[Magic] In ceremonial magic, what's the minimum FP expenditure for the leader?

[Refplace]

Originally Posted by Michael Thayne

Really this isn't limited to Lend Energy, the rules for magic items seem to incentivize passing around wands if you want to cast a spell repeatedly, which isn't a thing in most settings that I've seen. Possibly more items should be "mages only", at least if they aren't "always on".

A more obvious case for passing around a wand is for the healing spells.That -3 per same spell cast by the same caster per day can add up. Being able to bypass it is pretty valuable for a party.

[Anthony]

Originally Posted by Refplace

A more obvious case for passing around a wand is for the healing spells.That -3 per same spell cast by the same caster per day can add up. Being able to bypass it is pretty valuable for a party.

I'd tend to assume the wand counts as the caster in that case (so it means a mage can use the wand and cast the spell without them interfering, but two people can't conveniently use the wand on the same subject).

[Ulzgoroth]

Originally Posted by Michael Thayne

Huh. I hadn't really thought about the Wand of Lend Energy before, and on reflection it seems like a rather vital piece of magical equipment. Makes for an odd setting, though. Really this isn't limited to Lend Energy, the rules for magic items seem to incentivize passing around wands if you want to cast a spell repeatedly, which isn't a thing in most settings that I've seen. Possibly more items should be "mages only", at least if they aren't "always on".

Most fictional settings and a lot of gaming ones don't really have user-powered utility magic items.

[Fred Brackin]

Originally Posted by Anthony

I'd tend to assume the wand counts as the caster in that case (so it means a mage can use the wand and cast the spell without them interfering, but two people can't conveniently use the wand on the same subject).

Even Minor Healing Wands require Magery or Physican-15 (or maybe Esoteric Medicine at 15 now that Physican isn't supposed to exist before TL5 or 4 with a Perk).

So there might no be much convenience involved though Mage's might carry aWand for healing themselves. You take a -4 to cast healing yourself. The cheaper version is to _always_ carry a potion for the Mage.

[AlexanderHowl]

Since Magery 0 is only 5 CP, there is a case to be made for at least one other person in the party having Magery 0, to have someone else who can use wands.

[roguebfl]

Originally Posted by Gumby Bush

The accessibility of a lend energy wand is setting-dependent, however, even where both the spell and the wand exist. 100 energy may mean the wand is the cost of the stick and $100 in a setting using DF's Q&D threshold, but it's the stick plus $2000 using Magic's defaults, and higher in a setting with less common magic/more well-paid enchanters. That may well still be worth it, but it is easier to have many lackeys.

Let not forget the wand requires the User to have either Magery or Empathy advantages , so just no any lacky can use it.

[Anthony]

Originally Posted by roguebfl

Let not forget the wand requires the User to have either Magery or Empathy advantages , so just no any lacky can use it.

No it doesn't. You need magery or empathy to learn the spell, but the item has no listed restrictions on who can use it.

[Gumby Bush]

Originally Posted by Anthony

No it doesn't. You need magery or empathy to learn the spell, but the item has no listed restrictions on who can use it.

Yep, I triple-checked and was surprised by that fact. It appears the wands are practically designed with the use in question in mind. If one wanted to emphasize Mages and casting circles, one could change that, of course, and if one wanted to really cut down on the usefulness of enchantment, one could require any user to meet any advantage/skill prerequisites (but not spell prerequisites) in order to (consciously) use a magic item.

You can build non-mage-only magic items with Link, a power source, and a good trigger condition, but it gets expensive. A wand of healing with a trigger of tapping a wounded person lightly three times in quick succession, for instance, would want a Body-Reading spell built in for the trigger.

[Michael Thayne]

Looking at the DFRPG, it looks like a decision was made to emphasize "always on" magic items. Specifically p. 78 of Exploits says, "Most enchanted items are always on. This is how all the items in Adventurers work, save for the few with limited uses". Similarly, the only spells that explicitly give a price for a magic item with the spell in the Spells book seem to be of the "always on" variety. The assumption that this is how magic items work might be worth porting back to other fantasy settings, because honestly the default rules are just so weird.

[roguebfl]

Originally Posted by Anthony

No it doesn't. You need magery or empathy to learn the spell, but the item has no listed restrictions on who can use it.

um yes the do. It's one of the benefits of Magery 0, that allow you to use Mage only items, which include wands of spells the have a magery prerequisite.

Originally Posted by Magic p.19

Some are usable only by
mages; that is, they only work for
users who possess Magery. If an item
has any “mage only” effects on it, only
a mage may use the item’s powers.

Wands are not "always on" magical items