u/Sunforger42

Alright, so, in the book Secrets of Xendrik, and the Dragon Magazine issue 345, there are these things called artifact spells. They can only be learned with a high enough Spellcraft check from studying the place they're found. Once you learn it, you can cast it exactly once within the next year. You can't make a scroll of it, you can't make a wand of it. If you don't cast it within that year, you lose it. After you cast it or lose it, you have to go back to the source to relearn it. The spells are generally more powerful than most people can cast at this level because of all the restrictions.

Now.... I swear I remember one that, once learned, so long as you didn't cast it, only caused you to age one day for the year that it stayed in your head, after which time you'd have to relearn it. If you cast it, it no longer protected you from that aging. Except... none of the spells in either Xendrik or Dragon have this effect. Does anyone else know of anywhere else they might have come up with Artifact Spells, and particularly the one I'm looking for?

So.... I'm in a campaign where I'm playing a monk that has the Touch of Golden Ice feat. First off, would it be weird if I thought it should be a scalable DC based on my character's Con bonus, like so many poisons are? My argument is that the DC of 14 staying static makes it almost useless at higher levels.

But let's say that's whatever. My big question is that should Golden Ice affect corporeal undead? I think it should because it specifically says it affects things that are immune to poison, but my DM seems to think that because undead are separately immune to physical ability damage, they're immune to Golden Ice.

Last question. Let's say you're at a table where venomfire has not been banned. But you're playing an exalted good character, so intentionally using poison is apparently evil, even if the animals you're using aren't actually evil, but rather they're neutral. Personally, I would argue that using the natural poison abilities of an animal is a neutral act, not an evil one. But let's say it is evil, because of reasons. Good characters still get poisons in the form of ravages. Would you allow the use of venomfire to enhance a ravage like it does a poison? I would. It makes it only usable against evil foes, which is one of the reasons ravages aren't evil.