Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Patryn of Elvenshae" data-source="post: 2798052" data-attributes="member: 23094">I agree with the answer, but not the methodology.  <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />Generally, you should only price things as constant spell effects if there is no other way to do it, and even then be leary of it if the spell's effect is largely independent of caster level.There is a general formula for enhancement bonuses to various character abilities:[Bonus]^2 * ConstantFor example, for AC, the constant is 1,000gp for armor bonuses and 2,000gp for other bonuses.  For ability bonuses, it's 1,000gp.Therefore, we can devise the constant that allows us to calculate the value of enhancements to speed.We know that the boots of Striding and Springing have two components: +5 Competence to Jump, +10' movement speed.  We also know that +5 Competence to a skill is [Bonus]^2 * 100, which gives us 2,500gp base for the jumping part.  That means the other half (+10') must cost 3,000gp, which means that it's 2,000gp * 1.5 for a secondary ability.So,  [10']^2 * X = 2,000gp.X, then, is 200gp.The benefit of pricing them this way, rather than by the longstrider spell, is that it allows you to create boots with larger or smaller movement increases that scale appropriately.It also prevents the player from paying a ridiculous amount for a continous ability just because his item happens to have a high caster level - a 10' increase in movement is at CL 1, generally speaking, the same as a 10' increase in movement as CL 6.  The CL 6 version is much, much more expensive, however.If, instead, the effect of the item were more closely tied to its caster level (i.e., +10' + 5' / 5 caster levels), then tying it back to the continuous spell effect would make more sense.</blockquote>

Verification