We recently noticed the division between head slots and headband slots.
We happened upon it as our in house cleric just got his hands on a phylactery of positive channeling. Said cleric already had a headband of wisdom - I take it you already know what I am hinting at.
Why this sudden divisin between head and headband slots? and was it intentional that clerics should not be allowed to wear both a phylactery of channeling and a mental enhancing headband at the same time?
We have just chosen to make the phylactery an amulet in stead as in the grand old days, but was there an intentional reasoning behind this in the design process?
Um, PFRPG actually gives you MORE slots than 3.5.
In 3.5, headband/hat/helmet/phylactery was one slot.
http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicItems/magicItemBasics.htm#magicItemsOnTheBod y
In PFRPG, headband/phylactery is one slot and circlet/crown/hat/helm/mask is another slot.
http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/magicItems.html#magic-items-on-the-body
So the "these slots overlap" problem you're running into has existing since 2003. But there's less overlap in PFRPG.
But yes, sometimes you have to make hard choices about what item you're going to wear. Otherwise, you might as well let everyone wear whatever they want.
Um, PFRPG actually gives you MORE slots than 3.5.
In 3.5, headband/hat/helmet/phylactery was one slot.
http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicItems/magicItemBasics.htm#magicItemsOnTheBod yIn PFRPG, headband/phylactery is one slot and circlet/crown/hat/helm/mask is another slot.
http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/magicItems.html#magic-items-on-the-body
I realize that.
As such I do not regard it as an actual problem except that it makes for a lot of sillyness, like wearing a headband AND a circlet (two items that are paractically the same).Or wearing a mask and glasses (eyes slot) which most people with glasses will attest to being a very poor combination (... I am actually suggesting masks be made an eye slot here)
So the "these slots overlap" problem you're running into has existing since 2003. But there's less overlap in PFRPG.
But yes, sometimes you have to make hard choices about what item you're going to wear. Otherwise, you might as well let everyone wear whatever they want.
I imagined this might have been your reasoning.
I must point out however that at one point the two item in mention where actually a phylactery of undead turning (head slot) and a periapt of wisdom (neck slot) and thus where combinable. Even a cloak of charisma (shoulders slot) could be throw into the equation without any problem.As it is now a cleric has some VERY hard choices to make if the PRPG is played with only standard items ( my suggestion for a reprint is that the phylactery of channeling be made a periapt or amulet in stead. It would be more fair to clerics and more consistent with previous editions of the game - which as far as I recall at one point sported an amulet of undead turning).
Man with that chart a phylactery does go in the headband slot
it all depends on the cleric and what each item did. Anyhow yeah the circlet I would show him the chart for sure on that. He may just be having a hard time seeing them in different spots as they are both worn around the head.
But yes, sometimes you have to make hard choices about what item you're going to wear. Otherwise, you might as well let everyone wear whatever they want.
Of course. But I don't think it's good to force players to choose between being better at healing his party and better at contributing more directly.
PF helped clerics who want to both out a lot by freeing up spells formerly used for healing with channeling. It's one step forward, one step back.
You could go with the traditional Jewish ("tefillah") definition of phylactery, wherein it can be bound to the head or upper arm. It would then go in the Wrist slot.
Well you could always just use the rules for combining magic items too. They've been around for ages and almost no one even glances at them.
I had to explain them to my group (who didn't know they existed) when someone started complaining that belts/headbands of multiple stat enhancement were more expensive than buying two single attribute enhancers.
For those that don't want to look up the rules, you take the value of the higher priced item and add the value of the lower priced item multiplied by 1.5 or P=H+(L*1.5) where H is the high price, L is the low price and P is the total.
That's exactly what the multi-stats belts already do.
Edit: nevermind, I get what you're saying.
Well you could always just use the rules for combining magic items too. They've been around for ages and almost no one even glances at them.
Actually my gaming group has made extensive use of those rules through the years.
Except that it does not solve the problem for a party who happen to find the items in a treasure, rather than craft it themselves or order it at the hendge wizard's.
To be honest this appears to be a design slip.
Well you could always just use the rules for combining magic items too. They've been around for ages and almost no one even glances at them.
Actually my gaming group has made extensive use of those rules through the years.
Except that it does not solve the problem for a party who happen to find the items in a treasure, rather than craft it themselves or order it at the hendge wizard's.
To be honest this appears to be a design slip.
That's why our party wizard developed a new spell (using the develop new spell rules nobody seems to notice exists) that allows him to transfer the magic properties from one item to another. It has a Material Component cost equal to the 50% difference of the lower priced magical property.
For example, he could take the properties of a ring of invisibility (20,000gp) and place it on a cloak of resistance +1 (1,000gp). Since it would cost 21,500gp to create a cloak of invisibility/resistance +1, it costs 500gp to cast the spell (the difference).
