high level characters needing healing... And, "I didn't prepare any more cure-spells today" isn't going to fly for more than an adventure or two. And, "I" don't need those feats; I plan on buying the wand/rings, as needed.
NeueRegel 06-16-05, 10:58 AM	:bump:
hiryuu 06-16-05, 11:23 AM	He won't be able to maintaint he ruse for long at all. The moment he casts a wizard spell of any kind, he'll be found out. That's what spellcraft and Knowledge (aracana) skills are for.
Drachasor 06-16-05, 11:43 AM	Hmm, what about a feat that lets you make Arcane Spells look Divine and vice versa? Beyond that I'd take the Arcane Heirophant Prc (Races of the Wild) if I were him, then you get a bit of both. -Drachasor
bcr666 06-16-05, 11:44 AM	The druids IMO are fairly secretive, so it would be metagaming for the party to expect him to be casting cure spells. Unless they have had dealings with lots of other druids.
Decree Of Boredom 06-16-05, 12:38 PM	This ruse might be short-lived once the wizard starts studying his spellbook.
Tonus 06-16-05, 01:05 PM	I don't think using a wand should be a problem in and of itself. Druidic healing is not very efficient compared to clerical healing past first level. It would make perfect sense for a "real" druid to invest in healing wands and use his personal druid spells more efficiently. However, as other posters have pointed out, there might be other problems keeping up your ruse for long. Depends a lot on your DM and the meta-gaming mindset of your group I would think.
Drachasor 06-16-05, 01:08 PM	Since you'd be buying wands anyway, I don't see what the problem is. A CLW wand is 750 GP for 50*5.5 = 275 points of healing (on average). That's a mighty fine deal, and it lets your healers use their spells for other things (like emergency combat healing or offensive spells). -Drachasor
NeueRegel 06-16-05, 01:52 PM	I still think that some of you are missing the point. The other player characters will eventually gain his trust, and know "what's up". At the same time, I need to fulfill the role of party-healer, to an extent, and to be able to provide that service to npc's alot. It's what gets back to the druidical enclave that matters, the stories told that they will hear; thus the need for the on-going ruse. You ppl aren't working with me here; maybe the "ring" example was a bad idea; what "other" item could throw them off? A wand shaped like a druidic holy symbol, but small? A golden acorn, palm-able? A barkskin gauntlet? Anything that emulates a wand, but can make it look like I'm casting the spell, not the item... Neue
Thelon Fairblade 06-16-05, 02:06 PM	You did receive an answer: Complete Arcane has suggestions about alternate forms of magic items. Short answer: go ahead and make your "circular wooden wand that happens to fit a Medium humanoid's finger". In my last campaign, all "potions" created by the druids were enchanted fruits and nuts. All "scrolls" were engraved feathers and scales and braids of fur. All "wands" were (this doesn't help you) hollowed out bones filled with mystic herbs (which were slowly consumed as charges were used). Druids (including the PC druid in the party) were often seen with feathers and animal-fur/hair braided into their own hair; these fetishes could be grabbed and used very easily, while also conveying a "natural" appearance.
Zherog 06-16-05, 03:11 PM	You did receive an answer: Complete Arcane has suggestions about alternate forms of magic items. In addition to that, it was pointed out that a Druid is more likely to perform healing via a wand anyway - so there's no need to disguise that fact.
Kullak-Kobold Sorcerer 06-16-05, 04:41 PM	I still think that some of you are missing the point. The other player characters will eventually gain his trust, and know "what's up". At the same time, I need to fulfill the role of party-healer, to an extent, and to be able to provide that service to npc's alot. Why do you NEED to fufill the role of party healer? Try this word, "No". You craeted a battle druid, he uses lightning and fire. He doesn't prepare healing spells. Tell the party if they want him to heal, then they need to buy him a wand of Cure Light wounds. Just don't expect healing during combat. It's what gets back to the druidical enclave that matters, the stories told that they will hear; thus the need for the on-going ruse. You ppl aren't working with me here; maybe the "ring" example was a bad idea; what "other" item could throw them off? A wand shaped like a druidic holy symbol, but small? A golden acorn, palm-able? A barkskin gauntlet? Anything that emulates a wand, but can make it look like I'm casting the spell, not the item... Neue If yuou DM is traditional, you can't. There are alternate potion variants, but not alternate wand. I would rule the object would be disimilar and cost significantly more. Regardless, if they have any ranks in Spellcraft/Arcane, yuo will be discovered immediately. For the ruse to truly work, refuse to heal them. Make them buy potions or agree to use Cure wands. You can't get discovered that way. Otherwise, you have almost no chance, even with an alternate wand of maintaining the deception.
