Inherent Bonuses [Archive] - Wizards Community

Inherent Bonuses [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Tequila_Sunrise
04-02-07, 10:42 PM I don't like that inherent bonuses are so weighted towards high levels, nor that it's more appealing to wait for a +5 bonus than to accumulate bonuses one by one. I've come up with the best solution that I can, but I want to tap your creativity too.

So, assuming that you feel as I do, how would you make inherent bonuses applicable to all levels and appealing as a gradual investment like other items?
calronmoonflower
04-03-07, 04:59 AM I don't like that inherent bonuses are so weighted towards high levels, nor that it's more appealing to wait for a +5 bonus than to accumulate bonuses one by one. I've come up with the best solution that I can, but I want to tap your creativity too.

So, assuming that you feel as I do, how would you make inherent bonuses applicable to all levels and appealing as a gradual investment like other items?

Do you realize inherent bonuses don't stack.

If you get +1, then +2 inherent bonuses to the same ability you end up with +2 to that ability, but that would be increasing them 1 point at a time.

If you have a item that has the Wish or [i]Miracle{/i] spells you can have a wizard make them without the huge Xp cost.
Witch
04-03-07, 06:34 AM Do you realize inherent bonuses don't stack.
I believe he does.

But those bonuses should stack, because they increase in price linearly.
Merestil Haye
04-03-07, 07:01 AM There's a general principle for other bonuses which can be increased that the market price depends on the square of the bonus. Pretty much any enhancement bonus (to AC, attack & damage, abilities), any other AC modifier given, competence bonus for skills, and so on.

I actually reach the opposite conclusion to Witch - namely that they don't stack because they're linear. If they were meant to stack, they'd have a price progression based on the square of the bonus.

Looking at things like that, you're actually getting them cheaper this way. (And yes, this conclusion surprises me a bit too.)

Consider the cost for both systems, assuming you buy a +1 inherent, then upgrade to +2, then +3 and so on.

Linear Square
Bonus Price Price
+1 1 IBU 1 IBU
+2 3 IBU 4 IBU
+3 6 IBU 9 IBU
+4 10 IBU 16 IBU
+5 15 IBU 25 IBU1 IBU = the amount it would cost to buy a +1 inherent bonus to one ability. It works out that going from a +1 ability to a +2 ability trebles the cost under the current system, but would quadruple it if the bonus was a more conventional square-of-bonus system, and that the difference grows as the bonus increases.

By just going straight for a +5 increase you save about twice the amount you are paying for the increase, or ten times the cost of a +1 increase - which is a lot. If you go to a square of bonus costing scheme, cut the price of 1 IBU (currently 27,500gp) a great deal to maintain some sort of fiscal viability.

As for making them more viable at lower levels, I don't think they should be competing with enhancement bonuses to abilities, because they cannot be stripped away - not by anything (unless the DM makes stuff up - which is pretty much in the DM job description but still). They are high cost for a reason. I strongly advise leaving them there.
Arcade
04-03-07, 09:33 AM I don't think making them cheaper is the answer. Look at it this way- characters already get bonuses to stats, it happens once every four levels.

As for Merestil's chart, this only applies if you take each and every stat boosting item from 1 to 5. If you just take the +5, it is much cheaper, which is the original poster's point.

Perhaps then the idea should be to make a +5 item worth 15 IBU and change the pricing chart. However, you can use a series of smaller books to get the same bonus later on. For instance, let's say you already have a +3 inherent bonus and find another stat boosting item of +2. You can read it and now you are 3/4 of the way to getting your next inherent bonus. (you already had 6 IBU from having a +3 and added another 3 IBU with the +2 manual/tome to be at 6 IBU). It would be similar to a fighter starting with a small magical weapon and keep adding enchantments to it- the end price is the same either way, it's just you can take the blow slowly over time.
Tequila_Sunrise
04-03-07, 01:06 PM Do you realize inherent bonuses don't stack.
First of all, questions have question marks at their end, not periods. Second, you may not have intended your question to be snide, but it sounded that way.
Tequila_Sunrise
04-03-07, 01:07 PM Here's the best solution to my own problem that I've come up with, maybe it'll get some creative juices flowing. Obviously, this spell is way too good if you feel that inherent bonuses should be restricted to high levels and true wish related sources. Effectively, this spell puts inherent bonuses on par with magical weapons, costwise, which is where I feel they should be.