It does wonders for allowing us to keep our magical treasure.
That's why our party wizard developed a new spell (using the develop new spell rules nobody seems to notice exists) that allows him to transfer the magic properties from one item to another. It has a Material Component cost equal to the 50% difference of the lower priced magical property.
For example, he could take the properties of a ring of invisibility (20,000gp) and place it on a cloak of resistance +1 (1,000gp). Since it would cost 21,500gp to create a cloak of invisibility/resistance +1, it costs 500gp to cast the spell (the difference).
It does wonders for allowing us to keep our magical treasure.
I hope it is a hig level spell (7th or above).
As you describe it it appears to be a very generous spell. Unless it has a VERY high casting time it will spare the party a ton of time and will counter basically any attempt by the GM to force players into hard choices.I like the concept but doubt it is balanced. Would you care to post it statted up in a "spoiler"?
I must point out however that at one point the two item in mention where actually a phylactery of undead turning (head slot) and a periapt of wisdom (neck slot) and thus where combinable. Even a cloak of charisma (shoulders slot) could be throw into the equation without any problem.
And you used to be able to wear a belt of strength, gloves of dex, and an amulet of constitution. Things have changed--to prevent people from loading up a +6 item on any slot they want.
Characters have to make choices. Sometimes they're hard choices. That's what makes the game interesting.
Man with that chart a phylactery does go in the headband slotDang, yes. I was thinking circlet ... *sigh*
Well, no hard choice here. Any cleric in his right mind would go for the headband.
Not my character. He's totally geared around channeling negative energy and that extra +2d6 is huge to me. Ten 7d6 burst attacks at 10th level that don't hit my allies. I think they inadvertantly turned the Cleric into the new Evoker. Anyway, not a hard choice. I'll craft myself a vest of negative energy channeling or something and pay the extra 50%.
That's why our party wizard developed a new spell (using the develop new spell rules nobody seems to notice exists) that allows him to transfer the magic properties from one item to another. It has a Material Component cost equal to the 50% difference of the lower priced magical property.
For example, he could take the properties of a ring of invisibility (20,000gp) and place it on a cloak of resistance +1 (1,000gp). Since it would cost 21,500gp to create a cloak of invisibility/resistance +1, it costs 500gp to cast the spell (the difference).
It does wonders for allowing us to keep our magical treasure.
Awesome idea! I'll probably tweek it a little but very, very cool. I must begin research on this immediately. :)
I hope it is a hig level spell (7th or above).
As you describe it it appears to be a very generous spell. Unless it has a VERY high casting time it will spare the party a ton of time and will counter basically any attempt by the GM to force players into hard choices.I like the concept but doubt it is balanced. Would you care to post it statted up in a "spoiler"?
I never did see the spell in full myself, but I believe it was around 5th level and had a 24 hour casting time. That meant that you were limited to transferring 1 item at a time, could not go adventuring in the interim, and it would throw off some of your spellcasting for about two days (since you aren't preparing new spells in the meantime).
What would be so broken about it? The GM still required that most slotted items make some sense (no underwear of true seeing for example).
If you're playing a "healer" cleric the +2d6 channel is a great boon, but if you're into "many spells" builds the bonus on Wis/Cha is better.
If you're playing a "healer" cleric the +2d6 channel is a great boon, but if you're into "many spells" builds the bonus on Wis/Cha is better.
If you're trying to balance healing and affecting things more directly, it is a hard choice - punish yourself or your party members?
I liked how the new channel rule enabled clerics to do both so they can balance those two things more easily (I'm all for choices in general, but against some choices in particular, like this one), but making those an either/or choice goes against that.
I've been toying around with the idea since that now that you can wear three objects on your head/face (head, headband, eyes) that Ioun Stones should take up one of these slots--maybe your choice of slot, but it should take up one of them.
Maybe that's a restriction for no reason, but it seems like that's an awful lot of magic going around your head.
I've been toying around with the idea since that now that you can wear three objects on your head/face (head, headband, eyes) that Ioun Stones should take up one of these slots--maybe your choice of slot, but it should take up one of them.
Maybe that's a restriction for no reason, but it seems like that's an awful lot of magic going around your head.
Remember to reduce their cost, since they're priced as slotless items.
This is why I like including the slot and bonus appropriate slot placement. I would allow them to simple have one made, trade the item in, or even modify the one they got to fit another proper slot. Hell, if it is a headband I would probably not need any modification, as it can be wrapped around about anything.
Well, thank you any way Sean.
Since it appeared as an oversight during development I fought it was important to point out and with your participation in this thread I am now satisfied that you (developers) are aware of it.