Samurai's Ancestral Daisho

[green slime]

Because it is less arbitrary...?

The basic "doubling" to add additional abilities to magical items is flawed, according to me, because there is no limit to the amount of additional abilities that can be added (Disregarding the Epic rules).

Secondly, I failed to find your quote on page 21 of the OA description of Ancestral Daisho, where one would have expected such information to be found...

Thirdly Having an established mechanism for adding abilities to swords, what is the point of introducing a second? Don't suggest the Displacement ability isn't improving the Samurai's combat ability.

Fourthly, in order to have a Cloak of Displacement, he must either find one (DM placement of treasure), Purchase one (and thus probably sell items at half price), or convince someone to manufacture one (and thus sacrifice XP). But now he can sacrifice items with a worth of 50,000 gp (which would only render him 25,000 gp if he sold them) and get this ability imbued into his weapon.

I have already pointed out that there is no limit in the DMG of how expensive items may become. But weapons ARE limited to +10 enhancement bonus. Thus in a campaign without the Epic 200,000 gp limit, I'd think twice before allowing Samurai to add non-Enhancement bonus abilities to their weapons.

 

[hong]

The basic "doubling" to add additional abilities to magical items is flawed, according to me, because there is no limit to the amount of additional abilities that can be added (Disregarding the Epic rules).

First, I don't have a major problem with super-expensive items. You pays the money, you gets your powerup. Alternatively, if you DO have a problem with super-expensive items, I've already pointed you to the place in the rulebooks where such items are disallowed. If you wish to continue arguing with yourself, feel free to ignore this.

Secondly, I failed to find your quote on page 21 of the OA description of Ancestral Daisho, where one would have expected such information to be found...

There is a column labelled "total sacrifice required" in Table 2-2 on p.21. Perhaps I misread this column and instead of gold, it's referring to virgin sacrifices or something. I have heard that many virgins play D&D, so it makes sense.

Or maybe chicken sacrifices. I have also heard that many D&D players like choking chickens, so again it makes sense.

Thirdly Having an established mechanism for adding abilities to swords, what is the point of introducing a second?

To, I dunno, make it more consistent with the rest of the item creation guidelines, perhaps?

Don't suggest the Displacement ability isn't improving the Samurai's combat ability.

What? Displacement is displacement. It grants a 50% concealment miss chance. The cost of this, if from a cloak of major displacement, is a flat 50,000 gp, or 100,000 gp from an unslotted item. There is absolutely no reason why a 50% miss chance should cost any different just because it derives from a magic weapon as opposed to some other item. The game mechanical benefit is the same, hence the cost should be the same.

Fourthly, in order to have a Cloak of Displacement, he must either find one (DM placement of treasure), Purchase one (and thus probably sell items at half price), or convince someone to manufacture one (and thus sacrifice XP). But now he can sacrifice items with a worth of 50,000 gp (which would only render him 25,000 gp if he sold them) and get this ability imbued into his weapon.

I think this paragraph of yours is stuck in neutral or something.

I have already pointed out that there is no limit in the DMG of how expensive items may become. But weapons ARE limited to +10 enhancement bonus. Thus in a campaign without the Epic 200,000 gp limit, I'd think twice before allowing Samurai to add non-Enhancement bonus abilities to their weapons.

Are you arguing with yourself again?

Not, of course, that there's anything wrong with arguing with yourself. Why, I am "arguing with myself" RIGHT NOW, IYKIWMAIYTD.

 

[green slime]

First, I don't have a major problem with super-expensive items. You pays the money, you gets your powerup. Alternatively, if you DO have a problem with super-expensive items, I've already pointed you to the place in the rulebooks where such items are disallowed. If you wish to continue arguing with yourself, feel free to ignore this.

Except the Epic rules aren't in the OA. Epic rules aren't in the three core rule books. You can't assume that they are, which you do. Cut out the snide remarks.

There is a column labelled "total sacrifice required" in Table 2-2 on p.21. Perhaps I misread this column and instead of gold, it's referring to virgin sacrifices or something. I have heard that many virgins play D&D, so it makes sense.

Or maybe chicken sacrifices. I have also heard that many D&D players like choking chickens, so again it makes sense.

To, I dunno, make it more consistent with the rest of the item creation guidelines, perhaps?

Weapon Bonus....Total sacrifice required....

I fail to get

hong "quoted" a passage from the OA, the page reference which was not included;
If you want to move beyond strict pluses, the limit for enchanting a daisho is half the starting gp value by PC level, as given in the DMG table.

WTF? Which table? Where? Page reference please.

Furthermore Table 2-2, combined with the description under class features for the Samurai, makes it clear that IF the player sacrifices items instead of selling them, it is the market price that is calculated. If you want to strangle chickens to the value of 50,000 gp be my guest. But it doesn't make it consistent with the rest of the item creation guidlines.

What? Displacement is displacement. It grants a 50% concealment miss chance. The cost of this, if from a cloak of major displacement, is a flat 50,000 gp, or 100,000 gp from an unslotted item. There is absolutely no reason why a 50% miss chance should cost any different just because it derives from a magic weapon as opposed to some other item. The game mechanical benefit is the same, hence the cost should be the same.

50,000 gp for a cloak (slotted item), or 50,000 gp to place in an unslotted item (a sword) may seem good to you. I dunno, doesn't seem consistent to me... YMMV???

Thanks for adding to the discussion. Do you usually win arguments by belittling people? It seems to be your standard tactic.

 

[hong]

Except the Epic rules aren't in the OA. Epic rules aren't in the three core rule books. You can't assume that they are, which you do.

