Author Topic: Lily, Angel of Injection  (Read 4974 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Sobolev

  • Donkey Kong
  • ****
  • Posts: 742
Lily, Angel of Injection
« on: September 30, 2010, 06:59:53 PM »
Making a new character (I love to theorycraft, can you tell?)...

Inspired by the idea of using Tiny Arrows of Spell Storing as hypodermics I would like to make a character who makes use of this in the extreme, possibly (hopefully) shooting more than one arrow a turn in order to abuse action economy and cast multiple buffs on the first round of combat.

I figure for a base class Cleric or Archivist is likely the answer just for access to buffs.

I need some consistent way to hit allies as well, unsure of how to go about that.

Halp?

Constraints:
32 Point Buy
Books published by WotC or Dragon Magazine (please cite your sources so I can look them up!)

Ideas:
Tiny Arrows
Precise Shot
Multishot
« Last Edit: September 30, 2010, 07:02:29 PM by Sobolev »
Sha'ir Handbook
Binder Handbook


Quote from: Negative Zero on November 04, 2009, 02:16:14 AM
In my humble opinion, CO is haberdashery. Some say we're mad, but we can all agree we're hatters. Yes, we have potential to make very sophisticated hats, very fancy hats, be they dark or light. But the truth is that the color of the hat does not come from the group of us - our community doesn't directly produce hats. We simply give average head circumferences, list current fashion trends, and point out some shiny, obscure baubles to add to the latest hat line.

Bozwevial

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 4497
  • Developing a relaxed attitude to danger.
Re: Lily, Angel of Injection
« Reply #1 on: September 30, 2010, 07:05:02 PM »
Does Splitting work on Spell-Storing arrows? That would be good to have around.

KellKheraptis

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 2668
  • What's the matter? I thought you had me...
    • Email
Re: Lily, Angel of Injection
« Reply #2 on: September 30, 2010, 07:08:26 PM »
Chained Telekinesis :)  CL squared buffs, in a swift action if you quicken it.  It wasn't until I realized this that I saw why TML isn't as big a fan of War Weavers as I am :P
BG's Resident Black Hatter
The Mango List Reborn!
My Warmage Trickery (coming soon!)
My PrC Pally Trickery (coming soon!)
The D&D Archive
-Work in progress!

Sobolev

  • Donkey Kong
  • ****
  • Posts: 742
Re: Lily, Angel of Injection
« Reply #3 on: September 30, 2010, 07:32:42 PM »
Chained Telekinesis :)  CL squared buffs, in a swift action if you quicken it.  It wasn't until I realized this that I saw why TML isn't as big a fan of War Weavers as I am :P

Please explain!
Sha'ir Handbook
Binder Handbook


Quote from: Negative Zero on November 04, 2009, 02:16:14 AM
In my humble opinion, CO is haberdashery. Some say we're mad, but we can all agree we're hatters. Yes, we have potential to make very sophisticated hats, very fancy hats, be they dark or light. But the truth is that the color of the hat does not come from the group of us - our community doesn't directly produce hats. We simply give average head circumferences, list current fashion trends, and point out some shiny, obscure baubles to add to the latest hat line.

KellKheraptis

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 2668
  • What's the matter? I thought you had me...
    • Email
Re: Lily, Angel of Injection
« Reply #4 on: September 30, 2010, 07:36:57 PM »
Chained Telekinesis :)  CL squared buffs, in a swift action if you quicken it.  It wasn't until I realized this that I saw why TML isn't as big a fan of War Weavers as I am :P

Please explain!

A standard TK can fling CL (max 15) weapons as ranged attacks, using casting stat instead of Dex.  A chained TK affects 15xCL weapons, doing the same thing.  Now, pick any 300 or so nice buffs, and TK them into your buddies.  Hell, half buffs and half debuffs at the enemy :P  And enlarge the debuff sticks first.
BG's Resident Black Hatter
The Mango List Reborn!
My Warmage Trickery (coming soon!)
My PrC Pally Trickery (coming soon!)
The D&D Archive
-Work in progress!

Unbeliever

  • King Kong
  • ****
  • Posts: 766
Re: Lily, Angel of Injection
« Reply #5 on: September 30, 2010, 07:38:44 PM »
This is not the first time this has come up, but I was always under the impression that spell-storing could only be applied to melee weapons.  For example, it's only under the melee weapon special abilities here: http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicItems/magicWeapons.htm

This makes this plan either impossible, or very expensive -- 8k for each spell-storing weapon minimum.  Maybe Kensai's +10% for every extra natural weapon can help defray some of the cost.  

