Applying spells to items. [Archive] - Wizards Community

Applying spells to items. [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Draegun Fury
11-17-06, 05:49 AM Hey, can you make an Instantaneous Spell Continuos or Use activated on a Magic Weapon/Item?

Cheers.

PS: For example, a Sword of Disintergration.
risner
11-17-06, 10:24 AM You could, but since it MUST be priced based on its power, it would be very expensive.

Price it based on an average of a +4 sword (which is as close to 10th level without going under, i.e. 12th level).

+4 sword = 12th level = 12*2d6 or 5d6 = average of 27d6 / 2 = 13d6 + 1d3

13d6 = same as 13 Flaming +1d6 enchantments.

So Disintegrate on a weapon should cost the same as a +13 enchantment.

Since +4 weapon and +13 enchantment is a +17 weapon, this item would be an epic item.

17*17*2,000*10 = 5,780,000 gp ~ 6 million gp
Draegun Fury
11-17-06, 11:18 AM Sorry I meant making a continuous/use activated effect as in the following:

Spell Effect Base Price Example
Single use, spell completion Spell level x caster level x 25 gp Scroll of haste
Single use, use-activated Spell level x caster level x 50 gp Potion of cure light wounds
50 charges, spell trigger Spell level x caster level x 750 gp Wand of fireball
Command word Spell level x caster level x 1,800 gp Cape of the mountebank
Use-activated or continuous Spell level x caster level x 2,000 gp Lantern of revealing

In which case it would cost 280,000gp (7th Level Spell x 20th Caster Level x 2,000gp).

Cheers.
tarkin
11-17-06, 11:48 AM The rule for weapons in the DMG is:

If it does damage or affects your chance of hitting, then it SHOULD use the +x, not the +x,0000 gp, method.

I use this rule myself, instead: "If it does anything on a per attack basis or affects all your attacks, then it should be +x, not +x,000 gp."

In either case, you want a weapon that does damage on every attack, it should be a +x item. As the amount you want is HUGE, it should be epic.

However, here is a non-epic version of your desired power.

Distingration Sword. +2 weapon cost.

When this weapon hits, roll a Fortitude save (even if it is an object). A failed fort save means they take 2d6 of damage. A succesfull save means they take no damage.

Any creature or object reduced to -1 or fewer hit points by this weapon in a round they failed their save is entirely disintegrated, leaving behind only a trace of fine dust. A disintegrated creature’s equipment is unaffected.
Thiez
11-17-06, 12:31 PM That formula does not, I repeat, does not work with spells that enhance combat effectivenes.

Continuous/Use-Activated True Strike would cost 2k, but most people on this board agree the price should be a wee bit higher than that.

Use-activated stuff that works more than once per rounds is usually broken. Consider boots of Magic Missile that fire magic missiles at an enemy of your choice with each step you make. Let's say you move 5-ft. per step. That's a lot of magic missiles, for an effect that costs a mere 2000 gold pieces, only 200 gp more than a command word activated item (1 standard action/use).

Continous Disintegrate won't work because a duration of instantaneous is not a legal target for 'continousness'.

Edit: I like tarkin's version.
risner
11-17-06, 01:36 PM In which case it would cost 280,000gp (7th Level Spell x 20th Caster Level x 2,000gp).

As a note, I knew exactly what you meant.

Evidently my response didn't make it clear that your SLxCLx2,000 gp method is not allowed by the suggested rules.
Draegun Fury
11-17-06, 01:45 PM OK, so I get that everyone feels it shouldn't work (I knew that people would think this before I asked), but I need to know, from a rules point of veiw, does it work?

Cheers.

PS: As a note, I realized that because its a Weapon (a "slotless" item) it requires a x2 modifier, so that makes the price, 560,000gp.
risner
11-17-06, 06:19 PM from a rules point of veiw, does it work?

From a rules point of view, you are not allowed to price it via SLxCLx2,000 method, so NO it doesn't "work".

I don't understand why people can tell you that and you keep posting that you want that method. Unless you houserule to allow that method, the rules do not allow that method.
Draegun Fury
11-17-06, 08:23 PM From a rules point of view, you are not allowed to price it via SLxCLx2,000 method, so NO it doesn't "work".

I don't understand why people can tell you that and you keep posting that you want that method. Unless you houserule to allow that method, the rules do not allow that method.

Its not that I want that method, its that when I ask a Rules Question, all I'm really looking for is a RULE, so far the most helpful answer is Tarkin's, but even that says that it SHOULD not be used.

Here's a better way to ask the question, where is the RULING concerning whether or not this kind of thing can be done. Try using Page Numbers, or a Quote from the SRD. Sheesh.
risner
11-18-06, 01:42 AM Sheesh.

You are lucky I replied to that last message.

DMG p282

So, as I (and everyone else in this thread) have said, you can not leap to the SLxCL formula for this effect.

