hy doesn't every magic item key to an alignment?

[silvertable81]

it seems that every time i want to create a magic Item, I want to key it to a specific alignment. It gs a 30% disount in market value.
Someone made all the items in the DMG, why did those guys pay full price?

 

[Zhure]

1- they came from a party of mixed alignments?

2- they aren't metagamers?

3- the 30% discount is merely a guideline?

 

[Hashmalum]

If anything, the price to create ought to go up 30%. It serves as something of a security feature: the item is less likely to be stolen and used against you, and the thief will have a hard time even finding buyers for the stolen item. Of course, the item is considerably less valuable to someone who can't use it. It all just goes to show that the game designers had no clue that the entire concept of value is relative. (This is the reason I despise spells like know value and detect gems, BTW.)

 

[dvvega]

Hash: I would agree with you only in the case where someone goes to a wizard and says "I want an item that only LG people can use for security reasons". The wizard charges extra for this.

But I'm suspecting the original poster is looking at it from a PC point of view. Saving money etc.

silver: I can't remember where I read it, however a PC limiting an item in such a way that it doesn't affect himself/herself doesn't get the discount.

E.g. I'm a LG elven wizard. I make an item (spending XP and GP) to make a cloak useable only by LG elven wizards. Why should I get a discount? I'm making it for myself. That's metagamining.

However if the same wizard makes the cloak with intention to sell it (since you need quick cash and could only afford the cheap version) that would be different.

 

[dcollins]

Someone made all the items in the DMG, why did those guys pay full price?

Like all magic items, items in the DMG were designed by DMs (game/campaign designers) so that they would create a balanced gaming environment and campaign.

Monte Cook specifically addresses alignment as not a restriction but an advantage in most cases that shouldn't receive a rebate for an inventor of that alignment.

Moreover, players do not get to invent their own items, or use Table 8-40 as a shopping list, unless their DM is making an exception for them, which is where much confusion such as yours arises from.
www.superdan.net/dndfaq3.html

 

[Galfridus]

I ran into this real fast in my campaign -- after the first PC item was created at a 30% discount, I decided that (much like the logic above) keying to an alignment was a feature rather than a drawback, and removed the discount rule. Haven't regretted it since.

 

[Destil]

The way I look at it, it's a market price modifier, but shouldn't really factor into creation of the item. It's not any less powerful, and the 'can't be used against me' angle is an advantage at times. In my game I'd charge full price to create, but if you want to sell it later you will usualy need to mark it down to around a 30% discount or spend a disproportinal amount of time searching for someone to buy it.

 

[Hashmalum]

silver: I can't remember where I read it, however a PC limiting an item in such a way that it doesn't affect himself/herself doesn't get the discount.

However if the same wizard makes the cloak with intention to sell it (since you need quick cash and could only afford the cheap version) that would be different.

So the price depends on the creator's intention when the item is made? That's just way too abusable. What happens if the creator changes his mind later?

I'm working on a set of rules to cover nefarious cost-saving shortcuts taken in the item creation process. One possibility is that the item will end up with a limitation (such as alignment), but the player doesn't get to choose it. You might go to make an item cheaply and end up with something better than the base item (restricted such that people other than you will have a hard time using it), but more likely you'll end up with something worse that you might not be able to use at all. On the other hand, deliberately including a selected (rather than random) restricted-use feature will cost you more. I'll post it in House Rules when I'm done.

 

[dvvega]

It's not based on the creators intention ... it's based on the player's intention. Most DMs can tell if the player is trying to angle something. As mentioned by a couple of posters, Monte Cook has discussed the discount thing at length.

I personally allow the discount if they're making it to sell. I don't allow it if the limitations don't affect the creator and it is him/her that is using the item.

 

[magnas_veritas]

I personally allow the discount if they're making it to sell. I don't allow it if the limitations don't affect the creator and it is him/her that is using the item.

I don't like using player intent in that way. It doesn't make sense. If you don't like them getting a big discount for limiting it to themselves, disallow it or lower the discount to a more reasonable level. Otherwise, they'll ask questions like:

Why could it possibly make any difference to the creation price if I'm making it to sell than to use myself? Heck, if it's being made to be sold, why not use it for a while to demonstrate its quality and utility? After all, there's nothing stating that it has to be sold right away.

And what if I change my mind and don't want to sell the item at all? Is there a giant sucking sound as my XP then flows into the item? What if I sell it to myself, in my role as CEO and chief employee of PC, Inc.? It's technically not mine, it's my company's. (Note that while it's somewhat overly modern for most settings, it is possible in some. Our DM, when he plays, occasionally incorporates his character and even sells shares!)

And what if I sell it to a party member, who then sells it back to me for the same price? That would meet any and all criteria, but still give me the discounted item creation price. Heck, for an NE or CE character, sell it to the person, and then hunt them down and kill them...make back the XP and get back the nifty item, along with any extra treasure! After all, there's no end-user certificate requirement, and as we all know, most magic items wind up being looted off somebody's corpse.

Brad