Cagemarrow

  • Bi-Curious George
  • ****
  • Posts: 470
Re: Lily, Angel of Injection
« Reply #6 on: September 30, 2010, 07:44:26 PM »
well. . .if you add it to Diminuitive or smaller spears. . .price is still really high, but then they can be reused instead of being destroyed. Make them the Ricktick (spelling?) from frostburn and you can recover them after the fight by pulling them out of their skin like they were thorns.

Sobolev

  • Donkey Kong
  • ****
  • Posts: 742
Re: Lily, Angel of Injection
« Reply #7 on: September 30, 2010, 08:20:35 PM »
This is not the first time this has come up, but I was always under the impression that spell-storing could only be applied to melee weapons.  For example, it's only under the melee weapon special abilities here: http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicItems/magicWeapons.htm

This makes this plan either impossible, or very expensive -- 8k for each spell-storing weapon minimum.  Maybe Kensai's +10% for every extra natural weapon can help defray some of the cost.  

That list hardly seems complete, I think it's just for random generation purposes.

Additionally, weapon properties applied to projectiles is for 50, so it's only 160gp per arrow.  And then if you make them I guess it's 80.  It doesn't seem that bad to me.

Edit: Assuming I go the Telekinesis route, what do I do at lower levels.  Also DMM/Chain?  Archivist 9/Cleric 1/Dweomerkeeper 10? =D
« Last Edit: September 30, 2010, 08:28:04 PM by Sobolev »
Sha'ir Handbook
Binder Handbook


Quote from: Negative Zero on November 04, 2009, 02:16:14 AM
In my humble opinion, CO is haberdashery. Some say we're mad, but we can all agree we're hatters. Yes, we have potential to make very sophisticated hats, very fancy hats, be they dark or light. But the truth is that the color of the hat does not come from the group of us - our community doesn't directly produce hats. We simply give average head circumferences, list current fashion trends, and point out some shiny, obscure baubles to add to the latest hat line.

KellKheraptis

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 2668
  • What's the matter? I thought you had me...
    • Email
Re: Lily, Angel of Injection
« Reply #8 on: September 30, 2010, 08:44:12 PM »
This is not the first time this has come up, but I was always under the impression that spell-storing could only be applied to melee weapons.  For example, it's only under the melee weapon special abilities here: http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicItems/magicWeapons.htm

This makes this plan either impossible, or very expensive -- 8k for each spell-storing weapon minimum.  Maybe Kensai's +10% for every extra natural weapon can help defray some of the cost.  

That list hardly seems complete, I think it's just for random generation purposes.

Additionally, weapon properties applied to projectiles is for 50, so it's only 160gp per arrow.  And then if you make them I guess it's 80.  It doesn't seem that bad to me.

Edit: Assuming I go the Telekinesis route, what do I do at lower levels.  Also DMM/Chain?  Archivist 9/Cleric 1/Dweomerkeeper 10? =D

Sorcerer 2/Rainbow Servant 10/Incantatrix 4/Dweomerkeeper 4

Also gets full access to Sorc's action novas, reformatting of spells/feats on the fly thanks to Persistent Unfettered Heroism/Supernatural Limited Wish (PsyRef), ready access to any crafting you want (PsyRef), 20/20 casting, metamagic effect, 3 extra spells known (detect evil, thoughts, and chaos), 2 more that are mutable (Mantle of Spells 1 and 2), and 2 free metamagic feats.  Any feat not needed for PrC's (which after getting into RS is all of them other than two metamagic feats and Iron Will bought from the O-hole) is also Psy-able, meaning any combo/trick you want that day is all yours.
BG's Resident Black Hatter
The Mango List Reborn!
My Warmage Trickery (coming soon!)
My PrC Pally Trickery (coming soon!)
The D&D Archive
-Work in progress!

fallen-angle

  • Ring-Tailed Lemur
  • **
  • Posts: 51
    • Email
Re: Lily, Angel of Injection
« Reply #9 on: September 30, 2010, 08:54:44 PM »
I am afraid chain telekinesis doesn't work the way you think.