You may also wish to read the FAQ, it can help quite a bit for pricing.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Draegun Fury 11-17-06, 05:49 AM	Hey, can you make an Instantaneous Spell Continuos or Use activated on a Magic Weapon/Item? Cheers. PS: For example, a Sword of Disintergration.
risner 11-17-06, 10:24 AM	You could, but since it MUST be priced based on its power, it would be very expensive. Price it based on an average of a +4 sword (which is as close to 10th level without going under, i.e. 12th level). +4 sword = 12th level = 122d6 or 5d6 = average of 27d6 / 2 = 13d6 + 1d3 13d6 = same as 13 Flaming +1d6 enchantments. So Disintegrate on a weapon should cost the same as a +13 enchantment. Since +4 weapon and +13 enchantment is a +17 weapon, this item would be an epic item. 17172,00010 = 5,780,000 gp ~ 6 million gp
Draegun Fury 11-17-06, 11:18 AM	Sorry I meant making a continuous/use activated effect as in the following: Spell Effect Base Price Example Single use, spell completion Spell level x caster level x 25 gp Scroll of haste Single use, use-activated Spell level x caster level x 50 gp Potion of cure light wounds 50 charges, spell trigger Spell level x caster level x 750 gp Wand of fireball Command word Spell level x caster level x 1,800 gp Cape of the mountebank Use-activated or continuous Spell level x caster level x 2,000 gp Lantern of revealing In which case it would cost 280,000gp (7th Level Spell x 20th Caster Level x 2,000gp). Cheers.
tarkin 11-17-06, 11:48 AM	The rule for weapons in the DMG is: If it does damage or affects your chance of hitting, then it SHOULD use the +x, not the +x,0000 gp, method. I use this rule myself, instead: "If it does anything on a per attack basis or affects all your attacks, then it should be +x, not +x,000 gp." In either case, you want a weapon that does damage on every attack, it should be a +x item. As the amount you want is HUGE, it should be epic. However, here is a non-epic version of your desired power. Distingration Sword. +2 weapon cost. When this weapon hits, roll a Fortitude save (even if it is an object). A failed fort save means they take 2d6 of damage. A succesfull save means they take no damage. Any creature or object reduced to -1 or fewer hit points by this weapon in a round they failed their save is entirely disintegrated, leaving behind only a trace of fine dust. A disintegrated creature’s equipment is unaffected.
Thiez 11-17-06, 12:31 PM	That formula does not, I repeat, does not work with spells that enhance combat effectivenes. Continuous/Use-Activated True Strike would cost 2k, but most people on this board agree the price should be a wee bit higher than that. Use-activated stuff that works more than once per rounds is usually broken. Consider boots of Magic Missile that fire magic missiles at an enemy of your choice with each step you make. Let's say you move 5-ft. per step. That's a lot of magic missiles, for an effect that costs a mere 2000 gold pieces, only 200 gp more than a command word activated item (1 standard action/use). Continous Disintegrate won't work because a duration of instantaneous is not a legal target for 'continousness'. Edit: I like tarkin's version.
risner 11-17-06, 01:36 PM	In which case it would cost 280,000gp (7th Level Spell x 20th Caster Level x 2,000gp). As a note, I knew exactly what you meant. Evidently my response didn't make it clear that your SLxCLx2,000 gp method is not allowed by the suggested rules.
Draegun Fury 11-17-06, 01:45 PM	OK, so I get that everyone feels it shouldn't work (I knew that people would think this before I asked), but I need to know, from a rules point of veiw, does it work? Cheers. PS: As a note, I realized that because its a Weapon (a "slotless" item) it requires a x2 modifier, so that makes the price, 560,000gp.
risner 11-17-06, 06:19 PM	from a rules point of veiw, does it work? From a rules point of view, you are not allowed to price it via SLxCLx2,000 method, so NO it doesn't "work". I don't understand why people can tell you that and you keep posting that you want that method. Unless you houserule to allow that method, the rules do not allow that method.
Draegun Fury 11-17-06, 08:23 PM	From a rules point of view, you are not allowed to price it via SLxCLx2,000 method, so NO it doesn't "work". I don't understand why people can tell you that and you keep posting that you want that method. Unless you houserule to allow that method, the rules do not allow that method. Its not that I want that method, its that when I ask a Rules Question, all I'm really looking for is a RULE, so far the most helpful answer is Tarkin's, but even that says that it SHOULD not be used. Here's a better way to ask the question, where is the RULING concerning whether or not this kind of thing can be done. Try using Page Numbers, or a Quote from the SRD. Sheesh.
risner 11-18-06, 01:42 AM	Sheesh. You are lucky I replied to that last message. DMG p282 So, as I (and everyone else in this thread) have said, you can not leap to the SLxCL formula for this effect. You may also wish to read the FAQ, it can help quite a bit for pricing.