Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Juzzman 11-06-05, 08:06 PM	I'm getting brain ache trying to work out the magic item creatrion system in 3.5, and am looking for some assistance. 1. Is there a program, or a flow chart, or soething so simplify the process of figuring cost and required materials to make an item? 2. a sample. Ring of invisibility. The way i see it, the ring of invis is an command work activated item granting minimum 3 min invis per use.. Cost is Spell Level * Caster Level * 1800 2 * 3 * 1800 = 10,800 Even as a contiuous effect item 2 * 3 * 2000 = 12,000 But it is in the DMS for 20000? What am i missing? 3. If i want to create a ring of improved invis, my calculations say for a use activated it should cost... 4 * 7 * 1800 = 50,400 for a 2 use per day, take the base cost (50,400) and divide by (5 divided by 2 use per day) 50,400 / (5/2) 50,400 / 2.5 = 20,160 This would give a 7 round improved invis effect 2 per day. What am i doing wrong? thanks Strontium
FlameLover 11-06-05, 10:29 PM	I'm getting brain ache trying to work out the magic item creatrion system in 3.5, and am looking for some assistance. That's your problem right there - it's a guideline, not a system. It says right in the DMG, and I qoute: You'll notice, however, that not all the items presented here adhere to these formulas directly. The reasons for this are several. First and foremost, these few formulas aren't enough to truly gauge the exact differences between, say, a ring of fire resistance and boots of speed-two very dissimilar items. Each of the magic items presented here was examined and modified based on it's actual worth. The formulas only provide a starting point. The pricing of scrolls assumes that, whenever possible, a wizard or cleric created it. Potions and wands follow the formulas exactly. Staffs follow the formulas closley, and other items require at least some DM judgement calls. USe good sense when assigning prices, using the items in this book as examples. 'Nuff said?
Kendrick 11-07-05, 01:54 AM	The reason that the Ring of Invisibility has a higher price than the guidelines indicate is that it's more powerful than intended by the guidelines. You have to understand that the guidelines are just that, especially with items that duplicate spells. Some spells that are fine a couple of times per day break the game if you allow them continuously, and many (especailly low level spells) are at the very least underpriced by the guidelines. However, I would say that your custom item appears to be reasonably priced. 14 rounds of Greater Invisibility isn't obviously better or worse than potentially indefinite use of plain Invisibility - it has less utility use, but more combat use unless you fight a dozen encounters a day. I'd allow it as you priced it.
Juzzman 11-07-05, 04:02 PM	Well Flamelover, thanks for the semantics lesson. I guess i see why you chose the name flamelover. Thanks for the feedback Kendrik, that was handy. With yet more reading, it seems that the base price as yielded by table 7-33 in the GUIDELINES, is used in conjunction with item cost (if any) and component cost (if any) to reach a market price. In the instance of the ring of invis, the market cost is still 10,800 Now under the creating rings section, it says that the cost for ring creation is generaly half the market price. So my players claim that they could create a ring of invis for 5,400, why would anyone pay 20,000? So once again, i am left confused at these guidelines, and feel that i am missing something. For example, if the ring of invis were made by a caster of higher level than minimum, then the price could definately rise, but in the description of the ring of invis it doesnt specify at what level it was created, and as it has infinite uses it would be fairly pointless to do it at higher level. You say that the higher price is due to lower level spells becoming more powerfull than intended, but since there are no guidelines for that, this just has to be rule 0'ed? (ie as dm i whack up the price cause i think the item will be more powerfull than it might first appear) I dont want to cheat my players, i want to follow the rules (and GUIDELINES), i'm just asking for a little clarification. I've seen many posts in the forums where someone proposes an item, then other posters give a price, often disagreeing, but everyone seeming to believe that they followed the guidelined correctly. On the one hand, i have never seen GUIDELINES to complex or specific, and yet apparently also of no real use. At the end of the day the dm just has to make up a price, and hope the players arent too ****** off. Thanks Strontium
Zherog 11-07-05, 04:56 PM	Now under the creating rings section, it says that the cost for ring creation is generaly half the market price. So my players claim that they could create a ring of invis for 5,400, why would anyone pay 20,000? They pay 20K to buy it (or 10K to make it) because that's the listed price in the book. You say that the higher price is due to lower level spells becoming more powerfull than intended, but since there are no guidelines for that, this just has to be rule 0'ed? (ie as dm i whack up the price cause i think the item will be more powerfull than it might first appear) Yep. Exactly right. If you are unable to find a comparable item to compare it to (step one in the process) and you think the price produced by the formulas are too cheap, then yes - as DM you are expected to increase the number. Thanks You're welcome. :)
