Combining Magic Items [Archive] - Wizards Community

Combining Magic Items [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
oromancer
11-11-04, 03:04 PM I have a question about creating a magic item that is really a combination of two items. For example, if I'm a 9th level wizard with the Craft Magic Arms & Armor and the Craft Wand feats, can I create a +3 longsword that's also a 9th-level wand of magic missile? Quoting the SRD:
Multiple Different Abilities
Abilities such as an attack roll bonus or saving throw bonus and a spell-like function are not similar, and their values are simply added together to determine the cost. For items that do take up a space on a character’s body each additional power not only has no discount but instead has a 50% increase in price.
By that rationale, the +3 sword/wand of magic missile would cost 18,000 + (1.5 * 6,750) = 28,125gp. This means that you're getting 50 charges of magic missile for 3,875gp less than the cost of adding another +1 enhancement! What does everyone think about this? Would you allow this in your game?
calypso
11-11-04, 03:15 PM I have a question about creating a magic item that is really a combination of two items. For example, if I'm a 9th level wizard with the Craft Magic Arms & Armor and the Craft Wand feats, can I create a +3 longsword that's also a 9th-level wand of magic missile? Quoting the SRD:

By that rationale, the +3 sword/wand of magic missile would cost 18,000 + (1.5 * 6,750) = 28,125gp. This means that you're getting 50 charges of magic missile for 3,875gp less than the cost of adding another +1 enhancement! What does everyone think about this? Would you allow this in your game?

Has anyone noticed that on the magic item creation table, it says:

"Multiple different abilities, multiply higher cost by 2", but then below it says multiply additional abilities by 1.5? What's up with that?

But, to the point, the sword has to be used by someone with magic missile on their spell list or else be used via UMD. And, personally, were I a fighter, I'd favor the extra +1 over 50 charges of MM.

Hmm... a wand of magic missile costs:

1x1x375 = 375.

A "wooden stick of magic missile", usable by anyone, costs:

1x1x1800/2 = 900. Interesting.

Okay, I'm done rambling.

Calypso
oromancer
11-11-04, 03:23 PM Oh, sorry for not specifying - it's certainly intended for use by a fighter-mage type, so you can assume the item can be used at its greatest efficiency (i.e. the PC is proficient with a longsword and has magic missile on their spell list).
oromancer
11-11-04, 03:26 PM Has anyone noticed that on the magic item creation table, it says:

"Multiple different abilities, multiply higher cost by 2", but then below it says multiply additional abilities by 1.5? What's up with that?

Actually, in the SRD, the table says 1.5 as well.

Creating Magic Items (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicItems/creatingMagicItems.htm)
calypso
11-11-04, 03:34 PM Actually, in the SRD, the table says 1.5 as well.

Creating Magic Items (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicItems/creatingMagicItems.htm)

Weird... I was looking at the WotC SRD. (http://www.wizards.com/d20/files/v35/MagicItemsI.rtf) Gonna have to start using yours instead, hehe.
oromancer
11-11-04, 03:51 PM And, personally, were I a fighter, I'd favor the extra +1 over 50 charges of MM.
Really?? You'd pass up 50 shots of an unerring range weapon that affects even incorporeal creatures and does on average as much damage as a 5th-level wizard's fireball (10-25 instead of 5-30)? Especially for a tank with super-low Dex and limited ranged attacks (assume 1 level of wizard). Not to mention the fact that your melee & ranged weapon are one in the same. I think I'd take the 50 charges of MM over even a +2 bonus...
calypso
11-11-04, 03:55 PM Really?? You'd pass up 50 shots of an unerring range weapon that affects even incorporeal creatures and does on average as much damage as a 5th-level wizard's fireball (10-25 instead of 5-30)? Especially for a tank with super-low Dex and limited ranged attacks (assume 1 level of wizard). Not to mention the fact that your melee & ranged weapon are one in the same. I think I'd take the 50 charges of MM over even a +2 bonus...

Ah yes, but my sword will still be swinging long after your MM has run out. And a single 1st level spell (shield) completely negates yours, whereas it just makes my job a bit more difficult :)

Calypso
oromancer
11-11-04, 04:12 PM Ah yes, but my sword will still be swinging long after your MM has run out. And a single 1st level spell (shield) completely negates yours, whereas it just makes my job a bit more difficult :)
That may be true, but I'm pretty much guaranteed the first shot - do you really expect a fighter in full plate with a sword & shield to throw a MM at you? After that, I'm only at a slight disadvantage attack-wise (maybe 1 or 2 points lower than your attack bonus), but I've already done some damage for free ;)
Seeker95
11-11-04, 04:23 PM 1st -- the original question of the sword ignores the fact that a sword +4 can be swung an unlimited number of times, while the +3 sword of magic missiles has only 50 magic missiles.

