12k for ring of minor energy resistance? wrong? [Archive] - Wizards Community

12k for ring of minor energy resistance? wrong? [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Genzo
10-23-03, 04:26 AM Ok, so item creation is a big baffling thing for me and i'm never quite sure how to price anything more complicated than stacking enhancement bonuses. so i hope you'll forgive me if this is a silly question, but...

ring of minor energy resistance = 12k.

but at the back of the DMG:
spell-effect, continuous, use-activated=
spell level X caster level X 2k gp

this is 12k for (resist energy lvl 2) X (caster level 3)..
but there is a footnote:
"if the duration is 10 minutes/level, multiply cost by 1.5."..

so should this ring be 18k?
kreynolds
10-23-03, 08:09 AM Originally posted by Genzo
this is 12k for (resist energy lvl 2) X (caster level 3)..
but there is a footnote:
"if the duration is 10 minutes/level, multiply cost by 1.5."..

so should this ring be 18k?

Yes, you should apply the x1.5 duration modifier. If you look at the resistance abilities for armor, they also use it. They are priced using that straight-forward formula as well. Here's how the cold resistance armor abilities are priced...

Cold Resistance: 2*3*2000*1.5=18,000
Improved: 2*7*2000*1.5=42,000
Greater: 2*11*2000*1.5=66,000

As you can see, the totals given by the formulas match up with the prices on page 218 of the rDMG.

EDIT: Curiously, you will also notice that none of the energy resistance abilities for armor have their prices increased in any way even though they are additional powers on a magic item that occupies a body slot.
Thelon Fairblade
10-23-03, 09:25 AM So, kreynolds, you are agreeing with Genzo that the ring *should* be 18k, not the book price of 12k...

Gee, an error in magic item pricing from the core rules... what a surprise. *Or* you can view this as intentional, the designers felt that the ring should be cheaper than its hard-formula price because of ... whatever their reasons were. Maybe because it uses up a valuable ring slot for protection against just 1 element. Maybe because they forgot resistance applies to every elemental attack now, instead of across the entire round.

Most likely, though, they just copied and pasted from 3e, and forgot to adjust it for the new rules.
kreynolds
10-23-03, 09:57 AM Originally posted by Thelon Fairblade
So, kreynolds, you are agreeing with Genzo that the ring *should* be 18k, not the book price of 12k...

Yup.

Originally posted by Thelon Fairblade
Gee, an error in magic item pricing from the core rules... what a surprise.

:D

Originally posted by Thelon Fairblade
*Or* you can view this as intentional, the designers felt that the ring should be cheaper than its hard-formula price because of ... whatever their reasons were.

No, no. The prices I gave and referred to in the rDMG are for _armor_, not rings.

Originally posted by Thelon Fairblade
Maybe because it uses up a valuable ring slot for protection against just 1 element. Maybe because they forgot resistance applies to every elemental attack now, instead of across the entire round.

I think it's more likely that they simply forgot or just chose not to further increase the price of the energy resistance armor abilities as additional powers on a single magic item, regardless of what their own guidelines state (in more than one place, I might add).

Basically, that's my clue that the additional power price increase is likely unjustified and unnecessary in most cases.

Originally posted by Thelon Fairblade
Most likely, though, they just copied and pasted from 3e, and forgot to adjust it for the new rules.

I don't believe the prices even came from 3e, and if they did, I want to say they were priced with bonuses, not flat gold piece values. I don't have my 3e DMG with me at the moment, so I can't verify that just this second. I'll look into it later.
Zherog
10-23-03, 10:48 AM Kreynolds, you and Thelon are discussing different (but similar) things. You are referring to armor enhancements. You are correct, in 3.0 the armor enhancements for energy resistance were priced as pluses to the armor. 3.5 changed that, so that anything that doesn't directly protect you from a weapon is now a flat cost. I'm going to guess they did not apply the "additional powers" multiplier to the armor enhancements because you already have to pay a premium to get at least +1 armor first.

