Magic Item Pricing Alternatives [Archive] - Wizards Community

Magic Item Pricing Alternatives [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
CuRoi
10-09-07, 12:16 PM Alright, here is the deal. I am getting pretty tired of the custom magic item rules and have decided to remove custom items from game for a bit while I decide what to do. Essentially, I am increasingly annoyed by players min/maxing the rules. Yeah, in many ways I can't blame them for trying to save some gold, or get the most bang for their buck. However, when every item idea proposed to me has some sort non-limitation, or some sort of loop hole exploitation it starts to get on my nerves.

A couple of recent examples include players wanting to boost strength. Ok, gonna get some gauntlets of Ogre Power right? Maybe a Girdle of Giant Strength or some such? No. A ring of permanent Enlarge ought to do it - bonus strength, increased reach and greater dice for weapon damage. Costs as much as a +2 Strength enhancement and might even stack with Strength items added later since it is a "size" enhancement to strength. Or a request to make Bracers of Armor +4, but instead of using the +4 Bracers per the book, just making a continuous Mage Armor spell item. And don't get me started on the "once per day, usable by humans, specific class, during daylight yadda yadda."

Anyway, I have come to the conclusion that the rules are a bit....off. Yeah, my players are a bit off as well :) however, there has to be a better way. I want to play the game, DM a story and stop having to negotiate contracts over this crap, its a waste of my time honestly. Have other DMs had this problem? What have your solutions been?
Marcus Majarra
10-09-07, 12:35 PM This is a recurring problem with many DMs. This is not the first time I read about this (here or elsewhere). Your players are trying to exploit rulings to their advantage, while ignoring other rulings. This is always present when people try to capitalize on spell effects to disregard the general rule concerning bonuses on items. You should defer to the gold piece costs for items providing bonuses when the end result is pretty much that, even if it's emulated through a spell effect. Spell effect prices should be used when you're trying to reproduce an otherwise unique effect (i.e. one that isn't on the Effect part of the Estimating Magic Item Gold Piece Values table, found at http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicItems/creatingMagicItems.htm).
Thomar_of_Uointer
10-09-07, 12:39 PM My solution has been to require all custom magic items to be approved by me first. This discourages shady rules, and it lets me perform a sanity check on things like "permanent mage armor", or "swords of true striking", or "spears of use-activated disintegrate". Also, to get custom magic items you have to either make them yourself, or commission them from someone who can (a PC or NPC).

Or is that what you've already done?
CuRoi
10-09-07, 12:42 PM This is a recurring problem with many DMs. This is not the first time I read about this (here or elsewhere). Your players are trying to exploit rulings to their advantage, while ignoring other rulings. This is always present when people try to capitalize on spell effects to disregard the general rule concerning bonuses on items. You should defer to the gold piece costs for items providing bonuses when the end result is pretty much that, even if it's emulated through a spell effect. Spell effect prices should be used when you're trying to reproduce an otherwise unique effect (i.e. one that isn't on the Effect part of the Estimating Magic Item Gold Piece Values table, found at http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicItems/creatingMagicItems.htm).

Completely agreed and that is what I have done - the point being, there is a lot of re-explanations rules, breaking out the standard precedents, etc., etc. So, I suppose I am mainly looking for any alternative ideas out there to the current system.
CuRoi
10-09-07, 12:49 PM My solution has been to require all custom magic items to be approved by me first. This discourages shady rules, and it lets me perform a sanity check on things like "permanent mage armor", or "swords of true striking", or "spears of use-activated disintegrate". Also, to get custom magic items you have to either make them yourself, or commission them from someone who can (a PC or NPC).

Or is that what you've already done?

Yeah, it is what I have done. Problem is I can't get the players to try to make a "normal" item - seems most ideas are submitted with all of these ridiculous qualifications/loopholes. I know, I could blame it entriely on my players for being to greedy, however it seems the rules help encourage this sort of thinking. Right now I'm just not allowing custom items, period. Aside from that, I'll take any sort of creative solutions.

I tried a magic item creation system in the past where players had to research and gather components to create magic items....maybe I'll ressurrect that but apply it only to custom items (logic being the "standard" items are well known formulae and their components/plans are more easily available.)
Puca
10-09-07, 01:20 PM I think you are paying for your liberality.
A "mage armor" item shouldnt be priced like a 1st-level spell (CL x spell level x 2000) but like a +4 armor bonus (4^2 x 1000.)

Pricing by spell-level should always be last resort. Even after a gut-check for the items value.

For something like Enlarge Person, Id price it as a +2 strength bonus, then increase weapon damage (like a +1 enhancement) and then tack on some additional money for reach.

