Persistable first level arcane spells

[FocusWolf413]

One person I know has a character who's a sneak attacker. He dipped into wizard and started taking unseen seer levels. In his group, persistent spell is 1 spell per day, but at no spell level adjustment. What non divination spells should he persist?

[PaucaTerrorem]

True strike?

[Biffoniacus_Furiou]

PHB: Shield, Expeditious Retreat

SC: Critical Strike (Divination, but by far one of the best), Nightshield, Serene Visage

[FocusWolf413]

It looks like all of the best spells are divinations, which are unusable in the area he's in. I suggested shield and expeditious retreat too. He'll probably use those.

Thanks.

[Cruiser1]

One person I know has a character who's a sneak attacker. He dipped into wizard and started taking unseen seer levels. What non divination spells should he persist?

Protection From Evil: You are now immune to possession, and the effects of charms and compulsions that give enemies control over you. Also AC and save bonuses against evil creatures.

Blades of Fire (SC): Up to 2 weapons deal an extra 1d8 fire damage (stacks with all other sources of damage). Not useful for most Wizards, but a sneak attacker should consider it.

[Biffoniacus_Furiou]

True strike?

Spells that get discharged cannot be made persistent. No matter how long you make True Strike last, it always goes away after you make one attack roll.

Protection From Evil: You are now immune to possession, and the effects of charms and compulsions that give enemies control over you. Also AC and save bonuses against evil creatures.

Blades of Fire (SC): Up to 2 weapons deal an extra 1d8 fire damage (stacks with all other sources of damage). Not useful for most Wizards, but a sneak attacker should consider it.

Range: Touch spells cannot be made persistent. Natural reach varies with size, thus making touch a non-fixed range.

[Nifft]

Sniloc's Snowball - get an at-will ranged attack all day (1d6+5 damage); might also be useful to chill drinks.

Fist of Stone - +6 Strength (enhancement) and a slam attack.

Serene Visage - get a bonus equal to half your caster level on social stuff; it's an Illusion rather than a Divination.

[Crake]

Range: Touch spells cannot be made persistent. Natural reach varies with size, thus making touch a non-fixed range.

This is your interpretation honestly. It says a fixed range, that may simply mean no variability in the Range: section of the spell. Saying that range touch is variable because of the size of the creature is the same as saying that range unlimited is variable because of the expanding size of the universe. The range itself doesn't change, it's fixed to touch, and will never be anything other than touch, as opposed to short, medium or long, which will change based on the CL of the spell.

[Cruiser1]

Range: Touch spells cannot be made persistent. Natural reach varies with size, thus making touch a non-fixed range.

This is your interpretation honestly. It says a fixed range, that may simply mean no variability in the Range: section of the spell. Saying that range touch is variable because of the size of the creature is the same as saying that range unlimited is variable because of the expanding size of the universe. The range itself doesn't change, it's fixed to touch, and will never be anything other than touch, as opposed to short, medium or long, which will change based on the CL of the spell.

Also, you can change Touch range spells into a fixed numeric range with the Reach Spell or Ocular Spell metamagic feats (which is a common technique employed by Persistomancer characters).

[Nifft]

IMHO the "constant range" thing is intended to cover spells which target You (the caster) but work as emanations, like detect magic.

It's to cover a flaw in spell terminology: that Range sometimes means distance-to-subject, and at other times Range means distance-to-direct-object.

IMHO a rules-as-intended Persistent effect could not apply to a Touch range spell. This was explicit in 3.0e, I'm not sure why they changed that wording.

[Crake]

IMHO the "constant range" thing is intended to cover spells which target You (the caster) but work as emanations, like detect magic.

It's to cover a flaw in spell terminology: that Range sometimes means distance-to-subject, and at other times Range means distance-to-direct-object.

IMHO a rules-as-intended Persistent effect could not apply to a Touch range spell. This was explicit in 3.0e, I'm not sure why they changed that wording.

I personally use the very fact that they removed the inability to affect touch spells clause from it's 3.0 version means that they intended for the 3.5 version to affect touch spells. That's the ruling I use at my table, and I'm not gonna get into a debate about it here, I just don't like when people state their interpretation as fact, when it's just once side of the interpretation.

[Nifft]

I personally use the very fact that they removed the inability to affect touch spells clause from it's 3.0 version means that they intended for the 3.5 version to affect touch spells. That's the ruling I use at my table, and I'm not gonna get into a debate about it here, I just don't like when people state their interpretation as fact, when it's just once side of the interpretation.

As far as I can tell, Touch is not a constant range.

You can touch yourself (Range: 0 ft.) or you can touch someone nearby (Range: 5 ft.) or if you have more reach, you can touch someone even further away.

5 ft. away from yourself can't be the same as yourself. I'm sure there's a formal mathematical proof of that somewhere.

