Post/Author/DateTime	Post
fruits and vegetables 02-19-04, 05:41 AM	i know the whole arguement about if the item even works or not. this concerns that question. what if an archmage with mastery of shaping creates an antimagic item and designates the area not to be affected is the area within the item. would that not just sidestep that whole arguement? can an archmage apply his high-arcana abilities to items? i would think he could but i dont know what the cost modifier would be. maybe an extra 25,000GP? i beleave that is the unnofficial price modifier (using arms and equipment as the guideline) for emmulating class abilities. thoughts?
flyingpooch 02-19-04, 07:13 AM	No one has a problem with a beholders eye radiating anti-magic. The source can be magical (as in a beholders eye), and radiate anti-magic. An item would do this all around, rather than in one direction. Think of anti-magic as light, and the magic item as the sorce of that light. I think anti-magic items are perfectly fine. If you got a whole wack of beholders, shrunk them really really small, and attached them (with magical glue) back to back, I don't think people would have a problem with the logistics of that beholder creature radiating anti-magic in all directions... they may have problems with the logistics of a lot of other things to do with that idea, but the argument that is on the same grounds as an magic item radiating anti-magic, shouldn't be it.
DDRGasm 02-19-04, 07:29 AM	I'm generally against the PC's creating new items not normally found in the DMG or at least some published source I really trust. To custom make something like this, I might say it takes twice the time, several knowledge or spellcraft checks, and I would set the price to create fairly high. From a balance standpoint, there's nothing terribly wrong with an anti-magic field generating item. At higher levels, a Sorcerer could cast the spell dozens of times per day. However, antimagic is a very powerful effect, and I may impose some other restrictions, such as it cannot be continuous, but can be used a certain number of times per day, with a duration as per the spell. But that's all me and my rulings. Your question is the concept of making a magic item that radiates anti-magic. While it is a logical paradox, I see no reason why it couldn't be done eventually. I mean, magic creates the anti-magic - and it doesn't immediately dispel itself. For a flavor point, perhaps say it's an anti-magic item, sort of in a way anti-matter is used in science fiction. You had to infuse anti-magic within the item, instead of regular magic. Whatever works for you. I see nothing inherently wrong with an item that casts a 6th level spell (There's nothing wrong with a Scroll of Antimagic Field, after all). But, if it turns into one of those items that automatically wins encounters for the party without them expending any resources, then I'd think twice about allowing it.
fruits and vegetables 02-19-04, 07:40 AM	well, i really did not want to get into another discussion of an anti-magic item. my apologies that my topic seamed to infer that. i have already made up my mind that it can work. i wanted to see input on how much an item (any item i guess) would cost using an archmage's high-arcana abilities. the unofficial guideline for class abilities is 25,000GP. do you think this is appropriate for this?
Heron_Marked_Blade 02-19-04, 08:24 AM	I'll try to find the ruling for you, but its been stated that archmages cannot use their high arcana abilities (Mastery of Shaping/Elements) on spells cast from items. That means no Shaping the fireball from your Staff of Fire, or changing it to cold damage. So no, the archmage could not shape the antimagic field emanating from the item. [Edit: in the Main 3.5 FAQ. It's specifically addressing staffs, but if you can't apply your Shaping ability to spells cast from staffs (where you use your own ability modifiers and caster level), then I see no way you could apply it to an item.]
fruits and vegetables 02-19-04, 08:35 AM	yeah, i know they can't use it when casting spells from items. i am talking about creating items with the high-arcan in them. it would'nt be just for them. they could create the items for others. i guess 25,000GP is a nice price to tack on to item creating using high-arcana. i guess i'll go with that since i dont think there are any items to extrapolate from. your comment does give me another idea. creating high-arcana metamagic rods similar to metamagic rods. that is a cool idea.
tarkin 02-19-04, 09:02 AM	Keep in mind that the abilities were designed as PRestige Class feats because they were supposed to be significantly more powerfull than regular feats. As such the worst one should be more expensive than the best of the metamagic feats.
fruits and vegetables 02-19-04, 09:19 AM	point taken. they will most definetly be more expensive. but, i don't think a high-arcana rod effecting 3rd level spells or lower should cost more than a metamagic rod effecting 9th level spells. it depends on the type of metamagic rod too. a greater metamagic rod of quicken spell is more expensive than a greater metamagic rod of still spell.
