Another magic item question. [Archive] - Wizards Community

Another magic item question. [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
crusader1179
12-08-04, 01:43 AM *In D&D, specifically making magic items per the DMG* One of my players wished to create a magic item. Basically it is a Staff of Power that has a daily charge limit rather than the standard charges. In my interpretation the item would cease to be a staff, but would rather be treated as a Rod. So for price, instead of being a staff [spell level X caster level X 750gp 75% for second most powerful spell and 50% thereafter] it would be [spell level X caster level X 1,800 divided by {5 divided by number of charges per day} 75% for second most powerful spell and 50% thereafter. In addition he wants it to be usable by wizards only, so would he get an addional 30% off? Please let me know what you think?
green_yawgmoth
12-08-04, 01:52 AM Sounds about right I think, except the 30% off thing. That's only if you want to give that to him. Dm's choice, and what.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v91/yawgmoth/kittyjig.gif
Seeker95
12-08-04, 08:57 AM Staves have different pricing rules for multiple abilities. You are correct in ruling that this is not a staff. Therefore, not only does it not use the staff pricing formula, but it also does not get to use the staff multiple ability rules. It uses the standard multiple abilities rules. For a staff, the discounting applies to all spells in the staff, regardless of "similarity". For a non-staff, the abilities must be similar to get the 100%/75%/50% pricing.

Making a staff of power as anything but a staff is going to get ridiculously expensive. None of the powers in the staff are related, so no discount.

Lastly, if your wizard wants to make it usable only by wizards, I'd increase the price. No discounts for making an item do exactly what you want it to do.

Your player is better off starting over than trying to rebuild a staff of power.
crusader1179
12-08-04, 04:39 PM You made a good point Seeker95, I agree with you about the similar abilities. However, I must question you reasoning for denying the 30% discount. The DMG does say that items atunned to a specific class or alignment are at a 30% reduction. If I may refer to the Robes of the Arch Magi. Yes that is alignment based for the deduction, but the side note in the DMG does also allow for class as well. Not wanting to refute you, I appreciate your reply. I was just curious as to your thoughts on this.
green_yawgmoth
12-08-04, 04:51 PM You made a good point Seeker95, I agree with you about the similar abilities. However, I must question you reasoning for denying the 30% discount. The DMG does say that items atunned to a specific class or alignment are at a 30% reduction. If I may refer to the Robes of the Arch Magi. Yes that is alignment based for the deduction, but the side note in the DMG does also allow for class as well. Not wanting to refute you, I appreciate your reply. I was just curious as to your thoughts on this.
It's because the price decrease isn't going to affect him at all. There's no chance he's going to sell this thing.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v91/yawgmoth/kittyjig.gif
crusader1179
12-08-04, 05:20 PM Not meaning to be argumentative, but I have yet to see a pc wizard willing to part with a robe of the Arch Magi either. I have to disagree with you on this point. To still be objective, a DM cannot try a predict what profit may come to a characater in way of selling his items. Either the class restrictive discount is playable for all items, or none. Simply because an item may be deemed to valuable to sell should not effect its creation cost. Besides, I would find such an item solely the providence of wizards anyways. Therfore allowing to be usable only by that class would add support to the storie line. Your thoughts please.
zodiki
12-08-04, 05:37 PM Not meaning to be argumentative, but I have yet to see a pc wizard willing to part with a robe of the Arch Magi either. I have to disagree with you on this point. To still be objective, a DM cannot try a predict what profit may come to a characater in way of selling his items. Either the class restrictive discount is playable for all items, or none. Simply because an item may be deemed to valuable to sell should not effect its creation cost. Besides, I would find such an item solely the providence of wizards anyways. Therfore allowing to be usable only by that class would add support to the storie line. Your thoughts please.
How much would an item be that can only be used by the creator himself -- (1 / population of world) * the base cost -- in effect, free?
Ferret
12-08-04, 05:38 PM Hmmm as a player buying an item that has the price reduction in it for alignment or class as a base item in the DMG, why wouldnt you get it in making the same item?
Yes, I know that the items specifically usable by him so most like to say no to the reduction but he cant then lend it to a fellow team member either. So going back if a player can buy an item with the price reduction in the base DMG why cant he make it with the same reduction?
green_yawgmoth
12-08-04, 05:44 PM I think that 30% off for only useable by a certain ________ is way too abuseable in any case, since the player who wants item X but can't afford it could get anything (concievably) s/he wants for half price, just by making it useable only by CN bards, or whatever. It wouldn't hurt the player at all, because s/he's the one who wants to use it. And in the event that s/he wants to sell, how hard is it to find a CN bard that probably won't know the difference?

