|
| 20 people marked this as FAQ candidate. Answered in the FAQ. |
It was just ruled in the Pathfinder Soociety FAQ that animal companions get to wear armor and have a neck slot only. No other wand use or magic item slots. With that in mind, I'm trying to outfit a Large Animal Companion with Large Mithril Chain Shirt Barding for a Nonhumanoid (x4 cost).
What does it cost?
Is it base armor type x4 (Large Nonhumanoid Barding), plus +1,000gp?
Or does the mithril cost of +1,000gp also get multiplied by 4?
So is it:
Chain Shirt 100gpx4(Large Nonhumanoid Barding) + 1,000gp mithril = 1400gp
or
Mithril Chain Shirt 1100 x 4 (Large Nonhumanoid Barding) = 4,400gp
That's a 3,000gp difference...
For Large Nonhumanoid (x4 cost), text says, "Apply the multipliers to cost and weight for the armor type in question."
Does "armor type" include material cost? Or is the mithril cost added on top of the x4 mithril shirt?
I'm trying to outfit a Large Animal Companion with Large Mithril Chain Shirt Barding for a Nonhumanoid (x4 cost).
What does it cost?
Reading only the rules, you would apply the nonhumanoid multiplier to the armor, then apply the mithral cost modifier. (Because mithral is not an armor type, it's a material)
The same rule text is in 3.5, but the 3.5 FAQ says to multiply the mithral cost, so you can assume that the intent in PF is the same.
See this thread for discussion.
Where(which book) is this FAQ entry about only allowing neck slots and barding?
I'd multiply the material cost. If the material is expensive, then more of the material is more expensive.
If I were the GM, I'd say pay the costs, or go with a masterwork studded leather as everyone else :-)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Where(which book) is this FAQ entry about only allowing neck slots and barding?
PFS FAQ: Can my animal companion or familiar wear or use magic items?
"The intent is that animal companions or familiars can not activate magic items that require activation. Something like an amulet of natural armor does not require activation; it's always on (unless it's in an antimagic field or someone dispels it or whatever).
That said, a creature is limited by its anatomy. Something without shoulders can't wear a cloak, and something without fingers can't wear a ring. For the sake of PFS, animal companions can wear barding and neck-slot items. All other slots aren't really appropriate for animals (or even magical beasts). The only exception to this would be an imp or quasit familiar gained with the Improved Familiar feat. One could reasonably face either of these wielding a wand or wearing a circlet of persuasion in combat, and after investing a feat to gain their service, they are not limited by the same restrictions as normal bonded creatures like animals (whether treated like animals or magical beasts and regardless of Int scores)."
In 3.5 creatures(even animals) had more slots than a neck slot and armor slot. Headband are an example.
Normally when things are posted in the rules sections it applies to the entire game. That is why I was asking. Thanks for the clarification. :)
|
I'd say tack on the mithral costs afterwards, as little sense as it makes. You don't reduce the cost of mithral armor for small characters, even though it takes less material.
This also prevents cheese by having magic armor made for a diminutive sized creature (pricing reduced by a ton), then have it automatically resize when you put it on.
Yeah I would go with serum on this if you don't decrease cost for smaller things you don't increase it for bigger. Unless the rules say you do of course.
Which leads me to still wonder why armor get useless as it gets smaller but not better when its bigger.
You multiply the BASE cost, the special material cost is added to the end product.
(Base x SizeMod)+ Material = Cost.
Same with things like the Str modified compond bows made of Darkwood etc.
So:
Chain Shirt 100gpx4(Large Nonhumanoid Barding) + 1,000gp mithril = 1400gp
would be correct.
Not only do I price in the cost of mithril before the multiplier, I make my players feel guilty about not arming four cities worth of guardsmen with studded leather, heavy steel shields, and longswords.
Edit:
And feeding their families for two years...
And sending their kids to university...
And ending hunger in Korvosa...
For the sake of PFS, animal companions can wear barding and neck-slot items.
So in PFS a horse animal companion can't use magic horseshoes?
Still no FAQ entry on this. Ugh.
Quite likely general disrespect for the efforts of the dev team is the cause of that.
