Magic item creation question for the DMs

[kreynolds]

Let me expand upon this. If a player wants to enhance a sword with a use-activated property of True Strike, is this out of the question? It depends. You have three options.

#1 - The activation method is a standard action. This ruling balances out the extremely low cost of the powerful enhancement.

#2 - The activation method is not an action and is used whenever you swing the sword and costs roughly 5,000,000gp. A much higher cost would also balance this out. Obviously, in the case of True Strike, this isn't really an option. Any decent DM would know this, unless you're running a 75th level campaign.

#3 - You can't do it. The player will ask why. You will say "because I said so" or something along those lines. You need to have a valid reason of why they can't do it at all, otherwise, they'll just get ticked off. It's just like when you were a little kid and you asked your parents if you could go see a friend and they said "No." and you asked "Why not?" and they said "Because I said so". It didn't make much sense then, did it?

 

[kreynolds]

This is what I was getting at. If this is how I feel (let players make stuff, but DM can up the price beyond the guidelines as far as (s)he likes, or disallow certain items like gloves of true strike), how should I vote?

Totally cool, dude. Just vote "Sort of".

 

[Axiomatic Unicorn]

Option 1B: You make it a command word activated item, solving all of the problems.

 

[Axiomatic Unicorn]

Here is an exercise, can you point out a magic item in the DMG that works in the same manner as the gloves you describe?

 

[kreynolds]

Option 1B: You make it a command word activated item, solving all of the problems.

That is a perfectly viable option. This is a pefect example of what I was getting at. On these boards, or even in your own game, if someone comes to you and says, "Can I make a Longsword of True Strike", this is your decision. Not just "No. Because I said so."

 

[kreynolds]

Here is an exercise, can you point out a magic item in the DMG that works in the same manner as the gloves you describe?

Irrelevant. See above post about appropriate magic item enhancements. CRGreathouse replied to it.

 

[Axiomatic Unicorn]

Irrelevant. See above post about appropriate magic item enhancements. CRGreathouse replied to it.

For the specific case, that is fine. But if your general interpretation of use activated items is correct, there must be at least one example? No?

 

[kreynolds]

For the specific case, that is fine. But if your general interpretation of use activated items is correct, there must be at least one example? No?

This is my general interpretation:

The type of action a use-activated magic item requires must and should be determined by the DM. Think about it. Any time a player wants to create a new spell, it must be evaluated and approved by the DM. Any time a player wants to create a magic item, it must be evaluated and approved by the DM. Just because a player wants their Sword of True Strike to not use an action doesn't mean that you have to say "No. Because I said so."

I was curious as to why so many people were so reluctant to actually put in the effort to figure out how a magic item should work when a player requests one. Does that help?

 

[Henrix]

Let me expand upon this. If a player wants to enhance a sword with a use-activated property of True Strike, is this out of the question? It depends. You have three options.

#1 - The activation method is a standard action. This ruling balances out the extremely low cost of the powerful enhancement.

That still isn't a use activated power. See above, and RTFM! That's a command activated item.

#2 - The activation method is not an action and is used whenever you swing the sword and costs roughly 5,000,000gp. A much higher cost would also balance this out. Obviously, in the case of True Strike, this isn't really an option. Any decent DM would know this, unless you're running a 75th level campaing.

I would say this amounts to saying "no".

Just because you say "no", instead of "5,000,000gp" doesn't mean that you have no arguments, and vice versa.
If the player asks "why 5,000,000gp?" and your only answer is "because I'm the Law", then you're no better off than your example.

Besides, saying "no" is so much more satisfying

 

[kreynolds]

That still isn't a use activated power. See above, and RTFM! That's a command activated item.

Keep up with the posts. Check out the current argument between myself and Axiomatic. I'm not sure where it's gonna go, but we are making progress here.