Epic Magic Big Thread

Proposed new epic magic item: scarab of resilient health

Continuous death ward 4 x 7 x 2000 x 2 (minutes) = 112,000
+6 Con bonus 36,000 x 1.5 (slot) = 54,000
Immunity to diseases 7500 (from periapt of health) x 1.5 (slot) = 11,250
Immunity to poison 27,000 (from periapt of proof against poison) x 1.5 = 40,500

Total cost = 217,750

What do you think? Too much for too little?

If you change it to a +8 Con bonus, it gets a lot pricier:

+8 Con bonus = 640,000
Continuous death ward = 156,000
Immunities = 51,750

Total = 847,750

Should such an item be available at 22nd level? 33rd level? not at all?
 
Last edited:

log in or register to remove this ad

A new approach to [Augment]? And magic items.

I was just thinking about magic items; specifically, I was wondering if one could work backwards from the "Estimating Magic Item Gold Piece Values" chart (DMG 285) to create spells.

And whether an epic spell slot could be used to emulate an item; if so, how expensive an item.

A 3rd level character can cast bull's strength and, for a few minutes, get the benefit of a 16,000 gp item. You have to be 11th level before you get a +4 buff item for real (25% wealth). A 21st level caster who casts [augment] could get a +12 enhancement bonus, something that would only be routine equipment for a 38th level character. I wonder if other 1,440,000 gp items could be emulated with a SP 24 spell.

Incidentally, no-one uses the SR formula of 9000 gp per point of SR above 11, do they? Or else a SR 100 mantle would be worth less than a +10 headband, which seems improbable. 290,000 for SR 40 is awfully cheap; should a 25th level character have it?

I'm going to have to think about your scarab of resilient health a little. A continuous death ward smells a bit like a use activated item of cure light wounds or a continuous protection from evil; just a little cheesy. So I'm tempted to increase the cost of that component. Treat it as a 6th level spell, perhaps. Then it would be 6 x 11 x 2,000 x 2 = 264,000 gp, a price that indicates that a death ward item shouldn't be available to characters much before 20th level. That adds 152,000 to your cost of 217,750, or 369,750. Call it 370,000 gp. Still an awfully good value, but if we want this protection to be routine at low epic levels, it has to be fairly cheap. This is 1/4 the wealth of a 25th level character. By 30th level everyone should have a similar protection.

How much is a continuous mind blank item? Let's see... 8 * 15 * 2,000 = 240,000 gp? If that's right, it's pretty close to my estimate of the cost of a continuous death ward. Fold in a few other related abilities (Wisdom boost?) and you could have a headband of the clear mind that's also around half a million gp.

We'll need a variety of items like these; something that allows you to see in darkness and grants true seeing and immunity to blindness, say. Something else that makes you immune to transmutations. Maybe there are already items like this? There's already a ring that makes you immune to energy attacks; it's a couple of million. A ring of freedom of movement seems cheap at 40,000, but it uses up a ring slot. An item that delays the effect of an attack for a few rounds (or a minute or longer) would be interesting; it gives people time to get the appropriate counter-measure against a great variety of attacks. (If they hide in an anti-magic field the effect should trigger as soon as they leave.) An item that gives very high SR (but according to a better formula than the official one). A rod of invulnerability already exists; I see the DR was changed to 15/adamantine. I wonder how much it would cost to upgrade it?

Hmmm. Lots to think about.

I think these sorts of items would be OK. If everyone stocks up on defense, they aren't spending anything on offense. If someone has an irresistible defense against your attack, then you'll have to find another way to get them. Epic characters shouldn't be one trick ponies.

On the other hand, monsters often are. Thorciasids won't be nearly as much of a threat if they don't drain levels; and if you have a ring of freedom of movement they might as well be big cockroaches. Maybe that's appropriate; not all monsters are going to be effective against everyone.
 
Last edited:

Re: disintegrate and items; I just discovered that items add their hardness to their Fort saves. That helps a lot when disintegrates are flying around. And of course the hardness is subtracted from any damage done. And each +1 enhancement to a shield or weapon adds +2 to the hardness and +10 to its hit points. Dunno about armor; I imagine it's the same. A ring, though, only has hardness 10 and 2 hp. And AC 13 (plus the owner's dex modifier). It doesn't have much chance against a disintegrate.
 
