My DM asked our party to each design a unique magic item which would be so tailored to our characters as to seem to have been made especially for them. The price limit on the item is 9000 gold. (I am assuming this is market price, and not cost to create) My character is a fighter with two-weapon fighting, and specialising in daggers. (pretty evenly balanced between melee and ranged)
The item I came up with is a bandoleer which works much like the Efficient Quiver, except that it does not have a space for arrows or bows, but has one space which holds up to 40 daggers and dagger-shaped weapons, one which holds up to 18 weapons of approximately the same shape and size as a javelin, and one space which holds up to 40 potions and similar items, such as holy water, acid flasks and alchemist fire.
In addition, when a weapon is drawn from the bandoleer, it immediately has the spell Magic Weapon cast on it with a caster-level of 1. This is the part I need help with - The rules say that a spell effect which is use-activated and unlimited-use costs caster-level x spell level x 2000, but one which is constant, and based on a spell whose effect is minutes-per-level, costs double that much. The item will have other similar spell effects, depending on how expensive this effect is, so as not to exceed the 9000 gold price limit.
My question is: is drawing a weapon from a wondrous item designed to hold weapons like a scabbard or quiver a valid way to use-activate the item? It seems to me that such an activation may break the RAW, as a character with the quick-draw feat and/or two-weapon-fighting could draw more than one weapon per round, (and of course this is the intended use of the item) and I seem to remember that the rules say an item with spell-like abilities can not reduce the casting time of the effect below the casting time listed in the equivalent spell description.
If this is a violation of the rules for use-activated spell-like abilities on wondrous items, would making it a constant effect, and doubling the price of the effect, solve the problem of being able to activate a spell-like ability, which would normally take a standard action, as a free-action?
|
So basically you are doing a cross between an Efficient Quiver and a Scabbard of Vigor, but the scabbard is usable more than once per day.
Now the basic effect of these two items only cost [1800 + 1800] 3600gp, but you want it to work more than once per day. Now if you are only looking for +1, but for multiple items, I would say for the base cost it would work 10 items for 1 round each. Because the scabbard allows +1 for 1 items for 10 rounds. That would factor in the throwning only part of it and so that you couldn't just pull daggers out for HtH. If you want it for more items, say increase the base cost by 1800gp. So for your 40 thrown daggers, it would cost 4x1800 +1800 = 9175gp.
Still that is how I would do it. You could always justify just a 1800 + 1800 + 2000 per your formula above.
Finally, there is nothing in the quick draw feat saying you can't use it with an item like this. So throw away as many as you can based on iternate attacks and/or rapid fire.
Use-activated can also mean that the effects is always in place as long as you "use" the item. This could be just having it "equipped". Magic Weapons fall into use-actived category, so I think this is the right place for it.
The only reservation I would have to your formula TClifford is that the scabbard of vigor is not just limited to 10 rounds of a +1 effect per day, but those ten rounds have to be consecutive. Allowing that to be split up would increase the cost of the item I believe, since it makes it more useful. Generally making it more useful means at least a 1.5x cost.
Also, the scabbard is a belt slot item, and this item appears to be slotless, which would increase the cost another 1.5x.
Otherwise I think your take is pretty good.
I would give it the chest slot not alot of magic items in the chest slot
Edit Scabbards have no slot
|
|
Scabbards don't, but the write up on the Scabbard of Vigor states that it does. So it must be a scabbard and belt combo???
Isn't chest for armor? Well, no matter, I could see you saying that this is either a Belt slot item or even a Back slot item very easily.
Ultimately, I like the item and probably will steal it from you :P
Yeah, the scabbard of vigor, for some crazy reason (probably because I want one for my druid) takes up a belt slot. It doesn't make sense and might even be a design error, but there it is.
Here is how I would handle this item as a GM.
You are essentially treating the bandoleer as a weapon. It's the "bow" and your daggers are the "arrows". That's a completely balanced approach in my mind. Daggers get str bonus added to their damage, but they have extremely limited range, so I am comfortable saying that chunking daggers from the bandoleer more or less is game-equivalent to shooting arrows from a bow.
