corrected DMG 3.5 magic item prices [Archive] - Wizards Community

corrected DMG 3.5 magic item prices [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
donm61873
10-19-04, 02:46 AM Has anyone actually recalculated the DMG magic items to their "built by the magic item creation rules" cost?

I don't want to do it, but I keep thinking I'm going to have to...
Nom
10-19-04, 04:25 AM No, because (errors aside) the list prices are definitive, while the magic item creation rules are a set of fallback guidelines in the absence of other rules.
Seeker95
10-19-04, 08:18 AM What Nom said.

You have the process backwards. The DMG items were priced based on utility, power, archetype status, and tradition. The guidelines are for us to price new magic items when we can't easily compare to an existing one.
donm61873
10-19-04, 09:18 AM Tradition? We are talking 3.5 here, right?
As someone who played with the little white books, nothing in D&D 3.5 is based on tradition.

Some (if not a lot) of the listed magic item prices are just wrong, and I was wondering if anyone else had done the hard part before I tried.

Thanks for your inspiring comments. :rolleyes:
tarkin
10-19-04, 10:55 AM No. You are misunderstanding what we are saying. It has nothing to do with tradition (that was a badly worded post).

With the exception of a few things that have errata, the prices in the DMG are not wrong, by definition they are correct.

What is going on is that you personally do not understand how to price magic items.

The official rules for pricing magic items are as follows:

1) If it is a single use item/wand price it using the caster level x spell level rules.

2) Otherwise, compare it to listed stuff in the core DMG, identical/similar stuff get priced accordingly, with minor modifications for things like changing slots/additional powers, etc. etc.

3) Next look at rules for specifically priced stuff such as stat bonuses, skill bonuses, deflection bonuses, etc. etc.

4) If the above methods do not work, then and only then do you use the a pricing bonus for weapons/armor or the spell level x caster level for other such items.

5) Then adjust price accordingly to how powerfull the DMG things.

In other words, when creating a ring of Cure light wounds at will, you do NOT start by saying 1x1 x2000, instead you start at the price of 90,000 for a ring of regeneration, and modify it from there. Same for a ring of Mage Armor, you start at the value of Bracers +4, not a first level spell.
donm61873
10-19-04, 11:03 AM No - by admission and fact, the prices in the DMG are made up and meaningless.

Unless you agree there is a problem, ignore the thread, ok?
As far as misunderstanding the problem, no I fully understand it - I just disagree with you.
Seeker95
10-19-04, 02:29 PM Get your panties out of a bind.
You can't order folks to not comment on your thread just because they disagree with you.

You want the items in the DMG to follow the formula. They don't have to. If they were even intended to follow the formula, the instructions regarding making new magic items would not have to reference existing items at all. The instructions would be to just use the guideline formulas. That the first guideline is to compare to existing items is explicit acknowledgement by the designers that the existing items are the standard. When your new item does not fit any existing standard, use the formula.

That you wish to call the default core rules wrong, and then insist on replacing them with guidelines found in the core rules is somewhat amusing. Moreso when you take the attitude you have. :rolleyes:
Seyluun
10-19-04, 06:19 PM I agree with the other people. The price of the items in the DMG are always better (as in: more balanced) than the price it would be if you used the guidelines. When you create items, sometimes guidelines are accurate, sometimes they are not: for exemple, two items emulating two spells of the same level and duration will often have same price, while one will be a lot more useful than the other. Just my opinion, though.
CrimsonRyoko
10-19-04, 06:30 PM WOW, can i play in a game you DM?! Then i can have my Ring of Constant Cure light Wounds, my Sword and bow of True Strike, and my bracelets of Mage Armor and Shield, all for under 10k!!!!!!

I Will be UBER!!!11!!!!1!!!11
donm61873
10-21-04, 11:44 AM Sigh...

Never mind, question withdrawn. Obviously the DMG is perfect in every way, totally unalterable until the next update from the high and mighty Wizards.

Score another one for the fanboys.
Seeker95
10-21-04, 12:38 PM donm...

You are making a blanket statement about the DMG. You claim that any item in the DMG that does not follow the pricing guidelines is mis-priced. But the pricing guidelines for new items explicitly say to use a smiliar item in the DMG *before* using the pricing guidelines.

The guidelines are the default *after* the DMG.

Now, because folks disagree with your blanket statement (providing core rules as their support for the disagreement) you get all huffy and make a sarcastic statement like ". Obviously the DMG is perfect in every way, totally unalterable until the next update from the high and mighty Wizards." If your view of the world and the rules is always such an "all or nothing" approach, you're going to find it very difficult to avoid ulcers and headaches.