Not only do I price in the cost of mithril before the multiplier, I make my players feel guilty about not arming four cities worth of guardsmen with studded leather, heavy steel shields, and longswords.
Edit:
And feeding their families for two years...
And sending their kids to university...
And ending hunger in Korvosa...
What if they do not play saints ?
You multiply the BASE cost, the special material cost is added to the end product.
(Base x SizeMod)+ Material = Cost.
Same with things like the Str modified compond bows made of Darkwood etc.
So:
Chain Shirt 100gpx4(Large Nonhumanoid Barding) + 1,000gp mithril = 1400gp
would be correct.
Where does this come from?
I cannot find anything concerning mundane items and special materials making any discrepancy between base cost and final cost.
Magic item creation does have this breakdown, but those specific rules isn't really related here.
If I have missed something in the equipment rules, I will gladly be corrected.
Otherwise, I think we should avoid claims on, which rulings are correct, if there isn't any rules that cover it.
Well, I respect your thoughts, however we are here to determine which cost is the correct one - and you are certainly free to interpret the rules however you see fit, but the OP is asking for a determination and the rules as I read them say as I have suggested.
I would, however, suggest that there are two labels (descriptors) to be aware of, and those are 'cost' and 'item cost modifier'
Sizing lists a multiple of the item 'Cost'. Note it doesn't say 'item cost modifier', it simply lists 'Cost' and then a multiplier applicable.
When we go to special materials it begins a new definition which reads 'item cost modifier' which is recorded as +X.
So we calculate cost, and then add the modifier.
If you have a counter view you are welcome to elaborate.
Well the problems arise from the fact that the special material pricing rules is a bit of a mess. It isn't a problem 95 % of the time, as they work intuitively, but when we need to generalize it is a bit strange to have three different types of price adjustments to draw upon.
While I fully agree that it can be interpreted either way, I would rule that 'cost' before size multiplication includes special materials.
Given that the 'cost' in this matter isn't properly defined, it is very
While your separation between 'item cost' and 'item cost modifier' is logically sound, I don't feel the rules provide a clear enough distinction to make a ruling based on it.
One might argue that being a modifier the item cost modifier actually changes the 'item cost' for further purposes.
Another reason I'd rule that way, is to balance the different special materials to eachother. Otherwise we end up with adamantium, mithral, and silver being cheaper than other materials when applying them to larger creatures.
Darkwood: For darkwood items adjusting size, will adjust the price because the weight increases. In this case, we shouldn't double tax the size increase, however.
Adamantium, mithral, and cold iron: Fixed modifier, which could be interpreted either way.
Dragonhide, cold iron + all the new ones: Being a multiplier to the cost, it really doesn't matter when we apply it. The larger size will result in a higher multiplied cost.
|
|
The problem with your version, HaraldKlak, is that it immediately becomes subject to abuse with magic items. When someone can get a tiny mithral +1 fullplate crafted for half the cost of what it does for a small/medium character, then put it on easily because armor re-sizes to fit the wearer, you have a problem. Now, you can already do this with everything but adamantium/mithral, but they typically cost much less than 1/3 of that of these two metals.
I'd say tack on the mithral costs afterwards, as little sense as it makes. You don't reduce the cost of mithral armor for small characters, even though it takes less material.
This also prevents cheese by having magic armor made for a diminutive sized creature (pricing reduced by a ton), then have it automatically resize when you put it on.
But you don't really know that, do you? Medium and Small armor/weapons cost the same. Maybe a tiny mithral shirt is less
I can't say for certainty one way or the other for RAW- but I think that it would get multiplied. The only thing that wouldn't get multiplied for size is enchantments.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The problem with your version, HaraldKlak, is that it immediately becomes subject to abuse with magic items. When someone can get a tiny mithral +1 fullplate crafted for half the cost of what it does for a small/medium character, then put it on easily because armor re-sizes to fit the wearer, you have a problem. Now, you can already do this with everything but adamantium/mithral, but they typically cost much less than 1/3 of that of these two metals.
I thought only things like rings/circlets/cloaks/gloves resized- not arms or armor.