There are spells which have range "Touch or Personal", and those can be Persisted if you pick the "Personal" option.

That said, yeah, people can do whatever they want at their own tables.

[ExLibrisMortis]

You can touch yourself (Range: 0 ft.) or you can touch someone nearby (Range: 5 ft.) or if you have more reach, you can touch someone even further away.

You can affect targets 20' away with a 30' range spell, or even yourself. I'm not sure why you think 5' range (a small/medium creature's touch) is somehow different.

[Urpriest]

It looks like all of the best spells are divinations, which are unusable in the area he's in. I suggested shield and expeditious retreat too. He'll probably use those.

Thanks.

Note that before too long he'll probably be in an area where he can use divinations again (though admittedly this might happen after he gains access to higher level spells). Most DMs would warn you before taking Unseen Seer levels if you were going to spend multiple levels in a plane with divination suppressed or the like.

[FocusWolf413]

Note that before too long he'll probably be in an area where he can use divinations again (though admittedly this might happen after he gains access to higher level spells). Most DMs would warn you before taking Unseen Seer levels if you were going to spend multiple levels in a plane with divination suppressed or the like.

Yeah, they'll come back online eventually. Thing is, even with no divinations, unseen seer is way better than arcane trickster.

[Nifft]

You can affect targets 20' away with a 30' range spell, or even yourself. I'm not sure why you think 5' range (a small/medium creature's touch) is somehow different.

I did explain why -- it's because subject and direct object are different things, and Range can be used for either.

To put it another way: if you cast Persistent detect magic, you are not affecting any targets 20' away or 30' away. You are only affecting yourself, by giving yourself more information about things within the spell's range. The spell's effect can only target you.

IMHO that's the sort of effect which is intended to work with Persistent Spell.

But, again, if you do otherwise in your game, it's not going to adversely affect anything I care about.

[Chronos]

Personally, I can't understand why Persist Spell depends on range at all. It would make sense if it were restricted somehow based on duration, but what does duration have to do with range?

[zergling.exe]

Personally, I can't understand why Persist Spell depends on range at all. It would make sense if it were restricted somehow based on duration, but what does duration have to do with range?

Likely to try and restrict it to self buffs.

[Nifft]

Personally, I can't understand why Persist Spell depends on range at all. It would make sense if it were restricted somehow based on duration, but what does duration have to do with range?

It's because some self-buffs use "Range" to mean the spell's direct object, instead of the spell's subject. An example -- which is given in the Persistent Spell text -- is detect magic.

If spell Range were consistently the range to the subject, and there were a different range for spells which operated on direct objects, then such a clumsy clause would not be necessary.

[ExLibrisMortis]

I did explain why -- it's because subject and direct object are different things, and Range can be used for either.

To put it another way: if you cast Persistent detect magic, you are not affecting any targets 20' away or 30' away. You are only affecting yourself, by giving yourself more information about things within the spell's range. The spell's effect can only target you.

Well, clearly you are affecting things (not 'target:' things, but things), else the spell wouldn't have a 60' range. Detect magic doesn't have a target: it affects a cone-shaped area, which by definition starts from one of the four corners of your square, as per PHB 175: "A cone-shaped spell shoots away from you in a quarter-circle in the direction you designate. It starts from any corner of your square and widens out as it goes". It feeds the information back to the caster, because that's in the description. Arcane sight, on the other hand, has "Range: Personal" and mentions the 120' detection limit in the description. My conclusion is that detect magic must be an active ping, rather than passively listening like arcane sight.

There may well be spells that have some editing mistake and use 'range' for something other than range, but that doesn't affect the eligibility of touch spells for Persistent Spell (other things might, of course, such as the size/reach inconstancy).

[Nifft]

Well, clearly you are affecting targets, else the spell wouldn't have a 60' range. Detect magic doesn't have a target: it affects a cone-shaped area, which by definition starts from one of the four corners of your square, as per PHB 175: "A cone-shaped spell shoots away from you in a quarter-circle in the direction you designate. It starts from any corner of your square and widens out as it goes". Arcane sight, on the other hand, has "Range: Personal" and mentions the 120' detection limit in the description. My conclusion is that detect magic must be an active ping, rather than passively listening like arcane sight.

There may well be spells that have some editing mistake and use 'range' for something other than range, but that doesn't affect the eligibility of touch spells for Persistent Spell (other things might, of course, such as the size/reach inconstancy).

What detect magic affects is the caster, because the caster is the only thing changed by the spell: the caster learns about magic within a zone. The objects which detect magic detects are not changed. Only the caster's knowledge is changed. Only the caster is affected.

This is exactly analogous to how tremorsense affects the caster, by giving the caster a new sense which has a range. The things you detect via tremorsense are not affected by the spell.