I assume the numbers on your screen name represent a birthday.
How did you get to 31 with such an immature attitude toward those who dare disagree with you?
Zherog
10-21-04, 01:04 PM http://instagiber.net/smiliesdotcom/cwm/cwm/lurk.gif * pulls up a chair * Looks like this thread has great entertainment value. :)

***

donm61873: Is your intention to reprice every item in the DMG so that it directly follows the formula? Or is your intention less invasive (for a lack of a better word at the moment), and to only fix those you think are wrong and should use the formula rather than some "random" number?

Perhaps you could mention just one or two items in the DMG you think should be corrected?
donm61873
10-21-04, 01:15 PM Actually, my intention was not to let the thread grow further :)

However, here was my grand plan:

Take a spreadsheet with all the formulas calculated out, with an eye to where big differences are, see the "why's" of those big differences, adjust the formulas as necessary to accomodate those differences, remove some I think are silly, add some I think are needed (ioun stones, tomes), and use the spreadsheet to see how small changes to the formula affect prices overall from a metadesign perspective.

I'm also interested in comparing the results to the alternate system presented in the Mystic Eye Games "Artificer's Handbook".

Unfortunately, what I got as an answer to a simple yes or no question was "You dare to question the printed material?" or even better, "Don't you know that the printed numbers are valid, and the formula just a guideline", or the best response, "j00 r teh n00b, 1 r 133t".

Sigh.

Hope that makes more sense for those of you who are watching from the sidelines.
Zherog
10-21-04, 01:25 PM So let's see if I understand...

It sounds to me as though your intention is to design "better" formula to apply to items in the future. Step one is to analyze the existing items, see where there's a difference, figure out why there's a difference and go from there. The end goal would be to have a formula that was effective 99+% of the time.

Do I have the intention correct?

***

To answer your original question, though - no, I've never analyzed item prices and don't have anything to offer you as a starting point. However (assuming my assumptions above are correct) that doesn't mean I'm not interested in seeing where this sort of discussion leads. I'm also willing to wager that some of the people who responded with answers you didn't like would also be interested in such a discussion, had they understood the intention. :)
donm61873
10-21-04, 01:39 PM You've hit it on the head, for what it matters.

So much for asking a simple yes or no question. Ask, and you get a bunch of people giving you their opinions, none of which involve answering your original question :rolleyes:
Zherog
10-21-04, 01:46 PM I answered the original question. :)

And, now that the question has been stated differently, it's possible other people might answer the question, and possibly even offer you assistance on ways to go about it.
Keenath
10-21-04, 02:18 PM Given that your original post consisted three lines, and your full explanation that actually made sense took up at least ten, it probably isn't that shocking that people misunderstood your intent.

You also referred to the DMG prices as "meaningless", which is downright incorrect. They are meaningful, just not mathematically derived.

I don't think you really have a position to roll your eyes at the rest of us.
SunaRyu
10-21-04, 05:26 PM - About the original question : for a part of it yes !

- What I think about it ? Well it's nice to do a 3.5 (to correct/improved/ ... the 3.0) and add rules to create magic items. But if the item show in the book don't follow the rule well it's quite strange.

The big trouble about the dmg prices come when we want a modified item, like for exemple : I want to create a druid's vestment that do 2 (or 3) time instead of one by day. How much will it cost ? When we can't find the right formula we can't multiply it.
Keenath
10-21-04, 06:24 PM What I think about it ? Well it's nice to do a 3.5 (to correct/improved/ ... the 3.0) and add rules to create magic items. But if the item show in the book don't follow the rule well it's quite strange.

It really isn't that odd. As noted earlier in the thread, many spells or abilities would be abusive if you blindly followed the pricing guide in the DMG. A ring of Cure Light at will was mentioned. It's worth far, far more than the mere 2000 gp that such a thing would run you by the DMG rules. It's worth more than 10 *times* that much.

The prices in the DMG aren't arbitrary, as so many people seem to think. They were arrived at by balancing the cost against the effects the item has on the game, through playtesting and careful examination. Did you think there was a WOTC intern who went nuts with a pricing gun?

As far as items that have extra uses per day, it's not that hard, really. If you want it to work twice as often, it's worth about twice the cost. If only one of its powers works twice as often, then you need to work out what percent of the total 'usefulness' of the item that power represents, and double that percentage of the market value.

No, it isn't exact or mathematically precise. D&D isn't a mathematical game; it's creative, and creative players can manipulate the pure math in ways that could ruin a fun game. It's more important to have play balance than that every item fit into the structure of some Grand Unified Theory of Items.
smrtgmp
10-21-04, 06:51 PM Did you think there was a WOTC intern who went nuts with a pricing gun?