So to give the bandoleer a +1 enhancement should cost the same as enhancing a bow. Figure the bandoleer costs 25 gold, add 300g for masterwork construction, then 2,000g for a +1 enhancement and then add the efficient quiver function. So 2,325g + 1,800g for 4,125 gold and I'd let you have it.
Problem is that daggers aren't ammo. Also, you would technically only get +1 to hit and not damage since bows do not impart their enchantment to their ammo, just makes them magical for resistances.
I would treat daggers as ammo in this situation. Replace "daggers" with "shuriken" and see how much difference it makes.
Also, bows don't impart enchantment to ammo?
What? You're saying a +1 bow firing normal arrows doesn't impart a +1 to hit and a +1 to damage?
Seriously?
Ranged Weapons and Ammunition: The enhancement bonus from a ranged weapon does not stack with the enhancement bonus from ammunition. Only the higher of the two enhancement bonuses applies.
Ammunition fired from a projectile weapon with an enhancement bonus of +1 or higher is treated as a magic weapon for the purpose of overcoming damage reduction. Similarly, ammunition fired from a projectile weapon with an alignment gains the alignment of that projectile weapon.
The second paragraph is clarifying that the ammo overcomes damage reduction, no doubt because someone argued that the ammo might get the bonuses but still isn't magical. So they clarified that.
Ammo fired from a weapon gets the higher enhancement of either the weapon or the bow. This is so basic that I am stunned to even have to point this out.
Ok, so it seems that so far the people who have replied think that it is fine for a use-activated effect to be triggered more than once in a round, ignoring the casting time requirement of the spell Magic Weapon, which this item is duplicating the effect of. So, let me give a breakdown of the cost of the item in two different versions, one which is use-activated, and one which is constant effect:
Bladestorm Bandoleer V 1:
2/day Bless Weapon when weapon is drawn -
caster level 4 x spell level 1 x 2000 = 8000
divide by 2.5 because only 2 uses per day
3200
1/day Align Weapon when weapon is drawn -
caster level 3 x spell level 2 x 2000 = 12000
divide by 5, because only one use per day = 2400
multiply by .75 because this is the second most
expensive related effect
1800
unlimited uses per day Magic weapon when weapon is drawn
caster level 1 x spell level 1 x 2000 = 2000
divide by 2, because this is the third most
expensive related effect
1000
3 types of extra dimensional spaces for specifically
sized items, essentially identical to Efficient
Quiver = 1800
multiply by 1.5 because effect is unrelated to most
expensive effect
2700
Total Cost: 8700
Bladestorm Bandoleer V 2:
constant effect Magic Weapon when weapon is drawn
caster level 1 x spell level 1 x 2000 = 2000
multiply by 2 because it is a constant effect which
duplicates a spell with a duration of minutes/level
4000
2/day Bless weapon on command (once per round max)
caster level 4 x spell level 1 x 2000 = 8000
divide by 2.5 because only 2/day = 3200
multiply by .75 because second most expensive
related effect
2400
3 types of extra dimensional spaces for specifically
sized items, essentially identical to Efficient
Quiver = 1800
multiply by 1.5 because effect is unrelated to most
expensive effect
2700
Total Cost: 9100
So, which of those two sounds like it is correct according to RAW, or do both seem like munchkin shenanigans to anyone?
So, which of those two sounds like it is correct according to RAW, or do both seem like munchkin shenanigans to anyone?
This sort of analysis might be absolutely perfectly RAW.
As a player who has tried to play ranged dagger thrower characters before, and dealt with all the gimpiness that the game imposes on such a build, I am inclined to give the dagger thrower the same options for throwing daggers that other players get for shooting arrows. Forcing dagger throwers who want to be able to enhance their daggers to pay more than twice what a bow user would pay to get the same result is just punishing an already seriously gimped build.
