Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Balthanon 04-02-07, 08:42 AM	The Magic Item Compendium released several new additions to the magic item creation and distribution rules when it was released which could have an impact on Epic level play and should probably be discussed to get a consensus on how they should operate at that point. The quotes below regarding specific weapons were gathered by Mistwell on the Character Optimization boards and I added those on adding common effects to magic items. Together they cover most of the changes that were made. ________________________________________ _ The most significant change made by the Magic Item Compendium is that it changes the ability to add common effects to items, essentially removing the 1.5 cost modifier for secondary affects on them. It initially introduces the idea on page 233: In most cases, if the item is one that occupies a body slot, the cost of adding any additional ability to that item is 1-1/2 times the value of the added power (or the value of the added power plus 1/2 the value of the existing item, if the added power normally costs more than the existing item). For example... This added cost doesn't necessarily apply when adding some common effects to existing items; see below. It then goes on to cover the reasoning behind the change (namely that a few standard items generally restrict the ability to use nearly half of the items in the game) and provides a table with the appropriate body slots and which effects fall under the "Common Effects" rule on page 234. The table includes deflection to AC, natural armor enhancement, and armor enhancement bonuses, as well as stat bonuses, resistance bonuses to savings throws and resistance to energy. Each of these is provided with 2 to 3 body slots that they are associated with and for which they do not receive the standard 1.5 cost modifier. As an example of this, if you were to add a +6 Strength modifier or a +6 Dex modifier to a Glove of Storing, it would only cost you 36,000 gold. The Magic Item Compendium also clarifies adding new abilities to existing weapons, and lists the formula (under the Relics section, but stated to be applicable for all specific items). (MIC Pg. 222) Furthermore, a character can improve an existing relic just as he could any other magic item. An axe of ancestral virtue has an effective enhancement bonus of +2 (+1 plus another +1 for the keen property), so improving it to a +2 keen adamantine dwarven waraxe would cost 10,000 gp, just as it would for any other weapon. Clearly, specific items (this one is listed under Specific Weapons in the MIC) have their non-effective-enhancement-bonus portion treated as a flat cost. And from the Specific Armor and Shields section of the MIC (pg. 16): The following suits of armor and shields are usually constructed with exactly the properties described here. You can increase the enhancement bonus of these armors and shields or add more special properties, just as you would for any other item. And from the Specific Weapons section (MIC Pg. 46): The following weapons are usually constructed with the properties described here. You can increase the enhancement bonus of these weapons or add more special properties just as you would for any other item. And on the section on Improving Magic Items (MIC pg. 233): You can add new magical abilities to a magic item with virtually no restrictions. The cost and prerequisites to do this are the same as if the item was not magical. Thus, a +1 longsword can be made into a +2 vorpal longsword, with the cost to create it being equal to that of a +2 vorpal longsword minus the cost of a +1 longsword (93,315 - 2,313 = 96,000 gp). The character improving the magic item must meet the same prerequisites as of he were creating the item from scratch. So, to sum up, for specific armors or shields or weapons, you treat the effective-enhancement-bonus portion as you always did as if the item were not a specific armor or shield or weapon, and the non-effective-enhancement-bonus portion as a flat cost (just like all the other flat-cost items the DMG and MIC list).
Balthanon 04-02-07, 08:43 AM	Additionally, the Magic Item Compendium also released rules designed to streamline the distribution of magic items with a new concept called Item Levels. I haven't personally looked into that section yet personally. However, essentially, based primarily upon the cost of an item, they assigned item levels to all of the equipment in the DMG and the Magic Item Compendium. Basically, a given item level is intended to be appropriate for a character of that level, and they do extend into Epic levels, up to about level 26 or so. I'll expand upon this section later when I have the opportunity (or if someone else is willing to provide a summary of the other ramifications of item levels on epic play.)
Alias 04-02-07, 12:27 PM	Clearly, specific items (this one is listed under Specific Weapons in the MIC) have their non-effective-enhancement-bonus portion treated as a flat cost. This section is really badly written (actually, that entire chapter is), but what they're saying is this: If you have a +1 keen adamantine waraxe, you can make it +2 for 10,000 gp. Just like normal - it doesn't matter if the item is a relic or not, you use the normal upgrading rules. The fact that they use "effective enhancement bonus" instead of "market value bonus" just serves to cloud the issue. I'll expand upon this section later when I have the opportunity (or if someone else is willing to provide a summary of the other ramifications of item levels on epic play.) Since I'm already here, I'll do it. :P The table lists item levels up to 30th, but it's very easy to extrapolate; 20th level is 80-100K, and it goes up by increments of 20K every level thereafter, to 280-300K at L30. Astute observers will notice that under this system, +6 armor isn't available until L33, and +6 weapons until L51. :confused:
DeathXI 04-02-07, 05:39 PM	You can add new magical abilities to a magic item with virtually no restrictions. The cost and prerequisites to do this are the same as if the item was not magical. Thus, a +1 longsword can be made into a +2 vorpal longsword, with the cost to create it being equal to that of a +2 vorpal longsword minus the cost of a +1 longsword (93,315 - 2,313 = 96,000 gp). The character improving the magic item must meet the same prerequisites as of he were creating the item from scratch. Uh, 93,315 -2,313 most certainly does NOT equal 96,000, it's actually 91,002.