NeueRegel 06-16-05, 04:58 PM	Why do you NEED to fufill the role of party healer? Try this word, "No". You craeted a battle druid, he uses lightning and fire. He doesn't prepare healing spells. Tell the party if they want him to heal, then they need to buy him a wand of Cure Light wounds. Just don't expect healing during combat. If yuou DM is traditional, you can't. There are alternate potion variants, but not alternate wand. I would rule the object would be disimilar and cost significantly more. Regardless, if they have any ranks in Spellcraft/Arcane, yuo will be discovered immediately. For the ruse to truly work, refuse to heal them. Make them buy potions or agree to use Cure wands. You can't get discovered that way. Otherwise, you have almost no chance, even with an alternate wand of maintaining the deception. You've got some great points, and good answers. Duly noted. I'll even add in the fact, that unless a character states that he's doing so, there's no reason to even roll a spellcraft check for a trusting party member. Still asking for other differing/same answers everybody. :) thanks, Neue
godrik glendower 06-16-05, 05:01 PM	it sounds like the meta-gaming aspect of this could be cut down in character by disguise/bluff checks.?
Zherog 06-16-05, 05:05 PM	Regardless, if they have any ranks in Spellcraft/Arcane, yuo will be discovered immediately. There's no such thing as "Spellcraft/Arcane" or "Spellcraft/Divine." It's one skill. Further, to the best of my knowledge, when you use Spellcraft to ID a spell you don't know if it's arcane or dvine - you just know what the spell is.
BW0222 06-16-05, 06:08 PM	NeueRegel, >Character wants to be a member of the druidical heirarchy. He begins as a >first level druid, learns druidic and such. But, his studies are truly in the >direction of wizardry instead. ... You can't. >He uses wizard spells that duplicate the fire and lightning spells expected of >his "druidry", A DC 15 + level spellcraft check indentifies a spell being cast. You can't sustitute one spell for another. You also have to cast using a specific language (i.e. druidic and not draconic) and using druid components (i.e. a divine focus) and not wizard components. Any druid knows immediately you aren't casting as a druid. If you have to pull out brime stone and powered iron and springle them on the ground to make a flaming sphere, they know immediately that you aren't using your holy symbol. >as well as polymorph self and such to emulate wildshape, and Wildshape is an extra-ordinary ability. It doesn't require chanting, arm waving, or taking out spell components. Polymorph isn't the same since it doesn't provide the ability to speak in that form and it can be dispelled. >whatever other spells that seem druidic-ey to the non-druid class >associates, like control weather, etc; and carefully manages to be off >adventuring during solstice rituals and such, avoiding lots of higher level >druids observing him closely. He'd use the monster summons for animal >types as best he could, and maybe some major images and such too. Major images require concentration, they can't manipulate objects, etc. Why can't the summoned wolverine dig a hole? Why can't the summoned giant eagle actually carry me? You can't avoid higher level druids. They are going to test you as you rise in the druids order. They are going to require that you demonstrate specific spells. They are going to give you specific orders and tasks -- go help the farmers by plant growthing their fields, teach lesser druids, go visit the nixie under the lake, tree shape yourself and wait for the unicorn in the grove, they are going to take you on long trips and expect you to regain spells without sleep, they are going to spend long periods of time trying to teach you higher level spells and watch you fail to grasp even basic things, etc. It is like saying you getting your yellow belt in karate, then getting a black belt in judo, then go back to your karate school and try pretending that you have a black belt in karate. These folks aren't idiots.
NeueRegel 06-16-05, 06:37 PM	Again, you all have missed the points, for the wrong reasons. I don't want to play this character. I don't want a player to play this character. I want this character to make cameo appearances to the party, as a druid, but with an agenda of his own opposed to the druid order that the party is on a quest for. But I want it done by the rules, especially because a co-DM and I are taking turns each game, and we need to be perfectly in sync. We need to fool the players, not the whole world. The players are good roleplayers, but not so good that they'll think to roll a spellcraft check every time this NPC does something they fully expect a druid to do for them. Work with me here... Neue
mvincent 06-16-05, 07:23 PM	The healers in most groups that I played with use CLW wands like AA batteries. After battles, we just ask how many hp each player is down, and mark off 1 charge per 5 hp recovered. Heck, we now just have each player carry there own CLW wand and mark off the charges themselves after battles (assuming there is anyone still conscious that can use it). They are just so inexpensive (and useful) that it's worthwhile I don't think anyone would care if a Druid mostly used a wand for healing (it makes sense from a tactical viewpoint). They might however care if they needed a powerful healing spell in the middle of a tight battle, and all the Druid could offer was CLW... but that's not what you were worried about.
