Expansion?[]
Wasn't this spell added with one of the expansions? -- Austicke 18:13, 10 Sep 2005 (PDT)
- No need to delete discussions (especially if it's someone else's words). That's what talk pages are for. -- Austicke 21:23, 10 Sep 2005 (PDT)
- I'd say if the queries dealt with, there's no need to keep it. :p --Defunc7 22:15, 10 Sep 2005 (PDT)
- I'm just following practices I've seen at other wikis. I bow to their experience. -- Austicke 18:37, 11 Sep 2005 (PDT)
DR link[]
If you are linking to Damage Reduction... aren't you actually talking about "Damage Reduction (effect)"? Unless the dagger has the feat (in which case you should put the feat), or casts the spell (in which case you should use the spell). Essentially, I think the term is clear enough to go directly to the appropriate article instead of disambiguifying it. Enigmatic 20:56, 4 Oct 2005 (PDT)
- You're too quick, Enigmatic. I fixed the link before you finished posting. :) -- Austicke 21:06, 4 Oct 2005 (PDT)
Description[]
This description means nothing to me! 'As the summon has damage reduction' What does that mean? It ignores all damage reductions on it's target? So even 50/- is susceptible to this 1st level spell? --DiningPhilanderer February 2, 2006
- That means that the summon has damage reduction. If something attacks the summon with a mundane weapon, some or all of the damage gets reduced. That part of the description says nothing about what the summons is attacking. --The Krit 22:02, March 3, 2010 (UTC)
Metamagic and this spell[]
When I tried this spell in-game I found that I could not use the extend spell metamagic... however, I was able to use maximize spell. No idea why. Maybe someone can explain this odd behavior? --129.21.189.187 February 2006
- That's the way it's listed in spells.2da. (You can't empower this spell either, if I'm reading the codes right.) Is it supposed to be that way? No idea. If you submit a bug report, BioWare can sort it out. --The Krit 18:46, 29 September 2006 (PDT)
Attack bonus[]
Does the AB of the dagger change as the mage increases in levels?
What is the AB of the dagger based on?
How much DR does it have?
--129.42.161.36 September 29, 2006
- Answers to these are now in the article about the summons: Shelgarn's persistent blade (summon). --The Krit 22:02, March 3, 2010 (UTC)
- Also affecting the blade's AB: Due to the (possibly bugged) coding in
x2_i0_spells, the spell's call toGetIsMagicStatBonus()will ignore wizard levels when the caster has levels of any other base casting class, including paladin and ranger. So, for instance, a Wizard 39 / Ranger 1 with 30 INT and 10 WIS will create a summons with no attack bonus. I have modified the note to reflect that by changing the word order. I hope it is clear. - MrZork 22:01, June 7, 2012 (UTC)
DR and AB bonus[]
This dagger have a DR of +1/5 and this dagger get one extra ab per 2 Ability modifier. So 18 charisma (With sorcerer) give +4 AB to this dagger. ILKAY 00:36, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
- Close, but you forgot to divide. An 18 charisma is a +4 modifier, which divided by 2 gives the +2 AB item property on the dagger. --The Krit 22:02, March 3, 2010 (UTC)
ability cap[]
not really sure what this means: There is a practical cap for player characters of a +10 bonus as a level 40 character is unable to obtain higher without altering the ability score.
this seems to be assuming a starting score of 18 with all 10 ability bonuses in the casting stat & +12 from equipment or buffs for casting stat of 40 (+10 bonus). however, one can take up to 10 great cha or great int feats to raise that significantly higher (& 10 rdd levels will raise that by another 2) for an actual max of 52 (+16).
i'm not sure that having this note as is makes any sense. would recommend either removing it completely or altering it to reflect stat calculation including the great ability feats & rdd bonuses. Mysticjester 20:23, March 3, 2010 (UTC)
- An ability of 52 corresponds to an ability modifier of (52-10)/2 = 42/2 = 21. Dividing that by 2 (and rounding down) gives the practical maximum of 10. I'll put a table in this article also to clarify that. --The Krit 22:04, March 3, 2010 (UTC)
Attack bonus when item-cast[]
When cast from an item, the dagger AB bonus is determined by the item user's ability modifier (whose determination is described in the first sub-note). That seems a little unusual, but maybe only because an effective ability modifier of +3 is assumed for scroll DCs. Would it be worth noting? - MrZork (talk) 07:37, December 1, 2012 (UTC)
- You mean change "(especially if scroll cast)" to "(especially if cast from an item)"? --The Krit (talk) 17:28, December 24, 2012 (UTC)
- That might be it, since I noticed this while checking a WoG rod that casts the spell. I guess I see it as unusual because most spellbook spells don't scale with the item-wielder when they are cast from an item. In this case, because of the quirky ability modifier determination, a strength-based non-caster may end up with a fairly powerful summons when casting from an item. But, I don't suppose that is worthy of any special note. I will make the scroll-to-item change. - MrZork (talk) 21:06, December 25, 2012 (UTC)
- Technically, this change doesn't provide further distinction from the save DC. All items (and cheat cast spells) use the DC of 13 + innate level. This is not limited to scrolls by any means. Shelgarn's blade has an aspect of using the caster's ability modifier for determining attack bonus, however this is not the only spell to look at the caster. Dispelling for area of effects is enhanced by an ability modifier (intelligence or charisma) of the caster, bigby equations for contact and grappling also use this modifier, epic spells (also can be item cast) will use the highest of wisdom, intelligence or charisma, finally touch attacks all use the caster's strength or dexterity modifier (I could mention several others that can be item cast like divine might and shield). In short many spells that are item cast are enhanced by some aspect of the caster. WhiZard (talk) 22:18, December 25, 2012 (UTC)
- Perhaps I misunderstand the purpose of those examples: Are you saying that most item-cast spells do scale with the item user? Clearly some do; I just think that it is not the norm.