metalhawk 04-02-07, 11:43 PM	Since I'm already here, I'll do it. :P The table lists item levels up to 30th, but it's very easy to extrapolate; 20th level is 80-100K, and it goes up by increments of 20K every level thereafter, to 280-300K at L30. Astute observers will notice that under this system, +6 armor isn't available until L33, and +6 weapons until L51. :confused: I, too, was puzzled until I read and thought more. Note that this progression is a sample, and a way to quick-equip a character (choose two of every item level up to and including your current level). Said 33rd level char would have 66 items, far too many of which would be too weak for him or her. However, there are two points that I just noticed when reading with a critical eye: 1. Summing up the progression *does* give the char items of approximately the proper total gold for a given level (ie. the sum taking i from 1 to n of the eqn 2*i, where i is the average value of an item for a level and n is the char level...) - this is using tables 6-3 and 6-9 (item levels by price and character wealth by level, respectively). 2. Characters can "trade in" items of a lower level for items of a higher level. The table doesn't provide us a way to do this for a 33rd level item, but it could be extrapolated. Anyway, 2 23rd level items equals 1 30th, so a 23rd level char could trade in their two new 23rd level items for a 30th level item. A 300K item at 23rd level isn't so far off (20% of total PC wealth for that level). Getting a 33rd level item should be two of 26th (possibly less). Rob
Alias 04-03-07, 12:04 PM	Uh, 93,315 -2,313 most certainly does NOT equal 96,000, it's actually 91,002. He misquoted the example from the book - it's 98,315 - 2,315 = 96,000 gp. :P 2. Characters can "trade in" items of a lower level for items of a higher level. The table doesn't provide us a way to do this for a 33rd level item, but it could be extrapolated. Anyway, 2 23rd level items equals 1 30th, so a 23rd level char could trade in their two new 23rd level items for a 30th level item. A 300K item at 23rd level isn't so far off (20% of total PC wealth for that level). Getting a 33rd level item should be two of 26th (possibly less). Oh, right. You'd still end up with a crapload of items, I think.
metalhawk 04-03-07, 01:08 PM	Oh, right. You'd still end up with a crapload of items, I think. Right, unless you continue on with the above, and get your 3-4 (or more) "prime" items, having traded in some of the lower ones. Clearly if you just plug along with the formula at Epic Levels, I completely agree - you'll tend to have a crapload of items, of which perhaps 60% might be fairly useless to you at that point. If one were to add this set of charts to the Epic Level work that's being done here on the board, it would clearly have to be extended so that one could easily make use of the trading system to get a spread of items at or above char level. I think the PHB/DMG guides for creating a high level char suggest starting high level chars with a single item worth more than 25% of total wealth. In my current campaign I was also allowed a few others that were between 10 and 25% and the rest had to be less than 10. Note that the item value for a level is never 25% of TW for that level, and continues to go down, percentagewise (it is around, or greater than 10% at 20th level (80-100K/760k), whereas at 30th it's well under (280-300K/4300K). It's also the case that PC item total *number* at some point stops going up so much and average value per item tends to go up more, as PCs upgrade items to focus on a complete set for their slots, plus accessories, etc. While 10 items on a 5th level char makes sense, 40 on a 20th might not.... Rob
DeathXI 04-03-07, 05:58 PM	He misquoted the example from the book - it's 98,315 - 2,315 = 96,000 gp. :P . Ahh, well that makes more sense :) I was wondering about that 2 GP left over.
