A question about magic item creation?

[mseds99]

You're right Saeviomagy, it is perfectly legal. I didn't/forgot to mention that we don't allow the epic level handbook(because I don't have access to it) in to the campaign and he was trying to bring in a feat from a banned book. That why I thought it was funny. My players are always pushing, pushing, pushing, pushing. I'm usually a pushover, but I had to push back on that one.

 

[Destil]

Hmmm...where do you get this number? According to my research, heavy fortification is a +5 value to armor, which equates to a +25,000 GP valuation. As the heavy fort. will be the "base" power of the torque, the 25K should be considered to be the "base" price of the item. I am not aware of this "doubling for being non-armor" rule you reference.

Heavy Fort would cost a minimum of +24k (increase +1 to +6 armor) and a maximum of 75k (+5 to +10 armor). And given that the item price formulas are guidelines, not rules, I'd say doubble for non-armor is reasonable, since it would usualy have it's cost dependent on how good everything else in the armor is. Even at that (72k) is better than what it would cost to throw heavy fort onto a peice of +5 armor, by 3k.

 

[loki1loki1]

I have to say, though -- obviously this fellow wants the ring to be intelligent, so the ring can trigger it's OWN spells, and not cost action(s) form the wearer.

Right you are - there is hope for you yet.

That, personally, is where I'd put my iron-shod foot down. HARD. Personally, the Torc would be (barely) do-able if I were running an Epic campaign; but, the ring ... we're talking borderline "minor artifact" there, for all it costs less ... so it'd NEVER work right. Period..

Huh? Ever browsed the DMG Pax, especially the few pages devoted to "Intelligent Items" (starts on pg 228, DMG)? How you equate the powers of an exceptionally powerful, but still legitimately intelligent ring with a "minor artifact" is beyond me.

I take back there being any hope for you.

 

[Hypersmurf]

mseds99 - I made the comment about the combining feats thing. By the book, it's a perfectly legal combination.

No, it's not - Manyshot is a Standard Action, not an Attack Action, and Shot on the Run works with an Attack Action.

You can't use Shot on the Run to move, cast Ray of Frost, and move... neither can you move, Manyshot, move.

-Hyp.

 

[loki1loki1]

Heavy Fort would cost a minimum of +24k (increase +1 to +6 armor) and a maximum of 75k (+5 to +10 armor). And given that the item price formulas are guidelines, not rules, I'd say doubble for non-armor is reasonable, since it would usualy have it's cost dependent on how good everything else in the armor is. Even at that (72k) is better than what it would cost to throw heavy fort onto a peice of +5 armor, by 3k.

"Guidelines not rules"? Pardon me? Shall we just run the game on conjecture then, with a healthy does of "how you feel at the time" thrown in for good measure?

Let's try and keep a baseline here, as dictated by the rules , shall we? If you wish to disprove my contentions with valid references, great; I'm all for learning. If you would rather tell me what you think is "reasonable", no thanks.

 

[Hypersmurf]

"Guidelines not rules"? Pardon me?

Oh, trust us, that's exactly the way Magic Item pricing is done.

Otherwise you have the Use-Activated True Strike syndrome.

A Ring of Invisibility is priced higher than the guidelines would indicate, because many of the aspects that make Invisibility a 2nd level spell (shortish duration, gone once it's discharged, etc) are obviated by a ring with a/ unlimited duration, and b/ the ability to restore the invisibility whenever it's discharged.

It's much more powerful than a ring of use-activated Obscure Object, which the guidelines would price exactly the same.

Similarly, while a Sword of True Striking, with a use-activated +20 attack bonus on every single attack, would be completely wrong at the 2-3k the guidelines would indicate, the Bow of True Arrows - spell-trigger activation at will - is not too bad at the same price. But a Rock of Curing, spell-trigger activation CLW at will, would still be horribly, horribly, horribly underpriced at the same figure.

Guidelines? Hell, yes! Not inflexible rules.

-Hyp.

 

[loki1loki1]

Except that it is unavailable except on armor of at least +1 enhancement, so the minimum price of heavy fortification is the price of a +6 armor enhancement less the price of a +1 armor enhancement. 36,000 - 2,000 = 34,000 minimum.

I'll accept that, Hypersmurf - the price gets bumped accordingly, to include the requisite +1 base

If the DM allows the player to choose the powers etc of the item, then what's to stop him selecting "Roll twice on this table" for all four Primary Abilities, followed by a few more "Roll twice on this table"s, and a couple of "Roll on Extraordinary Powers instead"s, ending up with a couple of dozen primary abilities... likewise for all his Extraordinary Powers?

After all, you're already assuming that you can just assign a Special Purpose, which isn't a part of the base 90k price... it's the result of a 10% chance of an Extraordinary Power.

My understanding of intelligent item creation is that the crafter chooses how much money he's going to pour into the crafting, and then the DM either selects or randomly assigns the powers etc as he sees fit.

A lot like having a child, really - you can decide to bring life into the world, but you can't guarantee how it turns out...

-Hyp. [/B]

A cogent argument, and one borne out by the DMG on pg. 246. However, IF one were to be fortunate enough to actually roll for all of the powers of the ring as written, the price would STILL be 90K.

 

[Hypersmurf]

A cogent argument, and one borne out by the DMG on pg. 246. However, IF one were to be fortunate enough to actually roll for all of the powers of the ring as written, the price would STILL be 90K.

Yup... but you also have to pay 90k for each of the rings you make that don't get the powers you're after

-Hyp.

 

[loki1loki1]

Oh, trust us, that's exactly the way Magic Item pricing is done.

Otherwise you have the Use-Activated True Strike syndrome...

<snip>

Guidelines? Hell, yes! Not inflexible rules.

-Hyp.

Such a stance may be well-and-fine for your game, smurf, but the nature of BBS's necessitates a baseline if we are to engage in a meaningful exchange.

If one insists that such a baseline is some sort of nebulous paradigm that is subject to interpretation at will, then, by all means, indulge in arguing what is, by default, correct for you and those who agree with you, but is necessarily untenable.

 

[loki1loki1]

Yup... but you also have to pay 90k for each of the rings you make that don't get the powers you're after

-Hyp.

Yes, which answers 1/2 of the question that I posed when I forwarded the two items to my DM, that being "are these realistic?".

Perhaps I shall have to settle for a Ring of Nine Lives instead...

[edited for spelling]