And don't get me started on the "once per day, usable by humans, specific class, during daylight yadda yadda." Those make the item more difficult to sell, not easier to make. I would not give them any sort of discount for this.

I think it is natural for player to look for a "bargain" but the power of the item is what counts. How much the DM should require them to pay needs to be tied to the value of the item in the hands of the character in his campaign; not on the method of creation.

If it were causing a problem in my party, I would impose a moratorium on all custom items altogether. I would ease up later, cause hey, its a game and cool stuff is sorta the point, but I would let them know that the spell-level method of pricing is "officially" off the table in your campaign.

Id tell them that obviously underpriced submissions will not be considered at all. If they cant look for a fair price, from a value/balance perspective, dont ask at all.
mvincent
10-09-07, 01:41 PM I have come to the conclusion that the rules are a bit....off. Obligatory notes regarding the "Estimating Magic Item Gold Piece Values" section in the DMG:
This section contains rough guidelines only. It is not balanced for all circumstances, and it isn't intended to be freely used by PC's. Unfortunately, the section isn't clearly represented this way, but any DM that allowed free use of it would quickly find his game becoming unbalanced beyond control. As mentioned, there are considerable abuses available, like a sword truestriking mentioned here (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20050118a).

Here are some other unbalanced examples from the tables:
• Ring of Cure Minor Wounds, always on (1,000 gp)
• Headband of Charm Person, always on (1,800)
• Ring of Mage Armor, +4 AC, always on (2,000 gp )
• Shield of Shield spell, +4 AC, always on (2,000 gp)

The tables are meant to simply give some guidelines to DM's wanting to create new items. But the DM is the final arbiter on the price for these new items, and needs to take balance into account. It is best to avoid them entirely unless you are very comfortable with such balance issues.
Vharuck
10-09-07, 01:46 PM Also, take note of the order of pricing guidelines the DMG suggests. Those "caster level x spell level x Y gold" formulae are the very last resort, only to be used if nothing else worked. First, you compare to existing items. If it's better than something similar already detailed, it will cost more. If it's not as good, it will cost less.

Then you use the bonus^2 rules. These are a staple for everything. I mean everything.

Then you use the remaining rules. And you still give oyurself a lot of leeway with the price, so that you can make it more like it should be.

There is a reason why magic item creation rules are in the DMG. Players min/max; it's just what they do. DMs should not. There's no reason. If I wanted to kill my players, I could easily do that. Lightning hits them- bam, dead. My goal is not to "win," but to make the game enjoyable. I am in the position that stands to gain nothing from abusing these rules. The players can gain a lot from exploitation.
Thomar_of_Uointer
10-09-07, 01:49 PM Yeah, it is what I have done. Problem is I can't get the players to try to make a "normal" item - seems most ideas are submitted with all of these ridiculous qualifications/loopholes. I know, I could blame it entriely on my players for being to greedy, however it seems the rules help encourage this sort of thinking. Right now I'm just not allowing custom items, period. Aside from that, I'll take any sort of creative solutions.

I tried a magic item creation system in the past where players had to research and gather components to create magic items....maybe I'll ressurrect that but apply it only to custom items (logic being the "standard" items are well known formulae and their components/plans are more easily available.)

Well, if players did that to me, I'd just peg arbitrarily high prices on their items (as part of the sanity check). If they whine about it, I just point out that the guidelines are merely guidelines, and that the guidelines don't take into account whatever they're taking advantage of.
Fireclave
10-09-07, 02:04 PM Obligatory notes regarding the "Estimating Magic Item Gold Piece Values" section in the DMG:
This section contains rough guidelines only. It is not balanced for all circumstances, and it isn't intended to be freely used by PC's. Unfortunately, the section isn't clearly represented this way, but any DM that allowed free use of it would quickly find his game becoming unbalanced beyond control. As mentioned, there are considerable abuses available, like a sword truestriking mentioned here (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20050118a).

Here are some other unbalanced examples from the tables:
• Ring of Cure Minor Wounds, always on (1,000 gp)
• Headband of Charm Person, always on (1,800)
• Ring of Mage Armor, +4 AC, always on (2,000 gp )
• Shield of Shield spell, +4 AC, always on (2,000 gp)

The tables are meant to simply give some guidelines to DM's wanting to create new items. But the DM is the final arbiter on the price for these new items, and needs to take balance into account. It is best to avoid them entirely unless you are very comfortable with such balance issues.
QFT. The magic item pricing guidelines are just that. Guidelines, not rules.