rob_douglas 04-04-07, 01:10 AM	The biggest problem with the Item Levels continuation is that it goes up by +20K per level, whereas character wealth supposedly increases by +10%, so it scales exponentially, i.e. much faster. The 30th level items are ridiculously under the value of what a 30th level character could afford. Note that the "too many items" problem is only a PC problem, as the chart for NPC items is much more restrictive, and probably doesn't come close to representing fair NPC values. It only goes up to 25th level, but could be extrapolated. It does highlight the problem with PCs and NPCs as far as differences. I think that we need to find ways to give NPCs similar bonuses more cheaply - such as potions, scrolls, etc. Also, maybe they should have more non-transferrable items, which would make them dangerous, but not valuable, opponents - such as inherent bonuses. Maybe allow an inherent bonus based on NPC level that is not part of the wealth chart. And maybe Epic Spells - since killing an NPC doesn't give you his epic spells.... Another problem is that there is no scaling for having Item Creation feats when using this method - either PC or NPC. That should let you choose an item 2 levels higher or something, or treat any item as 2 levels lower. That might do it. ---- As for the additional magic rules, they clarify the existing rules, without changing them. But there are some things still left unclear. For example, if you have a Holy Avenger, and want to improve it to a +5 Holy, Lawful, Fiend-bane Holy Avenger, what would the cost be? Can you do it? You are adding +3 effective bonuses to a +7 cold-iron sword that has 2 special abilities that are not priced easily (are they flat cost adds, or effective bonuses? I am going with flat cost....) and a "paladins-only" discount (does the discount apply to the whole cost or only the non-usable cost - i.e. a +2 Cold-iron longsword would cost 10,330 to start with anyway?) Just to finish it up...(if you care....) I think the cost is 120,630 - 10,330 = 110,300/0.7 = 157,571.47-90,000 = 68K (base cost of Avenger properties added on). Now, 68K+(200,000-8,000) = 260K*0.7 = 182K+10,330 = 192,330. (On a different note, is it not an epic item simply because the Paladins-only) requirement makes it not be one? Should it really be easier to craft because you put that stipulation in. And given that, why don't we all craft every item with a racial and/or alignment lock/discount built in? ---- As for the common effects rules, while it does allow them for some items, one could definitely argue that the rule on reduced cost for them only applies to the first such enhancement added. Making a glove of storing that also has Dex +6 would be +36K. But then adding another STR +6 as well should be 54K more - since it already has a "common effect". Maybe 1 common effect per item without the markup. Those are my basic thoughts on the new rules - so far.... ROB
Alias 04-04-07, 01:42 PM	Double pos.t :(
Alias 04-04-07, 01:42 PM	The biggest problem with the Item Levels continuation is that it goes up by +20K per level, whereas character wealth supposedly increases by +10%, so it scales exponentially, i.e. much faster. The 30th level items are ridiculously under the value of what a 30th level character could afford. Yeah.. I tried figuring up what a L30 PC would have (see below), but he still couldn't get an epic weapon via the "upgrading items" rules. If we assume that the "you can trade in two items of 7 levels lower for one of your own level" formula continues unabated in epic, then a L30 PC would have: One each 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 6th, 8th, 10th, 12th, 14th, 16th, 19th, 24th, 26th, 28th, 29th, 30th, 31st, 32nd, 33rd, 34th, 35th, 36th, and 37th level item. That's just straight up converting the base two items you get at each level for a higher-level item. You could then "turn in" those items to gain higher bonuses on weapons and armor. Unfortunately, all of the armor/weapon choices have item levels listed that aren't on my list above. Oops - looks like I'm SOL. Either that, or I'm going to have to spend an hour or so balancing numbers to figure out the proper combination to get myself a set of armor and weapon commensurate with my level. For example, if you have a Holy Avenger, and want to improve it to a +5 Holy, Lawful, Fiend-bane Holy Avenger, what would the cost be? You're adding +3 market value to it (from +5 to +8, so it would be 78,000 gp, plus 4,000 gp it because it's cold iron - so 82,000 gp. (On a different note, is it not an epic item simply because the Paladins-only) requirement makes it not be one? Should it really be easier to craft because you put that stipulation in. And given that, why don't we all craft every item with a racial and/or alignment lock/discount built in? It's not an epic item because its enhancement bonus doesn't exceed +5, and its market value bonus doesn't exceed +10. I'm fairly sure price is based on the full powers, not the "+2 cold iron longsword". It would be silly to do otherwise, really, because those powers are still in the item, even if your average user can't access them. As for the common effects rules, while it does allow them for some items, one could definitely argue that the rule on reduced cost for them only applies to the first such enhancement added. Making a glove of storing that also has Dex +6 would be +36K. But then adding another STR +6 as well should be 54K more - since it already has a "common effect". Maybe 1 common effect per item without the markup. Interesting thought, and one I hadn't considered. What about adding +6 Str to gloves of Dex +6? Would the bonus still kick in there?