Vorpal Warhammer 02-19-04, 09:33 AM	My problem with an Antimagic item is that it takes a Personal range emanation spell and turns it into an object. What's to keep you from creating a candle with Antimagic Field cast on it, and then putting that candle in a bullseye lantern? Now you have a permanent Cone of Antimagic that can easily be pointed at your enemies while YOU get to keep all your buff spells. :turkey:
Heron_Marked_Blade 02-19-04, 09:34 AM	Originally posted by fruits and vegetables point taken. they will most definetly be more expensive. but, i don't think a high-arcana rod effecting 3rd level spells or lower should cost more than a metamagic rod effecting 9th level spells. Any wizard can take Quicken spell, or any metamagic feat. Only an archmage gets high arcana. Spell Power: emulated by numerous items (orange ioun stones, etc.), should be able to be placed in a metamagic rod Arcane Fire: unique ability, shouldn't be emulatable Spell-like Ability: emulated by Innate Spell (requires Quicken Spell, Still Spell, Silent Spell), could possibly be placed in a metamagic rod Mastery of Counterspelling: variation of spell turning, but applies to all counterspell attempts (if the spell is targetted on the archmage), could possibly be placed in a metamagic rod Mastery of Elements: equivalent to taking Energy Substitution five times, should be as expensive to emulate (i.e. 5x the cost of a metamagic feat) in a metamagic rod Arcane Reach: emulates Reach Spell (+2 adjustment), should be able to be placed in a metamagic rod Mastery of Shaping: much better version of Sculpt Spell, shouldn't be emulatable (or if it is, should be more expensive than any metamagic feat, even Quicken) With Mastery of Shaping and Arcane Fire, you're dealing with abilities that only Archmages get. You can emulate the other high arcana abilites through other feats, so I can see them being placed in metamagic rods (although very expensively). These two, however, are unique. I wouldn't let them be placed into rods.
fruits and vegetables 02-20-04, 01:40 AM	mastery of elements: you are forgetting about adjusting price for multiple similar effects. it should'nt be x5 price. i think it will be something around x3 or x3.25 the total cost overall using energy substitution as the model for determining its price. that seems reasonable. mastery of shaping: i am fine with it being emulable. agree, should be more expensive than quicken is per power of the rod. this obviously means that as i said earlier a 9th quicken rod will be more expensive than a 3rd level shaping rod. other stuff i pretty much agree with you.
adiaven 02-20-04, 01:46 AM	correct me if I'm wrong, but if you were wearing such an item, you would still get hit by magic. The spell is not destroyed or stoped by anti-magic field, it is just supressed when in the field. So a meteor swarm or cone of cold still hit's the wearer of the item (but not anything around the wearer)
Kyuketsukiouji 02-20-04, 08:31 AM	Originally posted by Vorpal Warhammer My problem with an Antimagic item is that it takes a Personal range emanation spell and turns it into an object. What's to keep you from creating a candle with Antimagic Field cast on it, and then putting that candle in a bullseye lantern? Now you have a permanent Cone of Antimagic that can easily be pointed at your enemies while YOU get to keep all your buff spells. :turkey: Brilliant item idea! Kudos to you! Lantern of the Beholder's Gaze sounds sufficiently evil and confusing... *schemes*
fruits and vegetables 02-20-04, 09:37 AM	Originally posted by adiaven correct me if I'm wrong, but if you were wearing such an item, you would still get hit by magic. The spell is not destroyed or stoped by anti-magic field, it is just supressed when in the field. So a meteor swarm or cone of cold still hit's the wearer of the item (but not anything around the wearer) actually no. this item disrupts line of effect. the short is you can not cast anything outside the area, you can cast personal affecting spells on yourself, spells cast at you from outside the area do not effect you, and items and everything magic within the area work but that's about it. it is pretty much the exact same as a normal antimagic field but you can retain all you magic buffs.
Heron_Marked_Blade 02-20-04, 09:45 AM	You will still get hit by the fireball that detonates 15 feet away. You cannot be specifically targetted by spells, but the lightning bolt, cone of cold, {insert area effect spell here} spell will hit you if it would normally pass through your space. The antimagic field suppresses magic effects within its area; it doesn't dispel them.
The Simbul 02-20-04, 06:47 PM	The ability for magic items to duplicate effects specifically tied to a class-based ability was virtually removed from 3.5, specifically with regards to using the ability as a crafting prerequisite. The crafting prerequisite abilities for creating magic items were replaced with spells that emulated a similar effect. The best example of this being the Stone of Good Luck, which originally required the crafter to have the granted power of the Luck Domain. While items like a Ring of Evasion still exist it bears noting that an PrC exclusive Archmage High Arcana ability is far superior to a standard defensive ability like evasion, which is available to 3 different core classes. Considering the fact most of the Archmage High Arcana abilities (including the one you mentioned) are more potent that most Epic Feats, then I would say an item cannot duplicate or store uses of the ability in question. As for the intended use of Mastery of Shaping and an Antimagic Field, I would rule that would would be effected by any spells that include you or the area which you exempted from the Antimagic effect. The intent of the Antimagic Field spell is to negate virtually all magic, and the sole balancing factor of the spells potent effect is that the caster suffers the same detriments of the spell. Metagaming and ambiguous "line of effect" jargan arguements can be used to pry loopholes in the spells original intent, and should be ripotisted with a sufficient slap from an errata or a DM rule 0.
fruits and vegetables 02-20-04, 08:26 PM	anyway............whatever. i think i have a fair assessment of value for the items. i do not care if anything has been removed or not either. nor do i think the value of the classes abilities are epic. +1 caster level....yep that is epic. tomato tomaato you do things your way, ill do them mine.