This is a super niche question that I could use an outside call on. One of my players, an 8th level cleric, bought a 3rd level spell gem in Blingdenstone. He messages me last night and asks what the limitations of the spell gem are, wanting to cast Glyph of Warding into it.
I look into it and I get a little confused. Glyph of Warding requires an hour to cast. It is attached to a location or object and can include a spell up to 3rd level with conditions set to trigger activation. A spell put in it that requires concentration simply lasts for the duration. Another detail of GoW is that if it's cast into an object, the Glyph is cancelled without activation if it's moved more than 10' from the point of casting.
The spell gem, a bloodstone, states that any spell, regardless of casting time, can be cast from it as an action. My player wants to know if I'm ok with him casting GoW into it. I reason that moving the object 10' from where it was cast triggers the nullification rule from Glyph. I point out to him that it's redundant to cast a spell requiring an hour to cast into it when he has to attune to the gem to put a spell in. His character has his attunement slots full, you see - if he wants to put a spell into the gem, he needs to attune to it, spend an hour casting the spell into it, then spend another hour re-attuning to the original item. I also note that it's "cheating" to cast Glyph out of the gem as Glyph sidesteps concentration on the spell - inside Glyph - inside the spell gem. I ask him what his character would want to put in the spell gem. I do this to counteract his rules lawyering and min-maxing tendencies.
What do you think of my interpretation? What judgment call would you make?
Rules as written, I don't see any explicit reasons why someone couldn't do this - but I understand why you are nervous about it.
Something that might help you out here is that I'd argue that once the spell gem is no longer attuned to the player, it "forgets" what spell was cast into it - that way, the player will have to make a choice about whether they really want this or not.
As you said, if they want the gem to carry an active version of Glyph, it would fall foul of the 10' movement rule. If they want to use the gem to "quick cast" Glyph as an action, that's fine - but make them choose in advance (and declare at the table) both the activation trigger, and type of Glyph (and spell it contains, if applicable). These things together should greatly cut down on the scope for abuse.
Also, if it makes you feel any better, the damage version Glyph of Warding is not actually an especially powerful spell in it's own right, and using it to cast another spell is really only an efficient way of doing things if the party is trying to set an ambush.
From the sounds of it, the player wants to cast the Glyph of Warding spell into the item for storage and not on the item as a protection. What if the gem was a ring of spell storing instead? Would you allow them to store a Glyph of Warding into the item that could then be cast later at the cost of an action?
For the ring of spell storing: "This ring stores spells cast into it, holding them until the attuned wearer uses them."
For the spell gem in OotA: "A spell gem can contain one spell from any class's spell list. You become aware of the spell when you learn the gem's properties. While holding the gem, you can cast the spell from it as an action if you know the spell or if the spell is on your class's spell list. Doing so doesn't require any components and doesn't require attunement. The spell then disappears from the gem."
"The spell is stored in the gem instead of having any effect."
Reading the text of the spell gem it clearly states that the spell is stored in the gem instead of having any effect. As a result, the constraints on moving the spell would not apply since the spell hasn't actually been cast - it has been stored for later casting.
The big difference between the spell gem and the ring of spell storing is that you have to attune the ring to use it while you only need to be attuned to the gem to store a spell in it, not to actually cast the spell stored in it. Casting it just requires an action.
So, as far as I can tell, from a RAW perspective it would work.
However, the character decides the parameters of the Glyph when it is cast or in this case stored in the gem.
"You decide what triggers the glyph when you cast the spell." You would also need to decide whether it was explosive runes or a spell, and if it contains a spell what spell that would be and expend the spell slot when you fill the gem. This would mean that the caster would need to make some reasonable assumptions about the spell being tcast and how they want to trigger it. In addition, the stored spell can only target a single creature or an area. You could not store things like group bless or bane since they target more than one creature but are not AoE. Similarly, the caster might need to be careful to specify trigger conditions that would not result in a party member triggering the glyph if it was cast.
Finally, if you decide that you don't like this application then you could tell the player that the gem has to be able to contain ALL the levels of spells cast. Thus a 3rd level Glyph of Warding which triggers a 3rd level haste spell would require a spell gem which could contain 6 levels of spells since it has to be able to hold both Glyph of Warding and Haste. That would seem to me to be a reasonable ruling on what you could store in a spell gem. Thus a third level spell gem could hold a Glyph of Warding that triggered explosive runes but not a secondary spell since the gem would not have room for both.
