Magic item creation question for the DMs

[kreynolds]

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

I guess you missed the part of my post referring to a 75th level game, didn't you?

 

[Axiomatic Unicorn]

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?

Honestly, no, it does not help. It seems to me that you want to insist on defining a command word activiated item as a use activated item. Quite simply, if you have to spend a standard action doing something that is not the normal use of the item in order to activate the item, then clearly it can't be a use activated item. It is a "that-something-else-you did-to-activate-it" item, generally a command word item.

I get the idea that you are twisting this because you want to have a command word item with an unlimited number of charges. I am not sure that is an intended kind of item.

I don't see how going to a non-random instant hit (and probable instant crit) every other round adds to the quality of the game.

Not letting a player make an item of a type that doe not exist in the rules is not saying "Because I said so."

Anyway, if you want me to follow up, I will. If you want me to drop it at this, that is fine.

 

[Sir Hawkeye]

A.From what I can infer from the DMG, use activated item powers tend to activate upon "use" and then last until the item is no longer used (e.g. Cloak of Resistance, +1 to +5 on saves until removed)

Therefore, use-activated gloves oftrue strike would give a +20 bonus to the user's first attack after putting on the gloves. To reactivate the true strike, the user would need to take the gloves off and put them back on again.

B. A sword that gives a +20 insight bonus to all attacks isn't really a use-activated sword of true strike: It's a sword that grants a +20 insight bonus to all attacks. Such an item might cost, perhaps, 20x20x1000gp = 400,000gp + cost of sword.

 

[kreynolds]

Anyway, if you want me to follow up, I will. If you want me to drop it at this, that is fine.

No. Please don't drop it, dude. You're providing an awful lot of feedback and I really appreciate it.

It seems to me that you want to insist on defining a command word activiated item as a use activated item. Quite simply, if you have to spend a standard action doing something that is not the normal use of the item in order to activate the item, then clearly it can't be a use activated item. It is a "that-something-else-you did-to-activate-it" item, generally a command word item.

I'm just going by what the core rules say. Look at like this, several rules regarding magic item creation are up to the DM. The biggest of which are rings. Rings are generally constantly activated. If you create a Ring of Mage Armor, it would make sense that it is always on, right? Well, what about a Ring of Deeper Darkness? Would it make sense that it is always on? What about a Ring of Mind Blank? Mind Blank is an awfully damn powerful spell, but would it make sense if it was always on? Sure it would. Even though it's that powerful, it isn't that unbalancing, so long as you actually know how Mind Blank works.

When considering how a ring works, you (the DM) must decide. You must evaluate the magic item and determine how it would appropriately function, based on cost versus power. Rings are generally always on, that is the them of the item anways. Technically, rings are no different than any other wondrous item except that it is a themed magic item. Any magic item follows a them, but it must also be balanced.

A Wand of True Strike is obvious: Standard action to activate that provokes an attack of opportunity.

A Sword of True Strike is different. Would you be comfortable allow the sword to be activated when it is swung? Of course not. Would you think it balanced if it was activated as a standard action? Of course you would. It can be either way. You just need to decide which one is more appropriate for the item. Obviously, it would be more beneficial for a player to craft a Sword of True Strike as a command word activated item.

But use-activated magic items can either be a standard action or not an action at all. You just need to decide which one it is.

 

[Axiomatic Unicorn]

Therefore, use-activated gloves oftrue strike would give a +20 bonus to the user's first attack after putting on the gloves. To reactivate the true strike, the user would need to take the gloves off and put them back on again.

I think the default interpretation would be like the cloak of resistance, always on. But, on the other hand, your interpretation does provide a clever solution.

 

[kreynolds]

A.From what I can infer from the DMG, use activated item powers tend to activate upon "use" and then last until the item is no longer used (e.g. Cloak of Resistance, +1 to +5 on saves until removed)

Therefore, use-activated gloves oftrue strike would give a +20 bonus to the user's first attack after putting on the gloves. To reactivate the true strike, the user would need to take the gloves off and put them back on again.

B. A sword that gives a +20 insight bonus to all attacks isn't really a use-activated sword of true strike: It's a sword that grants a +20 insight bonus to all attacks. Such an item might cost, perhaps, 20x20x1000gp = 400,000gp + cost of sword.

This has already been covered. Check out the posts by Axiomatic and CRGreathouse.

 

[kreynolds]

I think the default interpretation would be like the cloak of resistance, always on. But, on the other hand, your interpretation does provide a clever solution.

Exactly! See what I mean? Magic items are a wonderful and limitless way to expand the uniqueness of any given campagin. You can insert them into a game to give a hell-of-a-lot of meaning to a storyline. You can use them to empower your campaign and add flavor. My point is that you (the DM) don't need to simply ban magic items that bug you. There is always a way to balance them out. This part of the core rules was designed beautifuly.

Edited because I can't seem to spell "campaign" properly.

 

[CRGreathouse]

There is always a way to balance them out. This part of the core rules was designed beautifuly.

Let's agree that this refers to an end, not a means, alright?

"Increase AC by 10 when worn" -> OK
"+10 dodge bonus to AC when worn" -> Not OK

 

[Axiomatic Unicorn]

A Sword of True Strike is different. Would you be comfortable allow the sword to be activated when it is swung? Of course not. Would you think it balanced if it was activated as a standard action? Of course you would. It can be either way. You just need to decide which one is more appropriate for the item. Obviously, it would be more beneficial for a player to craft a Sword of True Strike as a command word activated item.

But use-activated magic items can either be a standard action or not an action at all. You just need to decide which one it is.

I agree with all of this. But if you describe it as a use activated item, then, by definition, the sword would be activated by using it. The way you use a sword is to swing it. So a use activated sword of true strike must be a free action to use. We both agree that this would be bad.

But I will continue to point out that there are no standard items (that I know of) which produce a specific effect over and over. Use activated items create an effect that starts and then simply persists.

True strike is an effect that starts and lasts for a brief time, then must be re-started to use again.

Because there is no precedent for making use activated items that produce a spell effect over and over, I feel comfortable answering "yes" to your poll, but still nto allowing use activited (anything) of true strike. I am not saying, "No, because I said so." I am saying, "No, because nothing in the rules allows for it." You want a gloves of true strike 5/day command word activated? No problem. 1800 gp (market price). 3600 for a sword because of the no space used factor.

Tangent: IMO, the most cost effective item of all. Amulet of Endure Elements. Pick the element when you make it, Make it usable 1/day because the duration is 24 hours. Market price = 360 gp. So for 15 exp and 180 gp you can have energy resistance 5 effectively forever against one energy type. Granted, it becomes trivial after you gain a few more levels, but what a bargain.

 

[kreynolds]

Let's agree that this refers to an end, not a means, alright?

"Increase AC by 10 when worn" -> OK
"+10 dodge bonus to AC when worn" -> Not OK

Beautiful! Now that the is kind of decision a DM should make. It's balanced, fair, and proves that the DM wants to work with the player instead of just saying "No." I love it.

Do you see why I started this thread now?