Recharging Magic Items

[Rystil Arden]

One thing tha could have been interesting, which make this option interesting even with high numbe rof charge, it is you don't need the feat. The object that hold the spell exist and you don't need to create it, but you still need to have access to the spell to recharge it (and all other requirement).

That's actually completely unfair. It makes the feat next to worthless, since you just wait until you get one and keep recharging it.

 

[Velmont]

You still haev to pay more than if you had the feat and you must wait to get your item... yes, it make teh feat less attractive, but I don't think it is completly unfair.

 

[Rystil Arden]

You still haev to pay more than if you had the feat and you must wait to get your item... yes, it make teh feat less attractive, but I don't think it is completly unfair.

You pay the up-front cost for the wand and then a tiny bit more than a wand crafter after that. So for most wand types where you run through all the charges and repurchase many times (like CLW wands), the difference between what the person with the feat pays and the person without the feat pays approaches 10% of the base cost over time, rather than 100%.

 

[orsal]

I think I'm going to vote No to recharging. It's not really a bad rule, and I wouldn't mind playing a game with it at all, but I don't think it makes enough of a difference to meet my standards for new crunch.

 

[Velmont]

The difference between what the person with the feat pays and the person without the feat pays approaches 10% of the base cost over time, rather than 100%.

Now, I don't understand your math...

If you take something you replenish frequently, you buy (or create) a new one instead, it cost less as you don't need to pay for the extra 10% gp.

 

[Rystil Arden]

Now, I don't understand your math...

If you take something you replenish frequently, you buy (or create) a new one instead, it cost less as you don't need to pay for the extra 10% gp.

Cost for the Guy with the Feat over 10 wands (500 charges): 3750 gold and 300 XP

Cost for the Guy without the Feat buying one wand and recharging it a lot (500 charges): 750 gold + 3712.5 gold = 4462.5 gold + 270 XP

Cost normally for the Guy without the Feat: 7500 Gold

 

[Erekose13]

I think we've got 3 to 1 votes now. So its in the 48hrs.

I am not sure that I can answer your concerns orsal. It isn't meant to be a big far reaching change, more of a house rule that I'd like to share with the community.

 

[Rystil Arden]

I think we've got 3 to 1 votes now. So its in the 48hrs.

I am not sure that I can answer your concerns orsal. It isn't meant to be a big far reaching change, more of a house rule that I'd like to share with the community.

I see 3 to 1 too

 

[Velmont]

My point is more that I see no interest into it, and maybe it would need a little extra to give some interest. I speak about removing the feat requirement as it is something it could make sense, as the feat could represent the art to create the object holding the charges.

 

[Patlin]

This assumes a 10% of the creation cost up front (or 37.5 gp in this example). So at 45 charges you can see that it costs 375gp to recharge and 375gp to make a new one with 50 charges.

(Emphasis to help others not become confused as I was.)

So it's 10% of the CREATION cost (37.5 gp) but 1% of the MARKET cost per charge? Shall we keep all the math as you have it currently but call it 5% of the MARKET cost and 1% of the MARKET cost per charge just to be more consistent?

Edit: Maybe it's just me... 10% creation and 2% creation per charge also works....