The problem with your version, HaraldKlak, is that it immediately becomes subject to abuse with magic items. When someone can get a tiny mithral +1 fullplate crafted for half the cost of what it does for a small/medium character, then put it on easily because armor re-sizes to fit the wearer, you have a problem. Now, you can already do this with everything but adamantium/mithral, but they typically cost much less than 1/3 of that of these two metals.I thought only things like rings/circlets/cloaks/gloves resized- not arms or armor.
Exactly.
The rules concerning sizes is:
When an article of magic clothing or jewelry is discovered, most of the time size shouldn't be an issue. Many magic garments are made to be easily adjustable, or they adjust themselves magically to the wearer. Size should not keep characters of various kinds from using magic items.
There may be rare exceptions, especially with race-specific items.
Armor and Weapon Sizes: Armor and weapons that are found at random have a 30% chance of being small (01–30), a 60% chance of being Medium (31–90), and a 10% chance of being any other size (91–100).
I agree it is a mess.
That mess is certainly not helped by running TWO systems - 'cost modifier' and 'cost per pound'.
Along with some untidy dialogue in general.
@Harald, there's more than one way to read that. I've always read it as saying all items resize, plus if you find a random piece of armor, this is how likely it is to be a specific size. Not that that excludes arms and armor from the previous paragraph.
@Harald, there's more than one way to read that. I've always read it as saying all items resize, plus if you find a random piece of armor, this is how likely it is to be a specific size. Not that that excludes arms and armor from the previous paragraph.
'
I disagree. Its fairly specific- garments and jewelry resize, armors and weapons do not. If they all resized it'd be irrelevant from a rules perspective what size you find the equipment at and as such that entire part of text would be superfluous.
Also, armor and weapons are neither garment nor jewelry and aren't treated as such anywhere else in the rules.
-S
For what its worth, 3.5 D&D has the same wording for magic item size as Pathfinder does. However, on page 43 of the Magic Item Compendium, there is the Sizing property for weapons, whose only use is to make weapons bigger or smaller. That shows that 3.5 magic weapons did not automatically resize by default. I don't know if there was a property for armor that did the same.
Not that that actually means anything. Pathfinder is a different game, and doesn't have to work the same as 3.5 did.
As I said, there's more than one way to read that. You read it differently than I do. Either way is arguable, and I'm not going to try and convince you my reading is more correct.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
James Jacobs did have this to say on the subject.
If your party includes gnomes and halflings, you should certainly adjust some of the sizes of magic items, since most magic items do not resize. Alternately, it'd be cool to introduce a spell that allows weapons and armor to be permanently resized.
That was said before Pathfinder was published, but the rules for magic item resizing haven't changed from 3.5 to Pathfinder.
Sean K. Reynolds said this about a custom magic item, whose purpose was to resize magical weapons and armor. (And this is for Pathfinder.)
It's one of those weird things where it fixes a "problem" with the game, but the "problem" would likewise go away if armor resized like all other magic items did.
If magical weapons and armor automatically resized, there would be no need for the item.
So at least as far as the developers were concerned at those times, magic weapons and armor did not resize automatically.
Not only do I price in the cost of mithril before the multiplier, I make my players feel guilty about not arming four cities worth of guardsmen with studded leather, heavy steel shields, and longswords.
Edit:
And feeding their families for two years...
And sending their kids to university...
And ending hunger in Korvosa...
You would hate my Half-Orc.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I do not have my book in front of me to confirm if this is in there or not, but the table that lists mount/barding costs in the PRD has a foot note after the 4x cost for large barding: "(2) Relative to similar armor made for a Medium humanoid."
If medium mithral chain armor costs 1100, then large mithril chain barding should be 4400.
(http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/equipment.html)
Where is it described that material modifiers are counted AFTER cost multipliers? The only mention of anything like this is in the magic item section where it says that magic costs are applied after multipliers for size ('special' sizes/shapes section in both the armor and weapon magic creation guides). This makes a bit more sense. The difference is that material isn't really an 'extra' it's more of a 'type' modifier.
