Magic Items that *don't* duplicate spells

[Wolfwood2]

While I appreciate the pricing guidelines for item creation, I do find that it predisposes people to either create items that exactly duplicate existing spells or create items that offer only flat bonuses.

Yet it's obvious from the sample items in the DMG that many magical items are (or can be) unique, offering benefits not precisely matched by any existing spells. The ubiquitous Bag of Holding works nothing like the Leomund's Chest spell used to create it, just as one example. So I'm putting out a call. What magic items have you come up with for your games that don't precisely duplicate the effects of any spell? How have you priced them for purposes of item creation?

I'm putting this in the Rules forum because I'm not so much interested in flavor text as I am in how the magic item creation guidelines have been used to design really weird items like a lyre of building.

 

[Nail]

Sticking with the RAW:

In previous campaigns, I *required* PCs to come up with a spell that exactly duplicates what the proposed magic item does. We put a spell level on the new spell, then priced the magic item that uses it accordingly. This removes most (but not all) of the wacky pricing problems for magic items.

Want an item that allows it's wearer to grapple as a Stone Giant? Make a spell that does that. (1 round per level, Range: touch? Sounds like a Sor/Wiz 4.) You want to be able to use it for 7 rounds per day, use activated? Price the spell into the item accordingly.

4(spl lvl) * 7(CL) * 2000gp (Use activated) * 1/5 (priced like Boots of Speed) = 11,200 gp

 

[Wolfwood2]

Sticking with the RAW:

In previous campaigns, I *required* PCs to come up with a spell that exactly duplicates what the proposed magic item does. We put a spell level on the new spell, then priced the magic item that uses it accordingly. This removes most (but not all) of the wacky pricing problems for magic items.

Did you mean required the PC or required the player?

That is, is the spell just a "theoretical" spell designed for the purposes of pricing, or does the spell actually have to be known by PC, rather than using some appropriately related spell?

How would you do something like a 'Hand of Glory' under the above system? Or something like a Horn of the Tritons? Or a Rod of Wonder?

I really like the weird and oddball effects in a lot of the legacy items, and I'm disappointed the system seems to discourage that in coming up with new items.

 

[Primitive Screwhead]

If we are talking about a PC creating an item, I would require the proper spell{s} get researched first...

If we are talking me as a GM coming up with a new item... I would probably still develop a spell in order to figure the mechanics of the item, but I never worry about pricing these things... they are plot devices after all.

To make it even easier to do the weird stuff use Elements of Magic: Revised for building the spell..much cleaner than trying to guestimate the core spell level witchery.

 

[Bardsandsages]

I can give you an actual example from an upcoming product:

Harbinger Sword of the Pigeon
This +1 longsword has a pigeon shaped hilt. As a standard action, the wielder can chose to make a touch attack instead of a normal attack against the opponent. The attack does no damage, but splatters the target in a green-black goo that smells foul. The target must make a Fortitude Save DC 15 or be nauseated for 1d4 rounds.
Faint Conjuration, CL 5, Craft Magic Arms and Armor, Stinking Cloud; Price 8,315 gp

I selected Stinking Cloud as the required spell for the item creation basically because it provided the basis of the main effect (nauseating the target). The weapon doesn't actually emulate the spell, but the core power of the spell provides the base for the weapon effect.

I agree with you that most people probably do simply seek to emulate the spell's ability. But the spell is simply another ingredient in the composition, and there is no reason the whole cannot be greater than the sum of it's parts. Each piece of item creation is like a recipe, and when you put the ingredients together, they become something completely different than they were individually.

 

[Nail]

Did you mean required the PC or required the player?

That is, is the spell just a "theoretical" spell designed for the purposes of pricing, or does the spell actually have to be known by PC, rather than using some appropriately related spell?

My answer would be -- wandering off into "Nail's House Rules" territory a bit -- the creator, i.e. "the wizard" or "the cleric", etc. It then became a real spell that could be used outside of magic item creation.

How would you do something like a 'Hand of Glory' under the above system? Or something like a Horn of the Tritons? Or a Rod of Wonder?

As above. (shrug) If the item does something a core spell doesn't do, we'd make up one that does.

In the Hand of Glory case, there are 3 powers:

• Exchange Necklace slot for extra ring slot (new Sor/Wiz 1 spell, 1hr/level) continuously [1(Spl Lvl) * 1(CL) *2,000gp = 2,000gp]
• Cast Daylight (Clr 2) 1/day [2(Spl Lvl) * 3(CL) *1,800gp * 1/5 = 2,160gp]
• Cast See Invisibility (Sor/Wiz 2) 1/day [2(Spl Lvl) * 3(CL) *1,800gp * 1/5 = 2,160gp]

Total Price (with 1.5 multiplier for Power 1 & 2) = 8,400gp

I really like the weird and oddball effects in a lot of the legacy items, and I'm disappointed the system seems to discourage that in coming up with new items.

It can!

 

[howandwhy99]

I really like the weird and oddball effects in a lot of the legacy items, and I'm disappointed the system seems to discourage that in coming up with new items.

I've been calling for guidelines like these for awhile. You are going to remain disappointed.

The problem lies in the fact that all Core Rules are part of one big integrated system. It wouldn't be so bad except the system is very finely tuned. Characters two or more levels off from each other aren't very fun to play in the same group. Misjudging a spell by even a level could change the way spells are picked.

The default means of creating a truly different magic item is to make it a spell first and then craft it into an item. It's all a balancing act. Judge both on the level of the spell and also comparable magic items nearby in your determined price.

In the end, take comfort in knowing that A LOT of the standard effects in D&D are arbitrarily placed. Many so they would fit in with older systems' placement. All "Communication at Range" spells could easily be moved to 7th level or above without destroying the balance of other spells.

 

[mvincent]

What magic items have you come up with for your games that don't precisely duplicate the effects of any spell? How have you priced them for purposes of item creation?

There are so many magic items out there that I haven't found a need to design new ones. Also, the existing guidelines are only a starting point and may not be accurate even for the items they do cover. Ultimately, it is up to the DM to come up with a SWAG.

 

[KarinsDad]

The problem lies in the fact that all Core Rules are part of one big integrated system. It wouldn't be so bad except the system is very finely tuned. Characters two or more levels off from each other aren't very fun to play in the same group.

I think this is mostly illusory. Otherwise, cohorts would not work well in groups and they do.

In fact, we had a combat a few weeks back where 3 out of 4 PCs were blinded/confused and the remaining PC and 2 cohorts (all played by players) saved the day.

 

[howandwhy99]

I think this is mostly illusory. Otherwise, cohorts would not work well in groups and they do.

For Cohorts and Henchman sure. I'd hope they were useful for a variety of levels. But when playing PCs having an allied PC (or PCs) 2 levels higher or more can really flatten the enjoyment. IME.