Enchant Magic Item Question - Downloaded from the Wizards Community, all coding removed by Solauren

Enchant Magic Item Question

Post/Author/DateTime Post
#1
Thanlis
Mar 28, 2010 18:54:25
OK, we know that you can turn a generic +2 weapon into a +2 vicious weapon with Enchant Magic Item. (AV, page 198.) What can you do with neck items? One of my PCs currently has a +3 Amulet of Protection. Can he turn it into:

a) Any +3 neck slot item, assuming he spends the money
b) Any +3 neck slot item that's clearly jewelry going around the neck (necklace, torc, etc) but not a cloak or cape
c) Any +3 neck slot item with "Amulet" in the name
d) None of the above

I lean towards B, I could easily be convinced of C, I would feel slightly cheesy if A was the answer (but maybe I want a Cape of the Mountebank anyhow!), and I will be sad but accepting if D is the answer.
#2
Mommy_was_an_Orc
Mar 28, 2010 19:23:23
A

Really, there's no benefit other than description as to whether or not the neck item is an amulet/cloak/jewelry - there's no additional side benefit. It is different than say Chain vs. Scale or Longsword vs. Fullblade. And I don't think the designers are deliberately kicking down the power level of amulets down a notch to create some kind of incentive.

Also, another way of looking at it is that you could enchant an amulet to work as the brooch element of a magical cloak...
#3
bgibbons
Mar 28, 2010 20:24:51 Actual answer: We don't know.

Answer I'm comfortable with: A.

Enchant Magic Item allows you to place a property in a magic item that has no property. (AV, p. 198). We ignore the fact that magic is a property in exactly the same way flaming is, to make the rule have meaning, and we thus assume that what this rule really means is that what we call plain vanilla +X items can be upgraded to any other +X item of the same type.

The rules are silent as to what "same type" means in the context of neck items. A reasonable argument could be made that all "neck slot items" are one type, in the same way that I wouldn't bat an eye at someone with a +X magic holy symbol wanting to upgrade it to a +X black feather of the Raven Queen or +X dragonscale of Bahamut. Different descriptive language is used, but at heart they're just holy symbols or neck slot items.

One could, I suppose, also argue that amulets, cloaks, periapts and so forth are completely separate items that just happen to fall within the category of neck slot items.

I'm quite happy saying that the former best matches what I'd consider to be the intent of the rules, but this is all pretty much in "DM judgment call territory" and, sadly, we have no DM.
#4
Thanlis
Mar 29, 2010 6:47:49 Yeah, I'm definitely looking for campaign consensus rather than a ruling from the admins or anything. I guess this could go in the next version of the CCG, but it's not a huge deal on the whole. The rationale of enchanting an amulet to work as the brooch element is awesome and pacifies my inner cheese scent.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 Thanlis Mar 28, 2010 18:54:25	OK, we know that you can turn a generic +2 weapon into a +2 vicious weapon with Enchant Magic Item. (AV, page 198.) What can you do with neck items? One of my PCs currently has a +3 Amulet of Protection. Can he turn it into: a) Any +3 neck slot item, assuming he spends the money b) Any +3 neck slot item that's clearly jewelry going around the neck (necklace, torc, etc) but not a cloak or cape c) Any +3 neck slot item with "Amulet" in the name d) None of the above I lean towards B, I could easily be convinced of C, I would feel slightly cheesy if A was the answer (but maybe I want a Cape of the Mountebank anyhow!), and I will be sad but accepting if D is the answer.
#2 Mommy_was_an_Orc Mar 28, 2010 19:23:23	A Really, there's no benefit other than description as to whether or not the neck item is an amulet/cloak/jewelry - there's no additional side benefit. It is different than say Chain vs. Scale or Longsword vs. Fullblade. And I don't think the designers are deliberately kicking down the power level of amulets down a notch to create some kind of incentive. Also, another way of looking at it is that you could enchant an amulet to work as the brooch element of a magical cloak...
#3 bgibbons Mar 28, 2010 20:24:51	Actual answer: We don't know. Answer I'm comfortable with: A. Enchant Magic Item allows you to place a property in a magic item that has no property. (AV, p. 198). We ignore the fact that magic is a property in exactly the same way flaming is, to make the rule have meaning, and we thus assume that what this rule really means is that what we call plain vanilla +X items can be upgraded to any other +X item of the same type. The rules are silent as to what "same type" means in the context of neck items. A reasonable argument could be made that all "neck slot items" are one type, in the same way that I wouldn't bat an eye at someone with a +X magic holy symbol wanting to upgrade it to a +X black feather of the Raven Queen or +X dragonscale of Bahamut. Different descriptive language is used, but at heart they're just holy symbols or neck slot items. One could, I suppose, also argue that amulets, cloaks, periapts and so forth are completely separate items that just happen to fall within the category of neck slot items. I'm quite happy saying that the former best matches what I'd consider to be the intent of the rules, but this is all pretty much in "DM judgment call territory" and, sadly, we have no DM.
#4 Thanlis Mar 29, 2010 6:47:49	Yeah, I'm definitely looking for campaign consensus rather than a ruling from the admins or anything. I guess this could go in the next version of the CCG, but it's not a huge deal on the whole. The rationale of enchanting an amulet to work as the brooch element is awesome and pacifies my inner cheese scent.