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

[Lord Sessadore]

Let's also keep in mind that the example given in the AV entry itself is of converting a +1 Longsword into a +1 Flaming Longsword. A cursory examination of the Player's Handbook reveals that a Flaming weapon has no "Property:" - only an "Enhancement:," "Critical:," At-Will Power, and Daily Power.

Ergo, the writer must be using the plain English definition of "properties."

From the examples given in the Adventurer's Vault it seems quite clear that the ritual can increase the Enhancement of an Item and/or convert a baseline magical +X item into a +X [special type] item.

- Marty Lund

Does anyone else find this argument silly?

I agree that it's pretty clear what the intent of the AV addition is, and I think pretty well everyone else here sees it too. The question was whether one could possibly extend this to item properties as defined for item descriptions, namely the "Property:" line in an item's description. It's very semantic, but I don't see anything that denies that interpretation.

Whether or not it would or should be allowed in a game is another matter; I've treated this whole thing more as a mental exercise than anything else.

To me that says that the end result of the Enchant Item ritual, by RAW, is a magic item of your level or lower. All that the new rules do is allow you to reduce the cost by beginning with a magic item of the same enchantment, or on with no property.

Some pains were taken to clarify the position several of us held in this thread, which is pretty much what you're saying - in the end, you can't create an item greater than your level. I didn't hear any dissent to that position once it was all cleared up, so I think you're preaching to the converted here.

If you want to use the ritual to turn a Belt of Blood into a Totemic Belt, by all means go for it. You will take a 5,000 gp item, spend 4,000 gp in ritual components and have a 9,000 gp item, no net increase.

A little quibble about this: if you're looking to do this, I would say it falls under the third paragraph in AV. Namely, this part:

The Enchant Magic Item ritual cannot convert one item property into another. ... However, at the DM's option, a character can upgrade a magic item to another item with similar properties.

In my opinion, that upgrade is entirely in the hands of the DM, and I wouldn't give it much chance of being approved if the DM went by what's written in AV. The Belt of Blood and the Totemic Belt really aren't anything alike, other than the fact that they're both belts. But that's beside the point, I'm just being anal.

 

[MadLordOfMilk]

Sorry to bring it back up, but what do you mean "core" isn't a 4e term!? Am I the only one who's looked at the back cover of the books? "For use with these 4th Edition Dungeons & Dragons core products:" is on the back of all of the core books, I'm pretty sure it's on the DM screen, and it's bound to be on other books....

 

[Regicide]

Sorry to bring it back up, but what do you mean "core" isn't a 4e term!? Am I the only one who's looked at the back cover of the books? "For use with these 4th Edition Dungeons & Dragons core products:" is on the back of all of the core books, I'm pretty sure it's on the DM screen, and it's bound to be on other books....

Different books say different things, but from the looks of it, everything is core including the miniatures, dungeon tiles and forgotten realms campaign book.

 

[Tony Vargas]

I agree that it's pretty clear what the intent of the AV addition is, and I think pretty well everyone else here sees it too. The question was whether one could possibly extend this to item properties as defined for item descriptions, namely the "Property:" line in an item's description. It's very semantic, but I don't see anything that denies that interpretation.

This line denies it: "This use of the ritual follows the same rules for enchanting a magic item from a mundane item but reduces the cost."

Do the rules for enchanting a magic item from a mundane item allow you to make custom items that conglomerate the property of one item with the power of another?

No.

Therefore you can't do it with this use of the ritual, either.

 

[Lord Sessadore]

This line denies it: "This use of the ritual follows the same rules for enchanting a magic item from a mundane item but reduces the cost."

Do the rules for enchanting a magic item from a mundane item allow you to make custom items that conglomerate the property of one item with the power of another?

No.

Therefore you can't do it with this use of the ritual, either.

Does the ritual allow you to create an item which isn't published in an official source? If it doesn't, I challenge you to prove that to me.

I won't bother arguing over whether custom items are house rules or not, because most of them are. That's beside the point. The ritual does not say that it can't make items which are found outside of official WotC books. And, frankly, that would be an utterly artificial restriction that would make no sense. Therefore, the ritual can be used to create any magic item, no matter who thought it up (ie - designers at WotC or Jim at your weekly game).

 

[Tony Vargas]

Does the ritual allow you to create an item which isn't published in an official source?

It certainly doesn't give any rules or guidelines for PCs creating new magic items.

Certainly, the DM can add new items to his campaign, and such items could be enchanted by a PC with the right ritual.

The alternate use for the ritual in AV does not open the door to PCs, in effect, creating new items on thier own, though, all it does is reduce the cost of making a magic item, when you start with another, similar item.

So, yes, if you choose to interpret the rules on magic items as allowing PCs to dream up new items and make them, then they can dream up hybrid items and make them cheaper using the AV option. They could also have done so without it, working from scratch - the new use for the ritual doesn't open up a loophole. But, you're right in as far as it does't close one the DM has already chosen to open, himself - which isn't very far at all.

 

[webrunner]

Looking at the Products list, everything that's "Dungeons and dragons" is "core".. so eg, martial power is core. "Forgotten realms" is it's own line.