Lesser Wish
Sor/Wiz: 3
Components: V, S
Lesser wish functions as the other wish spells, with regards to casting unknown spells of lower spell levels. Lesser wish's only other use is to grant inherent ability bonuses. Each casting grants a +1 bonus to a single ability, which stacks with other inherent bonuses only if the caster's level is four times that of the new bonus. This use of lesser wish requires diamond dust worth 2,000 gp (first bonus), 6,000 gp (second), 10,000 gp (third), 14,000 gp (fourth) or 18,000 gp (fifth).
Arcade
04-03-07, 01:37 PM I disagree that weapon bonuses and inherent bonuses should be the same. An inherent bonus gives you much more, especially for spellcasters. You should be looking at wondrous items instead- amulet of helath, belt of giant strength, etc. This spell essentially grants a slotless ability boost item that stacks with nearly every other bonus since it is inherent and can never be removed. It is also immune to anit-magic and dispel magic. If you use the table for creating magic items, then this means this item should cost at least 4 times as much as the normal ability boost items, and that's disregarding the permanent, non-removable cost. And no one ever complains that ability boosting items are too expensive because they are still the number one magic item choice.

So, if we were to use those guidelines and make it 4x expensive, the bonuses should be:
+1: 4,000 gold
+2: 16,000 gold
+3: 36,000 gold
+4: 64,000 gold
+5: 100,000 gold

Note, these are still much cheaper than the various tomes and manuals. And you can make them more accessible by trading in some of the cost for XP. For example, make it 3000 gold and 200XP for the +1 cost, 12000 gold and and 800XP for +2, etc. This puts it in the hands of your players by about 4th level.

I still feel this is a little inexpensive. I would suggest using these costs AND adding an XP component, say 100XP per 1000 gold piece cost. +1 is 4000 gold and 400 XP, or 6000 gold to have someone cast it on you. This seems like about the right cost to me. Remember that at the end of the day, your characters will likely have both inherent bonus and item bonus, so they will likely go back and forth between these two bonuses as the cost allows.

PS. the spell in general is a good idea.
calronmoonflower
04-03-07, 03:49 PM First of all, questions have question marks at their end, not periods. Second, you may not have intended your question to be snide, but it sounded that way.

