Attn: Tarkin [Archive] - Wizards Community

Attn: Tarkin [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
NeueRegel
08-06-05, 11:15 PM Yeah, I could have pm'd him. But some other munchkin out there will want (or not) to hear his answer too.

Alright, buck; You're the expert at assigning magic items abilities their enchantment bonus equivalents. Explain the why or why not for this one, puh-leez. ;)

In the special abilities aisle at armor-mart, they sell:
invulnerability (5/magic) for +3,
fortification (100%) for +5,
greater shadow (+15 hide) for +33,750 gp.

(Attention armor-mart shoppers! We'd like to announce a blue-light special for the next 10 minutes on aluminum helmets in the headgear dept; Guaranteed to grant you a +2 will save on all detect thought spells cast by alien aberrations and government officials; 25% off for the next 10 minutes!)

Oops, sorry guys; Now, where was I? Oh, yeah:

Tarkin, is there room in this conglomeration for "greater invisibility"? (50% miss chance, negates some precision damage types, etc).

Why or why not? And at what cost/price if affirmative?

As a possible mitigating factor, what if it had a clause comparable to etherealness armor:~become ethereal ~ once per day. The character can remain ethereal for as long as desired, but once he returns to normal, he cannot become ethereal again that day.

Obviously, everybody is allowed their two cents worth and rants-&-raves. But let's try and keep it civil. This is actually more an exercise in academia than anything we are likely to allow; At the same time; we "might", on a trial basis, unless it's deemed game-destroying by a majority of you in a rational and supported manner. (Pretend you're Tarkin, for instance, and don't just fire from the hip). ie, "called shots" are welcome, meaning that if you want to slay the idea, you have to take 10 to aim (explain).

It can't be any more ridiculous than playing the (optionally legal) pixie as a player character, even with a +4 LA. (Hey, maybe that's a comparison? +4 cost?- Don't mind me, that was truly off the cuff, last-second thought.)

Okay, hit me with your best shot! (50% miss chance, though!)

NeueRegel
jaelis
08-06-05, 11:57 PM Well I'm no Tarkin, but I can try to channel him for you if you like :)

So we can compare to etherealness, which costs +49000 gp. Etherealness is probably more powerful in general (thus Ethereal Jaunt is lvel 7, Gtr Invis is level 4). But becoming ethereal is sort of tangential to the point of armor, since it is not usually so helpful in combat. Whereas Gtr Invis certainly is useful in combat. So it makes sense that etherealness is a fixed cost, but Gtr Invis should be a +x cost. For reference, 49kgp is the cost of +7 armor.

The big thing that gtr invis does is give you a 50% miss chance. This is clearly better than greater fortification, in terms of reducing the amount of damage you take. But greater fort. works all the time, and requires dispel magic to suppress, whereas greater invis as described would be a 1/day thing, and it could be defeated with spells like see invisibility. I assume that invisibility purge would end the effect. So the effect might be comparable to greater fort, a +5 bonus.

Now let's look at who could be expected to have this. It shouldn't be available to characters until greater invisibility the spell is no big deal. Maybe when the party wizard is casting 6th level spells, at level 13. +1 armor of greater invis would cost 36kgp. That is just affordable at level 9. It gets practical at about level 13 or 14, which is about right.

So I'd say the version you describe, with unlimited duration but only 1/day activation, is probably OK at a +5 bonus. That's assuming invisibility purge or dispel magic ends the effect, just like the spell version.
NeueRegel
08-07-05, 12:17 AM That's assuming invisibility purge or dispel magic ends the effect, just like the spell version.
I'd certainly presumed that. Exactly as per the spell; I do want to clarify something though: When a magic item is targeted, Dispel Magic says the check is against the item's caster level; That does mean, the DC is 11+ item's caster level, right? The Dispel Magic spell description leaves that "11" out of the sentence, but we always assumed (and played) it meant that.

Great reasoning there Jae; let's see what the others have to say.