Last edited:

Continuous death ward 6 x 11 x 2000 x 2 (minutes) = 264,000
+6 Con bonus 36,000 = 36,000
Immunity to diseases 7500 (from periapt of health) x 0.5 = 3,750
Immunity to poison 27,000 (from periapt of proof against poison) x 0.5 = 13,500

I think extra abilities in slotted items cost 1.5 x their base cost. Items only have one primary ability. Rather than increase the presumed spell level of death ward (and hence the caster level), you are better off simply fiating:

obviously powerful ability = x2.

Which I was tempted to do, btw. 330,000gp, rounded up. Maybe we should ask the folks in the rules forum.


**

How about this? It translates a factor back into metamagic. Should it work against natural immunities as well?

Circumventory Spell [Metamagic][Epic]
Prerequisites: Spell Penetration, Knowledge (arcana) 27 ranks, Spellcraft 27 ranks
Benefit: You can modulate a spell to bypass magical protections, suspending them for the purposes of determining whether the target is affected. A spell cast as a circumventory spell ignores magical protections by spell or device (but not natural immunities) which would normally defeat it or reduce its efficacy. A circumventory fireball ignores magical resistance or immunity to fire; a circumventory finger of death ignores a death ward or a scarab of protection etc. A circumventory spell uses up a slot four levels higher than the spell's actual level.


I figure the arms race necessitates this feat.
 

I'd be happy with a 330,000 gp price tag on the periapt of epic resilience even if we had to resort to gematria and tarot cards to price it. Although going by the book is easier to justify.

I wonder if the periapt counts as having "multiple similar abilities"? DMG 282 says "calculate the price of the single most costly ability, then add 75% of the value of the next most costly ability, plus one-half the value of any other abilities." The grouping of afflictions that the periapt wards against seem semantically similar; the Con bonus is close (because of the health aspect) but not quite as similar. It's like the SR and DR of the rod of invulnerability; both related to "invulnerability" but not as close together as SR and save bonuses, or DR and natural armor bonuses. This "close but not real close" would justify not multiplying by 75%, I think. There really needs to be more worked-out examples.

Re: Circumventory Spell
Various spells in the SRD seem to indicate that a specific immunity is worth about +8SP (or +4 levels in metamagic). Command undead is the example that comes to mind. This circumvents a natural immunity to mind-affecting magic that is derived from the subjects being of the undead type. I could see generalizing the principles behind this spell and devising a feat that caused any spell to ignore undead immunities, although the most natural way would be at a substantial cost: modified spells might become necromantic, say, and not be able to affect creatures that aren't undead. Still, a +4 level modifier might be enough to ensure that a spell's utility extends to undead but is not otherwise diminished.

Be that as it may, I don't like the notion of magic as being considered a specific immunity on par with an undead's immunity to mind-affecting magic. I don't have a feel for how a feat like Circumventory Spell would be able to distinguish mechanically between natural immunities (and resistances) and protections that are derived from magic. Is it laced with strong anti-magic that suppresses spells? In which case, why wouldn't it suppress supernatural protections? If it works on the principles of dispel magic, why isn't there a caster level check? If it works on the principles of globe of invulnerability, why isn't there a spell level based component? And it seems kind of strong; as written it could punch through a forcefield, prismatic wall and an anti-magic field, and then ignore the epic ward that the caster has set up around herself.

Here's a feat that applies to spell protections. It draws on the principles of a globe of invulnerability, and so it doesn't apply to magic items. (It was published by Throwing Dice games in 2002, and is copyright me and Joseph Mucchiello, Jr.) The fact that a magic item has death ward in its prerequisites does not necessarily means that the protection granted is equivalent to a 4th level spell.

WRETCHED SPELL [METAMAGIC]
Your spells ignore magical counter-measures and defenses.
Prerequisite: Spellcaster level 5+, Spell Focus (Abjuration) or wizard specialization: Abjuration
Benefit: A spell modified with the wretched metamagic feat ignores all spells (including spell-like abilities) of level 1 or lower. For example, a wretched magic missile would ignore a shield spell. Ignored spells cannot reduce or prevent damage from, detect or interact in any way with the modified spell. A wretched spell takes up a slot 1 level higher. A wretched spell has no special effect on supernatural or extraordinary abilities or defenses. Nor does it ignore mundane materials created by spells such as wall of stone. Saving throw bonuses granted by spells are not negated by a wretched spell.
Special: Wretched spell is stackable; each additional level of wretched causes the modified spell to ignore an additional level of spells.

Besides the magic missile exploit, I thought this would also allow an invisibility to be warded against detect invisibility. Or even, if stacked high enough, true seeing. With six levels it would allow a spell ignore (and still be effective in) an anti-magic field. Of course, so could a spell modified by Circumventory Spell.

A variation of Wretched Spell whose principles are drawn from antimagic field would apply to items. But you'd need to give the spell you are casting the ability to function inside this virtual antimagic field. (A wretched spell needs no such provision because it is automatically raised to a level that bypasses the virtual globe of invulnerability that is suppressing the protections. Well, except for cantrips. :uhoh: ) I'd say +8 levels, and the modified spell would have the quirks of an antimagic field; spells modified wouldn't work against incorporeal undead or summoned creatures, and they wouldn't penetrate a wall of force or prismatic sphere/wall. And if an item would function in an antimagic field it would still provide protection against the modified spell. The modified spell would, however, ignore supernatural resistances and immunities, not just those derived from magic items and spells.

+8 levels is hefty, but it means that the save DC on that finger of death can't be heightened nearly as much. And it slows down the progression of the arms race; it will be a few levels before people absolutely have to have items that work inside an anti-magic field.

[edit] A +4 level modifier against a specific natural immunity, like undead immunity to mind-affecting spells, would also be appropriate. I don't know if it would be enough to bypass *all* undead immunities (allowing you to polymorph them as well as charm them). And it certainly wouldn't be enough to bypass all immunities by anything to anything.

[edit2] If we go this way, can we call it Despicable Spell? I love doing Sylvester the Cat imitations. :D
 
Last edited:

I'm happy with a 330,000 gp price tag on the periapt of epic resilience, even if we had to resort to gematria and tarot cards to price it. Although going by the book is easier to justify.

Hypersmurf prices it at 125K based on soulfire armor from the BoED. I asked him if he thought it deserved a price hike due to its power, and he thought it would probably be OK at that price, even though he felt the soulfire ability might be undervalued.

In general, I'd prefer to use prices which:

a) Strictly follow the rules in the DMG and;
b) Don't use noncore books as precedent if they're dubiously balanced.

Which would make my original price at 217,750 stand. The reason that I suggested that it be a +8 bonus to Con was simply to inflate the price to a more 'epic' scale. 850K is kind of high, though. But I think by judicious inclusion of abilities we can fiddle with the price until it's in the right zone.

At 25% of a character's wealth it is their 'number one item;' at 10% of their wealth, it is their 'number two item' - characters get three number two items. I think we should follow this pattern - I may have to adjust Matt's gear on this basis. In most cases, I think the value of the number two item might be more telling in terms of when it is likely to be commonly found - we should probably provisionally designate items which we invent as 'likely number ones' or 'likely number twos,' depending on their utility.

If you're willing to accept these principles, I suggest we we either

a) Make it an unslotted item, which would double its price or;
b) Make it an item which occupies a slot with which the item demonstrates no affinity, which would increase its price by 50% or
c) Purposely include an ability which is overpriced in order to artificially inflate the item's value.

I actually favor the last option, as contrived as it might sound. If we add (say) an ability which grants a +6 bonus to Fortitude saving throws (1/3 of a cloak of epic resistance +6 = 120,000 gp; x 1.5 (no slot affinity) the final item looks like this:

180,000 (resistance)
156,000 (continuous death ward
54,000 (+6 Con)
51,750 (immunities)


Amulet of Epic Resilience (or whatever)

This glistening silver amulet bestows a +6 enhancement bonus to Constitution, a +6 resistance bonus to Fortitude saving throws, and renders the wearer immune to all negative energy effects, effects with the [death] descriptor, all poisons and all diseases - whether natural or supernatural in origin. Caster Level: 20th; Prerequisites: Craft Wondrous Item, Craft Epic Wondrous Item, death ward, neutralize poison, cure disease, bear's endurance; Market Price: 441,750 gp.


The redundancy between the Fort save bonus and the immunities is intentional. It seems impressive, though.
 

Sepulchrave II said:
Hypersmurf prices it at 125K based on soulfire armor from the BoED. I asked him if he thought it deserved a price hike due to its power, and he thought it would probably be OK at that price, even though he felt the soulfire ability might be undervalued.

