# Is craft contingent spell to powerful?



## DarkJester (Mar 1, 2007)

Craft contingent spell from Complete Arcane allows you to have multiple contingencies in effect on your person at one time at the cost of some gold and experience at a rate a 100 gold x caster level x spell level. You are limited to a number of contingencies on your person equal to your caster level. 

Does this seem unbalanced for the cost of a feat? Obviously the cost is prohibited but for a relatively small amount of money you can pretty well ensure that you will have something prepared for nearly any situation. I'm not sure what to think.

I ask because I took this feat in a short-term game for my character without really putting much thought into it. Now, looking at it a couple sessions in I could really see how I could be using this a ton if the campaign were to be a continual one (Which it isn't, so this is just theoretical).


----------



## bestone (Mar 1, 2007)

yes, Absolutely too powerfully. It should not exist

Add thought bottle *which i think is complete arcane? i coudl be mistaken* to the list of things from that book never to exist


----------



## DarkJester (Mar 1, 2007)

What is so bad about the thought bottle? I can't remember all of it's abilities but didn't it allow you to negate level loss associated with death? I seem to remember the cost being kind of prohibited until higher level.


----------



## Michael Silverbane (Mar 1, 2007)

Craft Contingent Spell is very powerful, although it does cost both a feat and some small amount of xp to create a contingency in such a way.

Whether ornot it is too powerful really depends a lot on how strict or lenient the DM is with your contingency triggers.  And on whether or not the contingent spell is treated as a spell or as a magic item for the purposes of _dispel magic_ and _disjunction_.

Later
silver


----------



## FireLance (Mar 1, 2007)

If availability is your only concern, consider that it's eight times the cost of an equivalent scroll. The fact that you have to burn xp is usually painful, too.

I think some DMs may have problems with the auto-casting (including the ability to avoid AOOs and Concentration checks), and the possibility of unleashing several spell effects simultaneously in a single round. If those are your concerns, you might consider imposing the following restrictions:

1. A maximum of one contingent spell can trigger in any round. In addition, if the spellcaster had the Quicken Spell feat, you could allow him to trigger a second contingent spell in a round if he had crafted it a quickened contingent spell (at +4 spell level).

2. In the same round that a spellcaster triggers a contingent spell, he cannot cast another spell, or activate a spell completion or spell trigger magic item.


----------



## bestone (Mar 1, 2007)

I could point you to a dozen optimization threads using craft contingincy in ways that would just make you shake your head in disgust.

Same with thought bottle



			
				darkjester said:
			
		

> What is so bad about the thought bottle? I can't remember all of it's abilities but didn't it allow you to negate level loss associated with death? I seem to remember the cost being kind of prohibited until higher level.




It lets you "store" your level of experience, so you pay 500, it remembers your level 15. You then go and loose some levels, and later on can restore yourself back to 15. Only good for level drain? no

Theres a build that uses it with some ritual from savage species to apply multiple racial templates to your character *something along the lines of turning yourself into a shade, ritual of vitality to turn into a pc race, then using thought bottle to get your levels lost this way back*

Anyways, it just has some awful uses


----------



## Michael Silverbane (Mar 1, 2007)

I don't think that the fact that an option can be exploited or optimized is a good indicator of it being too powerful.  Lots of things can be optimized or exploited, whether or not your players are going to chooce to attempt such or you (the DM) will allow such exploitation is up to you and your players.

Later
silver


----------



## bestone (Mar 1, 2007)

Yes but some items just ooze exploitation. And for me, its easier to dis-allow a few items of feats altogeather, than have to argue with the player why he cant do something cheesy


----------



## Michael Silverbane (Mar 1, 2007)

I find that pessimistic method to be overly restrictive (I mean that from a permissions perspective, rather than from an attitide perspective).  I much prefer to work with my players to ensure that we all get the game that we want.

Later
silver


----------



## charlesatan (Mar 1, 2007)

bestone said:
			
		

> yes, Absolutely too powerfully. It should not exist
> 
> Add thought bottle *which i think is complete arcane? i coudl be mistaken* to the list of things from that book never to exist




Craft Contingency - it costs XP so I think that's a deterrent enough for trying to be prepared for everything.

Thought Bottle - A simple example is a 20th-level Wizard who casts Wish 3 times to get a +3 inherent bonus to his stat of choice at only a 500 XP cost.