2nd -- the original question ignores that the +3 sword of magic missiles is only useful in the hands of an arcane caster. Kinda scary to have a +3 sword in the hands of a wizard. :D

3rd -- the original question ignores that there are plenty of "special abilities" for weapons that are flat-rate pricing instead of enhancement equivalents. The +3 sword of magic missiles is even less impressive. It runs out of special ability after fifty missiles.

4th -- the original question ignores the universal applicability of a + to hit, whereas the damage of a magic missile has a reduced benefit as a character progresses in level (assuming the 50 charges last long enough to begin with). The Fighter can apply the extra 5% to hit to every attack at every level against every opponent.

5th -- the Table inconsistency is corrected in the DMG Errata (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/er/20040125a). The correction was also applied to the SRD.

The initial conclusion is "accurate" but far less "worrisome".
A +3 sword of magic missile costs less than a +4 sword.
Whoopee. :twitch:
oromancer
11-11-04, 04:39 PM Hey Seeker, thanks for your input.

1st -- the original question of the sword ignores the fact that a sword +4 can be swung an unlimited number of times, while the +3 sword of magic missiles has only 50 magic missiles.

2nd -- the original question ignores that the +3 sword of magic missiles is only useful in the hands of an arcane caster. Kinda scary to have a +3 sword in the hands of a wizard. :D

3rd -- the original question ignores that there are plenty of "special abilities" for weapons that are flat-rate pricing instead of enhancement equivalents. The +3 sword of magic missiles is even less impressive. It runs out of special ability after fifty missiles.

4th -- the original question ignores the universal applicability of a + to hit, whereas the damage of a magic missile has a reduced benefit as a character progresses in level (assuming the 50 charges last long enough to begin with). The Fighter can apply the extra 5% to hit to every attack at every level against every opponent.

5th -- the Table inconsistency is corrected in the DMG Errata (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/er/20040125a). The correction was also applied to the SRD.

The initial conclusion is "accurate" but far less "worrisome".
A +3 sword of magic missile costs less than a +4 sword.
Whoopee. :twitch:
1st -- Technically, ranged weapons run out of ammo too. But when that happens, you just buy more. The weapon in question can certainly be "re-crafted" into another wand once the charges run out.

2nd -- I did say a post or two down that I meant for it to be used by a fighter mage.

3rd -- True enough.

4th -- See my (immediately) previous post. It's a pretty awesome alternative to carrying a bow, especially for a low-Dex tank.

5th -- N/A.

6th -- I guess this means it's probably not a big deal for me to have a PC create that item.

7th -- That twitching smiley is disturbing. I like it.

Thanks again!
mordelacke
11-11-04, 07:02 PM so maybe MM is not the most uber spell to add to a sword....

but if this is all legal like....what is a spell to add that might be a game breaker?
kSquared
11-11-04, 07:06 PM See Seeker's signature.
mordelacke
11-11-04, 07:17 PM lol....how about one that might be passed by sane dm....
calypso
11-11-04, 07:53 PM Hmm... off the top of my head? A holy longsword +5 that grants SR and greater dispel once per round. Oh, wait.

But anyway, there aren't many gamebreakers. A constant effect 3.0 haste, constant effect improved invis. Those are about the worst I can come up with outside of true strike.

Heh, I probably wouldn't allow a sword with greater magic weapon (20th level caster) 1/day. Heheh.

Calypso
oromancer
11-11-04, 08:03 PM so maybe MM is not the most uber spell to add to a sword....
but if this is all legal like....what is a spell to add that might be a game breaker?

I guess that's a good point - I don't think any spell would necessarily be a game breaker. Any spell powerful enough to do that is either high enough in level that the cost becomes prohibitive (which is why I chose MM), or above 4th level (and thus not available for wands).

