Talk:Form Philosopher's Stone (3.5e Spell)

Some Questions
Is there a reason that clerics (not known for their use of alchemy) get this spell a whole spell level earlier than wizards?

How do its saves actually work? You give two saves as negating it, but this is unusual and needs further explanation, which is never given.

Given the canon, is it our intent to be able to fuel Philosopher's Stones using low-Int creatures, like many fiendish or celestial dogs or rats, as opposed to people, which is what makes them so dangerous to make?

MisterSinister 05:34, 7 November 2010 (UTC)


 * I am of the opinion that Clerics should be somewhat better at playing with souls than Wizards.


 * "All creatures in the area who fail both their Fortitude and their Will save are instantly disintegrated". You have to fail both saves.


 * Humans can have Intelligence, Wisdom, and/or Charisma as low as 3 (the standard NPC rules do put these values at 3d6, after all), so raising the minimum means that there would be stupid people who were unaffected by this spell. The canon isn't helpful here, since everybody is human. --Foxwarrior 05:41, 7 November 2010 (UTC)


 * I know this is FMA based and all, but this spell troubles me. It's a powerful spell that makes a powerful item and thats all well and good if it was something you couldn't pull off often, but the two saving throws doesn't serve as much of a balance.  The problem is, your target will never be Blorth'marag the Balor or the Pseudonatural Doom Hydra or anything high level, you'll aim this for commoners.  And while you can't do a Bag of Rats specifically, you can easily do a Bag O' Commoners.  Which while true to the anime, isn't very balanced.


 * I keep wanting to see some sort of balancer on this. Stupidly long casting time, hp or ability burn, xp cost, something to make it a spell you don't want to spam, much like Wish.  If I had this spell (and given it's evil, morals are not coming into play here) I'l waltz into town and start nuking a city of people, reaping the benefits. -- Eiji-kun 21:25, 9 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Well, I don't want to diverge from FMA much, but I can see people finding this spell worth spending a feat on. Perhaps I should simply make it require a feat, or give it one of your major costs and then take that cost away with a feat. --Foxwarrior 20:49, 10 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Well I could make an argument for both time and XP... time being needed to charge up the runes to convert people, and more likely XP, which we can't really see being transfered. I dunno about feats, I'll think about that. -- Eiji-kun 21:24, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

Trap Potential
Is it wrong that I want to put this spell up as a mechanically triggered trap on a door (the knocker), specifically to target solicitors? And that I would compensate for any added delay with a magic mouth and ghost sounds, to keep them from walking away while the spell charged? Ah... finally something useful from the door to door peoples... - Tarkisflux 21:43, 10 June 2011 (UTC)