Post/Author/DateTime	Post
BigDumb 11-16-05, 07:40 AM	How much should a GM deviate from items in the books? I have a player who likes to take abilities from one item and place them together to forge a "super" item. A low end example would be her Ring of Sustanence/Deflection+2, but on the high end is her falchion with a mix of Frostbrand's and the Sword of Sublety's abilities. She pulled the cost out by removing the cost of the base item and added the multiplier for multiple effects as described in the magic item creation section. She had a really good background for the item, so I said sure, but I am wary about opening to much of a can. In this system with artificers and magic more abundant, would you allow players to be more savy with item production and combonations? Also, how creative are some of your players when it comes to interesting magical mixes if you allow it?
der_gogo 11-16-05, 07:48 AM	I would say the double price of the costs of both powers if bought seperately. e.g. a Cloak of Res. +1 and Cha +2 is (4000+1000)*2 = 10k gold You save yourself a slot for an item, thats a big plus point.
ff6shadow 11-16-05, 07:56 AM	I let players craft their unusual items, but remember to scale the cost for the added bonus of having a free item slot. I like to increase the cost of the most expensive property by 2. Ring of Sustenance and Protection +2 - Market Price 18,500 Frostbrand Weapon of Subtlety 92250+Weapon Price+Enhancment Bonus Works for me. Then my party doesn't go for item creation. So I like to hand out some uniques combinations sometimes.
Dragonchild 11-16-05, 08:32 AM	I'd like to answer your general question: How much should a GM deviate from items in the books?The short answer is, never beyond your comfort zone. That goes for every DM, from newbies to the oldest veterans.
Darklyte64 11-16-05, 08:43 AM	Never let them make a ring of true strike.
MarkB 11-16-05, 09:48 AM	How much should a GM deviate from items in the books? I have a player who likes to take abilities from one item and place them together to forge a "super" item. A low end example would be her Ring of Sustanence/Deflection+2, but on the high end is her falchion with a mix of Frostbrand's and the Sword of Sublety's abilities. She pulled the cost out by removing the cost of the base item and added the multiplier for multiple effects as described in the magic item creation section. She had a really good background for the item, so I said sure, but I am wary about opening to much of a can. Just be careful here. When adding special abilities to a weapon, the costs increase exponentially (a +1 weapon costs 2000 gp for the +1, but a +2 weapon costs 8000 gp). If you're going to allow combination of named-weapon types as described above, the costs must scale in the same way. A sword combining Frostbrand and Subtletly should cost a lot more than just the combined costs of the base weapons - about four times more, if the weapons were of similar price.
der_gogo 11-16-05, 10:30 AM	I think it makes a big difference wether the abitities have something to do with each other or not. Meshing a Dwarven Thrower and a Holy Avenger together -> hell, a very powerful item now! cost needs to increase dramatically (even into epic dimensions maybe) Meshing a ring of sustenance and a ring of prot together -> no synergies, only benefit is 1 less slot. Increase cost to reflect this. I recomment double price. There are very good guidelines for self creation of magical items in Tome and Blood (3.0). Also bear in mind that someone has to craft those items. Standard items may be easy to obtain, but special items should be very hard to get if you can't craft them yourself...
scott644 11-16-05, 12:50 PM	The above points are good. Also consider in the DMG section on crafting magic items it mentions if the abilities aren't similar the price goes up. Combine this with the price for unslotted items, and the price for items with abilities not obviously affiliated with them, and it gets ugly fast. As for that ring of true striking ban above? I agree completely. That's effectively a +20 to hit, where above +5 is epic. It would at minimum require epic item creation. And at epic item creation we start getting even more expensive (regular price, x10). Thus the ring would be bonus squared (400) times 2k = 800k, times 10 for epic = 8million gp (4million to craft) and 320k exp. I sincerely doubt players are going to have this available to them. This brings up an idea. Compare prices at the high end. If the price tops 200k, rule it as epic and apply epic rules. Should solve a lot of the higher-end problems.
HamHam 11-16-05, 01:00 PM	As for that ring of true striking ban above? I agree completely. That's effectively a +20 to hit, where above +5 is epic. It would at minimum require epic item creation. Epic item creation for an item using a what... 1st level spell? That makes soooo much sense.
