Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Pielorinho" data-source="post: 680714" data-attributes="member: 259">Although you're by-the-book's-guidelines-correct, I'd figure the cost slightly differently.  The point of charging double for extra powers on an item is to compensate for the item's not taking up an extra slot (at least, I think that's why -- that's also why nonslotted items charge double for their powers).  However, wands are already (arguably) slotless items.  So I wouldn't charge double for any of the wand powers.  That would reduce the cost to 20,800, if I can successfully do math in my head.Furthermore, there's no innate reason why an insight bonus is better than (say) a deflection bonus; I think it's more expensive because you don't want people to stack too many bonuses one on top of the other.  If you think it's cool for a diviner to have an insight bonus, just restrict his access to deflection bonuses, and you won't have a problem.  This will be a your-campaign-only tweak that shouldn't affect the balance.  This'll get the cost down to 18,800.Finally, one of the big costs is the quickened true strikes.  Honestly, in the context of a wand, this is nowhere near as useful as (for example) a wall-of-force wand.  I wouldn't charge the same thing for this power as you would for a necklace that created ten walls of force.  This is purely IMHO, but you could reduce the value of these down to 750, and I think it'd be reasonable.That gets your item's total value down to 12,800.  Much closer to what you're looking for.One last note:  if you're gonna goof up with giving someone too powerful an item, it's a good idea to make it a charged item.  Worst case scenario, this fellow has 50 way-too-powerful rounds in combat before the item is gone.  And that's really not such a worst-case.Daniel</blockquote>

Verification