Telekinesis says:  the spell energy can be spent in a single round. You can hurl one object or creature per caster level (maximum 15) that are within range and all within 10 feet of each other toward any target within 10 feet per level of all the objects. You can hurl up to a total weight of 25 pounds per caster level (maximum 375 pounds at 15th level).

This can be interpreted in two ways.

1) The Items are the chained target. This means that you can indeed throw 300 arrows in one go, HOWEVER, they must all go at one target. Telekinesis specifies "any target", not "any number of targets", suggesting that only a single target can be hit at any one time with the spell. This target must be within CL*10 feet of the objects. Still awesome, as a wall of debuffs it is nearly unparalleled, but not a party buffing mechanism.

2) People are the chained target. This would mean that you could hit several different people with arrows, however you could only throw a number of arrows equal to your CL. Not bad, however since the arrows are spell storing, most of the spells would be delivered to the first target, therefore the arrows that hit the chained enemies would just be sharp sticks. Mind you, this is still strong. Since you decide when the spells come out you could make sure only the spells you want are dispersed across your desired targets.

Chain spell cannot do both of the above. That would imply two different targets (items and people) which chain spell explicitly prohibits.
Master Transmographist Guide (In Progress): http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=9277.20

X-Codes

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 3941
Re: Lily, Angel of Injection
« Reply #10 on: September 30, 2010, 08:55:58 PM »
That list hardly seems complete, I think it's just for random generation purposes.

Additionally, weapon properties applied to projectiles is for 50, so it's only 160gp per arrow.  And then if you make them I guess it's 80.  It doesn't seem that bad to me.

Edit: Assuming I go the Telekinesis route, what do I do at lower levels.  Also DMM/Chain?  Archivist 9/Cleric 1/Dweomerkeeper 10? =D
By the very nature of the game, saying that something isn't comprehensive is not a legitimate argument to say that the RAW condones something other than what's been explicitly statted out.  In other words, spell storing melee weapons are RAW because they are explicitly listed.  Spell storing arrows are not, because they aren't.

Bozwevial

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 4497
  • Developing a relaxed attitude to danger.
Re: Lily, Angel of Injection
« Reply #11 on: September 30, 2010, 09:19:04 PM »
Can't you use an arrow as an improvised melee weapon, though?

Sobolev

  • Donkey Kong
  • ****
  • Posts: 742
Re: Lily, Angel of Injection
« Reply #12 on: September 30, 2010, 09:20:04 PM »
This is not the first time this has come up, but I was always under the impression that spell-storing could only be applied to melee weapons.  For example, it's only under the melee weapon special abilities here: http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicItems/magicWeapons.htm

This makes this plan either impossible, or very expensive -- 8k for each spell-storing weapon minimum.  Maybe Kensai's +10% for every extra natural weapon can help defray some of the cost.  

That list hardly seems complete, I think it's just for random generation purposes.

Additionally, weapon properties applied to projectiles is for 50, so it's only 160gp per arrow.  And then if you make them I guess it's 80.  It doesn't seem that bad to me.

Edit: Assuming I go the Telekinesis route, what do I do at lower levels.  Also DMM/Chain?  Archivist 9/Cleric 1/Dweomerkeeper 10? =D

Sorcerer 2/Rainbow Servant 10/Incantatrix 4/Dweomerkeeper 4

Also gets full access to Sorc's action novas, reformatting of spells/feats on the fly thanks to Persistent Unfettered Heroism/Supernatural Limited Wish (PsyRef), ready access to any crafting you want (PsyRef), 20/20 casting, metamagic effect, 3 extra spells known (detect evil, thoughts, and chaos), 2 more that are mutable (Mantle of Spells 1 and 2), and 2 free metamagic feats.  Any feat not needed for PrC's (which after getting into RS is all of them other than two metamagic feats and Iron Will bought from the O-hole) is also Psy-able, meaning any combo/trick you want that day is all yours.

I might be missing something, but how do you qualify for those prestige classes? >_>
Sha'ir Handbook
Binder Handbook


Quote from: Negative Zero on November 04, 2009, 02:16:14 AM
In my humble opinion, CO is haberdashery. Some say we're mad, but we can all agree we're hatters. Yes, we have potential to make very sophisticated hats, very fancy hats, be they dark or light. But the truth is that the color of the hat does not come from the group of us - our community doesn't directly produce hats. We simply give average head circumferences, list current fashion trends, and point out some shiny, obscure baubles to add to the latest hat line.