metalhawk 04-04-07, 02:05 PM	Yeah.. I tried figuring up what a L30 PC would have (see below), but he still couldn't get an epic weapon via the "upgrading items" rules. If we assume that the "you can trade in two items of 7 levels lower for one of your own level" formula continues unabated in epic, then a L30 PC would have: One each 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 6th, 8th, 10th, 12th, 14th, 16th, 19th, 24th, 26th, 28th, 29th, 30th, 31st, 32nd, 33rd, 34th, 35th, 36th, and 37th level item. That's just straight up converting the base two items you get at each level for a higher-level item. You could then "turn in" those items to gain higher bonuses on weapons and armor. Unfortunately, all of the armor/weapon choices have item levels listed that aren't on my list above. Oops - looks like I'm SOL. Either that, or I'm going to have to spend an hour or so balancing numbers to figure out the proper combination to get myself a set of armor and weapon commensurate with my level. The numbers *do* work out however. The total value of those items is (close to) your current gold for your level, and you could then, of course, combine enough of their values to get your higher valued item. The system just doesn't support (with the current charts) getting the items that a *real* 25-30th level character would have. Given the 25% rule, a 30th level char might have one 1 Million GP item. What level is that item? :) 65th? Like you've stated, to actually get that one prime item, you'd have to spend a lot of time calculating the charts and figuring which items of which levels to trade for your "uber item" or two. EDIT: We just reviewed the numbers, and this does indeed work out until item levels of about 35th level, when the 2*20K is no longer greater than 10% of the previous item's value. At that point, total Char wealth starts to outstrip the total value of the items under the new system. You'd have to bump the increment to 25K for a while, then 30 and so on to keep pace.. I guess this is typical for wizards right now. Despite the fact that they put level numbers up to 30 in the charts, they aren't really supporting that level... Oh, and I don't think it stays at "7 levels lower". I think two 30s would be worth a 45, for example... Rob
rob_douglas 04-05-07, 01:53 AM	Yeah.. I tried figuring up what a L30 PC would have (see below), but he still couldn't get an epic weapon via the "upgrading items" rules. Yeah. And it still seems weird, even considering Rob's analysis. The rules don't allow for you to get a 1/4 wealth item easily, and the item levels just don't correspond really to character level. At 40th level, a max value item via ELH rules is 13.6M/4 = 3.4M. That is a really high item level. This method doesn't encourage or support epic level item consolidation. You're adding +3 market value to it (from +5 to +8, so it would be 78,000 gp, plus 4,000 gp it because it's cold iron - so 82,000 gp. Actually, I was adding +3 to a +7 item (from +7 t0 +10). Base Holy Avenger is +5 Holy. Cold Iron cost is only 2,000gp to enhance not 4,000. It's not an epic item because its enhancement bonus doesn't exceed +5, and its market value bonus doesn't exceed +10. I'm fairly sure price is based on the full powers, not the "+2 cold iron longsword". It would be silly to do otherwise, really, because those powers are still in the item, even if your average user can't access them. I meant based on base price over 200,000gp. Also if one rules that the dispelling and SR are effective enhancement bonuses, then it would be over a +10. I think I am going to go with a base cost. So my point was, that if the item didn't have the Paladin restriction, it would require "Craft Epic" feats, but since it has that restriction, it becomes not Epic. So then the question is, could you design and epic weapon and add a restriction to make it "easier" to craft. Makes me want to revisit crafting rules... Interesting thought, and one I hadn't considered. What about adding +6 Str to gloves of Dex +6? Would the bonus still kick in there? I was going to go with No - that you get one common effect for free, even if that is the only thing on it. ROB
Alias 04-05-07, 12:29 PM	We just reviewed the numbers, and this does indeed work out until item levels of about 35th level, when the 2*20K is no longer greater than 10% of the previous item's value. At that point, total Char wealth starts to outstrip the total value of the items under the new system. You'd have to bump the increment to 25K for a while, then 30 and so on to keep pace.. So if we continued the charts that way, with the increment increasing, what level would 1 milliion be? Just out of curiosity. :P I guess this is typical for wizards right now. Despite the fact that they put level numbers up to 30 in the charts, they aren't really supporting that level... I think they support up to L30, but not beyond - how many groups actually play at that level? Not many, I'm sure, and not nearly enough for WotC to spend time and money to come up with things to support it. And, as has been acknowledged by many, the system starts to break down after around 30th level, which gives them even less incentive to design things for that level of play. Actually, I was adding +3 to a +7 item (from +7 t0 +10). Base Holy Avenger is +5 Holy. Cold Iron cost is only 2,000gp to enhance not 4,000. I caught that bonus thing when I was writing the post; thought I'd fixed it. But, since you're adding two abilities - fiend bane and axiomatic - it's 4K. I meant based on base price over 200,000gp. Oh, yeah. So my point was, that if the item didn't have the Paladin restriction, it would require "Craft Epic" feats, but since it has that restriction, it becomes not Epic. So then the question is, could you design and epic weapon and add a restriction to make it "easier" to craft. Makes me want to revisit crafting rules... Or just ditch the Epic Item Creation feats altogether, and just apply the normal ones to epic items. I asked Upper Krust, one time, and he agreed - they're a waste of space. Then you don't have to worry about questions like this. Personally, though, I'd go with my earlier interpretation - you're putting ALL the abilities into the item, so your crafting costs (gp and XP) are based on the full cost, not the "non-paladin" cost. Same thing would apply to your new blade, so it would, technically, be epic. I was going to go with No - that you get one common effect for free, even if that is the only thing on it. Yeah, that would be the easiest way to rule it. Not the best, IMO - gauntlets of +6 Dex/+6 Str are 72K instead of 108K - that's only one level lower by the 1/4 wealth rule, but a significant chunk of change at that level (17th-18th) - that's 1,440 XP you won't be burning to make it.
