7
\$\begingroup\$

Some items increase the saving throw DC of spells cast using them or while holding them. For example the Rod of the Pact Keeper says:

While holding this rod, you gain a +[1-3] bonus to spell attack rolls and to the saving throw DCs of your Warlock spells.

If a Warlock cast a multi-round spell, such as Hunger of Hadar, while holding a Rod of the Pact Keeper then stowed the rod to wield a weapon would the saving throw DC for the affected creatures drop?

\$\endgroup\$
5
  • \$\begingroup\$ Not just this, but also when you cast Innate Sorcery as a Sorcerer which increases your Spell Save DC. \$\endgroup\$ Commented yesterday
  • \$\begingroup\$ I downvoted this question, and to give some feedback, this question could be improved by explaining a bit more what is confusing you. Are you unsure about what counts as “holding”? Because it seems pretty straightforward, “while you are holding” seems like it should answer this for you. \$\endgroup\$ Commented yesterday
  • \$\begingroup\$ Right now this question seems almost redundant to What is the relationship between wearing, holding, and carrying an item? but I guess you could want clarification about the specific rule concerning the DC of an ongoing spell changing suddenly. Maybe you should add more detail about what you might except and why, along with some research. \$\endgroup\$ Commented yesterday
  • \$\begingroup\$ Related question for the 2014 rules. \$\endgroup\$ Commented yesterday
  • \$\begingroup\$ @ThomasMarkov the question is less about whether you are affected by the item, it's whether ongoing spells are affected by DC changes. Joakim points to the parallel question for 2015 (5e). Do we already have that q for 5.5e? \$\endgroup\$ Commented yesterday

2 Answers 2

5
\$\begingroup\$

Yes, the DC would be reduced

It does say in its description "While you are holding this rod...", so you need to hold it to gain those effects.

\$\endgroup\$
12
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ Simple and straightforward. The question title and answer asked (as so often) the opposite question, I edited the title to also match. \$\endgroup\$ Commented yesterday
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ Aren't most spells instantaneous, so the effects (like DC) set when they are cast? And isn't this kind of complex remembrance of mechanics contrary to the intention of 5e? \$\endgroup\$ Commented yesterday
  • \$\begingroup\$ @SeriousBri I don't think this is the case here. \$\endgroup\$ Commented yesterday
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ I used the wrong term. Hunger of hadar has a casting time of 1 action, once it is cast can it still be affected? Concentration keeps it going, but I haven't seen any rules that say a spell can be affected once it is cast (other than dispelling). \$\endgroup\$ Commented yesterday
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ Yep, that would make a good answer here. The reasoning you put here is irrelevant IMO. It is an answer to "Does my spell DC change if I stop holding my focus?" but not to "Does the DC of my ongoing spell change if I stop holding my focus?" \$\endgroup\$ Commented 14 hours ago
3
\$\begingroup\$

No, the DC would not be reduced

The wording here describes a spell (which we can infer means a particular casting of a spell) as having a DC, not the caster themself. The wording in the PHB is similar when it says "Here's how to calculate the DC for your spells:", rather than "Here's how to calculate your spell save DC".

In both cases, the wording favors the DC being a property of the spell, not you; you cast the spell, and it derives its DC from your abilities, the spell itself is granted that DC, it's not constantly checking back if you're still as smart/wise/charismatic as you were when you cast it, nor is it checking if you still hold a particular item. For non-concentration spells, they can continue working even if you're dead (i.e. you're now an object, with no stats at all), and there's no implication in the rules that spells end when you die (in fact, there's a specific statement that merely being Incapacitated renders you unable to voluntarily end a spell).

At the moment you cast a spell, unless a class feature or item says otherwise (there are some effects I've seen that specify they affect only the first save), the save DC is locked in. If you cast without the Rod, drawing it won't make later saves harder, but if you cast with the Rod, stowing it won't make later saves easier (for that matter, changes to your stats or proficiency bonus won't affect it either).

This makes sense narratively as well. I view a spell with an attack roll as being a spell effect that must be aimed by the caster themself (no different from aiming a bow), while a spell with a saving throw does not rely on aiming, the spell's power is embedded in the spell itself and the target resists it, or not, based on the power imbued in the spell when it was cast (there's a weird in-between case for single target Dex saves, where attack rolls imply armor helps, while saves imply it doesn't, but all abstractions are going to leak sometimes). The Rod makes a spell more powerful when cast, and focuses the caster for aiming, but putting it away doesn't reach out and suck power out of a spell that's already existing, possibly entirely independent of the caster.

\$\endgroup\$
11
  • 3
    \$\begingroup\$ You very strongly draw your conclusion, but it is not at all clear that it follows from any rule(s). \$\endgroup\$ Commented yesterday
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ Re" "there's a specific statement that merely being Incapacitated renders you unable to voluntarily end a spell" where is that rule? \$\endgroup\$ Commented yesterday
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ This is considerably more ambiguous for spells that require concentration; in those cases the spell does require continuous effort from the caster to remain active and would end if they are slain or incapacitated, which strongly implies that other changes to the caster such as their DC could have a live impact as well. \$\endgroup\$ Commented yesterday
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ I think the argument about spells that do not require concentration is strong, and maybe then to be consistent (especially as there are no detailed rules about it), it might make sense that one just extends handling it this way to all spells, including concentration spells. That certainly is the much more practical solution during play to avoid bookkeeping. \$\endgroup\$ Commented yesterday
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ @ThomasMarkov: Eh. My conclusion draws more on the actual wording of the rules than the alternate conclusion. A single mention I'd discount, the fact that both the magic items and the rules for spellcasting use the same wording, describing the save DC as belonging to the spell, rather than the caster, convinces me. I understand DMs may disagree, and I'm not going to say they're committing some heinous sin by doing so, but the casting rules and magic item wording both support the interpretation that DC is tied to the (casting of the) spell. The whole "spells can survive death" issue seals it. \$\endgroup\$ Commented 15 hours ago

Start asking to get answers

Find the answer to your question by asking.

Ask question

Explore related questions

See similar questions with these tags.