Neue
Nom
08-07-05, 07:34 AM It says the dispel check is against the item's caster level. It does not say that this is the DC. Rather, note the similarity to the wording of making a dispel check against a spell; you check against the spell, and the DC is 11 + caster level. The text is telling you which caster level to use, not altering the basic mechanics of a dispel check (caster level check vs 11 + target CL).
Traevanon
08-07-05, 08:50 AM A agree with the +5 bonus as described by Jaelis.

I was thinking of the sneaky abilities of the armor (unable to target the subject at all until pinpointed), then I realized that any medium or heavy armor with this ability would be located by sound. It only works best with light armor types.

So with some reservations regarding Silenced Full Plate of Greater Invisibility or Leather Armor of Greater Invisibility I'll go with the +5.
NeueRegel
08-07-05, 11:35 AM It says the dispel check is against the item's caster level. It does not say that this is the DC. Rather, note the similarity to the wording of making a dispel check against a spell; you check against the spell, and the DC is 11 + caster level. The text is telling you which caster level to use, not altering the basic mechanics of a dispel check (caster level check vs 11 + target CL).

Yeah, just confirming that Nom; as I noted, that's what we always assumed. I just got weirdly confuzzled when I re-glanced at the DMagic spell last night when Jae suggested I make sure it was dispel-able. We were always playing it correctly; I was just sleepy.

Thanks for the input, and, you too Traev.

Ears to the ground...
Neue
wonlee76
08-07-05, 01:10 PM I would put a flat cost increase for armor to be able to use Greater Invisibility. Extrapolate the price from the Ring of Invisbility. Ring of Invisibility is 20k and is a command word item useable multiple times per day. It has a caster level of 3 so it has a relatively short duration for each use in a given day.

What you're suggesting is Greater Invisibility which should obviously cost more money then what a Ring of Invisibility grants but should be cheaper because it is only useable once per day vs. many times per day.

Looking over the chart in the DMG, a Ring of Invisibility at CL 3 with a command word activation should cost 10,800 gp but obviously the usefulness of the item makes it more expensive then the actual spell used to gain the effect. So for arguments sake, lets say double looking over the DMG guidelines and the actual cost of a ring of invisibilty.

Using a similar rough calculation, Greater Invisibilty at CL 7 (minimum caster level needed to cast Greater Invisibility) would cost according to the guidelines would cost 44,400 gp. Lets double that to approximately 88,000 gp. Now lets reduce the price because its only useable once per day by 1/5.
So the cost would be 17,600 gp.

Now I'm not sure whether invisibility would be considered to have affinity with armor. Presuming it doesn't have affinity with the armor slot (but based on the elemental resistance abilities in the DMG for armor is 50% more expensive then the ring of elemental resistance, I will presume a similar result will occur with invisibility), the final flat cost would be 26,400 gp for once per day Greater Invisibility on Armor at CL 7.
tarkin
08-07-05, 03:38 PM As a general rule, things that increase your melee defense are +x, while things that do not are +gold.

Greater Invisibility is a clear melee defense ability, much more similar to Fortification then it is to Shadow armor.

I would probably make a +2 price to do it 1/day with a 9 round duration.

But
+1 armor
+2 for Greater Invisibility
+3 for for invunerability
+5 for Fortification, 100%
====================
+11. Ooops, Epic item. Unless you are epic, you can't make/buy this

I would drop the Fortification. You can't sneak attack an invisible person anyway, and crits are rare.

If you want Unlimited Duration, then there is no real reason to make it only 1/day. 1/day becomes pointless if you can wear it all day and use it.

Note, Dispell Magic does NOT cancel it and require re-activation, it should only supress it for x rounds.

I agree that unlimited Duration is at least a +5 cost.
NeueRegel
08-07-05, 04:36 PM As a general rule, things that increase your melee defense are +x, while things that do not are +gold.

Greater Invisibility is a clear melee defense ability, much more similar to Fortification then it is to Shadow armor.