Now that would make for an amusing smilie! :)

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
donm61873 10-19-04, 02:46 AM	Has anyone actually recalculated the DMG magic items to their "built by the magic item creation rules" cost? I don't want to do it, but I keep thinking I'm going to have to...
Nom 10-19-04, 04:25 AM	No, because (errors aside) the list prices are definitive, while the magic item creation rules are a set of fallback guidelines in the absence of other rules.
Seeker95 10-19-04, 08:18 AM	What Nom said. You have the process backwards. The DMG items were priced based on utility, power, archetype status, and tradition. The guidelines are for us to price new magic items when we can't easily compare to an existing one.
donm61873 10-19-04, 09:18 AM	Tradition? We are talking 3.5 here, right? As someone who played with the little white books, nothing in D&D 3.5 is based on tradition. Some (if not a lot) of the listed magic item prices are just wrong, and I was wondering if anyone else had done the hard part before I tried. Thanks for your inspiring comments. :rolleyes:
tarkin 10-19-04, 10:55 AM	No. You are misunderstanding what we are saying. It has nothing to do with tradition (that was a badly worded post). With the exception of a few things that have errata, the prices in the DMG are not wrong, by definition they are correct. What is going on is that you personally do not understand how to price magic items. The official rules for pricing magic items are as follows: 1) If it is a single use item/wand price it using the caster level x spell level rules. 2) Otherwise, compare it to listed stuff in the core DMG, identical/similar stuff get priced accordingly, with minor modifications for things like changing slots/additional powers, etc. etc. 3) Next look at rules for specifically priced stuff such as stat bonuses, skill bonuses, deflection bonuses, etc. etc. 4) If the above methods do not work, then and only then do you use the a pricing bonus for weapons/armor or the spell level x caster level for other such items. 5) Then adjust price accordingly to how powerfull the DMG things. In other words, when creating a ring of Cure light wounds at will, you do NOT start by saying 1x1 x2000, instead you start at the price of 90,000 for a ring of regeneration, and modify it from there. Same for a ring of Mage Armor, you start at the value of Bracers +4, not a first level spell.
donm61873 10-19-04, 11:03 AM	No - by admission and fact, the prices in the DMG are made up and meaningless. Unless you agree there is a problem, ignore the thread, ok? As far as misunderstanding the problem, no I fully understand it - I just disagree with you.
Seeker95 10-19-04, 02:29 PM	Get your panties out of a bind. You can't order folks to not comment on your thread just because they disagree with you. You want the items in the DMG to follow the formula. They don't have to. If they were even intended to follow the formula, the instructions regarding making new magic items would not have to reference existing items at all. The instructions would be to just use the guideline formulas. That the first guideline is to compare to existing items is explicit acknowledgement by the designers that the existing items are the standard. When your new item does not fit any existing standard, use the formula. That you wish to call the default core rules wrong, and then insist on replacing them with guidelines found in the core rules is somewhat amusing. Moreso when you take the attitude you have. :rolleyes:
Seyluun 10-19-04, 06:19 PM	I agree with the other people. The price of the items in the DMG are always better (as in: more balanced) than the price it would be if you used the guidelines. When you create items, sometimes guidelines are accurate, sometimes they are not: for exemple, two items emulating two spells of the same level and duration will often have same price, while one will be a lot more useful than the other. Just my opinion, though.
CrimsonRyoko 10-19-04, 06:30 PM	WOW, can i play in a game you DM?! Then i can have my Ring of Constant Cure light Wounds, my Sword and bow of True Strike, and my bracelets of Mage Armor and Shield, all for under 10k!!!!!! I Will be UBER!!!11!!!!1!!!11
donm61873 10-21-04, 11:44 AM	Sigh... Never mind, question withdrawn. Obviously the DMG is perfect in every way, totally unalterable until the next update from the high and mighty Wizards. Score another one for the fanboys.
Seeker95 10-21-04, 12:38 PM	donm... You are making a blanket statement about the DMG. You claim that any item in the DMG that does not follow the pricing guidelines is mis-priced. But the pricing guidelines for new items explicitly say to use a smiliar item in the DMG before using the pricing guidelines. The guidelines are the default after the DMG. Now, because folks disagree with your blanket statement (providing core rules as their support for the disagreement) you get all huffy and make a sarcastic statement like ". Obviously the DMG is perfect in every way, totally unalterable until the next update from the high and mighty Wizards." If your view of the world and the rules is always such an "all or nothing" approach, you're going to find it very difficult to avoid ulcers and headaches. I assume the numbers on your screen name represent a birthday. How did you get to 31 with such an immature attitude toward those who dare disagree with you?