Thelon: The pricing guidelines will tell you that the first thing you ought to do is look through the book for a similar item to get a price. As a general rule of thumb, you can't reverse engineer the prices of magic items using the formulas provided. It's very much a "do as I say, not as I do" thing. :D

That being said, I believe you are correct that they grabbed the price of the item from 3.0 and just applied it to 3.5, as the multiplier based on duration is new to 3.5. When they finally get around to releasing errata for the 3.5 DMG, you may very well see the price of this ring change.
kreynolds
10-23-03, 11:18 AM Originally posted by Zherog
Kreynolds, you and Thelon are discussing different (but similar) things.

Ah. I see that now. Interesting that the ring's price goes against the guidelines. Actually, with so many items going against the guidelines, to heck with the guidelines. There. My life as a DM is so much simpler now. :D
bitnine
10-23-03, 11:33 AM Originally posted by kreynolds
Ah. I see that now. Interesting that the ring's price goes against the guidelines. Actually, with so many items going against the guidelines, to heck with the guidelines. There. My life as a DM is so much simpler now. :D

Well, as another radical idea, you might use them as guidelines instead of a pricing system formula.
kreynolds
10-23-03, 11:53 AM Originally posted by bitnine
Well, as another radical idea, you might use them as guidelines instead of a pricing system formula.

You missed the point.
Genzo
10-23-03, 06:20 PM thanks for your replies all. :D

i just wanted to make sure i wasn't missing something. i really like the thought of making magic items, but for some of the personalization it's a bit tough to use the guidelines. granted, they are guidelines and not rules. i would naturally prefer rules to make my life easier than having to 'guess-timate' pricing though. but i guess adding another 10 pounds to the DMG wouldn't be a good idea. =P

summing it up:
minor ring of energy resistence, we all agree, is 18k by core-rules guidelines, but 12k by rules.

Kreynolds: good catch on the elemental-resistances to armor .. they are 18k.. fair priced as we'd expect, but again the book says nothing that it should really be 27k when adding to +1 or so armor, since we should probably have to apply another 1.5 for "multiple different abilities" guideline. ah.. wizards..
mrandall
10-23-03, 06:37 PM Or, for the armour prices they took the (incorrect?) ring price and DID apply the 1.5 extra effect modifier. Who can tell? I'd really like to see a quick price breakdown in the DMG for each item so that we can see where they follow the guide line, where they don't and maybe even why. Something like: 2(spell) x 3(caster) x 3000(continuous) x 0.66 (adhoq) = 12,000gp
Xeviat-DM
10-23-03, 06:40 PM I believe the difference is there for several reasons.

Interestingly, 18,000 is 1.5x more than 12,000. An elemental resistance on armor is stacked ontop of the armor's enhancement bonus, thus it has several abilities. A ring of elemental protection has a single effect, thus it's power is priced as a slotted item.

Interesting, eh?
Genzo
10-23-03, 06:44 PM i think the argument is that for ANY slotted item with 10 energy res, the base cost is 18k.

i'm thinking they (wotc) forgot 1.5 multiplier for duration for both the ring and the armor bonuses in the DMG. hence 12k base price is assumed by the book for 10 eng resist.

but Xeviat is probably right in that they probably remembered the x1.5 for each additional power thing.. hence the 18k in the armor abilites section. :)
Ertai Planeswalker
10-24-03, 05:02 AM No it is correct. The base price is 12K. Sincerings have affinity for ANYTHING, the price is not further modified. Armor and Shields do not have affinity for Elemental Resistance,thus the price is 1.5*12K = 18K.
kreynolds
10-24-03, 07:05 AM Originally posted by Ertai Planeswalker
Armor and Shields do not have affinity for Elemental Resistance,thus the price is 1.5*12K = 18K.

Then what about the duration modifier? What about the additional power modifier? It could be any one of them being applied and could be any two of them missing.
Genzo
10-24-03, 04:28 PM right, the argued 18k price is because of the duration modifier (see footnotes on item costing table in dmg), which wotc failed to add to both the armor and the ring price.

armors with this ability should really be +27k
kreynolds
10-24-03, 04:31 PM Originally posted by Genzo
armors with this ability should really be +27k

Should it though? Remember, in D&D a doubling of a double equals a triple, i.e. no compound interest. IMO, the price would be...