I would probably make a +2 price to do it 1/day with a 9 round duration.

But
+1 armor
+2 for Greater Invisibility
+3 for for invunerability
+5 for Fortification, 100%
====================
+11. Ooops, Epic item. Unless you are epic, you can't make/buy this

I would drop the Fortification. You can't sneak attack an invisible person anyway, and crits are rare.

If you want Unlimited Duration, then there is no real reason to make it only 1/day. 1/day becomes pointless if you can wear it all day and use it.

Note, Dispell Magic does NOT cancel it and require re-activation, it should only supress it for x rounds.

I agree that unlimited Duration is at least a +5 cost.

Tarkin! What day are you on??? I never expected you to make a mistake like that; nobody else seems to have. I would never have tried to create armor with all of those properties; I'd ban it from the game just on silliness factor alone.

I meant, "Greater Invisibility", alone, period, as a free-standing ability.

I think everybody thought/assumed/understood that that's what I meant. Give me credit for a modicrum of common sense! ;)

Anyway, back to it: I'm also very surprised at a mere +2, from you; even for a 9-rnd/1-day.

Most of the others said +5 for unlimited too; You said, "at least". So, Tarkin: Would you allow it in your game, at +5?

NeueRegel
Vaelan
08-07-05, 06:42 PM I'm sure you really don't need to hear this again since you've all read it on at least two other occasions in similar threads, but here is how the rules state you create such an item.

Multiple Different Abilities: Abilities such as an attack roll bonus or saving throw bonus and a spell-like function are not similar, and their values are simply added together to determine the cost. For items that do take up space on a character's body (such as a ring or necklace), each additional power not only has no discount but instead has a 50% increase in price.
Since armor takes up space on a character's body, you would multiply the cost of Greater Invisibility by 150% and simply add it to the armor's value to determine the overall cost.