I'd think of something like this:
(B + M)xS + E = T
B = Basic Medium Humanoid Cost for the 'type' of item
M = Material Cost
S = Size/special multiplier
E = Magical Enchantments and Mundane Extras (spikes)
T = Total Cost
I think mege has it right except that mithral armor is automatically masterwork, so you would not pay the masterwork price four times. So a set of large mithril shirt barding should cost 3950gp.
|
I think mege has it right except that mithral armor is automatically masterwork, so you would not pay the masterwork price four times. So a set of large mithril shirt barding should cost 3950gp.
Agreed. The line from Mithral and adamantine state that:
Adamantine is so costly that weapons and armor made from it are always of masterwork quality; the masterwork cost is included in the prices given below.
and
Weapons or armors fashioned from mithral are always masterwork items as well; the masterwork cost is included in the prices given below.
This seems to imply that you handle it the same as masterwork.
except youre not paying for masterwork, just the fact that it is made out of mithral makes it masterwork. that is why you cannot apply the masterwork bonus on top of the bonuses you get from it being made from mithral. the only costs are 100 fore base price, plus 1000 for mithral. that is what you multiply for size and non-humanoid modifiers, so 4400g.
You are paying for masterwork because its
included in the price
... If you weren't paying for it it would be free, not included in the price. So 150gp of that price is for the skill of the labor, that does not go up just because the item is larger.
I'll try to give a real world example, I'm going on holiday for a week and the price is £1100 including £150 for flights. If I extend my stay to four weeks I don't have to pay for the flight again, I'm just paying four times as much for my hotel or whatnot. That wasn't very useful was it, lol.
|
|
Also, it does not state that they are "considered masterwork" but that they are also masterwork.
How about this, a medium size great-axe costs +3000 gp to make from adamantine. A small sized dagger also takes +3000 gp to make from adamantine.
Should not the axe take about 3x the metal to make than the dagger? Why is it a flat +3000 GP to make either out of adamantine.
Also a light steel shield (which normally weighs 6 lbs) and a heavy steel shield (which normally weighs 16 lbs) both only add +1000 gp to the price for making out of mithral.
both of these examples should use more material but cost the same.
|
|
Vacation stuff
LOL.. no it's not very useful, but a good try. The masterwork cost should definitely be included four times since it represents time and effort by the crafters.
Now I've never made barding, but guesstimating from what I've seen of horse barding, I can say that the X 4 seems reasonable. That X 4 wouldn't just be for materials. It would also be the time required to make the item. I would not be the least bit surprised if it took me 160 hours (or even more) to complete the barding just for the shear size of the item.So it's reasonable to say that if a crafter spends 14 hours on normal armor to make it masterwork and 52 hours on non-human large armor they should get more money for the masterwork portion of the crafting.
That being said the rules don't specifically point out if you add the cost of the materials before or after the size modification. I tend to apply them before (since it makes sense you need more or less materials depending on the size of the wielder)so the item in question would be 4,400 GP in my campaign.
You are applying real world logic which is entirely irrelevant. By your logic full plate and a buckler ought to have different masterwork costs - they don't. The relevant rules are in the magic Armor section...
Armor for Unusual Creatures
The cost of armor for non-humanoid creatures, as well as for creatures who are neither Small nor Medium, varies (see Equipment). The cost of the masterwork quality and any magical enhancement remains the same.
So by RAW and RAI the price is 3950gp, you can of course houserule it as you choose as always.
And you are paying four times the price for the mithril, it's just that the listed price for mithril includes 150gp of masterwork cost. So it's 950gp x 4 + 150gp = 3950gp.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
there has been no change in the rules on making unusual armor from mithral/adamantine in the conversion from 3.5 to pathfinder. It was clarified in the 3.5 FAQ that the cost of the base material is multiplied along with the cost of the armor itself. but what i had forgotten is you subtract the cost of masterwork from the material before multiplying. that is not included in pathfinder rules for unusual armor.
On page 217 of the DMG, it states that “the cost of the
masterwork quality and any magical enhancement remains
the same” regardless of a creature’s unusual size or shape.
Adamantine and mithral both state that items made from
such material are masterwork quality and the masterwork
cost is part of the material cost listed. How much would a
set of mithral chainmail barding for my warhorse cost?