Kendrick 11-07-05, 05:10 PM	Well Flamelover, thanks for the semantics lesson. I guess i see why you chose the name flamelover. Thanks for the feedback Kendrik, that was handy. With yet more reading, it seems that the base price as yielded by table 7-33 in the GUIDELINES, is used in conjunction with item cost (if any) and component cost (if any) to reach a market price. In the instance of the ring of invis, the market cost is still 10,800 Now under the creating rings section, it says that the cost for ring creation is generaly half the market price. So my players claim that they could create a ring of invis for 5,400, why would anyone pay 20,000? So once again, i am left confused at these guidelines, and feel that i am missing something. For example, if the ring of invis were made by a caster of higher level than minimum, then the price could definately rise, but in the description of the ring of invis it doesnt specify at what level it was created, and as it has infinite uses it would be fairly pointless to do it at higher level. You say that the higher price is due to lower level spells becoming more powerfull than intended, but since there are no guidelines for that, this just has to be rule 0'ed? (ie as dm i whack up the price cause i think the item will be more powerfull than it might first appear) I dont want to cheat my players, i want to follow the rules (and GUIDELINES), i'm just asking for a little clarification. I've seen many posts in the forums where someone proposes an item, then other posters give a price, often disagreeing, but everyone seeming to believe that they followed the guidelined correctly. On the one hand, i have never seen GUIDELINES to complex or specific, and yet apparently also of no real use. At the end of the day the dm just has to make up a price, and hope the players arent too ****** off. Thanks Strontium The reason your players would pay 20,000 is that whoever wrote magic item descriptions knew the ring would be broken at 10,000. They therefore changed the price to what was fair for the effect. The item creation "guidelines" are to help a DM get an idea of what an item should cost, but the DM is always supposed to look at the effect and see if it's broken. Does that make sense? The guidelines are not a catalogue for your players to use, they are ONLY there to give you a reasonable *minimum* cost. Then you yourself have to look at the item and ask yourself whether it might be underpriced even then because the effects of spells vary so widely that the guidelines don't always work. This is especially true for low level spells and the continuous/at will cost. I recommend that for low level custom items, you replace continuous/at will with 5/day. If you look at the pricing guidelines, 5/day is supposed to be equivilant to "at will", but with low level spells (with low durations and extremely low cost) players abuse this to get more like 30 uses per day. By level 4, the pricing guide is more reasonable, but even at level 3 there are several effects that are completely broken as at will/continuous - haste, fly, and so on. And to repeat my important points: 1. The DMG pricing guidelines are not a catalogue for your players to abuse. 2. Because there are so many spells with wildly varying effects the spell by level pricing guidelines are very easy to abuse if you just use them instead of considering the game effects of each item individually. 3. The guidelines provide a minimum, not an exact price. 4. Never use the guidelines for items duplicating level 1 or 2 spells, and be careful with level 3s.
Kendrick 11-07-05, 05:31 PM	After a minute more thought, let me adjust point 4: 4. Never use the guidelines for items duplicating level 1 or 2 spells that have an effect on combat, and be careful with level 3s. A permanent Tenser's Floating Disk for 4,000 gp (SL 1*CL 1*2000 Continuous*2 Unslotted) is not a big deal. A permanent 20% miss chance on all ranged attacks for 4,000 gp (Same formula as above, with Entropic Shield) is a big deal. If it has a combat effect, you need to compare it to existing items with similar effects. If it's a rp or utility thing, you're probably safe.
RisingZan 11-07-05, 09:23 PM	Just to reiterate why the tables in the DMG are a guideline and not a rule, try making an item of True Strike, as many people in the items boards try to do. Even if it were limited to 5/day and required a standard action to activiate it for only your next single attack (as it should), the tables cost is still way to low for the effect such an item would have in combat on a regular basis. (I would maybe only allow one at a 2 or 3/week level, and it would cost at least as one that is 2 or 3/day with that calculation.
Cole-Terenzin 11-07-05, 10:43 PM	As far as creating simalar items with similar effects of existing items in game I would recommend that you see if it is an unusual body position slot if so then this could increase the cost of the price by 50% thus the cost to create the ring of invisibility by your calcs is 10,800 to 12000. if you consider the slot that this is for. (a ring) I believe you would add another 50% thus the cost goes up to between 16,200 to 18,000. There may be an XP component that has not been factored. This could possibly bump the cost up a bit further. Thus reaching your 20K total.
Zherog 11-08-05, 12:13 AM	Rings don't have an affinity - anything can be placed there.
Juzzman 11-08-05, 12:38 AM	Thanks for the info, i think i get it now. I definately see what you mean with the tensers deadly strike. A pittance to make for a potentially devastating enchantment. It's a shame i guess that with all the work they did on the item creation in 3e that they coudnt come up with a system to avoid this. Ah well, time to slip the iron hand outa the velvet glove and point out some home truths to my players :-) Thanks again Strontium