BW0222 06-16-05, 07:27 PM	NeueRegel > Again, you all have missed the points, for the wrong reasons. > We need to fool the players, not the whole world. Then you should look at your original post. Okay, here's the premise: Character wants to be a member of the druidical heirarchy. ... You stated that this person is trying to be a member of the druidical heirarchy. You didn't say that he was trying to disquise himself as a druid or pretend to be a member of a druidical heirarchy. >But I want it done by the rules, Then you had better hope that they don't have spellcraft. Otherwise a simple check reveals that she isn't casting as a druid. She is using the wrong language and components, or she is casting a spell which isn't required. >Work with me here... Sorry... the rules really don't allow it. About the only way she could get away with it would be to not cast the spells other than 1st-level druid spells and hope that the players don't catch on. Maybe she could say that she is a druid/wizard and hope that the players don't notice that she is only casting wizard spells.
NeueRegel 06-16-05, 07:58 PM	You quote good points/examples of my posts, BW. As usual, my stream-of-thought style of writing often leads to many assumptions that I don't mean to throw out there. This has happened in my posts in other threads too, not just here. Much is lost in translation, in the forums. But also, lots of you play differently than we do; we roleplay lots more, and powerplay almost never. These kinds of situations work in our sessions, because we are writing character stories as we go, not hashing rules. We don't even always use grids in combat, but will often go through the roleplaying of changing outfits before a night in the city after arriving from the wilderness. We make spot checks when we suspect something, not otherwise. The DM says "you hear something" if it pertains to something in the adventure that came up half an hour ago. We don't get will saves for Hullicinatory Terrain, even if we make camp, unless somebody decides to because he does a purify water and something is amiss. Different style of playing. No meta-gaming at all. Just the way we play. I should never have brought up the whole druid scheme at all, and I wont the next time I ask. Next time: [/Post] Can I make a wand RAW in another shape? [/Endpost]. Seems a rather boring-a$$ way to write about a game based on imagination, though. :( Neue
Shaken, not Stunned 06-16-05, 07:59 PM	You could break the rules. If you are the DM, that is totally ok. As is, there is not a good way to do this. Eschew materials will solve your focus problem. A feat A wand of cure light wounds is acceptable, and should not draw any extra attention. A spellcraft check will still reveal the name of the spell you cast, and as such your true class. Get over it and stop suggesting that EVERYONE here is wrong, and that YOU are right. These people have given you some great advice and solid suggestions, as well as the actuall real and true rules. They did a ton of work for you. You should be glad. I suggest you ignore the rules and make up a feat which will enable you to continue this trick. Indiscernable Spell (general) Prerequisites Knowledge (arcane) 4, Knowledge (religion) 4, Able to cast arcane spells of at least first level, Able to cast divine spells of at least first level. You are capable of mingling arcane and divine energies, which makes identifying a spell you are casting much more difficult. Increas the DC of any spellcraft check made to determine the name of a spell you are casting by 10. In answer to your question, not really, not by the raw. It lacks precedent and so is a no go. If you want ot stretch and say that, based on the stuff in CA, you can, you have to meet a few pre-req's. 1. A spell-trigger item at set caster level with 50 charages base. 2. Able to be disarmed. 3. Able to be sundered. 4. Can be drawn as if a weapon. Clearly, a ring is not something one can be disarmed of by the raw, nor can it be sundered. Ic is not retrieved like a weapon. So no. There's your answer, just like half of these people have already said. The two items are not similar enough, nor could they be made similar enough, to be interchangable. I get the point, and the answer is still no.
