Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Chrono Nexus 03-15-07, 08:50 AM	I'm reverse engineering the cost of the ability that Rhino Hide armor grants for weapons. 5,165 gp (base price) - 350 gp (MW costs) - 165 gp (base cost) - 4,000 gp(enhancement bonus) = 750 gp?! This can't be correct. 750 gp for a +2d6 damage increase. This seems pretty powerful, at least warranting a +1 bonus or +2-4000 gp bonus to the total cost. I don't think MW was included among the costs originally, but then how could it be enchanted? Rhino skin is a magical material:confused: Any help with this would be appreciated. Edit: Note that the normal quality grants this damage bonus to all manufactured charge attacks.
tarkin 03-15-07, 11:44 AM	You have figured out a key thing: Reverse Engineering usually does NOT work. Lets try to figure out a fair price. First, look at the armor. It is not really +2 Hide armor. What idiot takes Hide Armor? Druids? Even they take Studded Leather. Hide Armor is itself a freakin weakness. It is only used by poor people who have only 15 gp left/can't spend the 25 gp for Studded Leather. This is effectively a +1 Medium Armor, not really a +2 base. The value of +2 Hide armor is only around 1,165 gp, not 4,165. The component of the Rhino armor price that is worth the +2d6 is about 3,000 gp. HOWEVER, there is a good question about whether or not it is appropriate at all to let this ability be taken in anything but a Rhino Hide. It was priced originally for Rhino Hide, the game creator had the opportunity to price it seperately, they choose not to do so, you should at least consider respecting their experience, if not their decision itself. Also As a general rule, it is not fair to price these things by making them a +x,000 gp. It is +2d6 of damage, and the things like flaming etc are all +x, not +x,000. This is a direct attack/armor bonus. As such, it should be priced using the +x method, not the +x,000 gp. If I wanted to make a charge only armor enchantment, I would make it +1 cost = +1d6, stackable. This compares well with weapon enchantments. Yes, armor enchantments cost 1/2 the price of weapon enchantments, but that just makes up for the fact that this is Charge only. It also gives people a reason to buy the original "Rhino Armor", which I think is always a good thing.
Chrono Nexus 03-15-07, 09:40 PM	You have figured out a key thing: Reverse Engineering usually does NOT work. Lets try to figure out a fair price. First, look at the armor. It is not really +2 Hide armor. What idiot takes Hide Armor? A griffon. This is effectively a +1 Medium Armor, not really a +2 base. The value of +2 Hide armor is only around 1,165 gp, not 4,165. The component of the Rhino armor price that is worth the +2d6 is about 3,000 gp. HOWEVER, there is a good question about whether or not it is appropriate at all to let this ability be taken in anything but a Rhino Hide. It was priced originally for Rhino Hide, the game creator had the opportunity to price it seperately, they choose not to do so, you should at least consider respecting their experience, if not their decision itself. I don't think I should. I see no reason why a +2d6 bonus to charge damage with a weapon shouldn't be made a separate weapon quality. And besides, the power of the armor is totally out of sync... armor that grants a bonus to damage makes as much sense as a weapon that grants damage reduction. Also As a general rule, it is not fair to price these things by making them a +x,000 gp. I agree. I also think WotC should follow it's own rules on this matter. As a result of their mistake, most of the weapon enhancements from the DMGII I can't use/have to heavily modify. Also, the uses/day of the items are ability based, another no-no. If I wanted to make a charge only armor enchantment, I would make it +1 cost = +1d6, stackable. This compares well with weapon enchantments. Yes, armor enchantments cost 1/2 the price of weapon enchantments, but that just makes up for the fact that this is Charge only. I think that the bonus +2d6 damage warrants a +1 bonus (non-stackable), since the damage only applies to charge attacks made with the weapon, while the armor quality benefits all manufactured charge attacks while worn (much better). Also, the damage type of the Dire Charge quality is the same as the weapon, not energy, which makes it somewhat weaker. It also gives people a reason to buy the original "Rhino Armor", which I think is always a good thing. I've only seen the armor worn once. And only because of a randomized treasure generator. It's really, really bad. The damage bonus just doesn't make up for the suck of hide armor. Not even close. I don't want to make it sound like I don't appreciate your opinion, I do, but I don't think the creators of the game have any special rights to how I play it either. They are just geeks, like me, and I can make contributions of my own to my games without looking over my shoulder. I mostly wanted to see if anyone understood why the armor was so ludicrous, mechanically. There just seemed to be too many holes in it...
Drodain 03-15-07, 10:02 PM	It was made that way because it really is horrible, but it is cheap too. You can make it +1 bonus should you so choose as long as you are the DM thats your choice. I highly doubt people are going to be using it though. I wouldn't buy it unless it was a +1(armor or weapon) because charges don't happen enough for me to spend it on improving that.
Xeviat-DM 03-16-07, 04:50 AM	I'd be fine with a +1 weapon enhancement that grants +2d6 charge damage. Improved Critical is a feat: keen is a +1 enhancement; Flying Kick is a feat that grants +1d12 damage on unarmed charge attacks: so +1 for +2d6 charge damage is reasonable to me. You generally can't make a charge every single round, unless you want to pay the AoO consiquence, so I'd be fine with that.