Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="pawsplay" data-source="post: 3429953" data-attributes="member: 15538">Arguing it's so inexpensive any bard would want it pretty much shows you are not coming at this from an objective standpoint. You have a goal you want to meet (making it more expensive) and it is coloring your idea of how to approach the rules analysis. </blockquote>Ad hominem. It shows no such thing. I am advocating the viewpoint that the magic item costs were originally designed with some concept of balance in mind. The DMG includes no flat cost weapon enhancements, and ones elsewhere rarely effect a weapon's damage directly. Thus, to me, it is central that the echoblade property is essentially a &quot;+&quot; quality that simply was not given a &quot;+.&quot;That remains the case whether you are adding the flaming quality to the echoblade or the echoblade quality to something else. Whether or not the other case is possible, if you add flaming to the echoblade, you are gaining the advantages of an unsually enhanced item. Treating &quot;echoblade&quot; as a static property simultaneously breaks down the existing price structure for weapons, while also ignoring the usual discount for a weapon that can be used only by certain characters, particularly by using an ability themselves.No one can say if the echoblade was designed in the first place as a &quot;+&quot; and then a discount was applied, of a certain percentage, or some arbitrary amount. Or whether conversely it was priced intuitively. I think it is not permissible to ignore the echoblade qualities when pricing the item, because it is exactly the sort of property that generally rates as a + increase. If mighty cleaving rates a +1, &quot;echoblade&quot; certainly does.[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE="pawsplay, post: 3429953, member: 15538"] [i]Arguing it's so inexpensive any bard would want it pretty much shows you are not coming at this from an objective standpoint. You have a goal you want to meet (making it more expensive) and it is coloring your idea of how to approach the rules analysis. [/quote] Ad hominem. It shows no such thing. I am advocating the viewpoint that the magic item costs were originally designed with some concept of balance in mind. The DMG includes no flat cost weapon enhancements, and ones elsewhere rarely effect a weapon's damage directly. Thus, to me, it is central that the echoblade property is essentially a "+" quality that simply was not given a "+." That remains the case whether you are adding the flaming quality to the echoblade or the echoblade quality to something else. Whether or not the other case is possible, if you add flaming to the echoblade, you are gaining the advantages of an unsually enhanced item. Treating "echoblade" as a static property simultaneously breaks down the existing price structure for weapons, while also ignoring the usual discount for a weapon that can be used only by certain characters, particularly by using an ability themselves. No one can say if the echoblade was designed in the first place as a "+" and then a discount was applied, of a certain percentage, or some arbitrary amount. Or whether conversely it was priced intuitively. I think it is not permissible to ignore the echoblade qualities when pricing the item, because it is exactly the sort of property that generally rates as a + increase. If mighty cleaving rates a +1, "echoblade" certainly does.[/i] [/QUOTE]

Verification