Paizo Top Nav Branding
  • Hello, Guest! |
  • Sign In |
  • My Account |
  • Shopping Cart |
  • Help/FAQ
About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game
Pathfinder Society

Pathfinder Beginner Box

Pathfinder Adventure Card Game

Pathfinder Comics

Pathfinder Legends

Belt of Incredible Dexterity +3


Rules Questions

1 to 50 of 231 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>

I have a belt of dexterity +2, at the most recent level I increased my dexterity from an even score to an odd one. Is there anything stopping me from increasing my belt of dexterity from +2 to +3?


Roshan wrote:
I have a belt of dexterity +2, at the most recent level I increased my dexterity from an even score to an odd one. Is there anything stopping me from increasing my belt of dexterity from +2 to +3?

Well it technically doesn't exist at least not as a written up item so it depends if you're allowed to create custom magic items by your DM.

Contributor

12 people marked this as a favorite.

Odd-bonus ability score items are deliberately not in the game.


Sean K Reynolds wrote:
Odd-bonus ability score items are deliberately not in the game.

But nothing in the rules actually prevents it. They are still generally a bad idea, however. You either have what is effectively an expensive +2 item (if your ability score is even), or a cheap +4 item (if your score is odd).


My main quarrel with the concept is this:

The belt is supposed to have a magical effect. When a user puts it on, it grants a benefit. In this case, not everyone could benefit from the stat increases. Ex. a +1 Belt of incredible dexterity would literally have no effect(with very few exceptions)for half the people that put it on, making it an attractive looking belt, nothing more.


Kybryn wrote:

My main quarrel with the concept is this:

The belt is supposed to have a magical effect. When a user puts it on, it grants a benefit. In this case, not everyone could benefit from the stat increases. Ex. a +1 Belt of incredible dexterity would literally have no effect(with very few exceptions)for half the people that put it on, making it an attractive looking belt, nothing more.

Indeed, for most people it wouldn't but then again it isn't for most people, it's tailor made for me. A hearing aid doesn't do anything for most people but for the hearing impaired it makes a world of difference.

Sean K Reynolds wrote:
Odd-bonus ability score items are deliberately not in the game.

Is it just because of a balance issue? If that's the case then why did you make it so easy to make odd ability score items?

Andoran

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Companion, Modules, Pawns, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I allow it. As I see I, following the rules, for the first 24 hours the belt will give a +1 to the dexterity based abilities, as it will be a temporary bonus.

PRD wrote:
Some spells and abilities increase your ability scores. Ability score increases with a duration of 1 day or less give only temporary bonuses. For every two points of increase to a single ability, apply a +1 bonus to the skills and statistics listed with the relevant ability.

After 24 hours it become a "permanent" effect and add directly to the character score, allowing him or her to get to the full effect of his increased dexterity.

To balance that I have introduced a rule while still playing 3.0 (and after considering what my wizard could have while entering the game at 14th level with self made items).
In my games a statistic enhancing item require a CL for the crafter equal to 3 times the item bonus. So a 3rd level caster can make a belt +1, a 6th level a belt +2 and so on. That make buying a purposely build stat enhancing item with a odd value more reasonable and limit somehow the availability of the highest level enhancing items.


It's up to your GM.

I agree with Sean and Jerra, it seems like a cheap way to get an additional bonus, and I would rule it as no you can't. However, I'm not your GM.


I think there is some fairness in allowing it as it would make a 15 dexterity better than a 14, which it is.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Modules Subscriber

Given the fact that an odd statistic score has been more or less degraded to 'Feat Prerequisite' (in 3.5, that extra point at least was a safety buffer vs. ability damage or penalties), I'd have no problem with odd-enhancement items being more viable for odd-statistic characters.

I do admit that I see some problems with Int items (as one of their hard-wired skills would only occasionally be granted). Plus, just from my gut feeling, the costs for a Thingie of Stat Buff +1, being a mere 1k, comes off a bit... cheap.