I truly didn't mean it that way. Also I included afterward how the inherent bonus could increase one by one.
Tequila_Sunrise
04-03-07, 09:03 PM Thanks for the input, all. I'm seeing a lot of knee-jerk reactions to a new idea, but I could be wrong.
JulesCARV
04-11-07, 10:06 PM What about just allowing inherent bonuses to stack, with the stipulation that they can't exceed +5 pre-epic? That way, you can read a Manual of Gainful Exercise +1 at mid levels and not have it be totally superceded at high levels. It's a simple solution, but I don't see why it wouldn't work.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Tequila_Sunrise 04-02-07, 10:42 PM	I don't like that inherent bonuses are so weighted towards high levels, nor that it's more appealing to wait for a +5 bonus than to accumulate bonuses one by one. I've come up with the best solution that I can, but I want to tap your creativity too. So, assuming that you feel as I do, how would you make inherent bonuses applicable to all levels and appealing as a gradual investment like other items?
calronmoonflower 04-03-07, 04:59 AM	I don't like that inherent bonuses are so weighted towards high levels, nor that it's more appealing to wait for a +5 bonus than to accumulate bonuses one by one. I've come up with the best solution that I can, but I want to tap your creativity too. So, assuming that you feel as I do, how would you make inherent bonuses applicable to all levels and appealing as a gradual investment like other items? Do you realize inherent bonuses don't stack. If you get +1, then +2 inherent bonuses to the same ability you end up with +2 to that ability, but that would be increasing them 1 point at a time. If you have a item that has the Wish or [i]Miracle{/i] spells you can have a wizard make them without the huge Xp cost.
Witch 04-03-07, 06:34 AM	Do you realize inherent bonuses don't stack. I believe he does. But those bonuses should stack, because they increase in price linearly.
Merestil Haye 04-03-07, 07:01 AM	There's a general principle for other bonuses which can be increased that the market price depends on the square of the bonus. Pretty much any enhancement bonus (to AC, attack & damage, abilities), any other AC modifier given, competence bonus for skills, and so on. I actually reach the opposite conclusion to Witch - namely that they don't stack because they're linear. If they were meant to stack, they'd have a price progression based on the square of the bonus. Looking at things like that, you're actually getting them cheaper this way. (And yes, this conclusion surprises me a bit too.) Consider the cost for both systems, assuming you buy a +1 inherent, then upgrade to +2, then +3 and so on. Linear Square Bonus Price Price +1 1 IBU 1 IBU +2 3 IBU 4 IBU +3 6 IBU 9 IBU +4 10 IBU 16 IBU +5 15 IBU 25 IBU1 IBU = the amount it would cost to buy a +1 inherent bonus to one ability. It works out that going from a +1 ability to a +2 ability trebles the cost under the current system, but would quadruple it if the bonus was a more conventional square-of-bonus system, and that the difference grows as the bonus increases. By just going straight for a +5 increase you save about twice the amount you are paying for the increase, or ten times the cost of a +1 increase - which is a lot. If you go to a square of bonus costing scheme, cut the price of 1 IBU (currently 27,500gp) a great deal to maintain some sort of fiscal viability. As for making them more viable at lower levels, I don't think they should be competing with enhancement bonuses to abilities, because they cannot be stripped away - not by anything (unless the DM makes stuff up - which is pretty much in the DM job description but still). They are high cost for a reason. I strongly advise leaving them there.
Arcade 04-03-07, 09:33 AM	I don't think making them cheaper is the answer. Look at it this way- characters already get bonuses to stats, it happens once every four levels. As for Merestil's chart, this only applies if you take each and every stat boosting item from 1 to 5. If you just take the +5, it is much cheaper, which is the original poster's point. Perhaps then the idea should be to make a +5 item worth 15 IBU and change the pricing chart. However, you can use a series of smaller books to get the same bonus later on. For instance, let's say you already have a +3 inherent bonus and find another stat boosting item of +2. You can read it and now you are 3/4 of the way to getting your next inherent bonus. (you already had 6 IBU from having a +3 and added another 3 IBU with the +2 manual/tome to be at 6 IBU). It would be similar to a fighter starting with a small magical weapon and keep adding enchantments to it- the end price is the same either way, it's just you can take the blow slowly over time.
Tequila_Sunrise 04-03-07, 01:06 PM	Do you realize inherent bonuses don't stack. First of all, questions have question marks at their end, not periods. Second, you may not have intended your question to be snide, but it sounded that way.
Tequila_Sunrise 04-03-07, 01:07 PM	Here's the best solution to my own problem that I've come up with, maybe it'll get some creative juices flowing. Obviously, this spell is way too good if you feel that inherent bonuses should be restricted to high levels and true wish related sources. Effectively, this spell puts inherent bonuses on par with magical weapons, costwise, which is where I feel they should be. Lesser Wish Sor/Wiz: 3 Components: V, S Lesser wish functions as the other wish spells, with regards to casting unknown spells of lower spell levels. Lesser wish's only other use is to grant inherent ability bonuses. Each casting grants a +1 bonus to a single ability, which stacks with other inherent bonuses only if the caster's level is four times that of the new bonus. This use of lesser wish requires diamond dust worth 2,000 gp (first bonus), 6,000 gp (second), 10,000 gp (third), 14,000 gp (fourth) or 18,000 gp (fifth).
Arcade 04-03-07, 01:37 PM	I disagree that weapon bonuses and inherent bonuses should be the same. An inherent bonus gives you much more, especially for spellcasters. You should be looking at wondrous items instead- amulet of helath, belt of giant strength, etc. This spell essentially grants a slotless ability boost item that stacks with nearly every other bonus since it is inherent and can never be removed. It is also immune to anit-magic and dispel magic. If you use the table for creating magic items, then this means this item should cost at least 4 times as much as the normal ability boost items, and that's disregarding the permanent, non-removable cost. And no one ever complains that ability boosting items are too expensive because they are still the number one magic item choice. So, if we were to use those guidelines and make it 4x expensive, the bonuses should be: +1: 4,000 gold +2: 16,000 gold +3: 36,000 gold +4: 64,000 gold +5: 100,000 gold Note, these are still much cheaper than the various tomes and manuals. And you can make them more accessible by trading in some of the cost for XP. For example, make it 3000 gold and 200XP for the +1 cost, 12000 gold and and 800XP for +2, etc. This puts it in the hands of your players by about 4th level. I still feel this is a little inexpensive. I would suggest using these costs AND adding an XP component, say 100XP per 1000 gold piece cost. +1 is 4000 gold and 400 XP, or 6000 gold to have someone cast it on you. This seems like about the right cost to me. Remember that at the end of the day, your characters will likely have both inherent bonus and item bonus, so they will likely go back and forth between these two bonuses as the cost allows. PS. the spell in general is a good idea.
calronmoonflower 04-03-07, 03:49 PM	First of all, questions have question marks at their end, not periods. Second, you may not have intended your question to be snide, but it sounded that way. I truly didn't mean it that way. Also I included afterward how the inherent bonus could increase one by one.
Tequila_Sunrise 04-03-07, 09:03 PM	Thanks for the input, all. I'm seeing a lot of knee-jerk reactions to a new idea, but I could be wrong.
JulesCARV 04-11-07, 10:06 PM	What about just allowing inherent bonuses to stack, with the stipulation that they can't exceed +5 pre-epic? That way, you can read a Manual of Gainful Exercise +1 at mid levels and not have it be totally superceded at high levels. It's a simple solution, but I don't see why it wouldn't work.