Balthanon 04-05-07, 01:10 PM	Or just ditch the Epic Item Creation feats altogether, and just apply the normal ones to epic items. I asked Upper Krust, one time, and he agreed - they're a waste of space. Then you don't have to worry about questions like this. You would probably still want some type of requirement for crafting Epic Items to keep them epic. I could see a simple Epic Item Creation feat that allows you to break the caps on item creation using your existing feats though. Personally, I tend to be inclined towards lowering feat requirements in general on item creation though. (Reduce it down to three to five broader feats rather than the dozen or so they have now.) I caught that bonus thing when I was writing the post; thought I'd fixed it. But, since you're adding two abilities - fiend bane and axiomatic - it's 4K. Cold iron adds 2,000 each time you want to enchant the item-- you don't need to do that separately for each ability. When you create an item, you do everything at once and that is when the cost would be applied. Otherwise, a +10 cold iron weapon would cost 20,000 gold extra automatically. (If he were upgrading it twice, once to fiend bane and then later to axiomatic, then it would be 4,000.) As for the additional magic rules, they clarify the existing rules, without changing them. But there are some things still left unclear. For example, if you have a Holy Avenger, and want to improve it to a +5 Holy, Lawful, Fiend-bane Holy Avenger, what would the cost be? Can you do it? You are adding +3 effective bonuses to a +7 cold-iron sword that has 2 special abilities that are not priced easily (are they flat cost adds, or effective bonuses? I am going with flat cost....) and a "paladins-only" discount (does the discount apply to the whole cost or only the non-usable cost - i.e. a +2 Cold-iron longsword would cost 10,330 to start with anyway?) From the quotes provided by Mistwell (I lifted those off of the CO boards), it sounds like special abilities are now automatically priced at a flat rate, so I don't think they would be effective bonuses. I would definitely price it based on the ideal wielder though, not the +2 cold iron longsword. Also, given that these rules are technically only for enhancing an existing item I think a safe ruling might be that you're paying the full price for those enhancements, despite the "paladin only" portion. Generally, I don't think your average wizard off of the street is going to give a discount on any work that he/she is doing. And prices for player creation should really operate off of the "market" rate that you would otherwise pay at half the cost. In the common effects section for instance, they give flat tables for enhancements-- these rules are advantageous enough that they shouldn't be really be subject to the 30% discount for restrictions given that they do not provide any rules for doing so. I would actually go so far as to say that the common effects in general should not be subject to price reductions because they are universally effective. That would be a house rule though, as far as I know.
metalhawk 04-05-07, 07:49 PM	So if we continued the charts that way, with the increment increasing, what level would 1 milliion be? Just out of curiosity. :P 1 million for items? It's actually easy, if the 20K stays stable, it's 100K per 5 levels. 35 = 400 40 = 500 45 = 600 50 = 700 55 = 800 60 = 900 65 = 1M So, like I inferred previously (I was throwing it out, guessing off the top of my head, but it was an educated guess :D ) 1 Mil is a 65th level item, by an extension of these rules.. By these rules, without consolidating items, a PC would finally get a 1M GP item (2 of them) at 65th level. This 2 per level thing is one of the things (in addition to the non-changing 20K increment) that breaks down at higher levels. Clearly, by the ELH 25% rule, a PC would get *1* of those items at ~30th level, not 65th :). I think that an extension of these tables with increasing increments of item values, and some better lookup/exchange tables for items *could* make this work for Epic levels. The question is, would it be useful? I think they support up to L30, but not beyond - how many groups actually play at that level? Not many, I'm sure, and not nearly enough for WotC to spend time and money to come up with things to support it. And, as has been acknowledged by many, the system starts to break down after around 30th level, which gives them even less incentive to design things for that level of play. Yes. Despite what many of us here would like to see/hear, I think that's true. It's also generally true that it's far more economically viable for them to produce lots of stuff for <20 level campaigns then divert some chunk of that to >20.
Balthanon 04-05-07, 10:07 PM	By these rules, without consolidating items, a PC would finally get a 1M GP item (2 of them) at 65th level. This 2 per level thing is one of the things (in addition to the non-changing 20K increment) that breaks down at higher levels. Clearly, by the ELH 25% rule, a PC would get *1* of those items at ~30th level, not 65th :). I think that an extension of these tables with increasing increments of item values, and some better lookup/exchange tables for items *could* make this work for Epic levels. The question is, would it be useful? I think item levels were definitely designed more with the concept of aligning NPC treasure than for players to tell the truth. They can be adapted that way, however, most players are likely to be more satisfied with simply purchasing their items since there is less need to quickly generate a character. DMs on the other hand really need as quick a method as possible for getting at the right encounter treasure.