Compare Greater Invisibility armor to a Greater Invisibility ring. The ring costs 4 * 7 * 2000 * 4 for a total of 208,000gp. The armor quality would have to be a +14 equivalent to come near what a ring would cost.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
NeueRegel 08-06-05, 11:15 PM	Yeah, I could have pm'd him. But some other munchkin out there will want (or not) to hear his answer too. Alright, buck; You're the expert at assigning magic items abilities their enchantment bonus equivalents. Explain the why or why not for this one, puh-leez. ;) In the special abilities aisle at armor-mart, they sell: invulnerability (5/magic) for +3, fortification (100%) for +5, greater shadow (+15 hide) for +33,750 gp. (Attention armor-mart shoppers! We'd like to announce a blue-light special for the next 10 minutes on aluminum helmets in the headgear dept; Guaranteed to grant you a +2 will save on all detect thought spells cast by alien aberrations and government officials; 25% off for the next 10 minutes!) Oops, sorry guys; Now, where was I? Oh, yeah: Tarkin, is there room in this conglomeration for "greater invisibility"? (50% miss chance, negates some precision damage types, etc). Why or why not? And at what cost/price if affirmative? As a possible mitigating factor, what if it had a clause comparable to etherealness armor:~become ethereal ~ once per day. The character can remain ethereal for as long as desired, but once he returns to normal, he cannot become ethereal again that day. Obviously, everybody is allowed their two cents worth and rants-&-raves. But let's try and keep it civil. This is actually more an exercise in academia than anything we are likely to allow; At the same time; we "might", on a trial basis, unless it's deemed game-destroying by a majority of you in a rational and supported manner. (Pretend you're Tarkin, for instance, and don't just fire from the hip). ie, "called shots" are welcome, meaning that if you want to slay the idea, you have to take 10 to aim (explain). It can't be any more ridiculous than playing the (optionally legal) pixie as a player character, even with a +4 LA. (Hey, maybe that's a comparison? +4 cost?- Don't mind me, that was truly off the cuff, last-second thought.) Okay, hit me with your best shot! (50% miss chance, though!) NeueRegel
jaelis 08-06-05, 11:57 PM	Well I'm no Tarkin, but I can try to channel him for you if you like :) So we can compare to etherealness, which costs +49000 gp. Etherealness is probably more powerful in general (thus Ethereal Jaunt is lvel 7, Gtr Invis is level 4). But becoming ethereal is sort of tangential to the point of armor, since it is not usually so helpful in combat. Whereas Gtr Invis certainly is useful in combat. So it makes sense that etherealness is a fixed cost, but Gtr Invis should be a +x cost. For reference, 49kgp is the cost of +7 armor. The big thing that gtr invis does is give you a 50% miss chance. This is clearly better than greater fortification, in terms of reducing the amount of damage you take. But greater fort. works all the time, and requires dispel magic to suppress, whereas greater invis as described would be a 1/day thing, and it could be defeated with spells like see invisibility. I assume that invisibility purge would end the effect. So the effect might be comparable to greater fort, a +5 bonus. Now let's look at who could be expected to have this. It shouldn't be available to characters until greater invisibility the spell is no big deal. Maybe when the party wizard is casting 6th level spells, at level 13. +1 armor of greater invis would cost 36kgp. That is just affordable at level 9. It gets practical at about level 13 or 14, which is about right. So I'd say the version you describe, with unlimited duration but only 1/day activation, is probably OK at a +5 bonus. That's assuming invisibility purge or dispel magic ends the effect, just like the spell version.
NeueRegel 08-07-05, 12:17 AM	That's assuming invisibility purge or dispel magic ends the effect, just like the spell version. I'd certainly presumed that. Exactly as per the spell; I do want to clarify something though: When a magic item is targeted, Dispel Magic says the check is against the item's caster level; That does mean, the DC is 11+ item's caster level, right? The Dispel Magic spell description leaves that "11" out of the sentence, but we always assumed (and played) it meant that. Great reasoning there Jae; let's see what the others have to say. Neue
Nom 08-07-05, 07:34 AM	It says the dispel check is against the item's caster level. It does not say that this is the DC. Rather, note the similarity to the wording of making a dispel check against a spell; you check against the spell, and the DC is 11 + caster level. The text is telling you which caster level to use, not altering the basic mechanics of a dispel check (caster level check vs 11 + target CL).
Traevanon 08-07-05, 08:50 AM	A agree with the +5 bonus as described by Jaelis. I was thinking of the sneaky abilities of the armor (unable to target the subject at all until pinpointed), then I realized that any medium or heavy armor with this ability would be located by sound. It only works best with light armor types. So with some reservations regarding Silenced Full Plate of Greater Invisibility or Leather Armor of Greater Invisibility I'll go with the +5.