Or that's how I see it. As I described above, the daggers, once thrown, would return to being normal mundane daggers, just like an arrow does once fired from a magic bow.
Give the dagger thrower a break, eh? Let him at least pay no more than the bow or sword user for the same game mechanic result.
I do not know why this was moved to the house rules section of the forums, I am not discussing a house rule, but discussing the rules as written (you may notice I have used the abbreviation RAW multiple times in the thread regarding what I am trying to achieve) as it applies to creating a new magic item. I would appreciate this thread being moved back to the rules discussion section, thank you.
I don't think even my approach to this is "house ruling" things. We're talking about creating a custom magic item. We're all trying to apply the rules, just different ways.
MODERATOR:
Seriously, this is not a discussion of house rules, please move back to Rules Questions.
MODERATOR:
Seriously, this is not a discussion of house rules, please move back to Rules Questions.
RAW is that you can't create any items that aren't already designed. Designing new items is the providence of a GM, and always requires judgement calls which are not defined in the rules.
Wondrous item costs are difficult to determine. Refer to Table: Estimating Magic Item Gold Piece Values and use the item prices in the item descriptions as a guideline.
MODERATOR:
Seriously, this is not a discussion of house rules, please move back to Rules Questions.
RAW is that you can't create any items that aren't already designed. Designing new items is the providence of a GM, and always requires judgement calls which are not defined in the rules.
Wondrous item costs are difficult to determine. Refer to Table: Estimating Magic Item Gold Piece Values and use the item prices in the item descriptions as a guideline.
LOL, well heck then. I'm sticking with my 4,125g version if the rules aren't explicit. :)
You won't get a canonical answer because there is not one.
1.You or the GM decide how you want your item to work in every detail including activation. Magic items can do anything. There is no RAW limit so there is no wrong. Now if you want advice as to whether or not it might be open to abuse that is still a matter of opinion that will vary be person and group, and still not a rules based answer. Making a weapon a +1 is not really all that strong. The fact that it stores a lot of items is a lot more useful than the +1 over the course of your career, assuming you play past level 5, and you are not in a low magic game.
2.You choose the best(most appropriate) formula.
3.Evaluate final price to see if it is reasonable.
4.Approve the price or ah-hoc as needed.
PS:Going strictly by price the first version seems more accurate to me.
Edit:The other thread was locked so I will place this here.
I will also add the word "rule" only appears once in the magic item creation section, and that is regarding the creation time. In order to be RAW rules must be involved, and the item creation section does not having rules it has guidelines.
Bob also put this out:
Wondrous item costs are difficult to determine. Refer to Table: Estimating Magic Item Gold Piece Values and use the item prices in the item descriptions as a guideline.
I've never seen a more effective way to kill a thread than to drop it in Suggestions/House Rules/Homebrew. Seriously, when I posted the original thread, there were posts every 5 minutes or so. The moderator drops it in this bottomless pit, and it went 4 hours with no replies.
I think I am completely justified in thinking this is an appropriate rules question, because I am mostly discussing the difference between use-activated and continuous spell effects on an item, which I do not find an easily accessible definition of either, even though it is written in the core rulebook.
If the disambiguation of text written in the core rulebook is not appropriate fodder for the Rules Questions section of the messageboards, I can't think of what is appropriate.
I think I am completely justified in thinking this is an appropriate rules question, because I am mostly discussing the difference between use-activated and continuous spell effects on an item, which I do not find an easily accessible definition of either, even though it is written in the core rulebook.
If the question were 'How do use-activated and continuous effects work?' it would be a rules question. Your question is 'How do I price this item I just made up?', which is a homebrew question, the same way 'Is this feat I just invented balanced?' is.
Relative traffic is not a valid reason to post something in the wrong forum: It just makes the forum labels meaningless.