KellKheraptis

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 2668
  • What's the matter? I thought you had me...
    • Email
Re: Lily, Angel of Injection
« Reply #13 on: September 30, 2010, 09:30:54 PM »
Sanctum Spell+Versatile Spellcaster to get into Rainbow Servant (with a level to spare technically, left it at 2 to make it even), all non-Sor/Wiz cleric spells gained from RS 10 remain divine, thus qualifying for Dweomerkeeper so long as you have a metamagic feat (duh) and an Item Creation feat (easy enough), and one more metamagic plus O-hole gets into Incantatrix.  Easy as pie, versatile, powerful, and the Adaptation of RS even opens up actual decent domains (though getting Holy Word/Dictum is pretty nice, even if it's also on the normal Cleric list).
BG's Resident Black Hatter
The Mango List Reborn!
My Warmage Trickery (coming soon!)
My PrC Pally Trickery (coming soon!)
The D&D Archive
-Work in progress!

X-Codes

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 3941
Re: Lily, Angel of Injection
« Reply #14 on: September 30, 2010, 11:57:31 PM »
Can't you use an arrow as an improvised melee weapon, though?
Improvised is the key word there.  AFAIK you can't make +1 spell storing folding chairs, either.

Bozwevial

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 4497
  • Developing a relaxed attitude to danger.
Re: Lily, Angel of Injection
« Reply #15 on: October 01, 2010, 12:03:01 AM »
Can't you use an arrow as an improvised melee weapon, though?
Improvised is the key word there.  AFAIK you can't make +1 spell storing folding chairs, either.
Do you happen to know the source? I don't think it's possible either, but on the off chance it is it would be hilarious.

The_Mad_Linguist

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 8780
  • Simulated Thing
Re: Lily, Angel of Injection
« Reply #16 on: October 01, 2010, 12:39:42 AM »
By the very nature of the game, saying that something isn't comprehensive is not a legitimate argument to say that the RAW condones something other than what's been explicitly statted out.  In other words, spell storing melee weapons are RAW because they are explicitly listed.  Spell storing arrows are not, because they aren't.

There exists a "list of enchantments which can be applied to objects of the subclass 'weapons'"
Of the set of "enchantments which can be applied to objects of the subclass 'weapons'", there exist some enchantments which explicitly state that they are "enchantments which can be applied only to the 'melee' subset of 'weapons'" or "enchantments which can be applied to the 'ranged' subset of 'weapons'"

There also exists a "table of enchanted weapons that can be randomly generated".

My assertion is that if a weapon A belongs to the "subset of 'weapons'", then it is a valid target for any enchantment B on the "list of enchantments which can be applied to objects of the subclass 'weapons'", provided
NOT((A is not member of the "melee subset of weapons")&&(B is a "enchantment which can be applied only to the 'melee' subset of 'weapons'"))
&&
NOT((A is not member of the "ranged subset of weapons")&&(B is a "enchantment which can be applied only to the 'ranged' subset of 'weapons'"))


That is, in plain English, the list of weapon enchantments just says they're enchantments for weapons.  Some enchantments specify melee only or ranged only.  Others do not.  Since the text says "these things can be applied to weapons", and arrows are weapons, who cares about what a random weapon generator says (unless you want to somehow put "roll again twice" as a weapon enchantment).
« Last Edit: October 01, 2010, 12:57:48 AM by The_Mad_Linguist »
Linguist, Mad, Unique, none of these things am I
My custom class: The Priest of the Unseen Host
Planetouched Handbook
Want to improve your character?  Then die.

Sobolev

  • Donkey Kong
  • ****
  • Posts: 742
Re: Lily, Angel of Injection
« Reply #17 on: October 01, 2010, 12:53:31 AM »
By the very nature of the game, saying that something isn't comprehensive is not a legitimate argument to say that the RAW condones something other than what's been explicitly statted out.  In other words, spell storing melee weapons are RAW because they are explicitly listed.  Spell storing arrows are not, because they aren't.

There exists a "list of enchantments which can be applied to objects of the subclass 'weapons'"
Of the set of "enchantments which can be applied to objects of the subclass 'weapons'", there exist some enchantments which explicitly state that they are "enchantments which can be applied only to the 'melee' subset of 'weapons'" or "enchantments which can be applied to the 'ranged' subset of 'weapons'"

There also exists a "table of enchanted weapons that can be randomly generated".

