13
\$\begingroup\$

This is already something of an edge case, and the intuitive answer would seem to be that the creature vanishes, right? But I'm interested in whether that is the case when certain items are involved. The relevant text for Ruby Weave Gem and Ring of Spell Storing are as follows:

Ring of Spell Storing: This ring stores spells cast into it, holding them until the attuned wearer uses them. The ring can store up to 5 levels worth of spells at a time. When found, it contains 1d6 - 1 levels of stored spells chosen by the DM. Any creature can cast a spell of 1st through 5th level into the ring by touching the ring as the spell is cast. The spell has no effect, other than to be stored in the ring. If the ring can't hold the spell, the spell is expended without effect. The level of the slot used to cast the spell determines how much space it uses. While wearing this ring, you can cast any spell stored in it. The spell uses the slot level, spell save DC, spell attack bonus, and spellcasting ability of the original caster, but is otherwise treated as if you cast the spell. The spell cast from the ring is no longer stored in it, freeing up space.

Ruby Weave Gem: ...When you finish a long rest, choose a spell from any class list. The spell you choose must be of a level you can cast. You know the chosen spell and can cast it with your spell slots of the appropriate level until the end of your next long rest.

The text for the spells Find Familiar and Find Steed (and its Greater variety,) only say explicitly that the creatures summoned disappear when the caster says so or when they drop to 0HP, so it seems RAW I could-- as a ranger-- have a (Greater) Steed, Familiar, and some other conjured thing from a non-ranger spell list; assuming none of the creatures hit 0 health and enough long rests have passed for me to have swapped the relevant spells out. My only issue with this interpretation is that it would seem to imply that casters that otherwise come by those spells naturally (looking at warlocks specifically,) would get to keep those creatures past swapping out pacts or spells, which seems somewhat... janked.

The alternative-- losing the creatures when you lose access to the spells-- would seem to mean that you just can't use the previously mentioned items (especially the ring,) to replicate those spells in any meaningful way.

Do I have the jist of this or am I missing something?

Paladins are prepared casters, not learned casters, which seems to reinforce the "creatures stay" option.

\$\endgroup\$
3
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ Welcome to RPGSE. We don't signal our edits in the text of a question or answer here, unlike at forums, so I have edited that last bit slightly for you. 😊 \$\endgroup\$ Jan 13, 2023 at 2:09
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ Re: "this interpretation...would seem to imply that casters that otherwise come by those spells naturally (looking at warlocks and paladins specifically) would get to keep those creatures past swapping out pacts or spells". Please clarify: are you asking about casters that don't normally get the summoning spells in question b/c they are not on their class lists but b/c of an item like the ring they have cast it once, or asking about a caster that loses access to a spell that was previously on their list like a warlock who changes pacts? And how would a paladin get to 'swap out spells?' \$\endgroup\$
    – Kirt
    Jan 13, 2023 at 8:52
  • \$\begingroup\$ I edited the question to clarify a bit, I had forgotten that paladins were prepared casters which was the source of some of my confusion. So it's mostly just looking at warlocks who swap out their pacts, but I'd also be interested in scenarios where say, you lose or sell an item that lets you cast the spell, or swap atunement on it, etc. \$\endgroup\$
    – Spexguy
    Jan 14, 2023 at 4:21

2 Answers 2

21
\$\begingroup\$

Spells do what they say they do.

If a spell says you summon a steed and get it until it dies, then you get it until it dies. You being turned into a frog, set on fire, losing access to a spell, or what have you does not change what the spell does. This goes for any magic item or class ability or what have you. If the ability says it turns off under XYZ circumstance, it does. If it doesn't, it doesn't. The game is not one of assumptions or exceptions or legalese - if there is any doubt, you are meant to ask the DM.

\$\endgroup\$
16
\$\begingroup\$

Nothing happens, there are no secret rules

There are lots of edge cases in the game, but these are not edge cases. For mundane items the game sometimes omits how it works as you can infer how it works from real life. But you cannot do that for magic items or spells. So for magic items and spells we stick to the text about what they do.

The ring of spell storing allows you to transfer a spell of any class, and in particular also spells that are limited to the caster, to be used by anyone. Here is an example with Find Greater Steed for anyone. (Here is an even more fun one, where you could have an unlimited number, if your DM is generous). It's similar for the ruby weave gem.

Once you achieve that, the spell will work as normal. There are no additional, secret limitations introduced that are not mentioned in the spell, such as that you need to have the spell prepared or know the spell.

The difference is that you will not be able to resummon/recast the spell when your familiar or steed happens to die, unless you again get someone to store it (for the ring) and can use the magic item again.

These items allow that. It may feel off, like a way to cheat, as it gives anyone access to powerful and differentiating spells that are the hallmark of certain classes and that feel more like a class feature in spell guise, like the Paladin's find steed or the warlock's or wizard's find familiar. If your DM does not like that, the simplest way for them to avoid it is by not handing out these magic items.

\$\endgroup\$

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .