Customizing Pre-defined Magic Weapons

[orangefruitbat]

I'm just about to start playing in a new, high-level campaign. My character is a high level assasin, and I want to equip him with an improved version of the assasin's dagger and a sword of subtlety.
-------------------------------------------
Assasin's Dagger: This wicked-looking, curved +2 dagger provides a +1 bonus to the DC of a Fortitude save forced by the death attack of an assassin.
Moderate necromancy; CL 9th; Craft Magic Arms and Armor, slay living; Price 18,302 gp; Cost 9,302 gp + 720 XP.

So, the improved death attack ability is basically considered an additional plus - correct?

If I want to increase the basic plus, or provide additional powers (bane, speed, etc), I can just add to the total plus and find the cost - correct?

Can I also increase the Death attack bonus at a cost of one additional plus each?
----------------------------------------
Sword of Subtlety: A +1 short sword with a thin, dull gray blade, this weapon provides a +4 bonus on its wielder’s attack and damage rolls when he is making a sneak attack with it.
Moderate illusion; CL 7th; Craft Magic Arms and Armor, blur; Price 22,310 gp; Cost 11,155 gp + 892 XP

A +1 short sword has a cost of 2,310. So, does the +4 sneak attack bonus cost a flat 20,000 gp, or is this figure calculated some other way?

If I want to increase the basic plus, or provide additional powers (bane, keen, etc), I can just add to the total pluses and find the cost (adding the additional 20,000) - correct?

-------------------------------------------

In addition, I would like to make a customized version of the Eyes of the Eagle miscallenous item that also provides the benefit of the Daylight Adaptation feat (FRCS). How do I calculate the value of an item that basically provides a feat capability?

Eyes of the Eagle: These items are made of special crystal and fit over the eyes of the wearer. These lenses grant a +5 competence bonus on Spot checks. Wearing only one of the pair causes a character to become dizzy and, in effect, stunned for 1 round. Thereafter, the wearer can use the single lens without being stunned so long as she covers her other eye. Of course, she can remove the single lens and see normally at any time, or wear both lenses to end or avoid the dizziness.
Faint divination; CL 3rd; Craft Wondrous Item, clairaudience/clairvoyance; Price 2,500 gp.

 

[Pax]

Those are questions that only your DM can answer, I'm afraid.

 

[Darklone]

Pax is mostly right. The question about adding additional powers to your shortsword of subtlety: Yes. It costs that much.

 

[orangefruitbat]

Ok, but how is the cost calculated? My DM is pretty relaxed about what I (this is a real gonzo, over-the-top sorta campaign), but he is a stickler to mechanics. I was hoping the collective brainpower on this forum could divine how prices for these items are calculated. I think I've got the dagger down, but the rest still seem arbitrary.

Pax is mostly right. The question about adding additional powers to your shortsword of subtlety: Yes. It costs that much.

 

[Nifft]

Sword of Subtlety: A +1 short sword with a thin, dull gray blade, this weapon provides a +4 bonus on its wielder’s attack and damage rolls when he is making a sneak attack with it.
Moderate illusion; CL 7th; Craft Magic Arms and Armor, blur; Price 22,310 gp; Cost 11,155 gp + 892 XP

A +1 short sword has a cost of 2,310. So, does the +4 sneak attack bonus cost a flat 20,000 gp, or is this figure calculated some other way?

If I want to increase the basic plus, or provide additional powers (bane, keen, etc), I can just add to the total pluses and find the cost (adding the additional 20,000) - correct?

I suspect that the +4 (sneak attack only) means that they took the cost of a +5 weapon minus a +1 weapon, and divided it by something (seems that 50kgp - 2kgp = 48kgp, so it would be divided by .416666... to get 20kgp).

So, if you add plusses, your +4 goes up in value.

The formula for a +N Sword of Subtlety should be: Price of N + (price of N+4 - price of N) * .40, and round it to a nicer number.

One thing for your GM to look out for is the Epic implications. (Some groups consider a +4 Bane weapon to be +6 when attacking its Bane foe, and therefore will penetrate DR/epic. Your GM may consider a +2 sword of subtlety to be +6 when sneak attacking, and therefore Epic when sneak attacking. A way around this would be to allow you to add special abilities but not enhancement bonuses.)

-- N

 

[dcollins]

Ok, but how is the cost calculated? My DM is pretty relaxed about what I (this is a real gonzo, over-the-top sorta campaign), but he is a stickler to mechanics. I was hoping the collective brainpower on this forum could divine how prices for these items are calculated. I think I've got the dagger down, but the rest still seem arbitrary.

Yes, all the rest are arbitrary. If you're making up new items that aren't in the core rules, you're in House-Rules territory, and the DM needs to decide what the price and allowability should be in his campaign.

If he's really a "stickler to mechanics" then the easiest thing is to let you buy anything, and stick to anything, specifically detailed in the core rules.

 

[Diirk]

Sword of subtlety doesn't seem worth it to me... comparing costs, sword of subtlety (+1/+4 depending) for 22k, or +3 sword for 18k? When you make sneak attacks you're at a -1/-1, which is mildly worse... the damage difference isn't much considering all those extra d6s you get, so the +1 to hit vs a flat +3 enchantment is the only benefit. On the downside when you run into those sneak attack immune creatures (undead, constructs, etc) you're already weaker.... and now your sword is only +1 !

For a very minor benefit while sneak attacking, it has a rather big drawback in that it further weakens an aspect of the class that is already relatively poor.

 

[Nifft]

comparing costs, sword of subtlety (+1/+4 depending) for 22k, or +3 sword for 18k?

I think it's +5 when sneak attacking -- an extra 20% chance to hit. (+1 always, +4 to sneak attack)

Bane is listed similarly, which supports this reading.

-- N