"You decide what triggers the glyph when you cast the spell." You would also need to decide whether it was explosive runes or a spell, and if it contains a spell what spell that would be and expend the spell slot when you fill the gem. This would mean that the caster would need to make some reasonable assumptions about the spell being tcast and how they want to trigger it. In addition, the stored spell can only target a single creature or an area. You could not store things like group bless or bane since they target more than one creature but are not AoE. Similarly, the caster might need to be careful to specify trigger conditions that would not result in a party member triggering the glyph if it was cast.
Explosive runes would be a bad idea. Whatever the trigger would be, the cleric would take damage from the activated runes as well, the spell gem being on their person.
The tricky part, for me, is what happens when Glyph of Warding is cast from the spell gem. Does the Glyph's requirements for remaining within 10' of where it was cast take effect? How does using an action to set up a reaction benefit the action economy? If the triggers never occurs, and the action taken to cast Glyph is used, does the spell last until the trigger happens?
"You decide what triggers the glyph when you cast the spell." You would also need to decide whether it was explosive runes or a spell, and if it contains a spell what spell that would be and expend the spell slot when you fill the gem. This would mean that the caster would need to make some reasonable assumptions about the spell being tcast and how they want to trigger it. In addition, the stored spell can only target a single creature or an area. You could not store things like group bless or bane since they target more than one creature but are not AoE. Similarly, the caster might need to be careful to specify trigger conditions that would not result in a party member triggering the glyph if it was cast.
Explosive runes would be a bad idea. Whatever the trigger would be, the cleric would take damage from the activated runes as well, the spell gem being on their person.
The tricky part, for me, is what happens when Glyph of Warding is cast from the spell gem. Does the Glyph's requirements for remaining within 10' of where it was cast take effect? How does using an action to set up a reaction benefit the action economy? If the triggers never occurs, and the action taken to cast Glyph is used, does the spell last until the trigger happens?
I have a headache.
Glyph of Warding is a complicated spell for this particular case, so to simplify think about it like this:
I am a Druid who owns a Spell Gem, and I am attuned to it. On a day of downtime, I decide that I want to store Call Lightning in the Spell Gem. I use one of my spell slots for that day and cast Call Lightning on the Spell Gem to to store the spell. The Spell Gem then contains Call Lightning until I decide to use it, or become un-attuned from the Spell Gem. I then rest at the end of the day, and the next day my party and I go on an adventure. At any point I can use an action to release the stored charge of Call Lighnting, and the game proceeds, using the casting of the spell I did yesterday. I choose a target for the spell and maintain concentration as normal - the only difference is that it does not cost me a spell slot as I am using the stored charge in the Spell Gem. The Spell Gem is then empty and I can choose a new spell to charge it with.
In summary, we cast the spell at some point in the past, following all instructions on the spell description - except for choosing a target.
So if we introduce Glyph of Warding into this scenario, what changes?
Comparing with the example of Call Lightning, where we could choose a target for lightning to strike, we can still choose a target for the Glyph. The target must follow the normal rules for valid targets i.e. the player must be able to touch it in the case of Glyph of Warding, but this might be any of the suggestions in the spell description, such as a surface or a book. What we cannot change is the other things that must be decided as part of the casting of the spell; the type of Glyph (Explosive or Spell), the trigger for the Glyph, and if it is a Spell Glyph what spell is contained. Using a Spell Glyph also allows for the Concentration requirement to be skipped because of the spell description.
To give a worked example, the party is trying to prevent a Halfling assassin from murdering a local dignitary. I know that we won't have an hour in the location where the Glyph needs to be placed, so I cast Glyph of Warding into my Spell Gem. I declare that I am casting a Spell Glyph which will contain Spirit Guardians, and that the trigger is "when a Halfling touches the glyph". The next day I then enter the house of the local dignitary, and touch an area of the floor to use the stored charge of Glyph of Warding in the Spell Gem. Later that night, the assassin makes his attempt. Unfortunately for me, he uses a window and does not walk on the area of floor I transferred the Glyph to. The Glyph then remains armed permanently (unless it is moved more than 10' or dispelled). Two days later, the local guard captain (also a Halfling) enters the house to find the dignitary, steps on the Glyph and is shredded by ghosts.
Finally in terms of action economy - it isn't really helpful at all. The whole point of Glyph is to set a booby trap, and players trying to use it in combat will quickly find the limitations. You also can't use it like an old-fashioned Spell Sequencer because it still takes an action to use the Spell Gem, and you need to touch where the Glyph is going to be placed.
A Glyph of Warding spell is one spell, the spell stored within it might be interpreted to be another spell, and thus could not be held within the same spell gem. This gets you away from the double concentration thing (which really needs to be avoided) but allows him to use it as an explosive runes style Glyph.
Like it or not, he/she is going to have trouble arguing that the spell contained within the Glyph doesn't count towards the total number of spells contained within the gem.