NeueRegel 06-16-05, 08:11 PM	Get over it and stop suggesting that EVERYONE here is wrong, and that YOU are right. I never suggested any such thing! These people have given you some great advice and solid suggestions, as well as the actuall real and true rules. They did a ton of work for you. You should be glad. Indeed, everyone has, to a wonderful extent! And many, many thanks are in order! The only problems that happened here are that I was unclear in terms of game usage, not meant for longterm playing of a class. For this, I apologize. I know the rules, I know all about the unfeasability of pulling it off as a player. It's a game flavor thing, for one or three encounters, to keep things interesting. Thanks again. Neue
BW0222 06-17-05, 03:05 AM	NeueRegel, D&D is a simulation. It creates an alternate reality through the rules of that simulation. Just like our universe is governed by rules (some of which we don't understand), one need not understand all those rules to know their effects on reality. It is not meta-gaming to understand the effects of the rules upon the reality. For example, if you step off a tall cliff, you will fall to your death. It isn't metagaming that someone who doesn't know that Force = Mass * Accelleration knows that a 90 ft. fall is likely fatal. Similiarly folks in the D&D universe may not realize they are going to take 9d6 damage from the fall and they only have 11 hit point, but they do know that stepping off a cliff will likely kill them. i.e. it isn't necessary to understand the underlying rules, to understand the *effect* of the rules in the real world. A person in the D&D world knows that elves have good vision in the dark -- without knowing that it is twice as good as a human. They know that it is hard to sneak up on a dog -- without knowing the details of scent. Meta-gaming is when you use your knowledge of the rules to pre-calculate the effects, typically to avoid them. Spellcasters know that other spellcasters can recognize spells being cast and identify them. They know that this isn't automatic and that higher-level casters are often better at identifying spells. They also know that spells require certain components, that arcane and divine use different components, and that folks cast in different languages. None of this is meta-gaming or powergaming. It is just part of the reality of the universe which the characters live in. They may not know that a d20 + int + ranks in spellcraft must equal or exceed 15 + spell-level, but they do know the effects. >But also, lots of you play differently than we do; we roleplay lots more, and >powerplay almost never. ... Please don't make assumptions of how other people play. A good understanding of the rules is key to good roleplaying. It means that you understand how the universe works -- something that your characters would instinctively know. You know that you can't jump 10' in heavy armour, you know that it's hard to sneak up on a dog, you know that a fight with ten wolves will kill a farmer, etc. Problems with roleplaying come up when players don't know the obvious, direct actions of the characters based on not knowing, see terrible effects, and then say "But my character wouldn't do that then." You get much better roleplaying when you know what your characters would know. In a simulation, that means you know the rules which your character's reality is based on.
Kullak-Kobold Sorcerer 06-17-05, 03:36 AM	There's no such thing as "Spellcraft/Arcane" or "Spellcraft/Divine." It's one skill. Further, to the best of my knowledge, when you use Spellcraft to ID a spell you don't know if it's arcane or dvine - you just know what the spell is. I was referring to Spellcraft or Knowledge Arcana.
Kullak-Kobold Sorcerer 06-17-05, 03:38 AM	Again, you all have missed the points, for the wrong reasons. I don't want to play this character. I don't want a player to play this character. I want this character to make cameo appearances to the party, as a druid, but with an agenda of his own opposed to the druid order that the party is on a quest for. But I want it done by the rules, especially because a co-DM and I are taking turns each game, and we need to be perfectly in sync. We need to fool the players, not the whole world. The players are good roleplayers, but not so good that they'll think to roll a spellcraft check every time this NPC does something they fully expect a druid to do for them. Work with me here... Neue Illusions would work better, and if this is an NPC, you shouldn't have to worry about healing the party.
Quirriff 06-17-05, 03:41 AM	i'm curious is this character going to be a blighter?
Kullak-Kobold Sorcerer 06-17-05, 03:47 AM	Illusions would work better, and if this is an NPC, you shouldn't have to worry about healing the party. The more I think of it, a Bard would be the best class to pull off such a hoax. Using a scroll or wand with Use Magic Device, actually knowing Druidic, use Bluff to make others think he is casting higher magics than they know, etc...... Plus Bards have plenty of illusions. But if he must be a wizard........