I can assume any darn thing I like. You can either continue to argue with yourself, or use the assumption that removes the source of your grievance.

Cut out the snide remarks.

You're still funny!

WTF? Which table? Where? Page reference please.

Sigh.

The minimum character levels for awakening an ancestral daisho are essentially capped at half the total gp value for a starting PC of that level, as given in Table 2-24, "Starting Equipment for PCs above 1st level", DMG p.43. For example, awakening a +2 sword costs 8,000 gp. 8000x2 = 16000, which is greater than the starting gear for a 6th level character (13,000 gp) but less than that for a 7th level one (19,000 gp). Thus a 6th level samurai can't awaken a +2 sword, but a 7th level one can.

Similarly, a +6 sword costs 72,000 gp. 72,000x2 = 144,000, which is greater than the starting gear for a 13th level character (110,000 gp) but less than that for a 14th level on (150,000 gp). Thus a 13th level samurai can't awaken a +6 sword, but a 14th level one can.

If one wants to allow fixed-price enchantments, then one can simply say that the max. market price for the daisho is limited by either the numbers given in Table 2-2 of OA, or half the numbers given in Table 2-24 of the DMG.

Aren't you glad you have people around like me to do your homework for you?

Furthermore Table 2-2, combined with the description under class features for the Samurai, makes it clear that IF the player sacrifices items instead of selling them, it is the market price that is calculated. If you want to strangle chickens to the value of 50,000 gp be my guest. But it doesn't make it consistent with the rest of the item creation guidlines.

I still don't have a clue what you're getting at here. Time to get that gearshift out of neutral, don't you think?

50,000 gp for a cloak (slotted item), or 50,000 gp to place in an unslotted item (a sword) may seem good to you. I dunno, doesn't seem consistent to me... YMMV???

The displacement weapon enchantment has a market price of 100,000 gp. If a samurai wants to have that in his daisho, then that's how much he'll have to sacrifice, and it'll count towards half the 200,000 gp limit at 18th level. Is this really so hard to understand?

Thanks for adding to the discussion. Do you usually win arguments by belittling people? It seems to be your standard tactic.

Only for special people.

 

[green slime]

Except my blind, argumentative friend, you'll notice it doesn't talk about "limit"; it is the total sacrifice required to achieve such a mighty weapon. (+5 vorpal katana, for example) but it doesn't say that it is a limit, and this is what I have been pointing out, that if you let players add non-enhancement abilities to the sword, then you need to observe another limiting mechanism.

But I let myself get sidetracked by your less than charming manner. As intelligent as you may think you are, some respect for others may earn you more reward than your attitude today has been toward me. Enjoy your game.

 

[hong]

Except my blind, argumentative friend, you'll notice it doesn't talk about "limit"; it is the total sacrifice required to achieve such a mighty weapon. (+5 vorpal katana, for example) but it doesn't say that it is a limit, and this is what I have been pointing out, that if you let players add non-enhancement abilities to the sword, then you need to observe another limiting mechanism.

You know, all of this could have been avoided by simply looking at the top of the thread:

If you want to move beyond strict pluses, the limit for enchanting a daisho is half the starting gp value by PC level, as given in the DMG table.

But that would be no fun.

 

[green slime]

And I ask WHICH table? Where in the DMG? Seriously! Just make a proper reference! So I can look it up!

 

[hong]

And I ask WHICH table? Where in the DMG? Seriously! Just make a proper reference! So I can look it up!

I'm getting a bit tired of repeating bits of my OWN POSTS, you realise.

If one wants to allow fixed-price enchantments, then one can simply say that the max. market price for the daisho is limited by either the numbers given in Table 2-2 of OA, or half the numbers given in Table 2-24 of the DMG.

Table 2-24 is on p.43 of the DMG.

 

[green slime]

Yes, well, I tend not to read the entire posts of people who are being rude... So that was rather counterproductive to the discussion. I apologise for not noticing your first reference to the page in question. That of course would have been avoided had you referenced the table correctly in your first post...

Looking at the page in question, I read it as only a recommendation, not a "rule" as you inferred in your first post.

Furthermore I see no reference to "half the starting wealth", in the table or in the accompanying text.

 

[Mordane76]

I've been watching this all, rather amused...


I'm Xeoble's DM; one of the reasons we're looking at this question in our group is that we're considering allowing a Monk to drop Ki Strike and pick up an Ancestral Daisho-like ability that allows the Monk to awaken weapon enhancement abilities to use with his unarmed strikes.

Before we go ahead with this little power switcheroo, I want to have as many of the potential bugs ironed out of the conversion; I'll admit I'm a little concerned by these gold-price-only abilities, because what we're doing here sets a precedent for the future, and I also want to make sure that the switch won't be unbalancing.


From my POV -- Ki Strike, as an ability, is weak. It gives a +3 to bypassing DR by what, 18th level? With the 3.5E revision to DR, I shudder to think what will replace it. However, a Monk did get it for free. With the Daisho-like ability, he'll be able to get more bonuses, but he'll have to pay gold for all of them now.

Originally posted by hong
If one wants to allow fixed-price enchantments, then one can simply say that the max. market price for the daisho is limited by either the numbers given in Table 2-2 of OA, or half the numbers given in Table 2-24 of the DMG.

I think this an elegant fix. Also, our monk is part of a group. To complete awakening a power takes 1 day per 1000 gp. If our monk put down 50,000 gp of powers in a shot, I think our group would probably leave his meditating arse for his 50 days, especially since a lot of our storyline is time-sensitive...