I briefly ran a no holds barred high level campaign while my DM Shilsen was back in India for the summer and that Soulfire Armor ability is HIDEOUSLY undervalued. As I think your earlier calculations showed for other ways of achieving the same thing. The only thing I can think of that seemed to more underpriced was the "Speed" ability in the original Defenders of the Faith Splat book that essentially gave you permanent (3e) haste for a +1 modifier (IIRC).
 

Pricing a +4 armor ability at 25,000 gp presumes that the armor is about +1. I don't think that is a reasonable assumption at epic levels. And if it is indeed "hideously undervalued" at +4, well, that is even more reason to doubt the analysis.

I don't trust the rules in the DMG for pricing epic items; SR, for instance, is way too cheap. So I reject your first principle. The second principle I agree with- but I'm not inclined to follow anything too slavishly. I even differ with UK on some things in the Immortal's Handbook!

If you're willing to accept these principles, I suggest we we either

a) Make it an unslotted item, which would double its price or;
b) Make it an item which occupies a slot with which the item demonstrates no affinity, which would increase its price by 50% or
c) Purposely include an ability which is overpriced in order to artificially inflate the item's value.
B and C are aesthetically unappealing. Especially B. What's next- goggles of titan strength? boots of sense motive? As for C, well, including overpriced and inappropriate abilities is just bad design, as far as I can tell. And I'd rather avoid A; I'd want there to be tough choices in deciding what equipment to take; I don't even know if there should be an option to make the periapt slotless.

Anyway, at 10% the periapt would be a secondary item at level 33. Is that too late? As a primary item it could be available at level 24. Which isn't too bad; they can't afford a +8 stat buff item as a primary item until level 30 anyway.

It would allow undead and thorciasids to be scarey for a while, and makes atropals a horrific threat for 20-something level characters. When they get into the 30s the threat of thorciasids should be much diminished, and atropals should be tough but manageable.

Actually... is ability damage/drain a negative energy effect? I don't see any support for this in the rules, but I was presuming that it was. Does soulfire armor protect against it? I gave away my book of exalted deeds so I don't have access to the text.

[edit] It seems like it doesn't. I was pricing the periapt as if it worked against ability damage/drain. Should it? The warding against disease and poison sounds like it is a fairly comprehensive protection, but might not work against curses (or other sources of penalties). Unless, perhaps, if they were necromantic in origin (i.e. a necromancy spell or undead special attack).

A more comprehensive protection would make a value of three or four hundred thousand gp or so feel a lot more appropriate. Is this the target price? A cheaper item with holes in its protection would also be OK. I'm unsure.
 
Last edited:

I don't trust the rules in the DMG for pricing epic items

Nor do I. But I'm not prepared to write a new system, nor am I prepared to accept a method of pricing items based on a CR system which I view as wildly inaccurate. Sorry to be so blunt.

Hence the suggestion that we craft items with a view to reflecting what we arbitrarily decide is a desirable level at which to possess it. I am perfectly happy to be arbitrary in many cases, and simply change the paradigm to accommodate. Sometimes there is an objective measure of balance, at others there is not. We should not be afraid to define balance where none exists.

B and C are aesthetically unappealing. Especially B. What's next- goggles of titan strength? boots of sense motive?

Helm of teleportation? I said nothing of absurd.

As for C, well, including overpriced and inappropriate abilities is just bad design, as far as I can tell.

It's playing a game. Using the rules to get the result we want - nothing more. If you think that a continuous death ward item should cost 350K, its easy to use the rules to create a plausible item to justify it. If I think it should cost 220K, the same goes. If Hypersmurf thinks 50K, ditto. The fundamental question is what level do we want this item to be available at? DMG pricing merely provides us with a set of tools. If SR is too cheap, then we include it in an item with a more expensive ability.

If you want to create an SR50 item but you're worried that SR is too cheap, then fold it in with a +10 armor bonus, a +6 resistance bonus to saving throws, +4 on caster level checks to penetrate SR, call it the robe of the ipsissimus and charge 1.6 million gp for it - it becomes the #1 item for a 40th-level wizard, who can get some decent milage out of SR50.

One reason that I partially agree with a high price on the amulet is that it does not force the player to make a choice. If you remove the +6 Con bonus it becomes much harder; the player has to choose between his death ward item and his 3hp/level. This may actually be a better solution - it vies with a periapt of wisdom and an amulet of health for space. It is suddenly far less appealing.
 
