Kerrick
First Post
While I was working on my artificing system I came across an idea someone had on the Wizards boards, regarding epic pricing. He suggested using a graded multiplier for items that exceeded the non-epic cap. I borrowed the idea and crunched some numbers, because I wanted to see if it would work with my system, and lo and behold it, did - with some modifications. So here's the graded multiplier system.
The way it works is this: For items that grant a bonus (weapons, armor, natural armor, deflection, ability bonus, etc.), you apply a multiplier for each level beyond the first, where the bonuses exceed the non-epic cap. To be a little clearer:
For weapons and armor...
+5 bonus: market price x1
+6 bonus: market price x1*
+7 bonus: market price x1.5
+8 bonus: market price x2
+9 bonus: market price x3
etc.
*Don't ask me why +6 has to be x1; it just works out better that way. It seems to support a theory of mine, however, that +6 should be a non-epic bonus and +7 should mark the beginning of "epic". Since the caster level for armor/weapon enhancement bonuses is bonus x3, +6 bonus is CL 18 (definitely non-epic) while +7 is CL 21. +5 being the cap is one of those sacred cows, but it's also got aesthetic reasoning, too - 5, 10, 15, are all nice intervals; 6 is not, at least not when you're going by 1s.
For ability bonuses...
+6 bonus: market price x1
+8 bonus: market price x1.5*
+10 bonus: market price x3
etc.
*Even though you don't normally find items that grant an odd ability bonus, they can be made, and they should be counted, hence the reason +8 is x1.5 instead of x1 - +7 is actually the first epic bonus and should be x1.
For skill bonuses...
+20 bonus: market price x1*
+25 bonus: market price x1.5
+30 bonus: market price x2
*The folks on the Wizards boards seem to agree that the cap for skill bonuses should be dropped to +20 (a few say that since you have to have 1 rank per point of the bonus of the item you're making, it should be +23, but I opt for a nice round +20). At any rate, the bonus increases at every 5 points.
Now, this system has several consequences.
First, and most importantly, it gets rid of the huge price hike from non-epic to epic, while still keeping pace with starting gold values. This is assuming, of course, that a PC can't buy an item that's worth more than 1/4 of his starting wealth.
Second, you don't have to use a new formula for XP calculation. It's simply market price divided by (25 x multiplier) - see below.
Example 1: You want to make a suit of +10 armor. Normally, +10 armor costs 2 million gp and 30,000 XP, but under this system, it's (100,000 x 4) = 400,000 gp and 4,000 XP.
Example 2: Say you have a +5 holy longsword (+7 market value) and want to increase it to +6 (8 market value). Since +6 enhancement is an epic bonus, you apply the multiplier (x2 for +8) to the sword's unmodified market value (in this case, 128,000 gp). XP cost also uses this multiplier - instead of dividing the market price by 25, you divide by 50. since you're upgrading an existing item, this would cost you (256,000 - 98,000 = 158,000 gp and 3,160 XP) instead of 1.1 million gp and 21,820 XP.
At first, I was thinking of merging the non-epic and epic modifiers (+6 to +10) so they used the same pricing scheme - a +7 enhancement bonus would be the same as a +7 market bonus - but that's probably a bad idea, simply because the XP costs would 2 or more times what they would be normally (a +2 keen holy flaming wounding longsword [+8 value] would cost 64,000 gp and 2,560 XP vs. 128,000 gp and 5,120 XP). But, it could be argued that a pile of lesser enhancements like that should cost just as much as one, more powerful one - in this case, the +8 bonus. Merging the lists certainly makes for easier bookkeeping and faster calculations, but I'm just not sure.
The way it works is this: For items that grant a bonus (weapons, armor, natural armor, deflection, ability bonus, etc.), you apply a multiplier for each level beyond the first, where the bonuses exceed the non-epic cap. To be a little clearer:
For weapons and armor...
+5 bonus: market price x1
+6 bonus: market price x1*
+7 bonus: market price x1.5
+8 bonus: market price x2
+9 bonus: market price x3
etc.
*Don't ask me why +6 has to be x1; it just works out better that way. It seems to support a theory of mine, however, that +6 should be a non-epic bonus and +7 should mark the beginning of "epic". Since the caster level for armor/weapon enhancement bonuses is bonus x3, +6 bonus is CL 18 (definitely non-epic) while +7 is CL 21. +5 being the cap is one of those sacred cows, but it's also got aesthetic reasoning, too - 5, 10, 15, are all nice intervals; 6 is not, at least not when you're going by 1s.
For ability bonuses...
+6 bonus: market price x1
+8 bonus: market price x1.5*
+10 bonus: market price x3
etc.
*Even though you don't normally find items that grant an odd ability bonus, they can be made, and they should be counted, hence the reason +8 is x1.5 instead of x1 - +7 is actually the first epic bonus and should be x1.
For skill bonuses...
+20 bonus: market price x1*
+25 bonus: market price x1.5
+30 bonus: market price x2
*The folks on the Wizards boards seem to agree that the cap for skill bonuses should be dropped to +20 (a few say that since you have to have 1 rank per point of the bonus of the item you're making, it should be +23, but I opt for a nice round +20). At any rate, the bonus increases at every 5 points.
Now, this system has several consequences.
First, and most importantly, it gets rid of the huge price hike from non-epic to epic, while still keeping pace with starting gold values. This is assuming, of course, that a PC can't buy an item that's worth more than 1/4 of his starting wealth.
Second, you don't have to use a new formula for XP calculation. It's simply market price divided by (25 x multiplier) - see below.
Example 1: You want to make a suit of +10 armor. Normally, +10 armor costs 2 million gp and 30,000 XP, but under this system, it's (100,000 x 4) = 400,000 gp and 4,000 XP.
Example 2: Say you have a +5 holy longsword (+7 market value) and want to increase it to +6 (8 market value). Since +6 enhancement is an epic bonus, you apply the multiplier (x2 for +8) to the sword's unmodified market value (in this case, 128,000 gp). XP cost also uses this multiplier - instead of dividing the market price by 25, you divide by 50. since you're upgrading an existing item, this would cost you (256,000 - 98,000 = 158,000 gp and 3,160 XP) instead of 1.1 million gp and 21,820 XP.
At first, I was thinking of merging the non-epic and epic modifiers (+6 to +10) so they used the same pricing scheme - a +7 enhancement bonus would be the same as a +7 market bonus - but that's probably a bad idea, simply because the XP costs would 2 or more times what they would be normally (a +2 keen holy flaming wounding longsword [+8 value] would cost 64,000 gp and 2,560 XP vs. 128,000 gp and 5,120 XP). But, it could be argued that a pile of lesser enhancements like that should cost just as much as one, more powerful one - in this case, the +8 bonus. Merging the lists certainly makes for easier bookkeeping and faster calculations, but I'm just not sure.