Quirriff 06-17-05, 04:28 AM	The more I think of it, a Bard would be the best class to pull off such a hoax. Using a scroll or wand with Use Magic Device, actually knowing Druidic, use Bluff to make others think he is casting higher magics than they know, etc...... Plus Bards have plenty of illusions. But if he must be a wizard........ Bards are also within Druidical orders, (Thus them casting Druid spells in early editions).
sabrewolf 06-17-05, 04:33 AM	For this idea i´d quote the ´great helmet-user in black with breathing-problems´ : "Impressive.. most impressive.." :D Might include advice given by others: To emulate a druid being an arcane, magic itens are your best friends so Create Woundrous Itens should be in your wish list: a glove of cure wounds shall work for what you want (might need craft wand to make the glove work the same way or you make a glove that works 3/day 5/day or even ´at will´) Other wondrous itens can be done for other powers you know exist, boots to walk without trace, amulets of morphing to copy wildshape and the like.. Eschew Materials and the focus rule (forgot in which book i saw that) to create foccuses of material components that costs = MC * 50 shall rid you of using components in the open.. (mask foccuses inside druid-looking-stuff and ta-daa you´re a druid) the Spell Tematics feat give you +1 CL for one chosen spell/spell level and +5 on spellcraft checks to identify your spells. Good to make your spells seem more convincing on their visual effects.. If you have at least 1 level in druid, enough skill points and it was your 2nd level or above, you can put 5 ranks on druid-only skills and with that for prerreq, latter craft skill boosting itens for these skills.. Also, if you get 3 levels in druid you can go Geomancer to ease your casting infusing it with the druidic ways plus get animal traits and blame on your druid side.. or go Mystical Theurge and boost both casting sides :mage: at the cost of not getting wiz´s bonus feats nor druid powers.. ..And plot wise, you could seek a Cleric with the Plant and Animal domains for ally for some help with your ruse and druid-like power emulation... ;)
Scifione 06-17-05, 05:03 AM	Yes, it is possible to craft alternative magic items with the permission of your DM. It is not core, but the basis is sound. If is was a ring that functioned like a wand, it would take up a ring slot. I suggest ignoring the body slot affinity rule to everyone. It is the stupidest thing since the ooze template. It is not off balance to have it take up a ring slot. Although it is not referred to at a slot, what you are carrying in you hands is essentially a magic item slot. If you have a wand in your right hand, you don’t have a magic sword. I would suggest taking ranks in use magic device. I would also suggest taking these feats, fake spell and crossclass learning (bluff, use magic device). This will be helpful when you are suppose to be casting high level spell and using staffs at your caster level. Here goes a feat from the “Netbook of Feats” for your character concept. FAKE SPELL [General] You can mimic the casting of spells Prerequisite: Sleight of Hand 1 rank Benefit: You say the words and make the gestures, but you don’t have the power needed to make the spell actually happen - it just looks like you do. You must have seen the spell you want to fake being cast several times in order to fake it. Make a Sleight of Hand check opposed to the observer's Spellcraft or Intelligence check. Special: Somebody who has readied an action to counterspell and who fails to see through your trickery will think you are about to cast the spell being faked. Notes: If the spell effect would have been unnoticeable (such as most divination spells) or you can fake the effects of the spell (perhaps through illusion, alchemical pyrotechnics or a willing accomplice), people watching you will generally believe the spell was real. Bluff, Perform, Craft (alchemy) and several other skills may be helpful in achieving this, but faking the spell effects themselves is outside the scope of this feat. FAKE SPELL Copyright 2001, Carl Cramér (Updated to 3.5 by NBOF) Balance: 4.04 (Purp 4.80, Pow 4.10, Port 3.70, Comp 3.70, Rule 3.90) CROSS-CLASS LEARNING [General] Pick two skills that become class skills for all your classes. Benefit: Pick any two skills. The selected skills become class skills for all your classes from this point on. Special: This feat may be taken multiple times, but does not stack with itself. Choose two new skills to become class skills each time it is taken. CROSS-CLASS LEARNING Copyright 2000, Bradley H. Bemis Jr. Revised by the Netbook of Feats Review Board Balance: 4.35 (Purp 4.75, Pow 4.00, Port 4.50, Comp 4.75, Rule 3.75) :mage:
