Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Sproik 01-20-04, 12:31 PM	According to the DMG, you can reduce the price of a magic item by restricting it to a certain class or alignment. Does no-one else find this a mite abusive? You could make potions of making you glow bright blue for one round (call it a level 0 effect), and then 'restrict' them to only Lawful Good alignment. You then make one of each for NG, LN and N. If anyone drinks them and fails to glow blue, you slaughter them like a hog and move on... This potion would cost 17.5 gp per potion as a base price. No more spies... even nondetection won't help you!
tarkin 01-20-04, 12:50 PM	It says you can reduce the selling cost. I have decided that this does not affect the making cost. Why should it cost less to add in a safety lock?
Seeker95 01-20-04, 01:10 PM	I agree with tarkin. I do not reduce item creation costs, although sale prices *might* be reduced for limited items. If a full-priced item ends up costing less to buy than to make, it is simple economics kicking in -- the cost outweighs the benefits. I also do not reduce the sale price for any commissioned item that gets restrictions. If you want a sword +5 that only works for halflings, you pay for a +5 sword. However, if you own a +5 sword that only works for halflings, you had better either find a halfling, or accept that a merchant will not pay you as much for an item that he has to find a special buyer for. My players will never *benefit* from the price reduction charts. Price reductions benefit the merchants.
Sproik 01-20-04, 01:22 PM	You have both entirely missed the point! :D I'd pay more for the ability to infallibly discern someones alignment, or class... especially class! How else are you going to know what class they are? Making an item that only glows pink when a blackguard puts it on is downright dirty, but according to the DMG it is a cheaper option than a regular item... I would be inclined to make a class-restricted or alignment-restricted item much more expensive. I would expect a potion that infallibly tells you if the person drinking it is an assassin PrC cost thousands of gold pieces, or indeed outlaw it entirely. In fact, outlawing it entirely is what I'm going to do...
Seeker95 01-20-04, 01:53 PM	Originally posted by Sproik You have both entirely missed the point! :D I'd pay more Sproik, I have not missed your point. But whenever I try to bring up the fact that customized function items (and custom items in general) should cost more, I tend to get jumped on (in a very unfriendly way) by whatever crowd happens to be reading the thread in which some munchkin is trying to get his uber weapon or item more affordable by restricting it until it only works for him, doing only exactly what he wants it to do! Consider the flaming, shocking, sonic, vampiric, vorpal longsword +5 that only works for chaotic neutral blue-eyed rogue halflings with 5 or more ranks in tumble, in order to turn an artifact into a 24,000 gp item.
Kyuketsukiouji 01-20-04, 01:56 PM	Seeker, It would be cheaper for female chaotic neutral blue-eyed rogue halflings with 5 or more ranks in tumble, y'know. :D
Edymnion 01-20-04, 02:04 PM	Way I see it, you get no reductions in cost for limitations if those limitations don't apply to you. If you want to make a sword that can only be used by 3 foot tall halfling women with blonde hair and blue eyes and at least 3 levels in rogue and expect to get a price break for it, you had better be a 7 foot tall half-orc. Its not a restriction if you just happen to meet all the requirements without even trying.
Mergandisevender 01-20-04, 02:40 PM	My players browse the DMG because, well, they're interested in DMing too. I like it, actually. THey play better. However, before they could touch it, I used a Black Sharpie to KILL THE ENTIRE BLOCK OF TEXT SPEAKING OF THIS. Restricted as my favorite bodily function! It was outright fraud when my Fighter tried (and failed) to make a Bastard Sword that only a person with Weapon Specialization could use, to reduce the price. I slapped him physically, and told him to roll on the Cursed Item Table. I'd consider Restriction on Magical Items to be a CURSE. Something BAD that the player CANNOT benifit from. Tell me I'm wrong! (Background: My Campaigns have interesting "Purchase" moments, in which the players spend a bit of time getting stuff. Mostly it's for the ECL +10 Campaigns in which they get a lot of magical stuff. Should one of my players ask me to roll on a table for something random, I do it. They're the ones risking getting a Grey Floating Stone of Fun. But sometimes they also ask for too powerful a combo. If it happens three times, they get a cursed item.)