Which brings me to my next question: suppose I want to make the ultimate AC-boosting ring. Let's say it grants a +2 shield bonus, +2 deflection bonus, +2 enhancement to natural armor, and a +2 armor bonus. I would say these are pretty similar things, since they're all protection items and they all increase your AC directly (that's why I didn't also throw in a Dex enhancement).
The rules say the following about similar abilities on an item:
Multiple Similar Abilities
For items with multiple similar abilities that don’t take up space on a character’s body use the following formula: Calculate the price of the single most costly ability, then add 75% of the value of the next most costly ability, plus one-half the value of any other abilities.
This means that my awesome ring would cost
8,500 + (0.75 * 8,000) + 0.5 * (8,000 + 4,000) = 20,500gp
for a +8 AC bonus. You can get the same bonus from bracers of armor alone, but at the high cost of 64,000gp. Does this make sense, because with the bracers you can still wear amulets or natural armor, rings of protection, etc.? Or, is it too underpriced?
oromancer
11-11-04, 08:10 PM Heh, I probably wouldn't allow a sword with greater magic weapon (20th level caster) 1/day. Heheh.
Why not? If anyone is willing to pay that much money/xp to craft it, they deserve it. The extra cost (assuming a wizard) is
3 (spell level) x 20 (CL) x 375 (wand) x 1.5 (different power) = 33,750gp.
That's on top of the existing price of the sword. Nice job coming up with what's probably the closest thing to a gamebreaker though. :)
mordelacke
11-11-04, 08:29 PM i dont think i would allow a Sword of True Striking either, that is crazy.

sidenote:
oromancer, i dont think just because something is possible in the nuance of the rules that it should alllows be aloud. Some things will break that game of make it unbalanced, then the DM will feel the need to do similarly to keep up with the party, and so forth. Which in the end might seem like the DM out to get ppl which should never be the case.
If something is broken, or overpowered, but alter it to make it fair or dont allow it.
calypso
11-11-04, 08:30 PM Why not? If anyone is willing to pay that much money/xp to craft it, they deserve it. The extra cost (assuming a wizard) is
3 (spell level) x 20 (CL) x 375 (wand) x 1.5 (different power) = 33,750gp.
That's on top of the existing price of the sword. Nice job coming up with what's probably the closest thing to a gamebreaker though. :)

... why not?? A +5 enhancement bonus costs 50k gold. And no, the ability costs: 3 (SL) x 20 (CL) x 1800 / 5 = 21600. And it lasts for 20 hours. And essentially, you only need 1 +5 weapon, because you could use it to make your bow +5 for the day instead. Or your axe, or whatever.

Calypso
oromancer
11-11-04, 08:34 PM i dont think i would allow a Sword of True Striking either, that is crazy.
I disagree - only because it's a standard action to activate the wand. So you can cast true strike in one round and then your next single attack the following round has a +20. This is nothing compared to greater magic weapon, which (as a 20th-level caster) you can cast every morning when you wake up, and for the next 20 hours your weapon is +5.

sidenote:
oromancer, i dont think just because something is possible in the nuance of the rules that it should alllows be aloud. Some things will break that game of make it unbalanced, then the DM will feel the need to do similarly to keep up with the party, and so forth. Which in the end might seem like the DM out to get ppl which should never be the case.
If something is broken, or overpowered, but alter it to make it fair or dont allow it.
If I thought that, mordelacke, I wouldn't be asking second opinions on the boards, now would I? :D
mordelacke
11-11-04, 08:37 PM hey, i know both sides....

as a dm..i see the need for balance of power...something i learned along the way...the same way most dm's learn it after they screw a few things up and allow things that they shouldnt have...

as a player...have no fear....i am right behind you....
calypso
11-11-04, 08:39 PM And, as to the question of the ring, no. When they say similar abilities, that is separate abilities that are not useful at the same time. For instance, that is the rule for a staff... it's basically a wand with related abilties (spells) that cannot be used simultaneously. So, you add full cost for the first, 75% of the second, and 50% of any extra. For rings with multiple abilities, note this:

Abilities such as an attack roll bonus or saving throw bonus and a spell-like function are not similar, and their values are simply added together to determine the cost. For items that do take up a space on a character’s body each additional power not only has no discount but instead has a 50% increase in price.

So your ring would be 4000 (armor) + 8000*1.5x3 (the other 3) = 40k.

Of course, the downside then is you have a bunch of mediocre increases in all your slots, as opposed to one really high one. So, in this case, if you found a ring of protection +2, it doesn't do jack for you. Whereas if you had bought bracers of armor +8, a ring of protection +2 would give you +2 to your ac.