The first step to pricing a new custom item should almost always be comparing it to existing magic items. The magic item pricing guidelines should be your last resort. Either way, all custom items should be approved by the DM before they ever appear in game.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
CuRoi 10-09-07, 12:16 PM	Alright, here is the deal. I am getting pretty tired of the custom magic item rules and have decided to remove custom items from game for a bit while I decide what to do. Essentially, I am increasingly annoyed by players min/maxing the rules. Yeah, in many ways I can't blame them for trying to save some gold, or get the most bang for their buck. However, when every item idea proposed to me has some sort non-limitation, or some sort of loop hole exploitation it starts to get on my nerves. A couple of recent examples include players wanting to boost strength. Ok, gonna get some gauntlets of Ogre Power right? Maybe a Girdle of Giant Strength or some such? No. A ring of permanent Enlarge ought to do it - bonus strength, increased reach and greater dice for weapon damage. Costs as much as a +2 Strength enhancement and might even stack with Strength items added later since it is a "size" enhancement to strength. Or a request to make Bracers of Armor +4, but instead of using the +4 Bracers per the book, just making a continuous Mage Armor spell item. And don't get me started on the "once per day, usable by humans, specific class, during daylight yadda yadda." Anyway, I have come to the conclusion that the rules are a bit....off. Yeah, my players are a bit off as well :) however, there has to be a better way. I want to play the game, DM a story and stop having to negotiate contracts over this crap, its a waste of my time honestly. Have other DMs had this problem? What have your solutions been?
Marcus Majarra 10-09-07, 12:35 PM	This is a recurring problem with many DMs. This is not the first time I read about this (here or elsewhere). Your players are trying to exploit rulings to their advantage, while ignoring other rulings. This is always present when people try to capitalize on spell effects to disregard the general rule concerning bonuses on items. You should defer to the gold piece costs for items providing bonuses when the end result is pretty much that, even if it's emulated through a spell effect. Spell effect prices should be used when you're trying to reproduce an otherwise unique effect (i.e. one that isn't on the Effect part of the Estimating Magic Item Gold Piece Values table, found at http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicItems/creatingMagicItems.htm).
Thomar_of_Uointer 10-09-07, 12:39 PM	My solution has been to require all custom magic items to be approved by me first. This discourages shady rules, and it lets me perform a sanity check on things like "permanent mage armor", or "swords of true striking", or "spears of use-activated disintegrate". Also, to get custom magic items you have to either make them yourself, or commission them from someone who can (a PC or NPC). Or is that what you've already done?
CuRoi 10-09-07, 12:42 PM	This is a recurring problem with many DMs. This is not the first time I read about this (here or elsewhere). Your players are trying to exploit rulings to their advantage, while ignoring other rulings. This is always present when people try to capitalize on spell effects to disregard the general rule concerning bonuses on items. You should defer to the gold piece costs for items providing bonuses when the end result is pretty much that, even if it's emulated through a spell effect. Spell effect prices should be used when you're trying to reproduce an otherwise unique effect (i.e. one that isn't on the Effect part of the Estimating Magic Item Gold Piece Values table, found at http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicItems/creatingMagicItems.htm). Completely agreed and that is what I have done - the point being, there is a lot of re-explanations rules, breaking out the standard precedents, etc., etc. So, I suppose I am mainly looking for any alternative ideas out there to the current system.
CuRoi 10-09-07, 12:49 PM	My solution has been to require all custom magic items to be approved by me first. This discourages shady rules, and it lets me perform a sanity check on things like "permanent mage armor", or "swords of true striking", or "spears of use-activated disintegrate". Also, to get custom magic items you have to either make them yourself, or commission them from someone who can (a PC or NPC). Or is that what you've already done? Yeah, it is what I have done. Problem is I can't get the players to try to make a "normal" item - seems most ideas are submitted with all of these ridiculous qualifications/loopholes. I know, I could blame it entriely on my players for being to greedy, however it seems the rules help encourage this sort of thinking. Right now I'm just not allowing custom items, period. Aside from that, I'll take any sort of creative solutions. I tried a magic item creation system in the past where players had to research and gather components to create magic items....maybe I'll ressurrect that but apply it only to custom items (logic being the "standard" items are well known formulae and their components/plans are more easily available.)
