Dunjon Magic Item Question

[Chris Kucsera]

In the treasure section, one of the example items is a wand that shoots flame.  It is listed as burn with flame 5 (total worth 10).  I'm not clear on how this item would work.  Does burn with flame 5 mean that the wielder rolls 5 dice + adroitness to hit her target?  If so, then how much damage is done on a succcessful hit?  Or is the wand treated as a spell--no to hit roll needed, roll a damage test using cerebrality + burn with flame 5?

CK

[Mike Holmes]

Hmmm. From the cost, that's a "general magic bonus". Which seem to me to be like Abilities (in both description and cost). I'd probably use it like one. Sounds to me like it would add to damage, mostly, so I'd say it did Cerebrality + 5 damage as you suggest. To hit with it, a mage should have a "Weild magic item" ability or something.

That all said, I suppose the description is up to the player creating it. He could say that it puts out a wide gout of weak flame that did only Cerebrality damage, but was Adroitness + 5 to hit.

I suppose if those were bought as four point levels, I might allow it to be more like a Main ability and add to both.

How does that all sound, Clinton?

Mike

[Clinton R. Nixon]

I wish I had the book in front of me so I could look up the magic item. My extremely off-the-cuff ruling:

Roll Adroitness + a "hit with wands" type Ability to hit; do Cerebrality + 5 damage.

What might be really cool, though, is to treat the wand like a spell of some sort: that is, it channels power from the user through the wand, creating fire. Roll a Gather Magic Power Test as normal, and roll Magic Power + 5 damage (allowing you to spend Magic Power to change the amount of people hit, of course.) That might make magic items uber-powerful for magicians, but I think it would work well.

[Chris Kucsera]

Clinton,

I like the idea of treating the wand as a spell.  However, I'd limit it as follows:

If the wielder has

cast spells as a main ability, then treat the wand as an additional source of power for the final casting.  Thus, the wielder gathers power as per a normal spell, then rolls successes + cerebrality + casts spells + wand's ability.

Wielders with spellcasting as a supporting ability are treated as above if the wand's magic falls within their realm of magic; otherwise, they cannot use their cast [type] spells ability with the wand.  So they would only roll cerebrality to gather power, and the actual casting would be done with successes + cerebrality + wand's ability.

Non-spellcasters cannot use the wand.[/list:u]
Any thoughts?

CK

[Clinton R. Nixon]

If the wielder has cast spells as a main ability, then treat the wand as an additional source of power for the final casting.  Thus, the wielder gathers power as per a normal spell, then rolls successes + cerebrality + casts spells + wand's ability.

Wielders with spellcasting as a supporting ability are treated as above if the wand's magic falls within their realm of magic; otherwise, they cannot use their cast [type] spells ability with the wand.  So they would only roll cerebrality to gather power, and the actual casting would be done with successes + cerebrality + wand's ability.

Non-spellcasters cannot use the wand.

Chris,

I like it very much, actually. I would change the wording to make sure that each wand (or staff or whatever) can cast one specific spell.