Assuming XP cost of creating Magic Items

[Sugarmouse]

Hey folks -

want to get your take on things. As everyone knows - to permanently enchant/create a migc item, the creator has to spend part of his/hers life force (ie XP) in order to properly imbue the item.

Now I am sure that this may have been bandied about, but what if the non-caster who commissioned the item offers to assume the XP cost.

I have already discussed this with my current DM, but we are curious to know what everybody else thinks on this?

Would you impose penalties (ie double the XP cost for an item?), barring the idea of allowing it in the first place. Would you reduce the cost of the magic item?

Eagerly awaiting you response.

PS: Piratecat, if you happen to browse this, did you get my somewhat late donation?

 

[Staffan]

Not sure I'd allow it in the first place, or to what extent, but if I did I'd reduce the item's price by 20%. That's by using the (Base Price/25) XP cost in combination with the 1 XP = 5 gp cost used for mercenary spellcasting.

 

[ARandomGod]

Hey folks -

want to get your take on things. As everyone knows - to permanently enchant/create a migc item, the creator has to spend part of his/hers life force (ie XP) in order to properly imbue the item.

Now I am sure that this may have been bandied about, but what if the non-caster who commissioned the item offers to assume the XP cost.

I have already discussed this with my current DM, but we are curious to know what everybody else thinks on this?

Would you impose penalties (ie double the XP cost for an item?), barring the idea of allowing it in the first place. Would you reduce the cost of the magic item?

Eagerly awaiting you response.

PS: Piratecat, if you happen to browse this, did you get my somewhat late donation?

I've seen a number of house rules that allow this to happen... basically if the non caster has a caster party member, it's assumed that the other party member can assume the life force part and pay only what the caster would pay to make the magic items.

It cannot be done with merchants and stuff.

It's an OK ruling. It's the only way I can see a party member wizard not charging at least 85%-90% of the base market price to make it. I mean, those XP are valuable!

In one campaign we made a magic item that cost 2500 gold (base) and no XP. Not paying XP is an intregal part of the item, because the void wants to be filled... but there's a magical funnel that keeps the XP from actually achieving it's goal, so any XP drawn into the item can be siphoned off to create magic items (only for item creation). If someone holds the item, they have to make a will save DC1 each round, or 100 XP will be drawn into the item. It had a maximum capacity of 4000 XP. In this case, unconcious people are considered to automatically attempt to make the save.

In a different campaign there was no excuse... just whoever first wore/attempted to activate the item would incur the XP cost of the item. When I joined that game I immediantly saw several problems with this, and asked what would be the mechanic that would stop an artificer from making a powerful magical item that's never been activated, leaving it around looking like normal loot, hire some "adventureres" to clear out the cave... and waiting for someone to put it on, thereby draining a LOT of XP... after which the magiker would simply kill the party and take the item.

I just wanted a better mechanic. There were several discussions as to what it could be, but in the end it couldn't be settled on, so it's just a "I will it SO" GM fiat. I hate those... I need a good, well planned out story. But, really, I like the rest of the game. So I can forgive some inanity.

PS> In that game darkness creates light. As I'm sure you could have guessed.

 

[robberbaron]

A GM in our group always has the customer pay the XP cost for item creation (obviously, if I made something for myself, I would burn the XP) and it has made us a lot more cautious when commissioning items.

Didn't like it at first, and don't do it in my game, but we got used to it.

 

[Eldragon]

It seems very reasonable to me. As long as the person donating the XP is present for the entire time the item is created. Being the only caster in a party and every other party member wanting magic items can set the caster pretty far back. This is especially true if you are running a low magic campaign. e.g. Where a longsword +1 is so rare that only royalty may ever hope to own one.

IMC, We decided that you could "dispel" a magic item and use the XP from the original item creating a new one. The original item is destroyed and any XP is lost.

 

[Goblyn]

We'd been using the 'willing' participant may donate thing so long, I thought it was a base rule ... it worked well in powerful spells being cast in ceremonies. What better way to get a buttload of experiance to spend on a spell than getting one point from each member of a congregation.

 

[azmodean]

Willing participant donating xp is fine for pcs, but compare to how much xp you can get out of npcs forcibly from the BoVD:

sacrifice ~125 xp per sacrifice, but only one sacrifice's worth can be used on a single item. (this is making a lot of assumtions, but it's a decent maximum for sacrificing a random individual, even if they are willing)

pain: 3 xp per dose, requires a full day to cast the spell per dose or a prohibitively expensive magical item (lists at 64,000gp in the BoVD!) and still only produces 3xp worth a day.

Souls: 10xp per soul, but the lowest level soul capturing spell is lvl 7, and acquiring larvae or petitioners to use is a diffirent issue entirely.

I'm not saying you shouldn't get some xp from peons, but my suggestion would be to balance it with the sacrifice system from the BoVD, but replace sacrifice with sermon or some such. (maybe bump it up a bit to make up for not being able to use pain or souls)

On another note, I'm really looking foward to my parties' temple complex getting finished so they can start making those daily sacrifices, set up the torture chambers...

Who knew it'd feel so good to be soooo bad.

 

[vsper]

We have a creator take a feat that allows him to tap from any willing individuals for xp. I believe it was from Dnd community council book of feats.

Vsper

 

[BSF]

The item creation feats are cool. I like them. What I don't like is when Bob the party Fighter wants a new sword and if he has it, he will be more effective in combat. Albus, the party wizard is the only PC with item creation feats. Bob expects Albus to burn his exp to make a better sword because it would be cheaper. However Albus would rather put that effort into something for himself.

It's a team game, but the spellcasters are expected to subsume all the exp costs for created items. Why not have any willing participant participate in item creation?

Two Solutions:
- Monte Cook published an item that lets you store exp to be used for item creation in the Book of Eldritch Might. Give it to the PCs.
- Let any willing participant be involved during the entire item creation process and use their exp as the basis for the item.

Really what does it do to balance that Bob the fighter just used his experience instead of Albus' to make a better sword? Albus will burn his own exp when he makes items that he wants to use.

 

[Staffan]

The item creation feats are cool. I like them. What I don't like is when Bob the party Fighter wants a new sword and if he has it, he will be more effective in combat. Albus, the party wizard is the only PC with item creation feats. Bob expects Albus to burn his exp to make a better sword because it would be cheaper. However Albus would rather put that effort into something for himself.

Or, Albus could charge the fighter more for the sword than just the component cost. That way, he could afford to make/buy more items for himself.

Just using the 1 XP = 5 gp standard, the appropriate "at cost" price of a magic item is 70% of market price (assuming no special costs like a masterwork weapon or extra XP) - 50% for components, and 20% for the XP.