Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Skull Guard 08-08-07, 10:51 PM	How much would a robe with the permanent effect of mage armor on it cost (market cost)? What about if it had a number of charges per day? 3/day?
StevenO 08-08-07, 11:20 PM	16000 gp That is using the armor enchancement bonus +4 squared times 1000 gp formula. (bonus^2)x1000 gp = item cost. I believe that is also how Bracers of Armor are priced.
Skull Guard 08-08-07, 11:30 PM	Why doesn't this use Spell Effect continuous spell lvl x caster lvl x 2000 gp found on 285 of dmg?
runestar 08-09-07, 12:02 AM	Because a precedent (bracers of armour) already exists, and thus, you are expected to use that.:)
Sildatorak 08-09-07, 12:10 AM	If you're looking to make it command word activated (which charges/day would indicate) then you would have 1800 gp x (spell level) x (caster level) x (daily charges/5 [treat more than 5 charges/day as 5]) If you wanted it to be unlimited charges/day with CL 1, then it would be a straight-forward 1800 gp. Seems moderately fair considering the item takes a slot and that will buy about 120 charges in wand form. Personally, I'd just make it continuous and price it as bracers of armor and allow values other than just +4.
Merestil Haye 08-09-07, 02:52 AM	Why doesn't this use Spell Effect continuous spell lvl x caster lvl x 2000 gp found on 285 of dmg?Because the first rule of pricing magic items is :- If two items do the same thing they have the same price. If you want an item that continuously generates the effect of a Mage Armour spell, then there is one already. It is called the Bracers of Armour +4 and costs 16,000gp. Therefore your proposed robe is priced accordingly. If you can't find an item with the exact same power, you look for something comparable, or something with a greater or lesser version of the power that you can scale up or down. Remember when you do this that all such scaling formulae have the price scale with the square of the power, so doubling the power of an item quadruples the cost. If there is no other guideline and the item is simply casting a spell, then you can consider using the spell effect formula (remembering to use the formula for the type of item). Once you have that number, you compare it to the Wealth by Level guidelines to see what level of play the price "pitches" the item at. If this level is too high (or low) then you adjust the price accordingly. For example a robe that casts the Mage Armour spell at CL1 three times daily would be 1,080gp by the formula. This pitches the item as being affordable1 to a character sometime before he reaches 4th level. +4 AC for the character in virtually all fights except ambushes is very significant for a character of that low a level. A third of fourth level wizard could not expect to have Mage Armour running for all fights without devoting at least two spell slots to it. I'd suggest it should be pitched for 5th level play which would mean around 2,250. I'd settle for 2,160 as that's twice the "formula value" of the item. 1 "Affordable" in D&D terms means that the item costs no more than one quarter of the value given in the wealth-by-level guideline table on page 135 of the DMG.
Dazzer 08-09-07, 02:55 AM	A really easy way to do the above examples post without changing the price is the following. It takes caster level 6 to create such an item, also since it was your idea, none currently exist. That way, he can only make it when he gets to 6th level.
NoirLotus 08-09-07, 02:56 AM	Why doesn't this use Spell Effect continuous spell lvl x caster lvl x 2000 gp found on 285 of dmg? When you are creating an item that grants a bonus, you must not use the rule of continuous effect for calculating the price but the rule of magic items granting bonuses. For AC, it is : 1000 x square(bonus) GP
StevenO 08-09-07, 02:06 PM	Why doesn't this use Spell Effect continuous spell lvl x caster lvl x 2000 gp found on 285 of dmg? Would you let me create a continuous effect item with True Strike using the formula? 2000 gp for an item that granted a +20 attack all the time is a little cheap; even if it required a standard action to active it would still be too cheap.
Pegasos989 08-10-07, 10:28 AM	Would you let me create a continuous effect item with True Strike using the formula? 2000 gp for an item that granted a +20 attack all the time is a little cheap; even if it required a standard action to active it would still be too cheap. It could't be done by the rules. True strike has duration of "next attack", not 1 round per level, minute per level, 10 minutes per level, hours per level nor 24 hours. That said, it is just a guideline and each custom brewn item should be concidered carefully. For example, continuous expeditious retreat is REALLY cheap for +30 ft. speed. That is why we have boots of striding and sprinting that gives +10 ft. speed with another spell. Because it would just be too good for the price to have it done with the formula and exp. retreat.