My assertion is that if a weapon A belongs to the "subset of 'weapons'", then it is a valid target for any enchantment B on the "list of enchantments which can be applied to objects of the subclass 'weapons'", provided
NOT((A is not member of the "melee subset of weapons")&&(B is a "enchantment which can be applied only to the 'melee' subset of 'weapons'"))
&&
NOT((A is not member of the "ranged subset of weapons")&&(B is a "enchantment which can be applied only to the 'ranged' subset of 'weapons'"))


Now that I have actually seen such a table, I understand.  However, I think this is one of the least troublesome things I have ever asked a DM for so I think I can slide it by.  Now, back to having fun with the idea.
Sha'ir Handbook
Binder Handbook


Quote from: Negative Zero on November 04, 2009, 02:16:14 AM
In my humble opinion, CO is haberdashery. Some say we're mad, but we can all agree we're hatters. Yes, we have potential to make very sophisticated hats, very fancy hats, be they dark or light. But the truth is that the color of the hat does not come from the group of us - our community doesn't directly produce hats. We simply give average head circumferences, list current fashion trends, and point out some shiny, obscure baubles to add to the latest hat line.

PhaedrusXY

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 8022
  • Advanced Spambot
Re: Lily, Angel of Injection
« Reply #18 on: October 01, 2010, 12:58:41 AM »
You could do the same thing with Caelic's "Lord of the Pies" idea, except up to 6th level spells.
[spoiler]
A couple of water benders, a dike, a flaming arrow, and a few barrels of blasting jelly?

Sounds like the makings of a gay porn film.
...thanks
[/spoiler]

X-Codes

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 3941
Re: Lily, Angel of Injection
« Reply #19 on: October 01, 2010, 03:16:00 AM »
By the very nature of the game, saying that something isn't comprehensive is not a legitimate argument to say that the RAW condones something other than what's been explicitly statted out.  In other words, spell storing melee weapons are RAW because they are explicitly listed.  Spell storing arrows are not, because they aren't.

There exists a "list of enchantments which can be applied to objects of the subclass 'weapons'"
Of the set of "enchantments which can be applied to objects of the subclass 'weapons'", there exist some enchantments which explicitly state that they are "enchantments which can be applied only to the 'melee' subset of 'weapons'" or "enchantments which can be applied to the 'ranged' subset of 'weapons'"

There also exists a "table of enchanted weapons that can be randomly generated".

My assertion is that if a weapon A belongs to the "subset of 'weapons'", then it is a valid target for any enchantment B on the "list of enchantments which can be applied to objects of the subclass 'weapons'", provided
NOT((A is not member of the "melee subset of weapons")&&(B is a "enchantment which can be applied only to the 'melee' subset of 'weapons'"))
&&
NOT((A is not member of the "ranged subset of weapons")&&(B is a "enchantment which can be applied only to the 'ranged' subset of 'weapons'"))


That is, in plain English, the list of weapon enchantments just says they're enchantments for weapons.  Some enchantments specify melee only or ranged only.  Others do not.  Since the text says "these things can be applied to weapons", and arrows are weapons, who cares about what a random weapon generator says (unless you want to somehow put "roll again twice" as a weapon enchantment).
I do not refute any of this, but my concern lies in the actual truth values of the relevant statements, especially "enchantment which can be applied only to the 'melee' subset of 'weapons'."  The table, which could very well be a simple random treasure table, implies to me that the truth value of this statement is T, and that "A is not member of the 'melee subset of weapons'" is also T because arrows are ammunition.  As a result, the conjunction of the two statements is also T, the negation changes it to F, and, therefore, regardless of the truth value of the other conjunction, the final result is F, and as such Spell Storing cannot be applied to Arrows.

That said, since my post the OP has noted this concern and stated that it will be a likely houserule that Spell Storing arrows can be made, anyway.  Therefore, I change my position to this:

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicItems/magicWeapons.htm#merciful

Using a Merciful Shortbow (or, even better, a Merciful Sling) will cause some nonlethal damage to your allies, but it guarantees that you'll never be the one that kills them.  If the nonlethal damage becomes problematic, use wands of CLW or Lesser Vigor between battles to recover.