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v91/yawgmoth/kittyjig.gif
Aracor
12-08-04, 05:56 PM Generally the reason that he's saying this is something I agree with. If you're making it for yourself, the person making it is coincidentally able to meet all of the requirements. Even to the point of making it only usable by chaotic good wizards named Bob, with a piercing in their left nostril.

What do you want to bet that it's being made by Bob, and he's just been described fairly effectively? It ends up being as much a security feature as anything, and there shouldn't be a discount for that, especially if the item is pretty much optimized for the intended user and they're the only one who would want to use it anyway. Basically, if it's not actually a disadvantage, it shouldn't be a price reduction. I'm sure someone else can cite the source, but it was said before that the discounts there are for market price, because it's harder to find a particular buyer, but they can't use it to reduce the cost and/or experience required to make it in the first place.

~Aracor
crusader1179
12-08-04, 08:00 PM First off, I would like to say that you all have good points. However, I am abliged obliged to allow the deduction. The DMG only allows for a 30% reduction. So, any further reduction (such as making it for a person anmed Bob) is quite silly. Second again let me refer to the DMG. If I was a Evil wizard and I wanted to make a Robe of the Arch Magi, would I have to pay more than the price prescribed in the DMG? I would hope not. So, in that case, I would of course make the Robe usable by one of my alignment. Should I be penalized for this? I think that if a PC can come up with a sufficent reason as to why a particular item should be class restrictive... and a spell triggered Rod does seem to be the providence of wizards to me... then they should be rewarded for their creativity and allowed the deduction. If they can not come up with a reason (such as making a Ring of Protection class/alignment restrictive) then they should be denied.
crusader1179
12-08-04, 08:05 PM One more question for all you DM's. Speaking of the Robe of the Arch Magi; does anyone know if its +2 to caster level checks would stack with a Spell Penetration?
MikeTheAmazingMuskrat
12-08-04, 08:08 PM Yes, it would stack. The feat is an unnamed bonus, the robe provides an enhancement bonus.

-mike the amazing muskrat
Seeker95
12-08-04, 10:01 PM The DMG only allows for a 30% reduction. So, any further reduction (such as making it for a person anmed Bob) is quite silly. Second again let me refer to the DMG. If I was a Evil wizard and I wanted to make a Robe of the Arch Magi, would I have to pay more than the price prescribed in the DMG? I would hope not.You are switching roles in mid paragraph.

If you are a DM, you are not obliged at all. If you are a wizard, you are a player, and want to make a robe. it will cost whatever the DM says.

Technically, yes. The price reduction is in the DMG.
But DMs are supposed to be in control of their game.

Do what you want in your game.
But make a decision because it is right for your game.
Not because the pricing guidelines suggest it.
evangelion1010
12-09-04, 12:15 AM How about a +10 magical dagger useable only by Neutral rogues (thats 5 reductions, of 30% each, or almost 25% of the orginal price. )

Just because the player can do something doesn't mean he should be allowed to. would you allow an at will true-strike weapon (free action) for the technical 30k or so it costs by the rules?
Rerednaw
12-09-04, 12:01 PM My take on this (as a DM) I allow the players to get the cost reductions. 10% for the lesser restriction and 30% for the higher restriction. However, no matter how many additional restrictions you wish to add, I cap the reduction at 10+30 = 40% off of the original price.