Last edited:

If you want to create an SR50 item but you're worried that SR is too cheap, then fold it in with a +10 armor bonus, a +6 resistance bonus to saving throws, +4 on caster level checks to penetrate SR, call it the robe of the ipsissimus and charge 1.6 million gp for it - it becomes the #1 item for a 40th-level wizard, who can get some decent mileage out of SR50.
Took me a minute to follow you there. 1,660,000 gp, right?

[sblock]It appears that the powers of a robe of the archmagi were priced separately, added up, and then reduced by 30% because of the alignment restrictions. i.e.

+5 armor bonus 25,000
SR18 60,000
+4 saves 16,000
+2 bonus to overcome SR 6000
(priced at bonus squared times 1500)​
sub-total: 107,000
times 0.7 (item requires specific class or alignment to use)

Total: 74,900 gp. Round to 75,000 gp. I am guessing at the bonus to overcome SR, but I can't see any way that the secondary functions are multiplied by 1.5 before the 30% discount is applied. If they were, the cost would be about 91,350 gp. Even if the Spell Penetration were free it would still cost 85,050. If the abilities were all related (and thus discounted) then the cost could be made to fit if the +2 bonus to SR were priced at bonus squared times 10,000. Which seems ridiculously high.

Assuming that the separate values are just added up, the robe of the ipsissimus would be priced as follows:
+10 armor bonus 1,000,000 (epic multiplier)
SR50 380,000
+6 saves 36,000
+4 bonus to overcome SR 24000​
total: 1,440,000. If secondary functions are priced at x1.5, then it is 1,660,000 gp.[/sblock]It looks like you are deciding that SR50 is appropriate as the major item for a 40th level wizard, and you are working backward from there. That's a workable rule, but a robe of the archmagi would be worn by a mage of at least 15th level, and so gives pretty weak SR; level + 3, not level + 10. Maybe the robe of the ipsissimus should have its power bumped to a 2.6 million gp level. I'm not sure what measure of utility you'll want to use; the rule of thumb that SR = caster level + 10? Or the utility of already published items?

The mantle of spell resistance is a secondary (10%) item at level 21, and so SR = level and it is useless except vs low-level opponents. It's a primary item (25%) at level 16, when it still isn't very useful. On the other hand, the mantle of epic spell resistance (SR 41 if the DMG formula were followed) would be a good value even as a 31st level character's secondary item. On the shoulders of a 23rd level character it is quite remarkable, even for a primary item.

I would suggest that we can make ad hoc adjustments to the DMG without having to totally rewrite the item creation formulas. The SR rule is the most egregious example; perhaps the only one that really demands to be fixed. To fix it (probably by putting it on a quadratic basis) you have to decide if it should be a good value (like the epic mantle) or a lousy value (like the non-epic mantle). Given how treasure scales, a poor value item will become a better value later on. Changing the zero point (like SR 12 for the official formula) will also affect things. I'll run some numbers and get back to you.

The lack of clarity about when two functions are "related" is also in need of ruling. In fact, you can't make a multi-function item without deciding this; your assumption seems to be that it never applies; secondary functions always have a 50% surcharge. Given the shortage of equipment slots at high levels, and the desire to make the characters be more than the sum of their equipment, this seems to be a reasonable assumption to make. (If this reasoning is, in fact, faithful to your intentions; I'm just guessing.)

If you want to include redundancies among primary items (like an armor bonus in the robe of ipsissimus, which is presumably superseded by epic bracers), that could certainly be done. It could even be made intelligible by having some kind of useful bracelet that doesn't provide protection; there is thus a reason why bracers of armor might not be worn. (Sending would be appropriate for a "friends" affinity, wouldn't it? And/or a way of teleporting them to you, or yourself to them.) But I'll be able to help you much better if I know the reasoning you are going to be following.

... nor am I prepared to accept a method of pricing items based on a CR system which I view as wildly inaccurate. Sorry to be so blunt.
Our real problem here is that *all* the official systems are wildly inaccurate when extrapolated into epic levels. UK's system has its flaws, but it is better, imho, than the WotC system. I'm trying to be helpful, but I will also defer to your wishes- if you don't want to see any ECL/gp meta-analysis of treasure, then I won't provide you with any. I think it could be a valuable tool, but YMOV. Perhaps this is just yet another passing enthusiasm; you are rightly wary of them.
 

Remove ads

Top