Honestly, a lot of things in the game can be abused when used in certain conjunction with others. Craft Contingency under certain specific conditions. Thought Bottle has a wider spectrum for abuse.


----------



## charlesatan (Mar 1, 2007)

bestone said:
			
		

> Yes but some items just ooze exploitation. And for me, its easier to dis-allow a few items of feats altogeather, than have to argue with the player why he cant do something cheesy




The problem is that a lot of things in the game, under certain specific conditions, can be abused. These items/spells/classes/whatever work okay in isolation or even make great combinations with others. It only becomes broken under a specific set of circumstances. As Michael Silverbane mentioned, it's better to talk it out with the player rather than ban things outright.

Of course having said that, there are a tiny few items/abilities/whatever that can be too easily abused. There's Thought Bottle for example but I could easily houserule it to only work as it was meant to be (i.e. restoring XP due to death, level drain, etc.) rather than the more blatant abuses (i.e. crafting a huge xp draining item and then using Thought Bottle).


----------



## starwed (Mar 1, 2007)

I'm pretty sure Craft Contingency is inherently broken at high levels, when you can run around with a dozen low level contingencies on at very little cost.  It may cost 8 times as much as a scroll, but it's easy to word the trigger such that it doesn't cost an action of any type to activate.


----------



## Justin Cray (Mar 1, 2007)

Man this feat would be so unfair in the hands of a dedicated BBEG. On the other hand it would make some final encounters more interesting.


----------



## Mistwell (Mar 1, 2007)

bestone said:
			
		

> I could point you to a dozen optimization threads using craft contingincy in ways that would just make you shake your head in disgust.




Please do so. In fact I will cut you a break and hold you to only half a dozen.


----------



## Felix (Mar 1, 2007)

starwed said:
			
		

> I'm pretty sure Craft Contingency is inherently broken at high levels, when you can run around with a dozen low level contingencies on at very little cost.  It may cost 8 times as much as a scroll, but it's easy to word the trigger such that it doesn't cost an action of any type to activate.



Comp Arc page 139

"Triggers for contingent spells are usually events that happen to the bearer of the spell"

This is open ended, but open ended enough for the DM to rule that the bearer of the contingent spell may not be the one to consciously activate the spell. This would lead to a situation where a 15th level character has 15 contingent spells upon them for 15 different situations. Which means that for any one situation, you will only trigger one contingent spell unless you have loaded more than one egg into that situation's basket. The trigger conditions on Contingent Spell may be broken as easily as the conditions for the Ready action. Restrain the triggers for the Contingent Spell as you restrain the triggers for Ready Actions and you'll have less of a problem.

The minimum cost for a 1st level contingent spell is 1100gp, unless you allow the crafter to lower his caster level. If you do allow the crafter to lower his caster level to 1, the minimum cost would be 100gp, and the contingent spell would be dispelled at the first targeted Dispel. Tradeoff either way. And this is only 1st level spells, the casting of which will not disturb the game since the crafter of the contingent spell must be at least 11th level. If you disallow the crafter to lower his caster level, you'll have less of a problem, because suddenly Contingent Spells will become expensive; at minimum 15,300gp for a 9th level spell (17x9x100). 

If targetted _Dispel Magic_ is rare in your game, this will be a more powerful feat. Targeted _Dispels_ are very common in the higher level games I've played in, so the power of this feat is mitigated: do you strengthen your offense by permanently upgrading your weapon, or do you sink that money into a one-time-use spell, the trigger for which may never occur, and which may be dispelled at any time? It's a horribly tenuous store of value.


----------



## green slime (Mar 1, 2007)

I've had no problems with it. But I can see how it could cause problems in certain games.


----------



## coriolis (Mar 1, 2007)

Justin Cray said:
			
		

> Man this feat would be so unfair in the hands of a dedicated BBEG. On the other hand it would make some final encounters more interesting.




I used it for Laveth (http://www.stephendaniele.com/gallery/gal_usurper.html) for my version of Monte Cook's 'The Harrowing' (I changed her to a Favored Soul 14 + Divine Level 0). I used it mainly defensively (the 5 _protections from energy_ triggering when hit by the appropriate energy type, _cure serious wounds_ when at a certain hp treshold, etc.)

One thing I noted: technically, the contingent spells are 'items', and so the crafting costs count as treasure... which the party can't ever use.

