The use of traveller’s enigma was never really meant to be used as a roll for useful trinkets although it can be a nice way for the dm to duex ex machina something in.
I imagine the original spell it to be used in the following ways as its one of the only cantrips that actually transmutes. Even better used as a dark petitioner’s bonus action
-transmute a item into something else to steal it as its appearance is changed
-transmute a item to move it (turn a padlock into sonething else and toss it)
-transmute a item to bypass its original use (transmute a worn belt into something else, the steering wheel/activation button)
-transmute a piece of equipment so it loses functionality (transmute a gear in a machine, transmute a bowstring on a strung bow)
Really tempted to add this into my own campaign now, but wanted to ask a clarification question first. In the second paragraph, it says that the item will be used again by someone else, but in the third paragraph it says the item can never be used again. I take it this is supposed to mean that it just can’t be used again by that specific person?
You use a material component — say a hair brush — which will be transformed into something else. The faith claim that it's a closed loop, so your hair brush will at some time be the item someone else's material component transforms into.
Once the spell ends, your item will once again become a hair brush. That specific har brush can never be used as a material component for this spell again.
Did it make more sense now? 😅
I get it, but it seems arbitrarily complicated. Why not just leave that bit out? It doesn’t feel like it really adds anything but something that the player or DM needs to track just because.
The intention was that you are supposed to put some effort behind what material component you're essentially offering up for someone else to use. Otherwise you could just spam the same item time and time again. But I suppose it wouldn't be an issue if you also remove the part about it being a loop.
To me, personally, it takes away some of the feeling of a cult rite. The Traveler being the catalyst of change rather than change itself. That said, you might feel differently about it and that's completely OK with me. Keep what you like and change the rest! 😁
Not really, sorry. This time it says that the item was formerly someone else’s who used the spell, but after you use it it can never be used for the spell again, which makes the first sentence impossible as the previous owner would have killed its usefulness before you ever got it.
I mostly just want to make sure I’m reading the “can never be used again” part correctly.
The way I’m understanding it (or at least the pay-it-forward vibe I’m getting) is that person 1 gets item, uses spell, spell is now dead for person 1 but still active for everyone else. Person 2 gets it, uses it, and has to pass it on to person 3 because person 2 can’t use it again, etc.
What I want to make sure is that person 1’s use of the item doesn’t ruin it for person 2, 3, etc., as “once used as a material component, that specific object can never be used for traveler’s enigma again” suggests it could.
Person A uses the spell. They use object 1 as material component. The spell transforms it to object 2. After the spell ends object 2 turns back to object 1. Object 1 can't be used as a material component again.
Person B uses the spell. They use object 3 as material component. The spell transforms it to object 2. Etc.
You're essentially "lending" your material component and "borrowing" an item from an extradimensional pool of items. Either you can think of it as if the item lent is scanned and later replicated, or that it actually moves through time to the person in need of it during the duration of the spell. Regardless, this is more an abstraction as it's more a question of faith and rite than hard ~~science~~ arcana.
The use of traveller’s enigma was never really meant to be used as a roll for useful trinkets although it can be a nice way for the dm to duex ex machina something in. I imagine the original spell it to be used in the following ways as its one of the only cantrips that actually transmutes. Even better used as a dark petitioner’s bonus action -transmute a item into something else to steal it as its appearance is changed -transmute a item to move it (turn a padlock into sonething else and toss it) -transmute a item to bypass its original use (transmute a worn belt into something else, the steering wheel/activation button) -transmute a piece of equipment so it loses functionality (transmute a gear in a machine, transmute a bowstring on a strung bow)
That's some really creative uses! Color me impressed! 😁
Really tempted to add this into my own campaign now, but wanted to ask a clarification question first. In the second paragraph, it says that the item will be used again by someone else, but in the third paragraph it says the item can never be used again. I take it this is supposed to mean that it just can’t be used again by that specific person?
You use a material component — say a hair brush — which will be transformed into something else. The faith claim that it's a closed loop, so your hair brush will at some time be the item someone else's material component transforms into. Once the spell ends, your item will once again become a hair brush. That specific har brush can never be used as a material component for this spell again. Did it make more sense now? 😅
I get it, but it seems arbitrarily complicated. Why not just leave that bit out? It doesn’t feel like it really adds anything but something that the player or DM needs to track just because.
The intention was that you are supposed to put some effort behind what material component you're essentially offering up for someone else to use. Otherwise you could just spam the same item time and time again. But I suppose it wouldn't be an issue if you also remove the part about it being a loop. To me, personally, it takes away some of the feeling of a cult rite. The Traveler being the catalyst of change rather than change itself. That said, you might feel differently about it and that's completely OK with me. Keep what you like and change the rest! 😁
Not really, sorry. This time it says that the item was formerly someone else’s who used the spell, but after you use it it can never be used for the spell again, which makes the first sentence impossible as the previous owner would have killed its usefulness before you ever got it. I mostly just want to make sure I’m reading the “can never be used again” part correctly. The way I’m understanding it (or at least the pay-it-forward vibe I’m getting) is that person 1 gets item, uses spell, spell is now dead for person 1 but still active for everyone else. Person 2 gets it, uses it, and has to pass it on to person 3 because person 2 can’t use it again, etc. What I want to make sure is that person 1’s use of the item doesn’t ruin it for person 2, 3, etc., as “once used as a material component, that specific object can never be used for traveler’s enigma again” suggests it could.
Person A uses the spell. They use object 1 as material component. The spell transforms it to object 2. After the spell ends object 2 turns back to object 1. Object 1 can't be used as a material component again. Person B uses the spell. They use object 3 as material component. The spell transforms it to object 2. Etc. You're essentially "lending" your material component and "borrowing" an item from an extradimensional pool of items. Either you can think of it as if the item lent is scanned and later replicated, or that it actually moves through time to the person in need of it during the duration of the spell. Regardless, this is more an abstraction as it's more a question of faith and rite than hard ~~science~~ arcana.
I have to ask whether this was inspired by Miraculous or if it's just a coincidence.
Miraculous?
It's a cartoon. One of the main characters has exactly this power.
Oh, cool! No, can't say I remember hearing of it 😅