Magic Item Compendium

[Cheiromancer]

I have been utilizing this book to reconfigure and evaluate the awesome Red Hand of Doom adventure on the WoTC boards, but if there is interest, I might post it here as well.

:looks interested:

Even a link would be nice; I don't know my way around the WotC boards.

 

[Archon of Light]

:looks interested:

Even a link would be nice; I don't know my way around the WotC boards.

Ah, guess that would be nice of me...

Part I and Part II.

 

[hong]

Sure, if you add the Bix Six bonus into an existing item, there won't be any additional cost. If you do it the other way around, though, you're paying through the nose for it.

There is nothing that requires this, and in fact the algorithm given in the book presupposes a unique cost for everything.

There's a paragraph on p. 233, right column, that says if the item you're adding occupies a body slot (boots of striding and springing, e.g.) you can add it to an existing item of that same slot (slippers of spider climbing) for 1.5 times the cost of the enchantment OR the value of the new power plus 1/2 the value of the existing item, if the new power costs more. The example they use is adding the feather falling ability to a ring of climbing - it would be 3,300 gp, the cost of the feather fall x1.5.

Yes, because competence bonuses to skills don't appear in Table 6-11, Adding/Improving Common Item Effects. And thus they fall into the category of "special stuff" whose cost is increased by 50%.

 

[Kerrick]

Both examples are of two non-"Big 6" abilities, and shows how it works, both ways, with two non-exception abilities. You are infering that this must be how it works with the exceptioned abilities because of a somewhat ambiguous rule explanation.

By "exceptioned abilities" I assume you mean "Big Six" stuff? If so, then no - that part's pretty clear.

I think the intent is that adding the powers either way costs the same (and yes, if you go strictly by letter of the RAW, you could argue that this isn't true, but why argue for something that you yourself agrees makes no sense?).

That might well be (that they cost the same either way) - that entire section is really badly written. It'd certainly be nice (and make more sense) if it were.

I'd say there will be errata to fix this soon, and if it bugs you until then, just do it the way that makes sense to you.

Or better yet, toss the rule out entirely and just go back to the DMG.

This process of subtracting the new from the old would hold regardless of which item you started with and which ability you were adding. It doesn't matter what order you do it in, you get the same end price.

No, that applies to upgrading items only - if you have a +1 sword and you want to make it +2, or gloves of Dexerity +4 and you want to make them +6. It does NOT apply if you want to add manual prowess to gloves of dexterity, or feather falling to a ring of jumping.

There is nothing that requires this, and in fact the algorithm given in the book presupposes a unique cost for everything.

Huh? The paragraph on 233 seems to imply it - if Lidda had boots of Dexterity +2 and she wanted to add striding and springing, she'd pay extra for it, because striding and springing is not a "common item effect", as you pointed out.

 

[hong]

That might well be (that they cost the same either way) - that entire section is really badly written. It'd certainly be nice (and make more sense) if it were.

The only one who seems to be interpreting it the silly way seems to be you. So why are you doing it?

No, that applies to upgrading items only - if you have a +1 sword and you want to make it +2, or gloves of Dexerity +4 and you want to make them +6. It does NOT apply if you want to add manual prowess to gloves of dexterity, or feather falling to a ring of jumping.

Why not?

Huh? The paragraph on 233 seems to imply it - if Lidda had boots of Dexterity +2 and she wanted to add striding and springing, she'd pay extra for it, because striding and springing is not a "common item effect", as you pointed out.

No, because striding & springing is not an ADDITIONAL special effect. It's the first special effect, on top of the +2 Dex.

 

[Kerrick]

The only one who seems to be interpreting it the silly way seems to be you. So why are you doing it?

I dunno.. it looked pretty clear to me until everyone started telling me I had it wrong. I'll submit the paragraph in question for the general populace, since not everyone's got the book yet.

In most cases, if the item is one that occupies a body slot, the cost of adding any additional ability to that item is 1-1/2 times the value of the added power (or the value of the add power plus 1/2 the value of the existing item, if the added power normally costs more than the existing item). For example, if the character adds the power to confer feather falling to her ring of jumping, the cost of adding the ability is 3,300 gp, the same as for creating a ring of feather falling times 1-1/2. On the other hand, if she were addiong the power of a ring of force shield to that ring of jumping, the cost of adding the ability woulid be 9,750 gp (8,500 gp for the ring of force shield plus half of 2,500 gp, the price of a ring of jumping.)

Why not?

See above.

No, because striding & springing is not an ADDITIONAL special effect. It's the first special effect, on top of the +2 Dex.

Now who's being pedantic? ANY magical effect is a "special effect", be it a +1 enhancement bonus, a +6 stat boost, or the power to blow up an entire city. See the quote below:

This added cost doesn't necessarily apply when adding some common effects to existing items; see below.

Adding "common effects" to an existing magic item doesn't trigger the multiplier; we can all agree on that one. Adding anything else, however, does.

 

[hong]

I dunno.. it looked pretty clear to me until everyone started telling me I had it wrong.

That should tell you something.

I'll submit the paragraph in question for the general populace, since not everyone's got the book yet.

Fascinating.

Now who's being pedantic?

Well, I'd be entirely happy to go by the common sense approach to the rules, but it seems some people only respond to pedantry.

ANY magical effect is a "special effect", be it a +1 enhancement bonus, a +6 stat boost, or the power to blow up an entire city.

Why?

Adding "common effects" to an existing magic item doesn't trigger the multiplier; we can all agree on that one. Adding anything else, however, does.

No.

It's very simple. The general principle for pricing enchantments in 3E/3.5E is that the order of adding stuff doesn't matter. There is _one_ price for any given combination of powers, and it doesn't matter whether you add A to B, or B to A. There is nothing in MIC, save some ambiguously worded paragraphs, to suggest this principle has changed. In fact, the examples given in that section imply the principle is still the same: they all reference a single price for an item, without any mention that the order is supposed to affect things.

From this principle, it is obvious that "add common effects to an existing magic item" is meant to be interpreted as "create a magic item with both common and special effects". By assuming otherwise, for no reason that I can tell, all you've achieved is to create a rod to beat yourself with. Cease with the pointless nitpicking, or I will be forced to assume you like beating yourself.


Hong "and that's MY schtick" Ooi

 

[Kestrel]

Its the witty banter that keeps me coming back for more!

 

[Mistwell]

I dunno.. it looked pretty clear to me until everyone started telling me I had it wrong. I'll submit the paragraph in question for the general populace, since not everyone's got the book yet.

Kerrick, when your players start a character at level 10, and they already have items on them, and you want to determine what their items are valued at to compare it to the guidelines for character wealth per level, are you going to roll randomly to determine which thing was added to the items first (in the case of items that involve a common ability)?

Worse, when your characters find an item that has a common ability on it and a non-common one, what will you tell them about what it is worth?

What can those characters sell the item for, since the price will apparently vary depending on the order of events that happened when the item was created?

I think you are adding a needlessly complicated element to this new system. Magic items are fungible. Their value/price/cost doesn't vary depending on what order you add abilities to them.

 

[Stalker0]

I think you are adding a needlessly complicated element to this new system. Magic items are fungible. Their value/price/cost doesn't vary depending on what order you add abilities to them.

So them the question becomes, which of the abilities do you x1.5? Is it the more expensive one, or the less expensive one?