This may cause issues dependent upon the wealth constraints in your game.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
crusader1179 12-08-04, 01:43 AM	In D&D, specifically making magic items per the DMG One of my players wished to create a magic item. Basically it is a Staff of Power that has a daily charge limit rather than the standard charges. In my interpretation the item would cease to be a staff, but would rather be treated as a Rod. So for price, instead of being a staff [spell level X caster level X 750gp 75% for second most powerful spell and 50% thereafter] it would be [spell level X caster level X 1,800 divided by {5 divided by number of charges per day} 75% for second most powerful spell and 50% thereafter. In addition he wants it to be usable by wizards only, so would he get an addional 30% off? Please let me know what you think?
green_yawgmoth 12-08-04, 01:52 AM	Sounds about right I think, except the 30% off thing. That's only if you want to give that to him. Dm's choice, and what. http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v91/yawgmoth/kittyjig.gif
Seeker95 12-08-04, 08:57 AM	Staves have different pricing rules for multiple abilities. You are correct in ruling that this is not a staff. Therefore, not only does it not use the staff pricing formula, but it also does not get to use the staff multiple ability rules. It uses the standard multiple abilities rules. For a staff, the discounting applies to all spells in the staff, regardless of "similarity". For a non-staff, the abilities must be similar to get the 100%/75%/50% pricing. Making a staff of power as anything but a staff is going to get ridiculously expensive. None of the powers in the staff are related, so no discount. Lastly, if your wizard wants to make it usable only by wizards, I'd increase the price. No discounts for making an item do exactly what you want it to do. Your player is better off starting over than trying to rebuild a staff of power.
crusader1179 12-08-04, 04:39 PM	You made a good point Seeker95, I agree with you about the similar abilities. However, I must question you reasoning for denying the 30% discount. The DMG does say that items atunned to a specific class or alignment are at a 30% reduction. If I may refer to the Robes of the Arch Magi. Yes that is alignment based for the deduction, but the side note in the DMG does also allow for class as well. Not wanting to refute you, I appreciate your reply. I was just curious as to your thoughts on this.
green_yawgmoth 12-08-04, 04:51 PM	You made a good point Seeker95, I agree with you about the similar abilities. However, I must question you reasoning for denying the 30% discount. The DMG does say that items atunned to a specific class or alignment are at a 30% reduction. If I may refer to the Robes of the Arch Magi. Yes that is alignment based for the deduction, but the side note in the DMG does also allow for class as well. Not wanting to refute you, I appreciate your reply. I was just curious as to your thoughts on this. It's because the price decrease isn't going to affect him at all. There's no chance he's going to sell this thing. http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v91/yawgmoth/kittyjig.gif
crusader1179 12-08-04, 05:20 PM	Not meaning to be argumentative, but I have yet to see a pc wizard willing to part with a robe of the Arch Magi either. I have to disagree with you on this point. To still be objective, a DM cannot try a predict what profit may come to a characater in way of selling his items. Either the class restrictive discount is playable for all items, or none. Simply because an item may be deemed to valuable to sell should not effect its creation cost. Besides, I would find such an item solely the providence of wizards anyways. Therfore allowing to be usable only by that class would add support to the storie line. Your thoughts please.
zodiki 12-08-04, 05:37 PM	Not meaning to be argumentative, but I have yet to see a pc wizard willing to part with a robe of the Arch Magi either. I have to disagree with you on this point. To still be objective, a DM cannot try a predict what profit may come to a characater in way of selling his items. Either the class restrictive discount is playable for all items, or none. Simply because an item may be deemed to valuable to sell should not effect its creation cost. Besides, I would find such an item solely the providence of wizards anyways. Therfore allowing to be usable only by that class would add support to the storie line. Your thoughts please. How much would an item be that can only be used by the creator himself -- (1 / population of world) * the base cost -- in effect, free?