Ross Byers:
From the original post:
My question is: is drawing a weapon from a wondrous item designed to hold weapons like a scabbard or quiver a valid way to use-activate the item? It seems to me that such an activation may break the RAW, as a character with the quick-draw feat and/or two-weapon-fighting could draw more than one weapon per round, (and of course this is the intended use of the item) and I seem to remember that the rules say an item with spell-like abilities can not reduce the casting time of the effect below the casting time listed in the equivalent spell description.
So, exactly what you said would make this thread valid for the rules questions section is what the original post is about. There was nothing in the original post asking how to price the item, I showed quiet expertly that I know how to price the item, given which rule is used. Perhaps you should read the original post of a thread, instead of one or two posts which take the thread off-topic when judging in which forum it belongs.
@Mabven: The original post basically said: Our GM asked us to design a custom magic item that costs 9,000g or less. That's the basic question. From that I can easily see a moderator conclude "hmmm. this must be a post about a custom magic item and it's price."
I think you can put the specific rule you want resolved back in the rules forum and run with it.
@Adamantine Dragon
Actually, that was the context of the question. If the moderator bothered to read the post carefully before moving it, he would have spotted the question, because it is the sentence which ends with a question-mark, which is pretty standard in English.
@Adamantine Dragon
Actually, that was the context of the question. If the moderator bothered to read the post carefully before moving it, he would have spotted the question, because it is the sentence which ends with a question-mark, which is pretty standard in English.
If I were the moderator, I'd have interepreted it pretty much the same way Mabven. "Hey, I've been asked to design a custom magic item tailored to my character for 9,000g or less. I've come up with something that works sorta like an efficient quiver..."
How much more am I gonna read as a moderator?
I'd post your specific custom item question here, and your specific rules question there. Just my thoughts.
Ok, well I don't want to post another thread and have it moved again, so I am going to ask permission here: Mr. Byers, if I post a thread in rules questions entirely about the hypethetical comparison of use-activated and continuous spell-like effects, and whether either one of those types of magic item effects can cast a spell on an item removed from it more than once a round, are you going to move it or lock it?
The item is only casting the spell if it is use-activated which requires an action. If you have no intention of using an action then it is always on.
Even if the guidelines say it is not the intent of the guidelines to do X you can still make an item that can do it, just increase the price to account for it.
Scabbard of hits: This item give your sword a +20 to hit every time the weapon is drawn. =continuous because the effect is constant.
Requirements:etc......True Strike
There is no rule against this.
Scabbard of hits 2: This item cast true strike on your weapon upon you speaking the command word.=command word/standard action--->price as use activated since it is not always on.
edit
I think that would be acceptable (although I'm not Ross), but I don't think you're going to get the answer you're looking for. There really isn't a RAW answer, because the rules are vague or non-existent.
Your thread title is referring to making a magic item. The first several paragraphs refer to what your new magic item does. Your question is about which pricing guideline the item falls into, rather than a section of the rules with stricter interpretations. Your first reply to the thread, when presumably you know what it is you're asking, is a list of ways to apply the pricing guidelines. To me, that looks like a thread about how to price a new magic item.
Furthermore, with the amount of attention given to the item before getting to your central question, it seems likely that having answered your question, conversation would have veered toward how to design or tweak your item.
Additionally, "bothering to read the post carefully before moving it" isn't always an option for us. There are over a hundred threads created on these boards every day and thousands of posts (Yesterday there were 116 new threads and new 4,227 posts,) and we don't have any full-time moderators. If we 'carefully read' every thread before deciding if it is in the right forum or not, we'd never get our actual jobs done.
As a result, we do make some mistakes, which we will generally rectify when the thread is brought back to our attention (usually by the 'Thread is in wrong forum' flag.)
However, in this case, I do not believe that I have made a mistake.
If you would like to continue to discuss our moderation practices, please create a new thread in Website Feedback.
Mr. Byers, if I post a thread in rules questions entirely about the hypethetical comparison of use-activated and continuous spell-like effects, and whether either one of those types of magic item effects can cast a spell on an item removed from it more than once a round, are you going to move it or lock it?
As long as the rules question is the primary concern of the thread, and not a secondary discussion, it should be left alone.