Puca 10-09-07, 01:20 PM	I think you are paying for your liberality. A "mage armor" item shouldnt be priced like a 1st-level spell (CL x spell level x 2000) but like a +4 armor bonus (4^2 x 1000.) Pricing by spell-level should always be last resort. Even after a gut-check for the items value. For something like Enlarge Person, Id price it as a +2 strength bonus, then increase weapon damage (like a +1 enhancement) and then tack on some additional money for reach. And don't get me started on the "once per day, usable by humans, specific class, during daylight yadda yadda." Those make the item more difficult to sell, not easier to make. I would not give them any sort of discount for this. I think it is natural for player to look for a "bargain" but the power of the item is what counts. How much the DM should require them to pay needs to be tied to the value of the item in the hands of the character in his campaign; not on the method of creation. If it were causing a problem in my party, I would impose a moratorium on all custom items altogether. I would ease up later, cause hey, its a game and cool stuff is sorta the point, but I would let them know that the spell-level method of pricing is "officially" off the table in your campaign. Id tell them that obviously underpriced submissions will not be considered at all. If they cant look for a fair price, from a value/balance perspective, dont ask at all.
mvincent 10-09-07, 01:41 PM	I have come to the conclusion that the rules are a bit....off. Obligatory notes regarding the "Estimating Magic Item Gold Piece Values" section in the DMG: This section contains rough guidelines only. It is not balanced for all circumstances, and it isn't intended to be freely used by PC's. Unfortunately, the section isn't clearly represented this way, but any DM that allowed free use of it would quickly find his game becoming unbalanced beyond control. As mentioned, there are considerable abuses available, like a sword truestriking mentioned here (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20050118a). Here are some other unbalanced examples from the tables: • Ring of Cure Minor Wounds, always on (1,000 gp) • Headband of Charm Person, always on (1,800) • Ring of Mage Armor, +4 AC, always on (2,000 gp ) • Shield of Shield spell, +4 AC, always on (2,000 gp) The tables are meant to simply give some guidelines to DM's wanting to create new items. But the DM is the final arbiter on the price for these new items, and needs to take balance into account. It is best to avoid them entirely unless you are very comfortable with such balance issues.
Vharuck 10-09-07, 01:46 PM	Also, take note of the order of pricing guidelines the DMG suggests. Those "caster level x spell level x Y gold" formulae are the very last resort, only to be used if nothing else worked. First, you compare to existing items. If it's better than something similar already detailed, it will cost more. If it's not as good, it will cost less. Then you use the bonus^2 rules. These are a staple for everything. I mean everything. Then you use the remaining rules. And you still give oyurself a lot of leeway with the price, so that you can make it more like it should be. There is a reason why magic item creation rules are in the DMG. Players min/max; it's just what they do. DMs should not. There's no reason. If I wanted to kill my players, I could easily do that. Lightning hits them- bam, dead. My goal is not to "win," but to make the game enjoyable. I am in the position that stands to gain nothing from abusing these rules. The players can gain a lot from exploitation.
Thomar_of_Uointer 10-09-07, 01:49 PM	Yeah, it is what I have done. Problem is I can't get the players to try to make a "normal" item - seems most ideas are submitted with all of these ridiculous qualifications/loopholes. I know, I could blame it entriely on my players for being to greedy, however it seems the rules help encourage this sort of thinking. Right now I'm just not allowing custom items, period. Aside from that, I'll take any sort of creative solutions. I tried a magic item creation system in the past where players had to research and gather components to create magic items....maybe I'll ressurrect that but apply it only to custom items (logic being the "standard" items are well known formulae and their components/plans are more easily available.) Well, if players did that to me, I'd just peg arbitrarily high prices on their items (as part of the sanity check). If they whine about it, I just point out that the guidelines are merely guidelines, and that the guidelines don't take into account whatever they're taking advantage of.
Fireclave 10-09-07, 02:04 PM	Obligatory notes regarding the "Estimating Magic Item Gold Piece Values" section in the DMG: This section contains rough guidelines only. It is not balanced for all circumstances, and it isn't intended to be freely used by PC's. Unfortunately, the section isn't clearly represented this way, but any DM that allowed free use of it would quickly find his game becoming unbalanced beyond control. As mentioned, there are considerable abuses available, like a sword truestriking mentioned here (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20050118a). Here are some other unbalanced examples from the tables: • Ring of Cure Minor Wounds, always on (1,000 gp) • Headband of Charm Person, always on (1,800) • Ring of Mage Armor, +4 AC, always on (2,000 gp ) • Shield of Shield spell, +4 AC, always on (2,000 gp) The tables are meant to simply give some guidelines to DM's wanting to create new items. But the DM is the final arbiter on the price for these new items, and needs to take balance into account. It is best to avoid them entirely unless you are very comfortable with such balance issues. QFT. The magic item pricing guidelines are just that. Guidelines, not rules. The first step to pricing a new custom item should almost always be comparing it to existing magic items. The magic item pricing guidelines should be your last resort. Either way, all custom items should be approved by the DM before they ever appear in game.