NeueRegel 06-17-05, 07:13 AM	Ya'know, you all have taken this to such a silly extreme that it's left a bad taste in my mouth. I wish I'd never given any background at all. I asked a simple question, and you gave a million game mechanic reasons why it wouldn't work, and took it upon yourselves to tear apart a great storyline for reasons all your own. Guess what? The character idea will work; it will work perfectly, in our campaign, and the players will never guess the difference. Somebody here once had a sig that went something like this: "Gandalf was not a wizard; He was a Paladin. He barely cast spells, he fought with a holy longsword, and he rode Shadowfax, a special steed. He just didn't like armor". Guess what? That made me think. Outward appearances are everything. So all of you that can't think outside of the box, eat me. This idea will work perfectly, in our campaign. The players will see what they expect to see. Now, back on topic: The only logical advice I gleaned from any one of you as to why the wand-ring idea (for effects only) would be unbalanced was this: Quothe "Shaken, not Stirred" In answer to your question, not really, not by the raw. It lacks precedent and so is a no go. If you want ot stretch and say that, based on the stuff in CA, you can, you have to meet a few pre-req's. 1. A spell-trigger item at set caster level with 50 charages base. 2. Able to be disarmed. 3. Able to be sundered. 4. Can be drawn as if a weapon. Clearly, a ring is not something one can be disarmed of by the raw, nor can it be sundered. Ic is not retrieved like a weapon. So no. There's your answer, just like half of these people have already said. The two items are not similar enough, nor could they be made similar enough, to be interchangable. I get the point, and the answer is still no. Those are indeed very good game balance reasons, and thanks for bringing them up; not that this "ring" would ever be available to the players, the NPC in question will not be an enemy to be overcome, just a distraction. Since we play core rules only, I'll figure something else out. Somebody else mentioned a splatbook, Complete Arms or something; thanks, but that's not allowed either. Let's all just end the thread now. We'll play D&D for our storyplaying; you go play for your lawyerplaying. NeueRegel
Shatteredtower 06-17-05, 08:12 AM	>He uses wizard spells that duplicate the fire and lightning spells expected of >his "druidry", A DC 15 + level spellcraft check indentifies a spell being cast. You can't substitute one spell for another. However, nothing in the RAW states that you can identify what class cast the spell, or whether it was divine or arcane. By the RAW, seeing flaming sphere cast only reveals that flaming sphere was cast, not that it was cast by a sorcerer, wizard, or druid. You also have to cast using a specific language (i.e. druidic and not draconic) House rule. Neither language is required to cast the given spells. ...and using druid components (i.e. a divine focus) and not wizard components. This is true. The next bit, however, is speculation: Any druid knows immediately you aren't casting as a druid. It's a reasonable bit of speculation, but someone with the least amount of druidic training and a divine focus in hand is not necessarily revealed. It depends on your DM, since the rules do not state anything one way or another on the subject. Wildshape is an extra-ordinary ability. It doesn't require chanting, arm waving, or taking out spell components. Polymorph isn't the same since it doesn't provide the ability to speak in that form and it can be dispelled. Good points, except that it's a supernatural ability and neither can you speak in a wildshaped animal form (third paragraph of the wildshape entry). The character can't risk doing this under observation without being discovered, at least not without a bit of preparation, but it's not an entirely unfeasible bluff. The rest assumes much. It's based on a reasonable model for how a druidic society might construct itself, but it's not the only feasible model for such a concept. Working strictly by the book, a wand must look like a wand. On the other hand, if money is no object, there's nothing to rule out the possibility of researching the means to create a ring or wondrous item that suits your needs. Such a thing would easily be more expensive than a wand, but possibly more versatile. Furthermore, it's the sort of item that could have been created by the character with non-druidic assistance and gradually improved over time. For example, would an item that casts cure light wounds three times a day and remove disease and cure serious wounds once each per day suit your purposes? The ruse could be detected by a Spellcraft check, at least in theory -- if you can use Spellcraft to identify a spell being cast, can you not also use it to fake casting said spell? Perhaps not by a strict reading of the RAW, but if it's a spell you can cast at your level, it's very much a matter of interpretation. It's not like your 1st level druid can't go through the motions of casting cure light wounds, even if it's not been prepared. By the rules, you should probably allow a Bluff vs. Sense Motive check vs. any spellcasters, but at the modifier for "The target wants to believe you," in most cases. On the other hand, with such an item, is there any reason a druid would feel the need to prepare such spells? "I created this torc for such situations." It saves you a lot of the need to fake casting certain spells, after all, and may even improve your druid's status. Again, it's expensive (especially since you need to research its creation first -- possibly several times if it keeps getting upgraded), but it might work for the idea you wish to pursue.
Thelon Fairblade 06-17-05, 08:24 AM	The posted question has been answered (although some believe no extra cost, and some believe extra cost). As for concealing the arcane/wizard nature of your spells, Dark Sun has "official" (Dragon magazine) rules for disguising your spells (slieght of hand and bluff, I think).
journeyman777 06-17-05, 08:48 AM	If you want him to use wands for healing and make it look like a touch effect, why not just cast invisibility on the wand when nobody's looking? Your players will never suspect a thing. BTW: Interesting concept. What lvl did you want this guy to be?