(I know, I know. It's a pretty literal interpretation that hoses the players. I compensated by allowing them to get a few divine sparks (http://www.montecook.com/cgi-bin/page.cgi?mpress_R4AG) if they managed to defeat Laveth on time.


----------



## Vegepygmy (Mar 2, 2007)

The thing about Craft Contingent Spell is that a single targeted _greater dispel magic_ can ruin your whole day.


----------



## airwalkrr (Mar 2, 2007)

Craft Contingent spell is prohibitively expensive, first of all. That means its usefulness is very limited for PCs. Secondly, if you follow the guidelines for NPC wealth in the DMG, then NPCs gain little use out of it since it costs so much. Add to that the simple fact that a dispel magic can ruin it, and I would hardly say it is too powerful.


----------



## Nail (Mar 2, 2007)

starwed said:
			
		

> I'm pretty sure Craft Contingency is inherently broken at high levels, when you can run around with a dozen low level contingencies on at very little cost.



That's exactly what I had my high level Clr do.  My favorites were 1st land 2nd evel spells, like Obscuring Mist, Lesser Vigor, Ghost Touch Armor, Invisibility, Feather Fall, etc.....and that was before Spell Compendium introduced all of those swift spells.


----------



## Justin Cray (Mar 2, 2007)

Vegepygmy said:
			
		

> The thing about Craft Contingent Spell is that a single targeted _greater dispel magic_ can ruin your whole day.




Not if your crafted contingency is _greater dispel magic_ that triggers to counter other _greater dispel magics_.


----------



## green slime (Mar 2, 2007)

Nail said:
			
		

> That's exactly what I had my high level Clr do.  My favorites were 1st land 2nd evel spells, like Obscuring Mist, Lesser Vigor, Ghost Touch Armor, Invisibility, Feather Fall, etc.....and that was before Spell Compendium introduced all of those swift spells.




Yeah, but did you consider it broken at the time? I mean, to anyone with _arcane sight_, you're nothing but a huge _greater dispel magic_ attractor.


----------



## green slime (Mar 2, 2007)

Justin Cray said:
			
		

> Not if your crafted contingency is _greater dispel magic_ that triggers to counter other _greater dispel magics_.




Sounds like a very expensive contingency suite is building up here, in terms of both XP and gp.


----------



## Felix (Mar 2, 2007)

Justin Cray said:
			
		

> Not if your crafted contingency is _greater dispel magic_ that triggers to counter other _greater dispel magics_.



_Greater Dispel Maigc_: 6th level spell.
Minimum Caster Level: 11th
Cost to craft: 6,600gp.

-or-

Ring of Counterspells
Cost: 4,000gp.

It seems for your purposes, the ring of counterspells is going to be a much, _much_ better way to stop _Dispels_ from stripping you of your Contingent Spells. And the ring is certainly not broken.


----------



## Nail (Mar 2, 2007)

green slime said:
			
		

> Yeah, but did you consider it broken at the time?



I was a player at the time...of course I didn't think it was broken!  



			
				green slime said:
			
		

> I mean, to anyone with _arcane sight_, you're nothing but a huge _greater dispel magic_ attractor.



Now would be the time to tell you about my Ring of Counterspells, right?


----------



## Nail (Mar 2, 2007)

Felix said:
			
		

> And the ring is certainly not broken.



Oh no, certainly not.


----------



## green slime (Mar 2, 2007)

Nail said:
			
		

> I was a player at the time...of course I didn't think it was broken!
> 
> Now would be the time to tell you about my Ring of Counterspells, right?




No worries. That trick works once per encounter, tops. It's a staple of 3e for any sensible spellcaster that utilizes buffs. Sort of expected.


----------



## Nail (Mar 2, 2007)

green slime said:
			
		

> ...Sort of expected.



I pretty much always surprised my DM with it, though.  Poor guy.

One ring is fine....but two rings are better.  Putting the ability into your vest is even better, and making the ability store three spells instead of one is priceless.


----------



## Felix (Mar 2, 2007)

Nail said:
			
		

> Putting the ability into your vest is even better



Eh?



> and making the ability store three spells instead of one is priceless.



I'm fairly sure a gp price could be assigned. It would cost more than 12,000gp. Much more.


----------



## Nail (Mar 2, 2007)

Felix said:
			
		

> I'm fairly sure a gp price could be assigned. It would cost more than 12,000gp. Much more.



