The Curse of the 100gp Pearl

...side-track

The use of 100gp pearls in commonly used spells lead my players to realize they were commonly available and worth about the same everywhere. That, combined with their heavy coin purses lead them to start using 100gp pearls as the next denomination of money beyond platinum (10 gold in a platinum, 10 platinum in a pearl). If I didn't provide a market for them to sell them they would take advantage of the market and find casters to sell them to.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

I like the range of divination spells, though with the changes to identify in 3.5 analyze dweomer is much less valuable. They need to be tweaked to bring back value. But I agree that the 100 gp pearl needs to go.
 

I don't know about the owl feather, but I have always wondered if . . . The wizard/sorcerer casting the spell is just pocketing the pearl; and who doesn't want a good excuse to dring a goblet of fine wine? :D
 

Deset Gled said:
The only way I can really see being pleased with an option like this is if the casting time was something like 1 day instead of 1 hour.

Ah, so you're a psionics fan, then!

I can definitely see the point on keeping magic items mysterious, though. If Wizards truly does away with the Christmas tree effect, then having a costly identify won't be too much of a problem. If the party expects to see just one magic item per adventure, rather than eight per encounter, then identify may not be all that onerous.

I think my group's disdain for identify comes mainly from having to cast it so blasted many times, and they hate hauling a huge pile of treasure back to town to identify it. If 4e does away with the huge pile of treasure, though, then there's no problem at all.
 

Hella_Tellah said:
Ah, so you're a psionics fan, then!

I can definitely see the point on keeping magic items mysterious, though. If Wizards truly does away with the Christmas tree effect, then having a costly identify won't be too much of a problem. If the party expects to see just one magic item per adventure, rather than eight per encounter, then identify may not be all that onerous.

I think my group's disdain for identify comes mainly from having to cast it so blasted many times, and they hate hauling a huge pile of treasure back to town to identify it. If 4e does away with the huge pile of treasure, though, then there's no problem at all.

That also saves all of your arcane casters from become alcoholics! :eek:
 

Back in the day, I actually used a 'Identifying Imp': a small brass imp which would identify any item you placed in its outstyretched palm, provided you fed it 100 gold pieces.

Today, I just use knowledge:arcana, spellcraft, and trial & error.
 

Aloïsius said:
I never think about it...

I guess that, with less magic item, it could be possible to make each one unique, with its history and ties to the plot.

I think the "identify" spell will not exist in my next campaign.
Ditto. And not at crazy DCs either, like the ELH presented. For a typical item, a typical spellcaster of the level of its creator shouldn't have much trouble identifying it IMO. Life is too short to waste time on identifying every +1 sword.
 

I use a variant on solution 2 from http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/sg/20051125a :

wizards.com said:
Solution 2: Spellcraft

The Spellcraft skill already allows characters to identify potions (DC 25) and scroll spells (DC 20 + spell level), so why not broaden it to include other magic items as well? Using Spellcraft, a character can identify a scroll in 1 round or a potion in 1 minute. You as DM must decide the time required for any other item, but most if not all should fall into one of those two timeframes. If you want to make it simple, just rule that a scroll takes 1 round and any other item takes 1 minute. That way, characters still can't identify most items in the middle of a battle, but they can do so as soon as the battle is over and then move on.

As a guide to setting Spellcraft DCs, you could use the prerequisite level for the relevant item creation feat. Potions (based on Brew Potion, minimum caster level 3rd) are DC 25 and scrolls (based on Scribe Scroll, minimum caster level 1st) begin at DC 20. By that logic, arms and armor and wands (minimum caster level 5th) should be DC 30, rods (minimum caster level 9th) should be DC 35, and rings and staffs (minimum caster level 12th) should be DC 40. Wondrous items (minimum caster level 3rd) should be relatively easy to identify (DC 25, the same as potions), but I suggest setting the DC at 25 for minor wondrous items, 30 for medium items, and 40 for major items.

If you want to make identifying magic purely a Spellcraft-based mechanic, you could change the identify and analyze dweomer spells so that instead of just identifying items, they provide bonuses to the caster's Spellcraft checks for identifying magic. Perhaps identify gives a +20 bonus on one check, and analyze dweomer gives a +20 bonus on every check made for the duration of the spell. You might also think about giving a character with the relevant item creation feat a +2 circumstance bonus (if not more) on checks to identify magic. That technique gives a character with Craft Wands a better chance to identify a wand than someone without the feat.
 


Deset Gled said:
I guess this is one of the few things I'm going to be a grognard about. I really like Identify having a high cost. There are many times that I've actually thought that it's to easy as it is.

Past low levels, its not a high cost though. Its just a nuisance. Particularly the time constraint.

It's just fun to have an item that you know is magic, but don't know what it does. Good old fashioned mystery and suspence. Leads to a lot of excitement when you are in the middle of a dungeon crawl and have run out of pearls. Does this item slice through enemies like butter, or will it curse me? Only one was to find out!

No, because if your DM uses cursed items, its just promoting "item weenies" who will always wait to town to ID it. Next to nothing gets used mid adventure.
 
Last edited:

Remove ads

Top