Dedicated Voter Season 6
|
My best guess is that the 2,000 gp level was used instead of 1,800 gp as a "tax" for being able to split up the duration, a
I would actually say that this wasn't really a "tax" but rather a function of how the item is activated.
1,800 is spell completion, which is usually a scroll or wand type item where you actually need to verbalize or somantize something.
2,000 is use activated. Things like bags of holding are activated when you put something in it.
My best guess is that the 2,000 gp level was used instead of 1,800 gp as a "tax" for being able to split up the duration, a
I would actually say that this wasn't really a "tax" but rather a function of how the item is activated.
1,800 is spell completion, which is usually a scroll or wand type item where you actually need to verbalize or somantize something.
2,000 is use activated. Things like bags of holding are activated when you put something in it.
Sure - but this all supports my point - there's a certain amount of creativity that can be used in deciding which costs to apply for items other than obvious ones.
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
,
Star Voter Season 6
|
Sure - but this all supports my point - there's a certain amount of creativity that can be used in deciding which costs to apply for items other than obvious ones.
My best guess is that the 2,000 gp level was used instead of 1,800 gp as a "tax" for being able to split up the duration, a
I would actually say that this wasn't really a "tax" but rather a function of how the item is activated.
1,800 is spell completion, which is usually a scroll or wand type item where you actually need to verbalize or somantize something.
2,000 is use activated. Things like bags of holding are activated when you put something in it.
"And thirdly, the code is more what you call "guidelines" than actual rules. Welcome aboard the Black Pearl, Miss Turner! "
If an Item is exhaustible meaning it only has a single use what kind of reduction would this effect on the item?
I am having some difficulty as when I am looking at the Candle of Invocation, which appears to have some reductions on it.... but I am unclear as to the math behind this.
...
"And thirdly, the code is more what you call "guidelines" than actual rules. Welcome aboard the Black Pearl, Miss Turner! "
Wow I actually head Jeffery Rush when you said that!
Dedicated Voter Season 6, Star Voter Season 7, Dedicated Voter Season 8
|
If an Item is exhaustible meaning it only has a single use what kind of reduction would this effect on the item?
I am having some difficulty as when I am looking at the Candle of Invocation, which appears to have some reductions on it.... but I am unclear as to the math behind this.
That would be the "Single use, use-activated" row.
The candle requires a specific alignment to use (-30%). It might have an ad-hoc cost reduction because, once activated, it's difficult to move and vulnerable to a relatively simple way to end its effects.
If an Item is exhaustible meaning it only has a single use what kind of reduction would this effect on the item?
I am having some difficulty as when I am looking at the Candle of Invocation, which appears to have some reductions on it.... but I am unclear as to the math behind this.
That would be the "Single use, use-activated" row.
The candle requires a specific alignment to use (-30%). It might have an ad-hoc cost reduction because, once activated, it's difficult to move and vulnerable to a relatively simple way to end its effects.
Would a language requirement to use item be sufficient to affect a -30% reduction? You think?
In and of itself, yes (static, point in time)...
But, anyone can pick up a language with a rank in the Linquistics Skill when they level up.
Maybe 10%, in my opinion. Skill requirement.
|
Actually I'm not too sure you are correct, having found the following from the core rule book (p549):
"In addition, some items cast or replicate spells with
costly material components. For these items, the market
price equals the base price plus an extra price for the spell
component costs. The cost to create these items is the magic
supplies cost plus the costs for the components. Descriptions
of these items include an entry that gives the total cost of
creating the item."I think this means my original algebra above is correct? What is your read on this?
Best Regards
Herremann the Wise
It's applicable, if the item allows the user to bypass the material cost per use.
If you make an item which allows access to the spell, but the user has to provide the components (like, a stoneskin amulet, that the user feeds diamonds into*), I wouldn't have it affect the price, or they'll be paying twice.*not my item!
|
|
If the GM wants to let you do a quest for X gp "worth" of troll fingers to find the perfect one, that's okay, but there's no game difference between doing that and just spending X gold on undefined components.
Wouldn't that be a good money-maker for the trolls, since the can cut 'em off, sell 'em and grow 'em back?
If the GM wants to let you do a quest for X gp "worth" of troll fingers to find the perfect one, that's okay, but there's no game difference between doing that and just spending X gold on undefined components.Wouldn't that be a good money-maker for the trolls, since the can cut 'em off, sell 'em and grow 'em back?
Given that there's a sect of trolls in Kaer Maga that make money by regularly disemboweling themselves, sure. (It sound way less painful your way.)