A Glyph of Warding spell is one spell, the spell stored within it might be interpreted to be another spell, and thus could not be held within the same spell gem. This gets you away from the double concentration thing (which really needs to be avoided) but allows him to use it as an explosive runes style Glyph.
Like it or not, he/she is going to have trouble arguing that the spell contained within the Glyph doesn't count towards the total number of spells contained within the gem.
A ring of spell storing would allow a Glyph and a second level spell within the Glyph to be stored for a total of 5 spell levels. With that limitation, I would be more comfortable with him holding two spells requiring concentration at a time. He/She is still going to have to be creative with how the conditions triggering the Glyph are worked out and that is another set of limitations that might make you more comfortable with this use.
Hello there!
This is a super niche question that I could use an outside call on. One of my players, an 8th level cleric, bought a 3rd level spell gem in Blingdenstone. He messages me last night and asks what the limitations of the spell gem are, wanting to cast Glyph of Warding into it.
I look into it and I get a little confused. Glyph of Warding requires an hour to cast. It is attached to a location or object and can include a spell up to 3rd level with conditions set to trigger activation. A spell put in it that requires concentration simply lasts for the duration. Another detail of GoW is that if it's cast into an object, the Glyph is cancelled without activation if it's moved more than 10' from the point of casting.
The spell gem, a bloodstone, states that any spell, regardless of casting time, can be cast from it as an action. My player wants to know if I'm ok with him casting GoW into it. I reason that moving the object 10' from where it was cast triggers the nullification rule from Glyph. I point out to him that it's redundant to cast a spell requiring an hour to cast into it when he has to attune to the gem to put a spell in. His character has his attunement slots full, you see - if he wants to put a spell into the gem, he needs to attune to it, spend an hour casting the spell into it, then spend another hour re-attuning to the original item. I also note that it's "cheating" to cast Glyph out of the gem as Glyph sidesteps concentration on the spell - inside Glyph - inside the spell gem. I ask him what his character would want to put in the spell gem. I do this to counteract his rules lawyering and min-maxing tendencies.
What do you think of my interpretation? What judgment call would you make?
Thanks for reading and for any advice!
Rules as written, I don't see any explicit reasons why someone couldn't do this - but I understand why you are nervous about it.
Something that might help you out here is that I'd argue that once the spell gem is no longer attuned to the player, it "forgets" what spell was cast into it - that way, the player will have to make a choice about whether they really want this or not.
As you said, if they want the gem to carry an active version of Glyph, it would fall foul of the 10' movement rule. If they want to use the gem to "quick cast" Glyph as an action, that's fine - but make them choose in advance (and declare at the table) both the activation trigger, and type of Glyph (and spell it contains, if applicable). These things together should greatly cut down on the scope for abuse.
Also, if it makes you feel any better, the damage version Glyph of Warding is not actually an especially powerful spell in it's own right, and using it to cast another spell is really only an efficient way of doing things if the party is trying to set an ambush.
From the sounds of it, the player wants to cast the Glyph of Warding spell into the item for storage and not on the item as a protection. What if the gem was a ring of spell storing instead? Would you allow them to store a Glyph of Warding into the item that could then be cast later at the cost of an action?
For the ring of spell storing: "This ring stores spells cast into it, holding them until the attuned wearer uses them."
For the spell gem in OotA: "A spell gem can contain one spell from any class's spell list. You become aware of the spell when you learn the gem's properties. While holding the gem, you can cast the spell from it as an action if you know the spell or if the spell is on your class's spell list. Doing so doesn't require any components and doesn't require attunement. The spell then disappears from the gem."
"The spell is stored in the gem instead of having any effect."
Reading the text of the spell gem it clearly states that the spell is stored in the gem instead of having any effect. As a result, the constraints on moving the spell would not apply since the spell hasn't actually been cast - it has been stored for later casting.
The big difference between the spell gem and the ring of spell storing is that you have to attune the ring to use it while you only need to be attuned to the gem to store a spell in it, not to actually cast the spell stored in it. Casting it just requires an action.
So, as far as I can tell, from a RAW perspective it would work.
However, the character decides the parameters of the Glyph when it is cast or in this case stored in the gem.
"You decide what triggers the glyph when you cast the spell." You would also need to decide whether it was explosive runes or a spell, and if it contains a spell what spell that would be and expend the spell slot when you fill the gem. This would mean that the caster would need to make some reasonable assumptions about the spell being tcast and how they want to trigger it. In addition, the stored spell can only target a single creature or an area. You could not store things like group bless or bane since they target more than one creature but are not AoE. Similarly, the caster might need to be careful to specify trigger conditions that would not result in a party member triggering the glyph if it was cast.