A strict reading of the rules indicates that in such a case the
masterwork cost for armor should be subtracted from the
special material price before applying the multiplier for any
unusual size or shape of the intended wearer.
For example, according to the Armor for Unusual Creatures
chart on page 123 of the PH, a set of chainmail barding for a
warhorse (a Large nonhumanoid creature) would normally cost
600 gp (four times the normal cost of 150 gp). A set of mithral
chainmail barding would cost 16,000 gp: 600 gp for the
chainmail barding plus 15,400 gp (the cost of mithral medium
armor [4,000 gp], minus the masterwork cost for armor [150
gp], times 4).
so the cost for mithral is still multiplied, hence 4400g
Except that it is included in the PF rules, see the quote in my post above. It's just in the magic items section which is confusing. So the cost is 3950gp. It works exactly like the 3.5 example you posted.
|
|
You are applying real world logic which is entirely irrelevant. By your logic full plate and a buckler ought to have different masterwork costs - they don't. The relevant rules are in the magic Armor section...
Armor for Unusual Creatures
The cost of armor for non-humanoid creatures, as well as for creatures who are neither Small nor Medium, varies (see Equipment). The cost of the masterwork quality and any magical enhancement remains the same.
So by RAW and RAI the price is 3950gp, you can of course houserule it as you choose as always.
And you are paying four times the price for the mithril, it's just that the listed price for mithril includes 150gp of masterwork cost. So it's 950gp x 4 + 150gp = 3950gp.
Wait a second.. I give a real world logic explanation in response to your real world logic explanation and mine is irrelevant? I was just pointing out a comparison that's closer to the example then the one you provided. Besides my logic is only half irrelevant, the other half is irreverent [j/k].
Seriously though, I realize that it's not 100% appropriate since crafting in PF (and in most RPGs) is an abstract rule to cut down on book keeping and minutiae and to be honest if you look at crafting too closely it breaks down on all levels.
That being said, when I look at the PFPRD it indicates the following for armor for unsual creatures;
Armor and shields for unusually big creatures, unusually little creatures, and nonhumanoid creatures (such as horses) have different costs and weights from those given on Table: Armor and Shields. Refer to the appropriate line on Table: Armor for Unusual Creatures and apply the multipliers to cost and weight for the armor type in question.
It does not mention anything about masterwork cost. The quote you are providing is for magic armor which indicates that the masterwork cost does not increase as a result of enchanting the item. However it is not clear (as you have said). Since the rules only indicate that the cost of the masterwork stay the same under the magic item creation and indicates that you should refer to the equipment section for prices I am inclined to continue with my original assessment. It may be incorrect (but I don't think it is), but it fits with how 3.5 handled crafting and works well with my games. That being said it would be nice if we could get an official ruling on it. I'll mark the thread for FAQ.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Sorry WarDriveWorley, you are quite right that sounds awful when I read it back, my apologies, it came out much snootier than I intended. Um, lets go with its essentially ignored in favor of balance.
The cost of the masterwork quality and any magical enhancement remains the same.
Its a rule, and not one thats invalidated by the section its been placed in. I suppose you could assume it only applies to magical armor, but it seems a very odd interpretation, so large masterwork barding pays 4 times masterwork cost, where +1 large masterwork barding does not, making the +1 set only 550gp more. My understanding of english reads that sentence as being splittable into two assertions; one, the cost of the masterwork quality remains the same; and two, the cost of any magical enhancement remains the same.
|
|
Sorry WarDriveWorley, you are quite right that sounds awful when I read it back, my apologies, it came out much snootier than I intended. Um, lets go with its essentially ignored in favor of balance.
The cost of the masterwork quality and any magical enhancement remains the same.Its a rule, and not one thats invalidated by the section its been placed in. I suppose you could assume it only applies to magical armor, but it seems a very odd interpretation, so large masterwork barding pays 4 times masterwork cost, where +1 large masterwork barding does not, making the +1 set only 550gp more. My understanding of english reads that sentence as being splittable into two assertions; one, the cost of the masterwork quality remains the same; and two, the cost of any magical enhancement remains the same.
Don't worry about it. Already forgotten. Water over the gelatinous cube as they say.