metalhawk 04-05-07, 10:19 PM	I think item levels were definitely designed more with the concept of aligning NPC treasure than for players to tell the truth. They can be adapted that way, however, most players are likely to be more satisfied with simply purchasing their items since there is less need to quickly with a character. DMs on the other hand really need as quick a method as possible for getting at the right encounter treasure. Yeah, that was a thought I had too. But they did go to the trouble of spelling out how it worked for NPCs completely seperately from how it works for PCs. I agree with your analysis, though. I think that perhaps the best PC use of this would be to rapidly put a non-1st level PC together for a "1-night" session, or a short campaign. I'm not sure I'd ever want to craft a high level PC that I planned on using for a long time using these quick rules. I'd just do what I've done previously (the 25, 10, 10 rule, then fill the remaining <55% with appropriate stat boosts, misc items, etc...) Rob
Alias 04-06-07, 11:37 AM	You would probably still want some type of requirement for crafting Epic Items to keep them epic. I could see a simple Epic Item Creation feat that allows you to break the caps on item creation using your existing feats though. That's what caster level is for. And the XP costs - you can't lose a level from making an item, I don't think. From the quotes provided by Mistwell (I lifted those off of the CO boards), it sounds like special abilities are now automatically priced at a flat rate, so I don't think they would be effective bonuses. You mean stuff like energy resistance and slick/shadow/silent? Those are bonuses now. 1 million for items? It's actually easy, if the 20K stays stable, it's 100K per 5 levels. No, no, I meant extending the tables but increasing the increment to 25K, 30K, etc. to keep up with starting wealth. Although I think it might be more work than it's worth. *shrugs* I think item levels were definitely designed more with the concept of aligning NPC treasure than for players to tell the truth. They can be adapted that way, however, most players are likely to be more satisfied with simply purchasing their items since there is less need to quickly generate a character. DMs on the other hand really need as quick a method as possible for getting at the right encounter treasure. Yeah, it was primarily designed for NPCs, but it says that you can use it for PCs - they shouldn't have any item with a greater level than their own, blah blah blah. I agree with your analysis, though. I think that perhaps the best PC use of this would be to rapidly put a non-1st level PC together for a "1-night" session, or a short campaign. I'm not sure I'd ever want to craft a high level PC that I planned on using for a long time using these quick rules. I'd just do what I've done previously (the 25, 10, 10 rule, then fill the remaining <55% with appropriate stat boosts, misc items, etc...) Agreed.
metalhawk 04-06-07, 02:39 PM	No, no, I meant extending the tables but increasing the increment to 25K, 30K, etc. to keep up with starting wealth. Although I think it might be more work than it's worth. *shrugs* Sorry. Read that as "without" instead of "with" the increasing increments. Probably would be more effort than it's worth. I'm not even sure what the expected wealth values are for >40th - is it supposed to go up by 10% per level? Rob
rob_douglas 04-06-07, 03:24 PM	Hey Rob Expected Wealth values do increase by 10% post-epic. There is a table up to 60th (though I generated one using excel up to 87th) in the FAQ sticky atop this forum. But the part you would still have to decide is when to add the new higher value. When do you start with 25K, and when 30K. I guess when 2x represents 10% of wealth increase....so 29th->25K, 31st->30K, 32nd->35K, 35th->45K... It just gets out of hand too fast. I don't think Item Levels are going to be useful for Epics, even for NPCs at least beyond 30th level. ROB
Balthanon 04-06-07, 08:42 PM	You mean stuff like energy resistance and slick/shadow/silent? Those are bonuses now. No, I mean items like celestial armor, an assassin's dagger, or other specific items. The unique abilities that these items provide are treated as flat costs on the armor for the purposes of improving that item. In the case of celestial armor, for instance, you would enhance it as if it were +3 armor with special abilities like "shadow/slick/silent" etc... (i.e. it adds a flat +13,000 or so gold that does not affect the scaling of armor.) Moving celestial armor from +3 chainmail to +5 would cost an additional 16,000 gold in this instance-- the difference between +3 and +5
Alias 04-07-07, 01:02 PM	I don't think Item Levels are going to be useful for Epics, even for NPCs at least beyond 30th level. Yeah. You'd be better off using the 1/4 wealth rule, to ensure that they can get +6 weapons (for one) at a reasonable level. No, I mean items like celestial armor, an assassin's dagger, or other specific items. The unique abilities that these items provide are treated as flat costs on the armor for the purposes of improving that item. In the case of celestial armor, for instance, you would enhance it as if it were +3 armor with special abilities like "shadow/slick/silent" etc... (i.e. it adds a flat +13,000 or so gold that does not affect the scaling of armor.) Moving celestial armor from +3 chainmail to +5 would cost an additional 16,000 gold in this instance-- the difference between +3 and +5 You could convert the extra costs to bonuses; in this case, fly 1/day on command is 5400 gp, so it'd be closest to a +2 bonus. You effectively have +5 market value armor; if you upgrade it to +5 enhancement, it would be priced as +7. (25K to 49K = 24K to upgrade). Or, in a similar vein, you could just take the item's price and convert that to the closest market value bonus. For example, breastplate of command is 25,400 gp; it would convert to +5. This method is likely not as accurate, though, since it's including the price of the armor/weapon, but it is quicker.