12K + (12K*1.5) + (12K*1.5) = 24K.
Genzo
10-24-03, 04:40 PM oops. forgot about that rule. wotc math. although i thought it only applied to threat range. :P if double-doublings applies for all types of multipliers (like 1.5) , then you're right, it would be +24k.

anything that makes a magic item cheaper is good in my book. ;)

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Genzo 10-23-03, 04:26 AM	Ok, so item creation is a big baffling thing for me and i'm never quite sure how to price anything more complicated than stacking enhancement bonuses. so i hope you'll forgive me if this is a silly question, but... ring of minor energy resistance = 12k. but at the back of the DMG: spell-effect, continuous, use-activated= spell level X caster level X 2k gp this is 12k for (resist energy lvl 2) X (caster level 3).. but there is a footnote: "if the duration is 10 minutes/level, multiply cost by 1.5.".. so should this ring be 18k?
kreynolds 10-23-03, 08:09 AM	Originally posted by Genzo this is 12k for (resist energy lvl 2) X (caster level 3).. but there is a footnote: "if the duration is 10 minutes/level, multiply cost by 1.5.".. so should this ring be 18k? Yes, you should apply the x1.5 duration modifier. If you look at the resistance abilities for armor, they also use it. They are priced using that straight-forward formula as well. Here's how the cold resistance armor abilities are priced... Cold Resistance: 2320001.5=18,000 Improved: 2720001.5=42,000 Greater: 2112000*1.5=66,000 As you can see, the totals given by the formulas match up with the prices on page 218 of the rDMG. EDIT: Curiously, you will also notice that none of the energy resistance abilities for armor have their prices increased in any way even though they are additional powers on a magic item that occupies a body slot.
Thelon Fairblade 10-23-03, 09:25 AM	So, kreynolds, you are agreeing with Genzo that the ring should be 18k, not the book price of 12k... Gee, an error in magic item pricing from the core rules... what a surprise. Or you can view this as intentional, the designers felt that the ring should be cheaper than its hard-formula price because of ... whatever their reasons were. Maybe because it uses up a valuable ring slot for protection against just 1 element. Maybe because they forgot resistance applies to every elemental attack now, instead of across the entire round. Most likely, though, they just copied and pasted from 3e, and forgot to adjust it for the new rules.
kreynolds 10-23-03, 09:57 AM	Originally posted by Thelon Fairblade So, kreynolds, you are agreeing with Genzo that the ring should be 18k, not the book price of 12k... Yup. Originally posted by Thelon Fairblade Gee, an error in magic item pricing from the core rules... what a surprise. :D Originally posted by Thelon Fairblade Or you can view this as intentional, the designers felt that the ring should be cheaper than its hard-formula price because of ... whatever their reasons were. No, no. The prices I gave and referred to in the rDMG are for _armor_, not rings. Originally posted by Thelon Fairblade Maybe because it uses up a valuable ring slot for protection against just 1 element. Maybe because they forgot resistance applies to every elemental attack now, instead of across the entire round. I think it's more likely that they simply forgot or just chose not to further increase the price of the energy resistance armor abilities as additional powers on a single magic item, regardless of what their own guidelines state (in more than one place, I might add). Basically, that's my clue that the additional power price increase is likely unjustified and unnecessary in most cases. Originally posted by Thelon Fairblade Most likely, though, they just copied and pasted from 3e, and forgot to adjust it for the new rules. I don't believe the prices even came from 3e, and if they did, I want to say they were priced with bonuses, not flat gold piece values. I don't have my 3e DMG with me at the moment, so I can't verify that just this second. I'll look into it later.
Zherog 10-23-03, 10:48 AM	Kreynolds, you and Thelon are discussing different (but similar) things. You are referring to armor enhancements. You are correct, in 3.0 the armor enhancements for energy resistance were priced as pluses to the armor. 3.5 changed that, so that anything that doesn't directly protect you from a weapon is now a flat cost. I'm going to guess they did not apply the "additional powers" multiplier to the armor enhancements because you already have to pay a premium to get at least +1 armor first. Thelon: The pricing guidelines will tell you that the first thing you ought to do is look through the book for a similar item to get a price. As a general rule of thumb, you can't reverse engineer the prices of magic items using the formulas provided. It's very much a "do as I say, not as I do" thing. :D That being said, I believe you are correct that they grabbed the price of the item from 3.0 and just applied it to 3.5, as the multiplier based on duration is new to 3.5. When they finally get around to releasing errata for the 3.5 DMG, you may very well see the price of this ring change.
