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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Lord Pendragon" data-source="post: 1284533" data-attributes="member: 707">RD:  Once you figure out a way to reverse-engineer the Ring of Invisibility, we can start using already created items as validation for the argument at hand.  More likely, the Druid's Vestment was given a discount because it's just not worth 16,000gp, just as the Ring of Invisibility was bumped way up.Tazarevick:  I have to admit that your campaign is far different from those I've played in.  I've never seen an entire party picking up UMD, 3.0 or 3.5.  You do bring up a valid point with regards to healing staves/wands.  IME, most parties are acutely aware of who can use the healing items.  However, I'm not comfortable allowing weapons, armor, rings, etc. to receive huge bonuses for restrictions that will still only be real restrictions on healing items.  Though you've made me consider allowing the restrictions on healing items, if the PCs actually wanted to do so.Your epic example is interesting, but unique to the switch from Standard to Epic play.  In particular, the huge Epic Item Creation price boost makes upgrading a weapon to epic, as opposed to simply finding an epic weapon, problematic at blest.Pre-epic, once you gain the feat, say Craft Arms and Armor, you are good to go for the next twenty levels.  So if you have a wizard in the party willing to craft your Ubersword mk1 in the first place, he's likely to still be around to upgrade it to the Ubersword mk2, and sufficiently powered to do so.The subject of healing items has me thinking, but on the whole I still don't think the designers intended for crafts to get a 30% price cut for what is, healing items aside, a beneficial feature.</blockquote>

Verification