Balthanon 04-07-07, 03:15 PM	You could convert the extra costs to bonuses; in this case, fly 1/day on command is 5400 gp, so it'd be closest to a +2 bonus. You effectively have +5 market value armor; if you upgrade it to +5 enhancement, it would be priced as +7. (25K to 49K = 24K to upgrade). Or, in a similar vein, you could just take the item's price and convert that to the closest market value bonus. For example, breastplate of command is 25,400 gp; it would convert to +5. This method is likely not as accurate, though, since it's including the price of the armor/weapon, but it is quicker. Given that they have flat costs for some abilities in the DMG though, how do you justify converting everything into an enhancement bonus though? Particularly given that Wizards of the Coast has now released guidelines/rules in the Magic Item Compendium that essentially do the exact opposite?
Alias 04-08-07, 12:35 PM	Given that they have flat costs for some abilities in the DMG though, how do you justify converting everything into an enhancement bonus though? Because those flat bonus were converted to market value bonuses - slick, shadowed, silent, energy resistance are all plusses in the MIC. Particularly given that Wizards of the Coast has now released guidelines/rules in the Magic Item Compendium that essentially do the exact opposite? Huh? You mean the rules for improving items? That's for combining two or more magic items, not upgrading common effects. Armor/weapon abilities (anything with a market value bonus) would be considered a "common effect" and thus falls under the upgrading rules - that's why they gave the above abilties plusses.
Balthanon 04-08-07, 01:11 PM	Because those flat bonus were converted to market value bonuses - slick, shadowed, silent, energy resistance are all plusses in the MIC. Huh? You mean the rules for improving items? That's for combining two or more magic items, not upgrading common effects. Armor/weapon abilities (anything with a market value bonus) would be considered a "common effect" and thus falls under the upgrading rules - that's why they gave the above abilties plusses. Slick, shadowed, silent, and energy resistance weren't reprinted in the Magic Item Compendium. In fact, they're listed in the back tables at their prices in the DMG-- +3,750 gold, +42,000 gold, etc.... Where are you seeing that change? (They did duplicate some of the abilities as gems I think, though I didn't check on that.) The rules for improving specific weapons and armor that I'm speaking about are quoted with page numbers in the bottom half of my first post-- I didn't put those together, but they seem to be fairly conclusive in terms of how upgrading those items is handled.
rob_douglas 04-08-07, 02:55 PM	This has really gotten off topic, but I still want to follow this line. I think Balthanon is right that the special abilities granted in "Specific Weapons and Armor" like Sunsword, Armor of Command, Armor of the Celestial Battalion, etc, are fixed cost additions to base items. We need to know if this is true to make enhancements to Specific items, like my intended Holy Avenger that is also Axiomatic and Bane (Evil Outsiders). Assuming the SR and Dispelling are fixed costs, then adding those properties costs (200K-98K)*.7 = 71,400, for a total cost of 192,030gp. I won't go into whether or not you pay the 2000 enhancement each time if you are upgrading an item - I don't think you do as it should cost the same if you upgrade or make it all at once. Now, since the total enhancement bonuses are less than +5 to hit, and +10 total, and the cost is < 200K, this is a non-epic item. But only by virtue of the fact that it has this paladins-only restriction. The same sword, with the same abilities, that granted SR and Greater Dispelling to anyone, would in fact be above the Epic pricing limit. So really, should a non-epic crafter be able to make this particular sword, just because it is only for a paladin? I guess the gods make it easier to make.... I am still trying to figure out the fixed cost of the SR and Dispel options. If we take the total 120,630 and assume all of it was reduced, we get 72K for the extra benefits. If we take out the "fixed cost" of a +2 cold-iron longsword of 10,330, we get 59.5K. If we only take out the cost of a cold-iron longsword, the base item, we get 74K. If we also take out the cold-iron enhancement cost of 2000, we get 71,000 exactly. Since that requires no rounding, and all the others do, I think this is correct formula for a Holy Avenger: materials longsword 15 cold-iron +15 masterwork +300 enhancing +2,000 --------- ----- total 2,330 enhancements +5, holy, +2 98,000 SR, Dispel +71,000 ------------ ------ total 169,000 paladin only x0.7 = 118,300 118,300+2,330 = 120,630 If you try to put the SR and Dispel into enhacement terms, you can't find them. Thanks guys, for the help. ROB