Calypso
oromancer
11-11-04, 08:44 PM ... why not?? A +5 enhancement bonus costs 50k gold.
True, but that +5 enhancement lasts forever, not just for 50 days.

And no, the ability costs: 3 (SL) x 20 (CL) x 1800 / 5 = 21600.
Again, this is all assuming a character who can use the item in the most efficient way possible, so the normal wand cost is used. Since it's being added to another (already magic) item, the cost is increased by 50%. All I was doing was adding the utility of a wand of [whatever] to a magic sword. I guess if you have a mundane sword and only give it that ability, the cost would be 21,600gp. That is pretty unbalancing.

And essentially, you only need 1 +5 weapon, because you could use it to make your bow +5 for the day instead. Or your axe, or whatever.
Right. Great idea, by the way.
calypso
11-11-04, 08:47 PM True, but that +5 enhancement lasts forever, not just for 50 days.

No... that would be pricing a command-activated 1/day ability on a sword. No cost for multiple abilities, and it's usable forever. Making a wand of it would actually be MORE expensive.

Calypso
oromancer
11-11-04, 08:48 PM And, as to the question of the ring, no. When they say similar abilities, that is separate abilities that are not useful at the same time
...
So your ring would be 4000 (armor) + 8000*1.5x3 (the other 3) = 40k.
That's said more clearly (I think) than what's in the rules. I figured this was the case, but the "similar abilities" wording seemed to suggest otherwise. Thanks.

Of course, the downside then is you have a bunch of mediocre increases in all your slots, as opposed to one really high one. So, in this case, if you found a ring of protection +2, it doesn't do jack for you. Whereas if you had bought bracers of armor +8, a ring of protection +2 would give you +2 to your ac.
Which is why I even raised the question in the first place, since there is that downside to it. Thanks again.
oromancer
11-11-04, 08:51 PM No... that would be pricing a command-activated 1/day ability on a sword. No cost for multiple abilities, and it's usable forever. Making a wand of it would actually be MORE expensive.
Yes, I see that now. You're a better min/maxer than me. :)
calypso
11-11-04, 08:53 PM Yes, I see that now. You're a better min/maxer than me. :)

:D Ever been over to the Character Optimisation board? I'm a freakin' amateur. A hulking hurler that does like 5000 damage per round. :twitch:

Calypso

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
oromancer 11-11-04, 03:04 PM	I have a question about creating a magic item that is really a combination of two items. For example, if I'm a 9th level wizard with the Craft Magic Arms & Armor and the Craft Wand feats, can I create a +3 longsword that's also a 9th-level wand of magic missile? Quoting the SRD: Multiple Different Abilities Abilities such as an attack roll bonus or saving throw bonus and a spell-like function are not similar, and their values are simply added together to determine the cost. For items that do take up a space on a character’s body each additional power not only has no discount but instead has a 50% increase in price. By that rationale, the +3 sword/wand of magic missile would cost 18,000 + (1.5 * 6,750) = 28,125gp. This means that you're getting 50 charges of magic missile for 3,875gp less than the cost of adding another +1 enhancement! What does everyone think about this? Would you allow this in your game?
calypso 11-11-04, 03:15 PM	I have a question about creating a magic item that is really a combination of two items. For example, if I'm a 9th level wizard with the Craft Magic Arms & Armor and the Craft Wand feats, can I create a +3 longsword that's also a 9th-level wand of magic missile? Quoting the SRD: By that rationale, the +3 sword/wand of magic missile would cost 18,000 + (1.5 * 6,750) = 28,125gp. This means that you're getting 50 charges of magic missile for 3,875gp less than the cost of adding another +1 enhancement! What does everyone think about this? Would you allow this in your game? Has anyone noticed that on the magic item creation table, it says: "Multiple different abilities, multiply higher cost by 2", but then below it says multiply additional abilities by 1.5? What's up with that? But, to the point, the sword has to be used by someone with magic missile on their spell list or else be used via UMD. And, personally, were I a fighter, I'd favor the extra +1 over 50 charges of MM. Hmm... a wand of magic missile costs: 1x1x375 = 375. A "wooden stick of magic missile", usable by anyone, costs: 1x1x1800/2 = 900. Interesting. Okay, I'm done rambling. Calypso
oromancer 11-11-04, 03:23 PM	Oh, sorry for not specifying - it's certainly intended for use by a fighter-mage type, so you can assume the item can be used at its greatest efficiency (i.e. the PC is proficient with a longsword and has magic missile on their spell list).
oromancer 11-11-04, 03:26 PM	Has anyone noticed that on the magic item creation table, it says: "Multiple different abilities, multiply higher cost by 2", but then below it says multiply additional abilities by 1.5? What's up with that? Actually, in the SRD, the table says 1.5 as well. Creating Magic Items (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicItems/creatingMagicItems.htm)
calypso 11-11-04, 03:34 PM	Actually, in the SRD, the table says 1.5 as well. Creating Magic Items (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicItems/creatingMagicItems.htm) Weird... I was looking at the WotC SRD. (http://www.wizards.com/d20/files/v35/MagicItemsI.rtf) Gonna have to start using yours instead, hehe.
oromancer 11-11-04, 03:51 PM	And, personally, were I a fighter, I'd favor the extra +1 over 50 charges of MM. Really?? You'd pass up 50 shots of an unerring range weapon that affects even incorporeal creatures and does on average as much damage as a 5th-level wizard's fireball (10-25 instead of 5-30)? Especially for a tank with super-low Dex and limited ranged attacks (assume 1 level of wizard). Not to mention the fact that your melee & ranged weapon are one in the same. I think I'd take the 50 charges of MM over even a +2 bonus...
calypso 11-11-04, 03:55 PM	Really?? You'd pass up 50 shots of an unerring range weapon that affects even incorporeal creatures and does on average as much damage as a 5th-level wizard's fireball (10-25 instead of 5-30)? Especially for a tank with super-low Dex and limited ranged attacks (assume 1 level of wizard). Not to mention the fact that your melee & ranged weapon are one in the same. I think I'd take the 50 charges of MM over even a +2 bonus... Ah yes, but my sword will still be swinging long after your MM has run out. And a single 1st level spell (shield) completely negates yours, whereas it just makes my job a bit more difficult :) Calypso
oromancer 11-11-04, 04:12 PM	Ah yes, but my sword will still be swinging long after your MM has run out. And a single 1st level spell (shield) completely negates yours, whereas it just makes my job a bit more difficult :) That may be true, but I'm pretty much guaranteed the first shot - do you really expect a fighter in full plate with a sword & shield to throw a MM at you? After that, I'm only at a slight disadvantage attack-wise (maybe 1 or 2 points lower than your attack bonus), but I've already done some damage for free ;)
Seeker95 11-11-04, 04:23 PM	1st -- the original question of the sword ignores the fact that a sword +4 can be swung an unlimited number of times, while the +3 sword of magic missiles has only 50 magic missiles. 2nd -- the original question ignores that the +3 sword of magic missiles is only useful in the hands of an arcane caster. Kinda scary to have a +3 sword in the hands of a wizard. :D 3rd -- the original question ignores that there are plenty of "special abilities" for weapons that are flat-rate pricing instead of enhancement equivalents. The +3 sword of magic missiles is even less impressive. It runs out of special ability after fifty missiles. 4th -- the original question ignores the universal applicability of a + to hit, whereas the damage of a magic missile has a reduced benefit as a character progresses in level (assuming the 50 charges last long enough to begin with). The Fighter can apply the extra 5% to hit to every attack at every level against every opponent. 5th -- the Table inconsistency is corrected in the DMG Errata (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/er/20040125a). The correction was also applied to the SRD. The initial conclusion is "accurate" but far less "worrisome". A +3 sword of magic missile costs less than a +4 sword. Whoopee. :twitch:
oromancer 11-11-04, 04:39 PM	Hey Seeker, thanks for your input. 1st -- the original question of the sword ignores the fact that a sword +4 can be swung an unlimited number of times, while the +3 sword of magic missiles has only 50 magic missiles. 2nd -- the original question ignores that the +3 sword of magic missiles is only useful in the hands of an arcane caster. Kinda scary to have a +3 sword in the hands of a wizard. :D 3rd -- the original question ignores that there are plenty of "special abilities" for weapons that are flat-rate pricing instead of enhancement equivalents. The +3 sword of magic missiles is even less impressive. It runs out of special ability after fifty missiles. 4th -- the original question ignores the universal applicability of a + to hit, whereas the damage of a magic missile has a reduced benefit as a character progresses in level (assuming the 50 charges last long enough to begin with). The Fighter can apply the extra 5% to hit to every attack at every level against every opponent. 5th -- the Table inconsistency is corrected in the DMG Errata (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/er/20040125a). The correction was also applied to the SRD. The initial conclusion is "accurate" but far less "worrisome". A +3 sword of magic missile costs less than a +4 sword. Whoopee. :twitch: 1st -- Technically, ranged weapons run out of ammo too. But when that happens, you just buy more. The weapon in question can certainly be "re-crafted" into another wand once the charges run out. 2nd -- I did say a post or two down that I meant for it to be used by a fighter mage. 3rd -- True enough. 4th -- See my (immediately) previous post. It's a pretty awesome alternative to carrying a bow, especially for a low-Dex tank. 5th -- N/A. 6th -- I guess this means it's probably not a big deal for me to have a PC create that item. 7th -- That twitching smiley is disturbing. I like it. Thanks again!
mordelacke 11-11-04, 07:02 PM	so maybe MM is not the most uber spell to add to a sword.... but if this is all legal like....what is a spell to add that might be a game breaker?
kSquared 11-11-04, 07:06 PM	See Seeker's signature.
mordelacke 11-11-04, 07:17 PM	lol....how about one that might be passed by sane dm....
calypso 11-11-04, 07:53 PM	Hmm... off the top of my head? A holy longsword +5 that grants SR and greater dispel once per round. Oh, wait. But anyway, there aren't many gamebreakers. A constant effect 3.0 haste, constant effect improved invis. Those are about the worst I can come up with outside of true strike. Heh, I probably wouldn't allow a sword with greater magic weapon (20th level caster) 1/day. Heheh. Calypso
oromancer 11-11-04, 08:03 PM	so maybe MM is not the most uber spell to add to a sword.... but if this is all legal like....what is a spell to add that might be a game breaker? I guess that's a good point - I don't think any spell would necessarily be a game breaker. Any spell powerful enough to do that is either high enough in level that the cost becomes prohibitive (which is why I chose MM), or above 4th level (and thus not available for wands). Which brings me to my next question: suppose I want to make the ultimate AC-boosting ring. Let's say it grants a +2 shield bonus, +2 deflection bonus, +2 enhancement to natural armor, and a +2 armor bonus. I would say these are pretty similar things, since they're all protection items and they all increase your AC directly (that's why I didn't also throw in a Dex enhancement). The rules say the following about similar abilities on an item: Multiple Similar Abilities For items with multiple similar abilities that don’t take up space on a character’s body use the following formula: Calculate the price of the single most costly ability, then add 75% of the value of the next most costly ability, plus one-half the value of any other abilities. This means that my awesome ring would cost 8,500 + (0.75 * 8,000) + 0.5 * (8,000 + 4,000) = 20,500gp for a +8 AC bonus. You can get the same bonus from bracers of armor alone, but at the high cost of 64,000gp. Does this make sense, because with the bracers you can still wear amulets or natural armor, rings of protection, etc.? Or, is it too underpriced?
oromancer 11-11-04, 08:10 PM	Heh, I probably wouldn't allow a sword with greater magic weapon (20th level caster) 1/day. Heheh. Why not? If anyone is willing to pay that much money/xp to craft it, they deserve it. The extra cost (assuming a wizard) is 3 (spell level) x 20 (CL) x 375 (wand) x 1.5 (different power) = 33,750gp. That's on top of the existing price of the sword. Nice job coming up with what's probably the closest thing to a gamebreaker though. :)
mordelacke 11-11-04, 08:29 PM	i dont think i would allow a Sword of True Striking either, that is crazy. sidenote: oromancer, i dont think just because something is possible in the nuance of the rules that it should alllows be aloud. Some things will break that game of make it unbalanced, then the DM will feel the need to do similarly to keep up with the party, and so forth. Which in the end might seem like the DM out to get ppl which should never be the case. If something is broken, or overpowered, but alter it to make it fair or dont allow it.