Ferret 12-08-04, 05:38 PM	Hmmm as a player buying an item that has the price reduction in it for alignment or class as a base item in the DMG, why wouldnt you get it in making the same item? Yes, I know that the items specifically usable by him so most like to say no to the reduction but he cant then lend it to a fellow team member either. So going back if a player can buy an item with the price reduction in the base DMG why cant he make it with the same reduction?
green_yawgmoth 12-08-04, 05:44 PM	I think that 30% off for only useable by a certain ________ is way too abuseable in any case, since the player who wants item X but can't afford it could get anything (concievably) s/he wants for half price, just by making it useable only by CN bards, or whatever. It wouldn't hurt the player at all, because s/he's the one who wants to use it. And in the event that s/he wants to sell, how hard is it to find a CN bard that probably won't know the difference? http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v91/yawgmoth/kittyjig.gif
Aracor 12-08-04, 05:56 PM	Generally the reason that he's saying this is something I agree with. If you're making it for yourself, the person making it is coincidentally able to meet all of the requirements. Even to the point of making it only usable by chaotic good wizards named Bob, with a piercing in their left nostril. What do you want to bet that it's being made by Bob, and he's just been described fairly effectively? It ends up being as much a security feature as anything, and there shouldn't be a discount for that, especially if the item is pretty much optimized for the intended user and they're the only one who would want to use it anyway. Basically, if it's not actually a disadvantage, it shouldn't be a price reduction. I'm sure someone else can cite the source, but it was said before that the discounts there are for market price, because it's harder to find a particular buyer, but they can't use it to reduce the cost and/or experience required to make it in the first place. ~Aracor
crusader1179 12-08-04, 08:00 PM	First off, I would like to say that you all have good points. However, I am abliged obliged to allow the deduction. The DMG only allows for a 30% reduction. So, any further reduction (such as making it for a person anmed Bob) is quite silly. Second again let me refer to the DMG. If I was a Evil wizard and I wanted to make a Robe of the Arch Magi, would I have to pay more than the price prescribed in the DMG? I would hope not. So, in that case, I would of course make the Robe usable by one of my alignment. Should I be penalized for this? I think that if a PC can come up with a sufficent reason as to why a particular item should be class restrictive... and a spell triggered Rod does seem to be the providence of wizards to me... then they should be rewarded for their creativity and allowed the deduction. If they can not come up with a reason (such as making a Ring of Protection class/alignment restrictive) then they should be denied.
crusader1179 12-08-04, 08:05 PM	One more question for all you DM's. Speaking of the Robe of the Arch Magi; does anyone know if its +2 to caster level checks would stack with a Spell Penetration?
MikeTheAmazingMuskrat 12-08-04, 08:08 PM	Yes, it would stack. The feat is an unnamed bonus, the robe provides an enhancement bonus. -mike the amazing muskrat
Seeker95 12-08-04, 10:01 PM	The DMG only allows for a 30% reduction. So, any further reduction (such as making it for a person anmed Bob) is quite silly. Second again let me refer to the DMG. If I was a Evil wizard and I wanted to make a Robe of the Arch Magi, would I have to pay more than the price prescribed in the DMG? I would hope not.You are switching roles in mid paragraph. If you are a DM, you are not obliged at all. If you are a wizard, you are a player, and want to make a robe. it will cost whatever the DM says. Technically, yes. The price reduction is in the DMG. But DMs are supposed to be in control of their game. Do what you want in your game. But make a decision because it is right for your game. Not because the pricing guidelines suggest it.
evangelion1010 12-09-04, 12:15 AM	How about a +10 magical dagger useable only by Neutral rogues (thats 5 reductions, of 30% each, or almost 25% of the orginal price. ) Just because the player can do something doesn't mean he should be allowed to. would you allow an at will true-strike weapon (free action) for the technical 30k or so it costs by the rules?
Rerednaw 12-09-04, 12:01 PM	My take on this (as a DM) I allow the players to get the cost reductions. 10% for the lesser restriction and 30% for the higher restriction. However, no matter how many additional restrictions you wish to add, I cap the reduction at 10+30 = 40% off of the original price. This may cause issues dependent upon the wealth constraints in your game.