Sure, but....Show me the calculation.   

[EDIT] ....and, let's keep the context in mind: this was for high level play.  At high levels, yer loaded with wealth.


----------



## wildstarsreach (Mar 2, 2007)

DarkJester said:
			
		

> Craft contingent spell from Complete Arcane allows you to have multiple contingencies in effect on your person at one time at the cost of some gold and experience at a rate a 100 gold x caster level x spell level. You are limited to a number of contingencies on your person equal to your caster level.
> 
> Does this seem unbalanced for the cost of a feat? Obviously the cost is prohibited but for a relatively small amount of money you can pretty well ensure that you will have something prepared for nearly any situation. I'm not sure what to think.
> 
> I ask because I took this feat in a short-term game for my character without really putting much thought into it. Now, looking at it a couple sessions in I could really see how I could be using this a ton if the campaign were to be a continual one (Which it isn't, so this is just theoretical).




I've had experience watching a warforged with an artificer cohort use this to excellent effect.  Maybe with a standard caster such as a sorcerer, this feat would be balanced but when you can get virtually any spell especially divine and arcane as the artificer can, this can become problematic.  The player didn't overly abuse this but was very effective in it's use.  He could have been horrendously worse in his use thereby.


----------



## Felix (Mar 2, 2007)

Nail said:
			
		

> Sure, but....Show me the calculation.



A calculation as a DM?

[thought bubble]
What's the probability that Nail will be unbearably smug when he survives the big fight because I let him have this QVC Three-In-One Ring of Counterspells?

100%
[/thought bubble]

"Sorry Nail, but this item just doesn't fit the _flavor_ of my campaign world."





> [EDIT] ....and, let's keep the context in mind: this was for high level play.  At high levels, yer loaded with wealth.



To be sure, but expensive is still expensive. And if you spend 50,000gp (or whatever) on a Ring of Can't Be Dispelled, you arn't spending 50,000gp on something else that also makes you more powerful.


----------



## Nail (Mar 2, 2007)

Felix said:
			
		

> "Sorry Nail, but this item just doesn't fit the _flavor_ of my campaign world."



Player: "Ackkk..... yer cramping the flavor of my PC, Mr. DM!"


----------



## Vegepygmy (Mar 3, 2007)

Justin Cray said:
			
		

> Vegepygmy said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



That's cute, but it doesn't work.  "Once triggered, a contingent spell takes immediate effect upon the bearer (or is centered in the bearer’s square if the spell affects an area)."  To counter a spell, you have to target the creature casting the spell, which you cannot do with a crafted contingent spell.

What does work, though, is a crafted contingent _spell turning_ triggered by a _greater dispel magic_ targeted on you.  But that only works once (and is a pretty expensive insurance policy).


----------



## airwalkrr (Mar 3, 2007)

Justin Cray said:
			
		

> Not if your crafted contingency is _greater dispel magic_ that triggers to counter other _greater dispel magics_.




Technically, that doesn't work. CCS requires the spell be one that targets you (and some interpret this to mean items in your possession as well, meaning a CS magic weapon would be ok).


----------



## airwalkrr (Mar 3, 2007)

Vegepygmy said:
			
		

> That's cute, but it doesn't work.  "Once triggered, a contingent spell takes immediate effect upon the bearer (or is centered in the bearer’s square if the spell affects an area)."  To counter a spell, you have to target the creature casting the spell, which you cannot do with a crafted contingent spell.
> 
> What does work, though, is a crafted contingent _spell turning_ triggered by a _greater dispel magic_ targeted on you.  But that only works once (and is a pretty expensive insurance policy).




It makes for an interesting conundrum when the BBEG has used CCS to make place several fireballs on his person, which are set to explode when he dies, just as a way to spite the PCs.


----------



## wildstarsreach (Mar 4, 2007)

Vegepygmy said:
			
		

> That's cute, but it doesn't work.  "Once triggered, a contingent spell takes immediate effect upon the bearer (or is centered in the bearer’s square if the spell affects an area)."  To counter a spell, you have to target the creature casting the spell, which you cannot do with a crafted contingent spell.
> 
> What does work, though, is a crafted contingent _spell turning_ triggered by a _greater dispel magic_ targeted on you.  But that only works once (and is a pretty expensive insurance policy).




Here's the master of the craft contigent spell in our game.


----------