Finally, if you decide that you don't like this application then you could tell the player that the gem has to be able to contain ALL the levels of spells cast. Thus a 3rd level Glyph of Warding which triggers a 3rd level haste spell would require a spell gem which could contain 6 levels of spells since it has to be able to hold both Glyph of Warding and Haste. That would seem to me to be a reasonable ruling on what you could store in a spell gem. Thus a third level spell gem could hold a Glyph of Warding that triggered explosive runes but not a secondary spell since the gem would not have room for both.
Explosive runes would be a bad idea. Whatever the trigger would be, the cleric would take damage from the activated runes as well, the spell gem being on their person.
The tricky part, for me, is what happens when Glyph of Warding is cast from the spell gem. Does the Glyph's requirements for remaining within 10' of where it was cast take effect? How does using an action to set up a reaction benefit the action economy? If the triggers never occurs, and the action taken to cast Glyph is used, does the spell last until the trigger happens?
I have a headache.
Glyph of Warding is a complicated spell for this particular case, so to simplify think about it like this:
I am a Druid who owns a Spell Gem, and I am attuned to it. On a day of downtime, I decide that I want to store Call Lightning in the Spell Gem. I use one of my spell slots for that day and cast Call Lightning on the Spell Gem to to store the spell. The Spell Gem then contains Call Lightning until I decide to use it, or become un-attuned from the Spell Gem. I then rest at the end of the day, and the next day my party and I go on an adventure. At any point I can use an action to release the stored charge of Call Lighnting, and the game proceeds, using the casting of the spell I did yesterday. I choose a target for the spell and maintain concentration as normal - the only difference is that it does not cost me a spell slot as I am using the stored charge in the Spell Gem. The Spell Gem is then empty and I can choose a new spell to charge it with.
In summary, we cast the spell at some point in the past, following all instructions on the spell description - except for choosing a target.
So if we introduce Glyph of Warding into this scenario, what changes?
Comparing with the example of Call Lightning, where we could choose a target for lightning to strike, we can still choose a target for the Glyph. The target must follow the normal rules for valid targets i.e. the player must be able to touch it in the case of Glyph of Warding, but this might be any of the suggestions in the spell description, such as a surface or a book. What we cannot change is the other things that must be decided as part of the casting of the spell; the type of Glyph (Explosive or Spell), the trigger for the Glyph, and if it is a Spell Glyph what spell is contained. Using a Spell Glyph also allows for the Concentration requirement to be skipped because of the spell description.
To give a worked example, the party is trying to prevent a Halfling assassin from murdering a local dignitary. I know that we won't have an hour in the location where the Glyph needs to be placed, so I cast Glyph of Warding into my Spell Gem. I declare that I am casting a Spell Glyph which will contain Spirit Guardians, and that the trigger is "when a Halfling touches the glyph". The next day I then enter the house of the local dignitary, and touch an area of the floor to use the stored charge of Glyph of Warding in the Spell Gem. Later that night, the assassin makes his attempt. Unfortunately for me, he uses a window and does not walk on the area of floor I transferred the Glyph to. The Glyph then remains armed permanently (unless it is moved more than 10' or dispelled). Two days later, the local guard captain (also a Halfling) enters the house to find the dignitary, steps on the Glyph and is shredded by ghosts.
Finally in terms of action economy - it isn't really helpful at all. The whole point of Glyph is to set a booby trap, and players trying to use it in combat will quickly find the limitations. You also can't use it like an old-fashioned Spell Sequencer because it still takes an action to use the Spell Gem, and you need to touch where the Glyph is going to be placed.
"A spell gem can contain one spell ..."
A Glyph of Warding spell is one spell, the spell stored within it might be interpreted to be another spell, and thus could not be held within the same spell gem. This gets you away from the double concentration thing (which really needs to be avoided) but allows him to use it as an explosive runes style Glyph.
Like it or not, he/she is going to have trouble arguing that the spell contained within the Glyph doesn't count towards the total number of spells contained within the gem.
"A spell gem can contain one spell ..."
A Glyph of Warding spell is one spell, the spell stored within it might be interpreted to be another spell, and thus could not be held within the same spell gem. This gets you away from the double concentration thing (which really needs to be avoided) but allows him to use it as an explosive runes style Glyph.
Like it or not, he/she is going to have trouble arguing that the spell contained within the Glyph doesn't count towards the total number of spells contained within the gem.
A ring of spell storing would allow a Glyph and a second level spell within the Glyph to be stored for a total of 5 spell levels. With that limitation, I would be more comfortable with him holding two spells requiring concentration at a time. He/She is still going to have to be creative with how the conditions triggering the Glyph are worked out and that is another set of limitations that might make you more comfortable with this use.