halzmar of geoff 01-20-04, 03:00 PM	First off I sort of like the idea of evil weapons - like a +1 evil longsword - no bonuses for being evil just that their powers -1 to hit/damage only function for evil characters - as a way of throwing in a nice bonus to my NPCs that doesn't make me Monty Haul if I decide to throw a dozen at them over the course of one adventure. But killing every being you encounter who doesn't turn blue for being lawful good would IMHO not be a Lawful Good act - would lead to an alignment shift - and would be the genocidal evil attitude that leads pack of Paladins to hunt the party down, and kill them in the name of good and justice.
Sproik 01-20-04, 07:31 PM	Originally posted by halzmar of geoff But killing every being you encounter who doesn't turn blue for being lawful good would IMHO not be a Lawful Good act - would lead to an alignment shift - and would be the genocidal evil attitude that leads pack of Paladins to hunt the party down, and kill them in the name of good and justice. Not really the point, but what the hell: I didn't suggest the person using it would be Lawful Good. I am suggesting that if you were apt to use security of the nature I described (i.e. you were paranoid and protecting something vulnerable to treachery), you might want to eliminate anyone in a position to betray you who is chaotic or evil. Lawful good and neutral people are unlikely to, neutral good people are unlikely to unless you are in some way evil, and neutral people are unlikely to if you keep them happy and make sure the alternative looks very unattractive. You realise the irony in the statement 'would be genocidal evil attitude that leads pack of Paladins to hunt... and kill them in the name of good and justice'?
halzmar of geoff 01-20-04, 09:54 PM	Originally posted by Sproik You realise the irony in the statement 'would be genocidal evil attitude that leads pack of Paladins to hunt... and kill them in the name of good and justice'? I most certainly do realize the irony - and the subtlties - Paladins hunt down and destroy those who COMMIT evil acts. Originally posted by Sproik You could make potions of making you glow bright blue for one round (call it a level 0 effect), and then 'restrict' them to only Lawful Good alignment.../...If anyone drinks them and fails to glow blue, you slaughter them like a hog and move on... "Slaughtering them like a hog" because of the alignment system is perhaps the worst metagaming abuse since the know alignment spell, and deserves penalization from the DM. I think it is the point since you presented the rule a problem when used as a way of detecting alignment so the PCs can justify slaughter of whomever falls underneath a certain alignment in a system which the character doesn't have any knowledge. So yes I agree with you the rule and the alignment system when used by PCs to justify baseless slaughter in such a way is a mite abusive and such use needs stomped on hard.
Sproik 01-20-04, 10:26 PM	Originally posted by halzmar of geoff I most certainly do realize the irony - and the subtlties - Paladins hunt down and destroy those who COMMIT evil acts. "Slaughtering them like a hog" because of the alignment system is perhaps the worst metagaming abuse since the know alignment spell, and deserves penalization from the DM. I think it is the point since you presented the rule a problem when used as a way of detecting alignment so the PCs can justify slaughter of whomever falls underneath a certain alignment in a system which the character doesn't have any knowledge. So yes I agree with you the rule and the alignment system when used by PCs to justify baseless slaughter in such a way is a mite abusive and such use needs stomped on hard. What do you mean, they don't know what an alignment is?! Are you suggesting that they have no way of knowing that the alignment poles of Law, Chaos, Good and Evil exist? Despite the fact there are planar alignments, alignment specific spells, alignment divine domains, etc? Come on. While it may be possible that they think themselves 'outside the sytem' in terms of their own complicated lives, they are almost certainly aware of the existence of alignment, at least as a cosmic / otherworldly force. The very fact that alignment can be discerned by a character with appropriate spells or abilties (e.g. detect evil) indicates the characters in the game world have a clear understanding of good/evil and law/chaos. The senseless slaughter angle is, of course, utterly vile and ridiculously over the top. But it isn't the issue - feel free to replace the words "slaughter like a hog" with "dismiss from employment" or "imprison" or "convert" or whatever it is you are trying to do at the time.