NeueRegel 08-07-05, 11:35 AM	It says the dispel check is against the item's caster level. It does not say that this is the DC. Rather, note the similarity to the wording of making a dispel check against a spell; you check against the spell, and the DC is 11 + caster level. The text is telling you which caster level to use, not altering the basic mechanics of a dispel check (caster level check vs 11 + target CL). Yeah, just confirming that Nom; as I noted, that's what we always assumed. I just got weirdly confuzzled when I re-glanced at the DMagic spell last night when Jae suggested I make sure it was dispel-able. We were always playing it correctly; I was just sleepy. Thanks for the input, and, you too Traev. Ears to the ground... Neue
wonlee76 08-07-05, 01:10 PM	I would put a flat cost increase for armor to be able to use Greater Invisibility. Extrapolate the price from the Ring of Invisbility. Ring of Invisibility is 20k and is a command word item useable multiple times per day. It has a caster level of 3 so it has a relatively short duration for each use in a given day. What you're suggesting is Greater Invisibility which should obviously cost more money then what a Ring of Invisibility grants but should be cheaper because it is only useable once per day vs. many times per day. Looking over the chart in the DMG, a Ring of Invisibility at CL 3 with a command word activation should cost 10,800 gp but obviously the usefulness of the item makes it more expensive then the actual spell used to gain the effect. So for arguments sake, lets say double looking over the DMG guidelines and the actual cost of a ring of invisibilty. Using a similar rough calculation, Greater Invisibilty at CL 7 (minimum caster level needed to cast Greater Invisibility) would cost according to the guidelines would cost 44,400 gp. Lets double that to approximately 88,000 gp. Now lets reduce the price because its only useable once per day by 1/5. So the cost would be 17,600 gp. Now I'm not sure whether invisibility would be considered to have affinity with armor. Presuming it doesn't have affinity with the armor slot (but based on the elemental resistance abilities in the DMG for armor is 50% more expensive then the ring of elemental resistance, I will presume a similar result will occur with invisibility), the final flat cost would be 26,400 gp for once per day Greater Invisibility on Armor at CL 7.
tarkin 08-07-05, 03:38 PM	As a general rule, things that increase your melee defense are +x, while things that do not are +gold. Greater Invisibility is a clear melee defense ability, much more similar to Fortification then it is to Shadow armor. I would probably make a +2 price to do it 1/day with a 9 round duration. But +1 armor +2 for Greater Invisibility +3 for for invunerability +5 for Fortification, 100% ==================== +11. Ooops, Epic item. Unless you are epic, you can't make/buy this I would drop the Fortification. You can't sneak attack an invisible person anyway, and crits are rare. If you want Unlimited Duration, then there is no real reason to make it only 1/day. 1/day becomes pointless if you can wear it all day and use it. Note, Dispell Magic does NOT cancel it and require re-activation, it should only supress it for x rounds. I agree that unlimited Duration is at least a +5 cost.
NeueRegel 08-07-05, 04:36 PM	As a general rule, things that increase your melee defense are +x, while things that do not are +gold. Greater Invisibility is a clear melee defense ability, much more similar to Fortification then it is to Shadow armor. I would probably make a +2 price to do it 1/day with a 9 round duration. But +1 armor +2 for Greater Invisibility +3 for for invunerability +5 for Fortification, 100% ==================== +11. Ooops, Epic item. Unless you are epic, you can't make/buy this I would drop the Fortification. You can't sneak attack an invisible person anyway, and crits are rare. If you want Unlimited Duration, then there is no real reason to make it only 1/day. 1/day becomes pointless if you can wear it all day and use it. Note, Dispell Magic does NOT cancel it and require re-activation, it should only supress it for x rounds. I agree that unlimited Duration is at least a +5 cost. Tarkin! What day are you on??? I never expected you to make a mistake like that; nobody else seems to have. I would never have tried to create armor with all of those properties; I'd ban it from the game just on silliness factor alone. I meant, "Greater Invisibility", alone, period, as a free-standing ability. I think everybody thought/assumed/understood that that's what I meant. Give me credit for a modicrum of common sense! ;) Anyway, back to it: I'm also very surprised at a mere +2, from you; even for a 9-rnd/1-day. Most of the others said +5 for unlimited too; You said, "at least". So, Tarkin: Would you allow it in your game, at +5? NeueRegel
Vaelan 08-07-05, 06:42 PM	I'm sure you really don't need to hear this again since you've all read it on at least two other occasions in similar threads, but here is how the rules state you create such an item. Multiple Different Abilities: Abilities such as an attack roll bonus or saving throw bonus and a spell-like function are not similar, and their values are simply added together to determine the cost. For items that do take up space on a character's body (such as a ring or necklace), each additional power not only has no discount but instead has a 50% increase in price. Since armor takes up space on a character's body, you would multiply the cost of Greater Invisibility by 150% and simply add it to the armor's value to determine the overall cost. Compare Greater Invisibility armor to a Greater Invisibility ring. The ring costs 4 * 7 * 2000 * 4 for a total of 208,000gp. The armor quality would have to be a +14 equivalent to come near what a ring would cost.