Combined Magic Items - cost?

[Tony Vargas]

I think I'm just going to be repeating what has already been said, but:

1) No, there's no provision in the rules for doing this. The closest you get to it, the Rules in AV for upgrading or transfering magic items, in fact, explicitly forbid it.

2) IF you were to do it, the obvious way would be to take the level difference of each item from a generic item of their enhancement +1 level. (Because, there are items that are the same level as a basic enchanted item, and you shouldn't be able to combine them with eachother 'for free'). Add them together. If the total is 5 or less, you can make the item, it's level is the level of a generic magic item of the desired ehancement, plus that total.

If it adds up to more than 5, forget it.

2.5) Combining costs just isn't going to do it, magic items increase in cost geometrically (or exponentially or something, I haven't reverse-engineered the math), and simply adding them together would be way too cheap.

3) If you're using the Essentials magic item system, you have to decide if the item is common, uncommon, or rare. I'd suggest upping it one from the rarer item. So combining two commons is an uncommon, combining with an ucommon is rare, and rares can't be combined. Of course, this'd also mean PCs can make/buy such items. Which is fine, really, since they already can't.

 

[bganon]

I think I'm just going to be repeating what has already been said, but:
2.5) Combining costs just isn't going to do it, magic items increase in cost geometrically (or exponentially or something, I haven't reverse-engineered the math), and simply adding them together would be way too cheap.

FYI, item cost is actually pretty interesting: it's a bunch of linear segments that form an exponential. Item price goes up a fixed amount per level until you hit a level where the enhancement bonus goes up, then there's a big jump in both overall price and price increase per level. It's set up so that a bump up one "enhancement tier" (+5 levels) multiplies the cost by 5.

Anyway, the upshot is what people have already said, really. Adjusting anything beyond the "enhancement bonus tier" (i.e. level 1-5, 6-10, etc...) that you started in is going to be screwed up. And really, it's not just cost in wealth that balances items, it's opportunity cost in item slots taken up.

That said, while vicious weapons cost about what they "should" given DPR calculations, paired weapons are set up so that the enchantment costs nearly as much as just buying two flat-out. Which, IMO, is lame, especially since "paired" means you give up any other enchantment. So in this specific case I think "paired vicious" as a 10th level item is just fine, because it still winds up costing nearly as much as two vicious weapons, and stacking those two enchantments doesn't really offer any other special benefit.

But it's really impossible to come up with a general rule.

 

[ThirdWizard]

Keep in mind the reason that they changed this from 3e to 4e was that effects and raw pluses of items weren't equivalent, but were treated as equivalent for magic item creation. So your +1 flaming, frost, shock weapon was worth the same as a +4 weapon, but did considerably more damage (and you'd just cast greater magic weapon on it at the start of the day). So, 4e went away from the equivalents. So in 4e you get a certain plus at certain levels and powers vary within said level range.

This creates a consistency of power both for expected bonuses and expected powers. If you change either, you might throw off the other one. You don't want a level 7 sword, for example, that has only a +1 to hit because that's what some formula said. Everything has to be looked at individually.

Having said that, I'm a big fan of custom magic items. One of the weapons I gave out in my last game was a +4 Jagged Vicious Executioner Axe. Instead of calculating costs, what I did was add a penalty, making it slightly cursed. So, two things make the weapon dangerous: 1) when the wielder becomes bloodied, they take ongoing 5 damage that cannot be prevented and 2) enemies score critical hits on 19-20 against the wielder.

I like dangerous items like that, which tempt the character into using them. The axe also fit, in this case, the barbarian's wild nature and habit of accelerating combat, in either direction. It worked really well and was a memorable weapon.

Another item I put out there was a mannequin. Once per year, two items could be placed on the mannequin in the same slot. The first would disappear, then the second would absorb the powers of the first, but whoever wore the item would lose a healing surge for the day. So the players could combine any two items they wanted, once, and suffer a minor generic consequence.

Another interesting one I did was infusing the PCs' armor with Far Realm taint, giving them slightly increased powers with disturbing flavor. The cleric's armor would heal him, blood from his armor running into his own, but he became addicted to it (suffering penalties if he didn't use the ability early in the adventuring day), while the ranger would involuntarily steal healing magic for herself when bloodied, and the barbarian would shrug off enemy dominate effects, but his armor would dominate him instead.

So, I'm a big fan of giving out power for a price. I don't know if it would work for ever group, and some players might balk at the idea of using any item with a curse on it, but in my experience, players eat that kind of stuff up. They just can't help themselves.

 

[Ryujin]

As a DM I would make it at least double the cost of each individual weapon, and then only consider it on a case by case basis. I would never create an all encompasing mechanic for it.

 

[BobTheNob]

Having said that, I'm a big fan of custom magic items. One of the weapons I gave out in my last game was a +4 Jagged Vicious Executioner Axe. Instead of calculating costs, what I did was add a penalty, making it slightly cursed. So, two things make the weapon dangerous: 1) when the wielder becomes bloodied, they take ongoing 5 damage that cannot be prevented and 2) enemies score critical hits on 19-20 against the wielder.

Now this has some merit. At the end of the day, GOLD cost is nothing! Means squat, there is always more of it, and if you treat gold as the cost as the aquisition of powerful items, your will end up in trouble. Its taken 20+ years of role playing experience to figure that out.

But this idea, well, the cost of power is NOT gold, its risk. The player "pays" for the extra power by taking risk unto themselves. Its a tangible cost and, whats more, its interesting.

Like it alot

(I would steal the idea off you, but we had our last session with me as DM last night....after almost 3 years! Wow that was a long campaign)