- Regardless of how common it may be for spells generally, I was thinking in the context of summoning spells like Shelgarn's and I should have been more clear. What I thought was unusual was that the strength of the item-cast summons spell will vary with this odd ability modifier. Most of the spells which are exceptions make it pretty clear that the item-user's stats affect the spell effects. I was wondering whether that aspect of this spell was noteworthy. Probably not. - MrZork (talk) 23:05, December 25, 2012 (UTC)
- If you are looking at summoning spells, take the animal domain. The summon is improved by the caster having that feat even when item cast. The only thing that the item casting determines is caster level and standard DC. Anything not derived from these values should be attributed as either constant or based on the caster (not the item). Just glancing at the non-epic clerical spells alone, I counted 26 that are enhanced by some aspect of the caster. WhiZard (talk) 00:06, December 26, 2012 (UTC)
- That's quite a few, nearly a quarter of cleric spells. To re-clarify: I am not saying that there aren't spells that scale with item-user when cast from items. I simply thought that most did not. But, I haven't checked them exhaustively and you are saying it's quite common, so perhaps a majority do. Anyway, it's good to know that so many item-cast spellbook spells have effects that depend on the caster. I had never surveyed the item-cast spell effects that way. I guess it makes sense, since my (incomplete) examination of spell scripts shows they don't typically make any attempt to determine whether they are item-cast. Thanks for checking. - MrZork (talk) 23:51, December 26, 2012 (UTC)
- If you are looking at summoning spells, take the animal domain. The summon is improved by the caster having that feat even when item cast. The only thing that the item casting determines is caster level and standard DC. Anything not derived from these values should be attributed as either constant or based on the caster (not the item). Just glancing at the non-epic clerical spells alone, I counted 26 that are enhanced by some aspect of the caster. WhiZard (talk) 00:06, December 26, 2012 (UTC)
- Regardless of how common it may be for spells generally, I was thinking in the context of summoning spells like Shelgarn's and I should have been more clear. What I thought was unusual was that the strength of the item-cast summons spell will vary with this odd ability modifier. Most of the spells which are exceptions make it pretty clear that the item-user's stats affect the spell effects. I was wondering whether that aspect of this spell was noteworthy. Probably not. - MrZork (talk) 23:05, December 25, 2012 (UTC)
- Technically, this change doesn't provide further distinction from the save DC. All items (and cheat cast spells) use the DC of 13 + innate level. This is not limited to scrolls by any means. Shelgarn's blade has an aspect of using the caster's ability modifier for determining attack bonus, however this is not the only spell to look at the caster. Dispelling for area of effects is enhanced by an ability modifier (intelligence or charisma) of the caster, bigby equations for contact and grappling also use this modifier, epic spells (also can be item cast) will use the highest of wisdom, intelligence or charisma, finally touch attacks all use the caster's strength or dexterity modifier (I could mention several others that can be item cast like divine might and shield). In short many spells that are item cast are enhanced by some aspect of the caster. WhiZard (talk) 22:18, December 25, 2012 (UTC)
Descriptor: Summoned Item[]
What does it mean? Does it have any effects on the gameplay?
118.101.238.79 16:01, September 6, 2015 (UTC)
- In this case, Bioware's descriptor is just a category of what the spell effect is. And, it's not a great one, since "summoned item" might lead players to think that an item is summoned that a PC could use, which isn't the case.The descriptor probably ought to be blank, as it is for the Mordenkainen's sword spell. - MrZork (talk) 20:25, September 6, 2015 (UTC)
Yes the name is misleading, because it more closely describes summoning a talking weapon like Enserric, or maybe even Infinity Engine style Melf's Minute Meteors or Goodberry. 118.101.238.79