halzmar of geoff 01-20-04, 11:50 PM	Originally posted by Sproik What do you mean, they don't know what an alignment is?! Are you suggesting that they have no way of knowing that the alignment poles of Law, Chaos, Good and Evil exist? Despite the fact there are planar alignments, alignment specific spells, alignment divine domains, etc? It's all in emphasis that the DM puts on the alignment system in his or her world. Only Clerics and Paladins have access to any spells or abilities that can detect alignment. Character's with a certain amount of ranks in knowledge-planes, religion, or spellcraft would have access to the theories about alignment poles, and how they affect behavioral tendancies in their world, but they wouldn't necessarily believe them or allow them to control their day to day lives - Your average noncaster character would not know, or care about these theories. Characters should act upon what they see, or discover about the NPC doing not use divination on every NPC to go on the defensive. Therein is the roleplaying part of the game. Originally posted by Sproik Come on. While it may be possible that they think themselves 'outside the sytem' in terms of their own complicated lives, they are almost certainly aware of the existence of alignment, at least as a cosmic / otherworldly force. The very fact that alignment can be discerned by a character with appropriate spells or abilties (e.g. detect evil) indicates the characters in the game world have a clear understanding of good/evil and law/chaos. Again only Clerics and Paladins have access to any spells or abilities that can detect alignment. But the issue is the characters are using player knowledge about the system instead of playing the game. I agree with very few of the points about the evils of metagaming but on the point of alignment any non-divine spellcaster trying to detect and act on alignment is metagaming, and is needs to be redressed by in game penalties by the DM. They aren't thinking about their characters or what the DM is presenting they are thinking about game mechanics and looking for a short cut to roleplaying their characters.
Psifon 01-21-04, 01:08 AM	This rule is not abusive at all, and here is why: There are two interpretations of this rule. 1) The rule is in the pricing guidelines, and while it doesn't specifically state this, it is ment to be used on items that have an alignment based THEME. So for instance a collar/ring pair that allows the wearer of the ring to inflict Nybor's gentle reminder (a pain inflicting spell) on the wearer of the collar is an evil magic item and bestows negative levels on the ring wearer if he is not evil. this sort of thing will get the 20% discount. This is the intention of the rule and since the guidelines for pricing are GUIDELINES and not rules, you really don't need to justify your position in saying that this is how you interpret the guideline. Just inform your player that this is a guideline and NOT A RULE and be done with it. 2) The interpretation of your player is that this is a rule and that as a rule he/she is free to rape it. While wrong (as stated above) some players will none-the-less insist on this interpretation. This is OK. Go ahead and let them insist all they want. You see, this "rule" hurts the players FAR more than it helps them. Let's take the example of your potion: Makes anyone of good alignment glow blue. Groovy. And at a 20% discount too! But now wait a minute. If you can make ANY magic item cheeper by making it "my alignment only" then how does this effect the economy of your campaign? Well, now ALL the bad guys have ALL their equipment "alignment specific." Yes, that's right, every +1 sword you find on a bad guy bestows a negative level to any non-evil character who weilds it! Every potion only works for the minotaur who carried it. Every cone of incense of meditation only works for the evil cult you defeated! Not only that, but every bad guy can afford 20% more equipment with which to beat up the PC's! Finally, WHERE ARE YOU GOING TO SELL A BUNCH OF EVIL-ONLY STUFF? Never mind that even trying to sell it might be an alignment violation, the only people who would buy it are evil people, who are all perfectly williing (and often able) to screw you over if not kill you for the highly valuable (to them only) crap that you just brought out of the dungeon! So you see. Either the game stays balanced, and the players use the 20% guideline as a guideline, or they use it as a rule and the rule screws them over royally. I ran into this same situation with my players, and after pointing out to them the consequences of a "strict interpretation of the rules" they never brought up the subject again. so don't sweat it.