AV allows magic item power creep. Am I overlooking something?

[keterys]

That may be what you're replying to... I was replying to "It basically allows magic item power creep." - which it doesn't. You still have to treat it as a fully fledged item with its own level, whatever the heck that level actually is - there's no power creep.

In fact, given that you must be high enough level to craft the item anyways, you can craft the item without doing the transfer ritual, and all it does is potentially save you a small amount of gold (80% of the value of one of the two items)... I don't see that any of it _really_ matters

 

[Nifft]

As I understand it, this topic discusses what "...in a magic item that has no property" means legally.

WotC has made "property" a term of art when used to discuss magic items. IMHO there's not much room to wiggle out of a strict, technical reading of the term.

Looks to me like the OP is correct.

Cheers, -- N

 

[Lord Sessadore]

The OP may be correct in that it would allow adding a Property line to an item which has none, but, as keterys said, it in no way allows "power creep".

You still have to fulfill all the requirements to create the new item from scratch, whether you're upgrading or not. It in no way allows you to create an item which is above your ability to create in the first place, it simply requires the DM to set a reasonable level on the item. You could just as easily write up your "Totemic Belt of Blood" and create it from scratch instead of upgrading the Totemic Belt.

 

[Orcus Porkus]

Read page 225 and 226 of the PHB.
"Property" and "Power" are two distinct magic item terms that are clearly defined.
Thus, my original claim is correct. No question about it.
Now, when it comes to setting the level of the new item, it becomes tricky.
Obviously, the new belt with the merged property and power has a higher level, but I wouldn't call it level 20.
For example, when you have a plain amulet of protection +2 which is level 6, and a amulet of false life+2 which is level 9 and has a power, and a amulet of health +2 which is level 8 and has a property, and you combine the power of "falses life" with the property of "health" you would only add the level difference of the "health" item to the "plain" item, which is 2. So the level of the new item would be 11.
"health" level 8 - "plain" level 6 = 2
"false life" level 9+2 = 11.

I think this would not be overpowered, particularly because at level 11 you can get a +3 "plain" amulet.

 

[Lord Sessadore]

Well, basically this all boils down to how do you determine the level of a magic item. In the case of the amulets you provided, I'd agree that 11 is probably ok. The belts from the OP is another case, though - level 12 would be too lenient, I'd say. Probably around level 15 at least, as a rough guess.

As long as a DM understands that doing this is not what was intended by the expanded ritual, and they compare the new item to similar ones of the proposed level, they should be OK. The fact that there are absolutely no guidelines for determining the new item's level tells me that by "property" they meant the name of it, especially for armor/weapons/implements/neck slot. For example, a +2 sword doesn't have a "property", while a +2 flaming sword does have a "property". Their bad for not using their naming conventions.

 

[Danceofmasks]

I'm with Orcus Porkus' method.
Mostly, it's fair ... but there are some exceptions, so the DM will have to make his/her right of veto clear.

I'll provide just one example:
Distance weapon ... its level is exactly the same as a boring magic weapon.
Its property comes at the cost of additional damage on a crit.

Consider things carefully when deciding final level of item.

 

[CapnZapp]

Keterys and Sessadore, my take is that creating something not otherwise allowed by the original PHB rules is powercreep.

Being able to add both a property and a power into the same item, with no increase in level to match the increased flexibility (before you needed two items to access the power and the property, now you need only one) is what I thought the OP meant by "powercreep".

Now that we have agreed this loophole is in fact real (good find, btw, OP!), the remaining question is what to do about it?

 

[keterys]

Keterys and Sessadore, my take is that creating something not otherwise allowed by the original PHB rules is powercreep.

Items can have multiple properties - see Black Iron Scale and compare to Resistance. Or compare that to Deathcut, for something which effectively has three. Or Gauntlets of Ogre Power which have a power and a property and are far from broken, etc. Manshoon's Mask from the FRCG is an extreme variant thereof with like a dozen different properties and powers.

At any rate, Power Creep is the process by which power creeps upwards as new options appear - it's often sped up by miscosted items and new synergies. So, there may be power creep via miscosting (such as suggested by the OP of just assuming there can be a formula taking the level difference, which breaks for many item types), but I'd suggest not doing that. If anything, I'd suggest overcosting because there's no reason to encourage the tactic and it's safer for the game to do so.

Being able to add both a property and a power into the same item, with no increase in level to match the increased flexibility

There is nothing that allows you to do this, you are incorrect.

Now that we have agreed this loophole is in fact real (good find, btw, OP!), the remaining question is what to do about it?

Nothing? The same that you'd do if someone wanted to just design a new item that included the relevant properties instead of combining them? You still need to figure out the appropriate level/cost for it to be balanced and if you're in a game that doesn't do that, then it's a non-issue.

 

[CapnZapp]

Are we talking beside each other, Keterys? Or are you agreeing or disagreeing with me? Not sure, hard to tell...

The OP said "This means I can place an item property into an item that has no property, but a daily power." and after some initial discussion we concluded this in fact was true.

Now, how isn't this powercreep?

(It's possible we do agree in general, if you by "I'd suggest not doing that" mean you don't allow this aspect of the ritual as introduced by AV in your game.)

I still don't understand your final paragraph though: you seem to suggest this isn't overpowered after all because there isn't any miscosting. But unless I'm horribly mistaken the ritual (as per the AV extension) does not add any costs at all, and doesn't raise the level of the item. (In fact, it doesn't discuss that at all!)

I might be misreading you here, Keterys... my apologies if I do!

 

[bganon]

I don't even think Orcus Porkus is correct. If you're going to be that literal in interpreting rules, then AV does nothing to circumvent the fact that Enchant Magic Item still can only be used to create magic items. The section from AV simply allows you to add a property to a magic item if the result is another magic item. The "Totemic Belt of Blood" is not a magic item that appears anywhere in the rules. Thus, you can't make it - the original claim is false, no question about it.

I think what Keterys is saying is that even if you do allow this reading (and do we all agree that this is not RAI?), that the real power creep has to do with how you cost the result. Inventing new magic items isn't necessarily power creep - inventing powerful and cheap new magic items definitely is.