LordArkan 11-16-05, 02:10 PM	What's wrong with a ring of true strike? The spell wears off after one round or until you hit, requiring another standard action to activate it again. IIRC, there was even a weapon enhancement that did this. Does a ring of invisibility make you invisible all the time? Didn't think so. First level spell, first level caster, use activated = 2000gp x4 for having a duration measured in rounds = 8000gp to cast True Strike at will. I don't think its broken, and many players would likely trade it out for a better ring (Evasion, Freedom of Movement, Prot+5, etc).
scott644 11-16-05, 03:56 PM	What's wrong with a ring of true strike? The spell wears off after one round or until you hit, requiring another standard action to activate it again. IIRC, there was even a weapon enhancement that did this. Does a ring of invisibility make you invisible all the time? Didn't think so. Actually, the ring of invisibility can, if you never attack and never turn the invisibility off. As for the ring of true striking, if you rule that it takes a standard action to activate one single use, then yes it's balanced as the character would only get the +20 once every two rounds. The problem comes when a player tries for what amount to cheats; the continous +20 on the ring, or a quiver that bestows it upon every arrow drawn, are two commonly encountered examples (a friend of mine tried the quiver cheat - the DM caught it and wisely gave it an unconditional refusal). It's those that are being warned about; continuous use True Strike at full power simply is epic power. Doesn't matter that it's a level one spell - when it takes epic creation rules to make a +6 weapon, it's clearly overpowered to have continuous +20 (especially from a spell that lasts at most one round or first attack).
scott644 11-16-05, 04:03 PM	This brings another thought to mind. Per the SRD: You gain temporary, intuitive insight into the immediate future during your next attack. Your next single attack roll (if it is made before the end of the next round) gains a +20 insight bonus. Additionally, you are not affected by the miss chance that applies to attackers trying to strike a concealed target. Very limiting. Duration is either 1 round or next attack (rather than next successful attack). The reason I point this out is three particular things. First is it's range is personal. Second is the Extend Spell feat. Third is the Persistant Spell feat. My point is, the only actual time duration is the 1 round, thus Extending it makes it 2 rounds, and Persistant allows it to last 24 hours. However, actually making an attack discharges the spell, thus if a character cast it Persistant and got into a fight five minutes later, they just wasted 6 levels worth of spell slot. Don't let advanced characters try the trick of getting +20 on attack for 24 hours.
LordArkan 11-17-05, 12:55 AM	The duration isn't actually 1 round, though - the description itself states that the spell does not function longer than a round. Besides, Persistant Wraithstrike is so much better anyway. As for "cheats", well, the word "cheat" should be your first clue ;) . If I make a "constant/use-activated item" of fireball, does that mean there's always a fireball centered around me at all times? Its just a matter of common sense.
Mirikon 11-17-05, 01:09 AM	How much should a GM deviate from items in the books? I have a player who likes to take abilities from one item and place them together to forge a "super" item. A low end example would be her Ring of Sustanence/Deflection+2, but on the high end is her falchion with a mix of Frostbrand's and the Sword of Sublety's abilities. She pulled the cost out by removing the cost of the base item and added the multiplier for multiple effects as described in the magic item creation section. She had a really good background for the item, so I said sure, but I am wary about opening to much of a can. In this system with artificers and magic more abundant, would you allow players to be more savy with item production and combonations? Also, how creative are some of your players when it comes to interesting magical mixes if you allow it? I believe there are actually rules for that in the DMG. If I recall correctly, you take one property (Ring of Sustenance) as the base, and then multiply the other property (Deflection +2) by either 1.5 or 2. Something like that. ADDING NEW ABILITIES A creator can add new magical abilities to a magic item with no restrictions. The cost to do this is the same as if the item was not magical. Thus, a +1 longsword can be made into a +2 vorpal longsword, with the cost to create it being equal to that of a +2 vorpal sword minus the cost of a +1 sword. If the item is one that occupies a specific place on a character’s body the cost of adding any additional ability to that item increases by 50%. For example, if a character adds the power to confer invisibility to her ring of protection +2, the cost of adding this ability is the same as for creating a ring of invisibility multiplied by 1.5. Page in question is: http://srd.pbemnexus.com/magicItemsCreation.html. Scroll down to the bottom.
BigDumb 11-17-05, 01:31 AM	Those are the rules I am using Mirikon. I was just wondering if anyone else was running into any issues and what to look out for. I know you value the most expensive, then multiply the remaining lot by 1.5 to get a cost for the remaining effects. With the new armor resistance add-on, for example, the value of the add-on is different from the bonus granted. I think it follows the rules for the add-on multiplier keeping the item bonus as the highest cost whether it is or not. (EX: +1 hide armor of cold resistance greater [30]) I translated this to the Ring of Deflection and added the Sustanence on at 1.5 the cost of the power. So now she can enhance the ring up to +5 as a weapon or armor could. To powerful or not?
scott644 11-17-05, 08:03 AM	The duration isn't actually 1 round, though - the description itself states that the spell does not function longer than a round. The stat block says to see text in duration, and the one time reference is until the end of your next round (in other words, one round). Don't let the munchkins confuse you and force you to observe twisted interpretations of the rules because they don't fit a specific format. Logic clearly defines the duration on this one as 1 round or until discharged - the authors just didn't write is as clearly as usual is all. By the way, which book is Wraithstrike in? Those are the rules I am using Mirikon. I didn't see the sidebar about further modifications that's in the DMG. The one where similarity of abilities make a price difference, skill use makes a difference, and race/class/alignment makes a difference. In these cases, you multiply things significantly - I believe the most expensive power as well.