kreynolds 10-23-03, 11:18 AM	Originally posted by Zherog Kreynolds, you and Thelon are discussing different (but similar) things. Ah. I see that now. Interesting that the ring's price goes against the guidelines. Actually, with so many items going against the guidelines, to heck with the guidelines. There. My life as a DM is so much simpler now. :D
bitnine 10-23-03, 11:33 AM	Originally posted by kreynolds Ah. I see that now. Interesting that the ring's price goes against the guidelines. Actually, with so many items going against the guidelines, to heck with the guidelines. There. My life as a DM is so much simpler now. :D Well, as another radical idea, you might use them as guidelines instead of a pricing system formula.
kreynolds 10-23-03, 11:53 AM	Originally posted by bitnine Well, as another radical idea, you might use them as guidelines instead of a pricing system formula. You missed the point.
Genzo 10-23-03, 06:20 PM	thanks for your replies all. :D i just wanted to make sure i wasn't missing something. i really like the thought of making magic items, but for some of the personalization it's a bit tough to use the guidelines. granted, they are guidelines and not rules. i would naturally prefer rules to make my life easier than having to 'guess-timate' pricing though. but i guess adding another 10 pounds to the DMG wouldn't be a good idea. =P summing it up: minor ring of energy resistence, we all agree, is 18k by core-rules guidelines, but 12k by rules. Kreynolds: good catch on the elemental-resistances to armor .. they are 18k.. fair priced as we'd expect, but again the book says nothing that it should really be 27k when adding to +1 or so armor, since we should probably have to apply another 1.5 for "multiple different abilities" guideline. ah.. wizards..
mrandall 10-23-03, 06:37 PM	Or, for the armour prices they took the (incorrect?) ring price and DID apply the 1.5 extra effect modifier. Who can tell? I'd really like to see a quick price breakdown in the DMG for each item so that we can see where they follow the guide line, where they don't and maybe even why. Something like: 2(spell) x 3(caster) x 3000(continuous) x 0.66 (adhoq) = 12,000gp
Xeviat-DM 10-23-03, 06:40 PM	I believe the difference is there for several reasons. Interestingly, 18,000 is 1.5x more than 12,000. An elemental resistance on armor is stacked ontop of the armor's enhancement bonus, thus it has several abilities. A ring of elemental protection has a single effect, thus it's power is priced as a slotted item. Interesting, eh?
Genzo 10-23-03, 06:44 PM	i think the argument is that for ANY slotted item with 10 energy res, the base cost is 18k. i'm thinking they (wotc) forgot 1.5 multiplier for duration for both the ring and the armor bonuses in the DMG. hence 12k base price is assumed by the book for 10 eng resist. but Xeviat is probably right in that they probably remembered the x1.5 for each additional power thing.. hence the 18k in the armor abilites section. :)
Ertai Planeswalker 10-24-03, 05:02 AM	No it is correct. The base price is 12K. Sincerings have affinity for ANYTHING, the price is not further modified. Armor and Shields do not have affinity for Elemental Resistance,thus the price is 1.5*12K = 18K.
kreynolds 10-24-03, 07:05 AM	Originally posted by Ertai Planeswalker Armor and Shields do not have affinity for Elemental Resistance,thus the price is 1.5*12K = 18K. Then what about the duration modifier? What about the additional power modifier? It could be any one of them being applied and could be any two of them missing.
Genzo 10-24-03, 04:28 PM	right, the argued 18k price is because of the duration modifier (see footnotes on item costing table in dmg), which wotc failed to add to both the armor and the ring price. armors with this ability should really be +27k
kreynolds 10-24-03, 04:31 PM	Originally posted by Genzo armors with this ability should really be +27k Should it though? Remember, in D&D a doubling of a double equals a triple, i.e. no compound interest. IMO, the price would be... 12K + (12K1.5) + (12K1.5) = 24K.
Genzo 10-24-03, 04:40 PM	oops. forgot about that rule. wotc math. although i thought it only applied to threat range. :P if double-doublings applies for all types of multipliers (like 1.5) , then you're right, it would be +24k. anything that makes a magic item cheaper is good in my book. ;)