Zealot 08-10-07, 12:36 PM	It could't be done by the rules. True strike has duration of "next attack", not 1 round per level, minute per level, 10 minutes per level, hours per level nor 24 hours. Per Skip Williams; Use the Correct Formula: One item people frequently ask me about is a ring of true strike. The spell provides a whopping +20 insight bonus on attack rolls and negates miss chances arising from concealed targets. It's only 1st level, however, because it is a personal range spell with a duration of 1 round. That means you can normally manage one attack every 2 rounds when using the spell. Also, you can't bestow it on an ally (except for a familiar or animal companion) because of its personal range. Assuming such a ring worked whenever it was needed and has a caster level of 1st, it would cost a mere 2,000 gp by the formula for a use-activated spell effect (in this case, 1 x 1 x 2,000 gp). Sharp-eyed readers will note that any continuously functioning item has a cost adjustment of x4 (see the footnotes to Table 7-33), which bumps up the ring's cost to 8,000 gp. That's a real bargain for an item that provides so much boost to a user's combat power. Much too great a bargain. So, what would our example ring of true strike be worth? Insight bonuses aren't included on Table 7-33, but a weapon bonus has a cost equal to the bonus squared x 2,000 gp, so a +20 weapon would cost 800,000 gp. One can argue that the ring isn't quite as good as a +20 weapon because it doesn't provide a damage bonus. That, however, ignores the very potent ability to negate most miss chances. Also, the ring's insight bonus works with any sort of attack the wearer makes. On top of all that, the insight bonus stacks with any enhancement bonus from a magic weapon the wearer might wield. Still, 800,000 gp is a lot of cash and the lack of a damage bonus is significant, so some price reduction is in order. A 50% reduction might be in order, or 400,000 gp for the ring. Would you pay 400,000 gp for a ring of true striking? I would if I could afford it. At a price of 400,000 gp, our mythical ring of true strike is something only an epic-level character could afford. That's fine, because epic play is where the ring belongs. More must be taken into consideration when crafting an item that gives permanent Mage Armor. The most notable is that mage armor works vrs. touch attacks. Add to that the fact that you don't have to be proficient with any armor to wear such a robe and you have a rather expensive item. Certainly more expensive than Bracers of Armor.
DoveArrow 08-10-07, 04:01 PM	Why doesn't this use Spell Effect continuous spell lvl x caster lvl x 2000 gp found on 285 of dmg? BECAUSE THAT'S BROKEN, YOU MUNCHKIN!!!! :P Seriously, though, it says in the DMG that the tables in the back are used as guidelines for pricing magic items. It also says that if a comparable item already exists, you should use that as a guide for pricing similar magic items.
Raymond_Luxury_Yacht 08-11-07, 06:44 PM	Per Skip Williams; Use the Correct Formula: One item people frequently ask me about is a ring of true strike. The spell provides a whopping +20 insight bonus on attack rolls and negates miss chances arising from concealed targets. It's only 1st level, however, because it is a personal range spell with a duration of 1 round. That means you can normally manage one attack every 2 rounds when using the spell. Also, you can't bestow it on an ally (except for a familiar or animal companion) because of its personal range. Assuming such a ring worked whenever it was needed and has a caster level of 1st, it would cost a mere 2,000 gp by the formula for a use-activated spell effect (in this case, 1 x 1 x 2,000 gp). Sharp-eyed readers will note that any continuously functioning item has a cost adjustment of x4 (see the footnotes to Table 7-33), which bumps up the ring's cost to 8,000 gp. That's a real bargain for an item that provides so much boost to a user's combat power. Much too great a bargain. So, what would our example ring of true strike be worth? Insight bonuses aren't included on Table 7-33, but a weapon bonus has a cost equal to the bonus squared x 2,000 gp, so a +20 weapon would cost 800,000 gp. One can argue that the ring isn't quite as good as a +20 weapon because it doesn't provide a damage bonus. That, however, ignores the very potent ability to negate most miss chances. Also, the ring's insight bonus works with any sort of attack the wearer makes. On top of all that, the insight bonus stacks with any enhancement bonus from a magic weapon the wearer might wield. Still, 800,000 gp is a lot of cash and the lack of a damage bonus is significant, so some price reduction is in order. A 50% reduction might be in order, or 400,000 gp for the ring. Would you pay 400,000 gp for a ring of true striking? I would if I could afford it. At a price of 400,000 gp, our mythical ring of true strike is something only an epic-level character could afford. That's fine, because epic play is where the ring belongs. More must be taken into consideration when crafting an item that gives permanent Mage Armor. The most notable is that mage armor works vrs. touch attacks. Add to that the fact that you don't have to be proficient with any armor to wear such a robe and you have a rather expensive item. Certainly more expensive than Bracers of Armor. Speaking of the ring of true strike, Skip priced it wrong. While his 400k is a starting point, he forgot to double it for using a non-standard bonus, and then multiply it by ten for being an epic item.