Zherog 10-21-04, 01:04 PM	http://instagiber.net/smiliesdotcom/cwm/cwm/lurk.gif * pulls up a chair * Looks like this thread has great entertainment value. :) *** donm61873: Is your intention to reprice every item in the DMG so that it directly follows the formula? Or is your intention less invasive (for a lack of a better word at the moment), and to only fix those you think are wrong and should use the formula rather than some "random" number? Perhaps you could mention just one or two items in the DMG you think should be corrected?
donm61873 10-21-04, 01:15 PM	Actually, my intention was not to let the thread grow further :) However, here was my grand plan: Take a spreadsheet with all the formulas calculated out, with an eye to where big differences are, see the "why's" of those big differences, adjust the formulas as necessary to accomodate those differences, remove some I think are silly, add some I think are needed (ioun stones, tomes), and use the spreadsheet to see how small changes to the formula affect prices overall from a metadesign perspective. I'm also interested in comparing the results to the alternate system presented in the Mystic Eye Games "Artificer's Handbook". Unfortunately, what I got as an answer to a simple yes or no question was "You dare to question the printed material?" or even better, "Don't you know that the printed numbers are valid, and the formula just a guideline", or the best response, "j00 r teh n00b, 1 r 133t". Sigh. Hope that makes more sense for those of you who are watching from the sidelines.
Zherog 10-21-04, 01:25 PM	So let's see if I understand... It sounds to me as though your intention is to design "better" formula to apply to items in the future. Step one is to analyze the existing items, see where there's a difference, figure out why there's a difference and go from there. The end goal would be to have a formula that was effective 99+% of the time. Do I have the intention correct? *** To answer your original question, though - no, I've never analyzed item prices and don't have anything to offer you as a starting point. However (assuming my assumptions above are correct) that doesn't mean I'm not interested in seeing where this sort of discussion leads. I'm also willing to wager that some of the people who responded with answers you didn't like would also be interested in such a discussion, had they understood the intention. :)
donm61873 10-21-04, 01:39 PM	You've hit it on the head, for what it matters. So much for asking a simple yes or no question. Ask, and you get a bunch of people giving you their opinions, none of which involve answering your original question :rolleyes:
Zherog 10-21-04, 01:46 PM	I answered the original question. :) And, now that the question has been stated differently, it's possible other people might answer the question, and possibly even offer you assistance on ways to go about it.
Keenath 10-21-04, 02:18 PM	Given that your original post consisted three lines, and your full explanation that actually made sense took up at least ten, it probably isn't that shocking that people misunderstood your intent. You also referred to the DMG prices as "meaningless", which is downright incorrect. They are meaningful, just not mathematically derived. I don't think you really have a position to roll your eyes at the rest of us.
SunaRyu 10-21-04, 05:26 PM	- About the original question : for a part of it yes ! - What I think about it ? Well it's nice to do a 3.5 (to correct/improved/ ... the 3.0) and add rules to create magic items. But if the item show in the book don't follow the rule well it's quite strange. The big trouble about the dmg prices come when we want a modified item, like for exemple : I want to create a druid's vestment that do 2 (or 3) time instead of one by day. How much will it cost ? When we can't find the right formula we can't multiply it.
Keenath 10-21-04, 06:24 PM	What I think about it ? Well it's nice to do a 3.5 (to correct/improved/ ... the 3.0) and add rules to create magic items. But if the item show in the book don't follow the rule well it's quite strange. It really isn't that odd. As noted earlier in the thread, many spells or abilities would be abusive if you blindly followed the pricing guide in the DMG. A ring of Cure Light at will was mentioned. It's worth far, far more than the mere 2000 gp that such a thing would run you by the DMG rules. It's worth more than 10 times that much. The prices in the DMG aren't arbitrary, as so many people seem to think. They were arrived at by balancing the cost against the effects the item has on the game, through playtesting and careful examination. Did you think there was a WOTC intern who went nuts with a pricing gun? As far as items that have extra uses per day, it's not that hard, really. If you want it to work twice as often, it's worth about twice the cost. If only one of its powers works twice as often, then you need to work out what percent of the total 'usefulness' of the item that power represents, and double that percentage of the market value. No, it isn't exact or mathematically precise. D&D isn't a mathematical game; it's creative, and creative players can manipulate the pure math in ways that could ruin a fun game. It's more important to have play balance than that every item fit into the structure of some Grand Unified Theory of Items.
smrtgmp 10-21-04, 06:51 PM	Did you think there was a WOTC intern who went nuts with a pricing gun? Now that would make for an amusing smilie! :)