metalhawk 04-09-07, 11:01 AM	Hey Rob Expected Wealth values do increase by 10% post-epic. There is a table up to 60th (though I generated one using excel up to 87th) in the FAQ sticky atop this forum. But the part you would still have to decide is when to add the new higher value. When do you start with 25K, and when 30K. I guess when 2x represents 10% of wealth increase....so 29th->25K, 31st->30K, 32nd->35K, 35th->45K... It just gets out of hand too fast. I don't think Item Levels are going to be useful for Epics, even for NPCs at least beyond 30th level. ROB Thanks, Rob. Yes, I agree. With work, one could make these charts work at Epic levels, but I don't see how it would actually be more useful than the 25/10/10 rules. Having done that 2 times in the past couple years, for a serious "almost epic" PC build, I think that's far more intuitive. Now, since the total enhancement bonuses are less than +5 to hit, and +10 total, and the cost is < 200K, this is a non-epic item. But only by virtue of the fact that it has this paladins-only restriction. The same sword, with the same abilities, that granted SR and Greater Dispelling to anyone, would in fact be above the Epic pricing limit. So really, should a non-epic crafter be able to make this particular sword, just because it is only for a paladin? I guess the gods make it easier to make.... I'm not sure there's any way around the economics of specialty items, Rob. The fact that they're worth less money because they're specialized makes complete sense (and specialized items add great flavor). Conversely it really doesn't make lots of sense that it'd be somehow "cheaper to create" (other than the "god rule" you mention :). I think you just allow it where it makes sense and guard against abuse ("My LG Dwarven Warpriest Cleric makes an item only usable by Dwarves. And Warpriests. And Clerics. And LG. Instead of 300K it costs 75K.) :P) Rob
Alias 04-09-07, 11:19 AM	Slick, shadowed, silent, and energy resistance weren't reprinted in the Magic Item Compendium. In fact, they're listed in the back tables at their prices in the DMG-- +3,750 gold, +42,000 gold, etc.... Where are you seeing that change? (They did duplicate some of the abilities as gems I think, though I didn't check on that.) You're right... I know I saw it somewhere, because I made a note of them being pretty close to what I'd converted them to (this was shortly after the book came out), but I can't find it now. :( It might have been in one of the previews, but I can't check since the D&D portion of the WotC site is down. The rules for improving specific weapons and armor that I'm speaking about are quoted with page numbers in the bottom half of my first post-- I didn't put those together, but they seem to be fairly conclusive in terms of how upgrading those items is handled. Oh, I see what you're saying - the abilities without market value bonuses aren't factored in with the MIC method, and my method does. I think they should be, in some form - you do it for normal magic items, after all... If you try to put the SR and Dispel into enhacement terms, you can't find them. Greater dispel 1/round would be something like a continual effect, I think... but that'd be something like 6*11*2,000 = 132,000 gp. If you halve it (for variability based on paladin's level), you get 66K. SR is 10,000 per point above 12; if you go with the base value and halve that (again, variability) you get 5K. 5K + 66K = 71K. Possible?
rob_douglas 04-09-07, 05:00 PM	That makes sense. The Greater Dispel is slightly less valuable than continuous dispel, as you need to use an action to use it - so it would interfere with attacking, so it is worth a discount. ROB
metalhawk 04-09-07, 10:11 PM	That makes sense. The Greater Dispel is slightly less valuable than continuous dispel, as you need to use an action to use it - so it would interfere with attacking, so it is worth a discount. ROB It's also handicapped in features in the HA, isn't it? It can't do the targeted dispel of the standard GD spell.... Still, nice spell to have once per round. Ahrm, makes my sorcerer wonder why he's been casting it so often while the Paladin stands and watches :rolleyes: ... Rob
bluemage55 04-10-07, 12:32 AM	That makes sense. The Greater Dispel is slightly less valuable than continuous dispel, as you need to use an action to use it - so it would interfere with attacking, so it is worth a discount. ROB There's actually an existing pricing scheme for it: command word = 1,800 gp. It's a little bit cheaper than continuous.
Alias 04-10-07, 12:28 PM	There's actually an existing pricing scheme for it: command word = 1,800 gp. It's a little bit cheaper than continuous. I thought it might be priced that way, too - it says "Once per round as a standard action" which implies a command of some sort - but... a) the CL is the paladin's class level; and b) you only get an area dispel. I think pricing it as a continuous effect (usable once/round is basically "continuous") and giving it a hefty discount (for the above drawbacks) works too. In any case, it happens to fit the formula, so it might be the way WotC did it too. You could try to figure it out based on the command word formula - I did a couple quick calculations, figuring maybe a 40% reduction, but I couldn't come up with 71K exactly.
Marshall 04-12-07, 07:44 PM	You're right... I know I saw it somewhere, because I made a note of them being pretty close to what I'd converted them to (this was shortly after the book came out), but I can't find it now. :( It might have been in one of the previews, but I can't check since the D&D portion of the WotC site is down. The random item generation tables in the back of the book all have headers like "+1", "+5" etc. Yet the flat cost enhancements are still listed in those tables. This led to a little confusion among those who just read the previews...