I understand what you're saying and actually agree with your interpretation. I just think there's more to the interpretation that you're overlooking.
Let's look at it this way. Let's say that you're new to PF and RPGs in general. Now let's say you want some chain mail barding for Frank, your spiffy new giant war ferret mount (a large creature). You grab the player's handbook and go to the equipment section where the rules say you spend 4 times the normal cost of the item.
Now a little later you decide to make Frank's armor masterwork. you go back to equipment and because there's nothing saying that masterwork armor is not multiplied when you create the armor (see my last post) you multiply the cost of the masterwork by 4.
Now here is where the disconnect comes in.
Now you want to enchant Frank's armor with the slick property. For the first time since you started you go into the magic item section and lo and behold the book now says that the cost of masterwork is NOT increased.
Well this creates the whole conundrum IMHO. It's my interpretation that the line you're referencing was added so that no additional costs above the standard multiplier for making the armor is incurred.
Either way you look at the writing it's a valid interpretation. That's why I'm hoping we can get a dev specific comment on the whole thing.
D&D math 101
Add or subtrat all thing up then multiply or divide.
STR 8 -1 Magic +2 Sword long sword roll crittcal damage is (1d8+2-1)x2 or 2d8+2.
Same way for cost of items.
It based of real word cost Plate mail armor for knight was way less than Barding for Mount.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I've failed to come up with a definitive answer before, so I don't expect to see one now, but you can look at the threads I link to in here.
That said, I lean towards multiplying the mithril material cost as well, because otherwise you can buy gargantuan mithril breastplates and then melt them down for a profit for simply the weight in mithril.
|
|
I've failed to come up with a definitive answer before, so I don't expect to see one now, but you can look at the threads I link to in here.
That said, I lean towards multiplying the mithril material cost as well, because otherwise you can buy gargantuan mithril breastplates and then melt them down for a profit for simply the weight in mithril.
So, I buy a mithral chain shirt buy the book. 1100 gp to purchase (100 gp for the chain shirt, +1000 gp for light mithral armor)
The price of mithral is 500gp/lb (based on the cost of "other items")
Chain armor weighs 25 lbs normally, 10 lbs if mithral (should be 12.5, but the mithral shirt item is only 10 lbs)
Melting down and selling the raw mithral (even at 1/3 the price for raw materials), gives you ~1667 gp back. A profit of ~567 gp. At the 500 gp/lb price it is 5000 gp for a 4900 gp profit.
How are we stopping this again?
You're not stopping it, you're preventing it from being worse in larger sizes.
it has already been answered in 3.5 FAQ, and since pathfinder has not changed them, the faq applies. you multiply the cost for mithral too. the current argument is how you deal with the masterwork cost.
|
I've DM'd for years, and have always multiplied the whole thing by the size/non-humanoid modifiers and was done with it (4400gp for mithral chain shirt barding in this case). But after reading all the quotes above I'm leaning more towards the 3950gp total.
If a Chain Shirt is normally 100gp, and the masterwork cost of 150gp is included in the Item Cost Modifier for Mithral, as it states on page 155 of the CRB, then 3950 is the only logical, mathematical conclusion, given that on page 462 the CRB clearly states that "The cost of the masterwork quality and any magical enhancement remains the same".
The cost of a medium-sized, mithral chain shirt, 1100gp, breaks down to (100 base + 850 mithral + 150 masterwork).
Only the base of 100gp and the 850gp of mithral would be multiplied by 4, not the masterwork cost of 150gp.
So you are left with: 4(100) + 4(850) + 150 = 3950
Someone above posted a real world example of how they think the masterwork cost should be included, which makes sense for a real world application, but consider this: "the cost ... of any magical enhancement remains the same" as well. In a real world application, assuming magic existed, of course, wouldn't enchanting a larger piece of armor cost more, too? But RAW it doesn't, so I'm led to believe that the same goes for masterwork.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Haha, found this quote by James Jacobs back in 2010:
Frankly, the over-examination of tiny fiddly rules bits in an attempt to "solve" the equation of how things are priced is more or less destined to cause only greater confusion. Magic item pricing is equal parts math and art, since the game itself wasn't designed from the ground up by mathematicians.
