Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
ShortQuests -- Pocket Sized Adventures! An all-new collection of digest-sized D&D adventures designed for 1-2 game sessions.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Spatzimaus" data-source="post: 1133101" data-attributes="member: 3051">As for your other points, you shouldn't have to double the cost of the 50k ability if you consider that to be the "base" item. Yes, but the rules as written aren't clearly stated that way; I believe it's in the FAQ, but that's not exactly official.The DMG says that for multiple similar abilities, the most costly ability is full price and the cheaper ones are discounted.  For multiple abilities in a slotted item, though, it says that "each additional power... has a 100% increase in price".  So, while you could say that the cheaper ones are the "additional" powers, this in fact is the opposite of the only precedent they ever gave (where the most expensive ability is the only one you never discount).Of course it's stupid to double the expensive one since the person could buy that as a slotted item and the others as slotless for less, but we're talking ballpark price here.  I'd price it the same way you did (except for the +100% thing), I was just pointing out that when you use the other interpretation of price you cross the Epic threshold, which multiplies price by 10...So do you think items with multiple abilities shouldn't be allowed by GM's? I never thought about it actually. The rules are in the book, the examples make precident for it. Somewhere early in 3.0 the suggestion of adding multiple abilities to items was even made in the core books somewhere.The DMG uses a Belt of Strength +4 and Dexterity +4 as the example of designing an item with multiple bonuses.I'm not totally against the multi-ability concept.  I'm willing to allow items like this, but there have to be some limitations.  If you're just talking about combining two items that were for the same slot already, it's not a problem.  If they're thematically linked, no problem.  If one is far, FAR more expensive than the other, no problem.  For example, if I want my Ring of Regeneration to also act as a Ring of Sustenance.  Both of these are existing items, both are the same slot, and they're thematically linked.  No problem.First, though, there's the Feat issue.  A lot of people try to do something like make a "Vest of Regeneration", that's just like a Ring of Regeneration but only requires Craft Wondrous Item (one of my players tried that), since they don't want to take the Forge Ring feat.  Even though the 3E rules don't say this'd be any more expensive, why would you allow it?  For your item this isn't as much an issue, although I'd still say that something combining 5 different items should probably require a more critical slot.  A Ring would be more appropriate for something of this power level.  This is related to the developers' "Quack Like A Duck" policy.Then, there's the pick-n-choose aspect.  Why would an item boost STR, CON, DEX, and of all things CHA, without also boosting INT and WIS?  What does CHA have to do with all the other abilities?  Mixing two physical stats is one thing; mixing five different things that happen to be EXACTLY what the intended player wanted is something else.It just annoys me that in every player-designed item there's never any "wasted" ability.  Look at the multi-ability items in the books; the Rings of Elemental Command are good for this.  There are some good abilities, some abilities where you wish they had more uses per day, and some that you wish they hadn't put on if it'd keep the price down.If it's a DM-designed item, add some "flavor" abilities.  If it's "Divine Body", then throw on some sort of Poison or Disease resistance, or let it activate a few times a day for some minor divine spell (Aid, for example).  Tweak the other abilities a bit; maybe it's only +3 Natural Armor.  That sort of thing.Anyway, it's just something you want to be careful about.  If you don't put any sort of limitation on these sorts of items, then that's all the players will EVER want, and they'll only view loot as something to be sold to fund the next super-item.</blockquote>

Verification