IMHO detect magic certainly should be Persist-able, but that's not because detect magic has any particular Range. Rather, it's because detect magic is an effect that targets You like a Personal effect, even if it does a poor job of indicating this fact in its statistics block.

Similarly, IMHO the spell thunderlance is a valid spell to Persist, even though it can hit targets at variable range -- the effect is the lance, and that's got a constant range of 0 (in your hand).

Contrarywise, IMHO a Ray spell is not a valid spell to Persist, because the effect of the spell is the Ray, and the Ray itself is an Instantaneous effect. I know this goes against some popular interpretations, but I think it's consistent.

- - -

Anyway, it doesn't really matter unless the OP is a DM who is looking for advice on how to handle Persistent Magic in his or her game.

[ExLibrisMortis]

This is exactly analogous to how darkvision affects the caster, by giving the caster a new sense which has a range.

By RAW, no, this is not the case.

Darkvision has a target ("Creature touched") and a range ("Touch"). The 60' range of the darkvision granted by the spell is mentioned in the description.
Detect magic has an area ("Cone-shaped area") and a range ("60 feet"). The fact that it informs the caster is mentioned in the description.

I get your point, and yes, you could write a version of detect magic analogous to darkvision - that's pretty much arcane sight. However, detect magic is not that spell.

You claim that detect magic does the same thing that arcane sight does, but with a weird range entry. That's not how it works. Detect magic uses a different method to obtain the same information that arcane sight gives you, as evidenced by the fact that detect magic has a different range entry, a 'Save: No' entry and an 'SR: No' entry.

Detect magic is active, arcane sight is passive, hence the different range entries.

[Curmudgeon]

This is your interpretation honestly. It says a fixed range, that may simply mean no variability in the Range: section of the spell. Saying that range touch is variable because of the size of the creature is the same as saying that range unlimited is variable because of the expanding size of the universe. The range itself doesn't change, it's fixed to touch, and will never be anything other than touch, as opposed to short, medium or long, which will change based on the CL of the spell.

This isn't consistent. You might just as plausibly argue that Medium range isn't variable, because once a spell description states that it has Medium range that won't change to Short or Long.

Medium range is variable with caster level. Touch range is variable with caster reach. There is no restriction in Persistent Spell to particular variables; rather, all variables (anything where the range is not fixed but instead is dependent on the character casting the spell) exclude use of the feat.

[Nifft]

By RAW, no, this is not the case.

Darkvision has a target ("Creature touched") and a range ("Touch").

Ah, that's my mistake. Thanks for catching it.

The analogy I should have used is a spell like Tremorsense, not Darkvision.

I get your point, and yes, you could write a version of detect magic analogous to darkvision - that's pretty much arcane sight. However, detect magic is not that spell.

You claim that detect magic does the same thing that arcane sight does, but with a weird range entry. That's not how it works. Detect magic uses a different method to obtain the same information that arcane sight gives you, as evidenced by the fact that detect magic has a different range entry, a 'Save: No' entry and an 'SR: No' entry.

Detect magic is active, arcane sight is passive, hence the different range entries.

Hmm.

I think that, since arcane sight says that it works like detect magic except faster and with more range, therefore arcane sight would inherit Saving Throw: None. and SR: No. from detect magic.

But yeah, I think they are exactly the same effect, except as noted in their descriptions.

That's why detect magic can be made Permanent on yourself -- not on a bunch of objects which you are currently looking at, but rather on you -- it's because detect magic targets you, exactly the same way arcane sight targets you.

Your interpretation would mean that a Permanent detect magic would not have any sensible utility.

[Rubik]

Depending on how he wants to play it, I would suggest either Enlarge Person or Reduce Person. The first grants increased reach, increased Str, and some pretty big bonuses on combat maneuvers (trip, disarm, etc). The second grants bonuses to AC, Dex, to-hit, and Hide.

If he's Medium and uses melee, I'd suggest Enlarge. If he's Small and uses ranged, I'd suggest Reduce.

[elonin]

Likely to try and restrict it to self buffs.

For persist spells it is a better idea to use it on self buffs. Especially on a gish. I'm curious how this character is persisting without high level spells or DMM.

I'm not trying to start an argument, but have heard of builds in which persist was used to grant the character day long ray attacks. Thought I smelled some gouda but don't know enough to say for sure.

[Urpriest]

For persist spells it is a better idea to use it on self buffs. Especially on a gish. I'm curious how this character is persisting without high level spells or DMM.

I'm not trying to start an argument, but have heard of builds in which persist was used to grant the character day long ray attacks. Thought I smelled some gouda but don't know enough to say for sure.

In this case, the OP explicitly says they houseruled persist to only be usable 1/day, but require no level adjustment.

And while that seems like a pretty breakable houserule, it's apparently what they're playing with.