calypso 11-11-04, 08:30 PM	Why not? If anyone is willing to pay that much money/xp to craft it, they deserve it. The extra cost (assuming a wizard) is 3 (spell level) x 20 (CL) x 375 (wand) x 1.5 (different power) = 33,750gp. That's on top of the existing price of the sword. Nice job coming up with what's probably the closest thing to a gamebreaker though. :) ... why not?? A +5 enhancement bonus costs 50k gold. And no, the ability costs: 3 (SL) x 20 (CL) x 1800 / 5 = 21600. And it lasts for 20 hours. And essentially, you only need 1 +5 weapon, because you could use it to make your bow +5 for the day instead. Or your axe, or whatever. Calypso
oromancer 11-11-04, 08:34 PM	i dont think i would allow a Sword of True Striking either, that is crazy. I disagree - only because it's a standard action to activate the wand. So you can cast true strike in one round and then your next single attack the following round has a +20. This is nothing compared to greater magic weapon, which (as a 20th-level caster) you can cast every morning when you wake up, and for the next 20 hours your weapon is +5. sidenote: oromancer, i dont think just because something is possible in the nuance of the rules that it should alllows be aloud. Some things will break that game of make it unbalanced, then the DM will feel the need to do similarly to keep up with the party, and so forth. Which in the end might seem like the DM out to get ppl which should never be the case. If something is broken, or overpowered, but alter it to make it fair or dont allow it. If I thought that, mordelacke, I wouldn't be asking second opinions on the boards, now would I? :D
mordelacke 11-11-04, 08:37 PM	hey, i know both sides.... as a dm..i see the need for balance of power...something i learned along the way...the same way most dm's learn it after they screw a few things up and allow things that they shouldnt have... as a player...have no fear....i am right behind you....
calypso 11-11-04, 08:39 PM	And, as to the question of the ring, no. When they say similar abilities, that is separate abilities that are not useful at the same time. For instance, that is the rule for a staff... it's basically a wand with related abilties (spells) that cannot be used simultaneously. So, you add full cost for the first, 75% of the second, and 50% of any extra. For rings with multiple abilities, note this: Abilities such as an attack roll bonus or saving throw bonus and a spell-like function are not similar, and their values are simply added together to determine the cost. For items that do take up a space on a character’s body each additional power not only has no discount but instead has a 50% increase in price. So your ring would be 4000 (armor) + 8000*1.5x3 (the other 3) = 40k. Of course, the downside then is you have a bunch of mediocre increases in all your slots, as opposed to one really high one. So, in this case, if you found a ring of protection +2, it doesn't do jack for you. Whereas if you had bought bracers of armor +8, a ring of protection +2 would give you +2 to your ac. Calypso
oromancer 11-11-04, 08:44 PM	... why not?? A +5 enhancement bonus costs 50k gold. True, but that +5 enhancement lasts forever, not just for 50 days. And no, the ability costs: 3 (SL) x 20 (CL) x 1800 / 5 = 21600. Again, this is all assuming a character who can use the item in the most efficient way possible, so the normal wand cost is used. Since it's being added to another (already magic) item, the cost is increased by 50%. All I was doing was adding the utility of a wand of [whatever] to a magic sword. I guess if you have a mundane sword and only give it that ability, the cost would be 21,600gp. That is pretty unbalancing. And essentially, you only need 1 +5 weapon, because you could use it to make your bow +5 for the day instead. Or your axe, or whatever. Right. Great idea, by the way.
calypso 11-11-04, 08:47 PM	True, but that +5 enhancement lasts forever, not just for 50 days. No... that would be pricing a command-activated 1/day ability on a sword. No cost for multiple abilities, and it's usable forever. Making a wand of it would actually be MORE expensive. Calypso
oromancer 11-11-04, 08:48 PM	And, as to the question of the ring, no. When they say similar abilities, that is separate abilities that are not useful at the same time ... So your ring would be 4000 (armor) + 8000*1.5x3 (the other 3) = 40k. That's said more clearly (I think) than what's in the rules. I figured this was the case, but the "similar abilities" wording seemed to suggest otherwise. Thanks. Of course, the downside then is you have a bunch of mediocre increases in all your slots, as opposed to one really high one. So, in this case, if you found a ring of protection +2, it doesn't do jack for you. Whereas if you had bought bracers of armor +8, a ring of protection +2 would give you +2 to your ac. Which is why I even raised the question in the first place, since there is that downside to it. Thanks again.
oromancer 11-11-04, 08:51 PM	No... that would be pricing a command-activated 1/day ability on a sword. No cost for multiple abilities, and it's usable forever. Making a wand of it would actually be MORE expensive. Yes, I see that now. You're a better min/maxer than me. :)
calypso 11-11-04, 08:53 PM	Yes, I see that now. You're a better min/maxer than me. :) :D Ever been over to the Character Optimisation board? I'm a freakin' amateur. A hulking hurler that does like 5000 damage per round. :twitch: Calypso