Nom 08-11-07, 08:07 PM	Speaking of the ring of true strike, Skip priced it wrong. While his 400k is a starting point, he forgot to double it for using a non-standard bonus, and then multiply it by ten for being an epic item.The non-standard bonus was included: "On top of all that, the insight bonus stacks with any enhancement bonus from a magic weapon the wearer might wield. Still, 800,000 gp is a lot of cash and the lack of a damage bonus is significant, so some price reduction is in order. A 50% reduction might be in order, or 400,000 gp for the ring.". The logic is likely wrong - eliminating damage bonus and being insight rather than enhancement bonus should cancel at best - but he did include it.
fatmonkey 08-11-07, 08:24 PM	I would allow pricing as a continuous Spell Effect.This is 1 x 1 x 2000 gp. But it is a non-standard affinity (unless it has other magical abilities) so that is 1.5x cost so it is 3000 gp. I would make it function for Arcane casters only. This makes it a very nice item for a Wizard or other arcane caster but it seems fair compared with the price of a Chain shirt (100gp for +4 Armor). It only has the advantages of no spell failure, no check penalty, no max dex, and work vs incorporeal. Remember that it can be dispelled and that it will not function in an anti-magic area.
Einvaldurinn_mikli 08-11-07, 08:34 PM	Speaking of the ring of true strike, Skip priced it wrong. While his 400k is a starting point, he forgot to double it for using a non-standard bonus, and then multiply it by ten for being an epic item. Slight nitpick, you don't multiply because it's an epic item, you multiply because the bonus exceeds a certain number. If that's what you meant sorry.
Pegasos989 08-12-07, 02:51 AM	Skip priced it wrong anyways, thinking of it as use-activated item. Use activated is shield that has the +1 ac whenever it is worn or weapon that deals flaming attacked whenever it is attacked with. Naturally a DM can say that a weapon can cast a standard action spell whenever it is attacked with but that would be SO broken, not just with true strike. (So 16th level fighter could cast three spells per round) Spell storing specifically calls itself an exception to the general rulem which is frankly using a command word because casting a spell from an item takes always as much time as casting it normally, so a standard action. Some (few) command words are swift but even that won't work for us. <item> of truestrike that works on every attack would need to be able to cast a quickened truestrike with a free action between every attack. Even intelligent item can't do that as it can only delay once per round. Assuming we could do it, an item able of casting 8 (two weapon fighter with haste) quickened spells per round, there are MUCH worse things we could do than give a fighter an item that lets him always hit. So really, without houseruling, infinite true strike item can't be created. It seems everyone always forgets that true strike does not have a duration of 1 round. -_- To sum it up, it can't be made continuous duration item as it has duration of "next attack before the end of next round" which doesn't have a formula. It also can't be made an item that casts the spell constantly as it would cast it only once per round and most likely with a command word.
runestar 08-12-07, 04:25 AM	MIC has a sword of true-striking, though it works only 1/day.:D
Merestil Haye 08-12-07, 07:49 AM	Skip priced it wrong anyways, thinking of it as use-activated item.No, he didn't. He priced what he has been asked about. An item that provides a continuous +20 insight bonus on all attack rolls the wearer makes. Not "use-activated" - continuous effect. (And yes there is a difference - you don't apply the duration price modifier to a use-activated item, only to continuous effect items). He got it wrong by omitting the Epic price multiplier, but that's about the only thing he got wrong on the item he was discussing. Naturally a DM can say that a weapon can cast a standard action spell whenever it is attacked with but that would be SO broken, not just with true strike. (So 16th level fighter could cast three spells per round) Spell storing specifically calls itself an exception to the general rulem which is frankly using a command word because casting a spell from an item takes always as much time as casting it normally, so a standard action. Some (few) command words are swift but even that won't work for us. <item> of truestrike that works on every attack would need to be able to cast a quickened truestrike with a free action between every attack. Even intelligent item can't do that as it can only delay once per round. Assuming we could do it, an item able of casting 8 (two weapon fighter with haste) quickened spells per round, there are MUCH worse things we could do than give a fighter an item that lets him always hit.You seem to be under the impression that if an item has a spell for a prerequisite, the effect of the item must conform in all ways to the effect the spell produces. That turns out not to be the case. (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicItems/rings.htm#xRayVision) To sum it up, it can't be made continuous duration item as it has duration of "next attack before the end of next round" which doesn't have a formula. It also can't be made an item that casts the spell constantly as it would cast it only once per round and most likely with a command word.To restate : There is no rule that says the effect of the item must be exactly the same as the prerequisite spell. There is no rule that says you cannot make a continuous use item out of a short-duration spell. A Ring of True Strike (as discussed by Skip) does not cast the spell constantly - it provides a continuous effect that mimics the spell. You're correct in saying that the duration of True Strike is not 1 round; it's longer. A spell that lasts 1 round ends at the beginning of the caster's next turn, whereas True Strike lasts until the end of the caster's next turn. You'd do better arguing that you can't make a continuous-effect item out of a dischargeable spell (which True Strike is). I wouldn't be surprised to find such a rule, either. Anyone know of it?
Nom 08-12-07, 09:50 PM	You'd do better arguing that you can't make a continuous-effect item out of a dischargeable spell (which True Strike is). I wouldn't be surprised to find such a rule, either. Anyone know of it?Unlikely. Only wands, staves, potions, scrolls, and items which specifically say they work "as the spell" work as the spell. Any other item can work however it likes, and the pre-req spells are chosen to fit the flavour. Cost is, of course, based on effect, not the mangled spell.
Pegasos989 08-13-07, 03:08 AM	No, he didn't. He priced what he has been asked about. An item that provides a continuous +20 insight bonus on all attack rolls the wearer makes. Not "use-activated" - continuous effect. (And yes there is a difference - you don't apply the duration price modifier to a use-activated item, only to continuous effect items). He got it wrong by omitting the Epic price multiplier, but that's about the only thing he got wrong on the item he was discussing. You seem to be under the impression that if an item has a spell for a prerequisite, the effect of the item must conform in all ways to the effect the spell produces. That turns out not to be the case. (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicItems/rings.htm#xRayVision) To restate : There is no rule that says the effect of the item must be exactly the same as the prerequisite spell. There is no rule that says you cannot make a continuous use item out of a short-duration spell. A Ring of True Strike (as discussed by Skip) does not cast the spell constantly - it provides a continuous effect that mimics the spell. You're correct in saying that the duration of True Strike is not 1 round; it's longer. A spell that lasts 1 round ends at the beginning of the caster's next turn, whereas True Strike lasts until the end of the caster's next turn. You'd do better arguing that you can't make a continuous-effect item out of a dischargeable spell (which True Strike is). I wouldn't be surprised to find such a rule, either. Anyone know of it? Hmm, well, I should try to be more clear. I didn't mean there is a rule saying you can't make an item of such a spell. I tried to say there are no guidelines for that in the DMG. Sure, you can make an item that doesn't mimic the spell completely. However, if you stretch away, the guidelines don't apply. This is why saying "Every item must be examined carefully, because if you blidnly follow guidelines, you could have item of continous true strike for x amount of money" if there aren't guidelines for that. And as far as I see, there aren't guidelines for a continous item from spell with duration of "next attack" (not 1 round, not to the end of the next round, it is next attack and if it won't happen before end of next round, it won't work). You could argue that "the rules tell how to multiply cost if there is minutes per level or rounds per level but not say that you should multiply it if it is far less, so you shouldn't, by the guidelines" but I don't quite agree to that. I think that looking at the guidelines, it would suggest that if duration is even shorter than the shortest there are guidelines for, you couldn't make such item by guidelines. Naturally a matter of interpretation.
Merestil Haye 08-13-07, 06:56 AM	Hmm, well, I should try to be more clear. I didn't mean there is a rule saying you can't make an item of such a spell. I tried to say there are no guidelines for that in the DMG. Sure, you can make an item that doesn't mimic the spell completely. However, if you stretch away, the guidelines don't apply. This is why saying "Every item must be examined carefully, because if you blidnly follow guidelines, you could have item of continous true strike for x amount of money" if there aren't guidelines for that.But there are guidelines for pricing the spell effect. That is what you price. Nom has it right. You design the item, then pick prerequisites to suit. You are not in any way limited in your item design by the characteristics of the spell. The funny duration of True Strike is irrelevant. And as far as I see, there aren't guidelines for a continous item from spell with duration of "next attack" (not 1 round, not to the end of the next round, it is next attack and if it won't happen before end of next round, it won't work).The duration of True Strike really is "until the end of your next turn, or until discharged." You could argue that "the rules tell how to multiply cost if there is minutes per level or rounds per level but not say that you should multiply it if it is far less, so you shouldn't, by the guidelines" but I don't quite agree to that. I think that looking at the guidelines, it would suggest that if duration is even shorter than the shortest there are guidelines for, you couldn't make such item by guidelines. Naturally a matter of interpretation.But the guidelines for continuous-use items, quite apart from being irrelevant because they're not being used, can also be extrapolated fro,. The price of an item that gives a +20 enhancement bonus to hit and damage is 8 million gold pieces. You derive the price of a Ring of True Striking from that. Because you're not using the continuous-spell-effect formula, the duration modifier is irrelevant.