Andoran

Jeraa wrote:
Sean K Reynolds wrote:
Odd-bonus ability score items are deliberately not in the game.
But nothing in the rules actually prevents it. They are still generally a bad idea, however. You either have what is effectively an expensive +2 item (if your ability score is even), or a cheap +4 item (if your score is odd).

I think that is the reason. They would have a different mechanical effect on two different characters if one had odd and one had even, effectively seeming like two different items.


Roshan wrote:


Is it just because of a balance issue? If that's the case then why did you make it so easy to make odd ability score items?

For the same reason its easy to have a red dragon pet at first level. To allow DMs to do weird stuff if they want to.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Since you increased your Dex to an odd level on your own, I assume you'll do it again in the not too distant future. At that point, then the odd bonus stops delivering the extra goods and you're right back to the belt giving you just a +1 to your Dex mod. You might as well save up to upgrade it to a full +4.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

The reason is, as was explained elsewhere, that it's worth different amounts to different people, and it's something very universal.


To the original guestion, nothing short of GM ruling.

If I was gm only problem would be finding someone to make it for you or make it yourself.

Actually with the price that +2/4/6 items cost I would guess almost each one would be custom ordered.(Depending on the world of coarse) So it would make sense 50% of such items found be odd numbered.

I see no reason to disallow such items. Not having even number will have it's drawback with the maxium bonus of such items being +6.

Might want to take all that with a grain of salt, since if I had my way if there is a different score there is a different bonus. That might make a little biased.

Shadow Lodge

My 2 cents:

As a player I see the usefulness of the idea, I have an odd stat and I'd like to make it a nice even number without wasting an extremely valuable stat bump.

As a GM I see the "cheaty" side of it in that it would allow you to carelessly level your stats out across the board.

That said if I were going to allow it I would probably make the cost half of what the regular bonus would be. So for example a +1 item would be half the cost of a +2; a +3 item would be half the cost of +4 and a +5 would be half the cost of a +6. In addition I think I would also not allow players to use item creation feats to use the work around. The idea being there is a very set formula to make a +2,4 or 6 item and once you stray from that formula your "adventurer" character just doesn't have the crafting chops to work outside the +2,4,6 formula. I suppose if the players tied to argue the last point you could let them use item creation feats to make odd numbered items at 3/4 price or something along those lines.


The purpose of the +2/+4/+6 progression is that it is a guaranteed improvement no matter who puts it on. It bumps you up a tier on the attribute bonus chart.

Odd numbered bonuses create a disparity in the progression. Since magic items are priced at the square of their bonuses, a +3 belt is much cheaper than a +4 belt but for someone with an odd attribute provides the same benefit as a +4 belt.

Is this enough of a concern to warrant calling it a "game balance issue?"

Well, yes. In the sense that it can be exploited by certain types of character optimizers.

But those folks are going to break your game anyway. So the question is "does it matter for normal players?"

I think the answer is "no."

So I would allow it.

Contributor

4 people marked this as a favorite.

There's also the element of having an incentive for a character to spend an ability score point on an odd-numbered ability score vs. an even one.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber

I would price such an item as per the +2 item and 75 percent of the cost difference between it and the +4.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Shar Tahl wrote:
Jeraa wrote:
Sean K Reynolds wrote:
Odd-bonus ability score items are deliberately not in the game.
But nothing in the rules actually prevents it. They are still generally a bad idea, however. You either have what is effectively an expensive +2 item (if your ability score is even), or a cheap +4 item (if your score is odd).

I think that is the reason. They would have a different mechanical effect on two different characters if one had odd and one had even, effectively seeming like two different items.

Adamantine Dragon wrote:

The purpose of the +2/+4/+6 progression is that it is a guaranteed improvement no matter who puts it on. It bumps you up a tier on the attribute bonus chart.

Odd numbered bonuses create a disparity in the progression. Since magic items are priced at the square of their bonuses, a +3 belt is much cheaper than a +4 belt but for someone with an odd attribute provides the same benefit as a +4 belt.

These two quotes really nailed it.

Remember, your character doesn't know his own statistics. He has no way to say "I want this belt to give me a +3 instead of a +2". He has no way to know that getting a +3 would increase his modifier by two steps and a +2 would only increase it by one.

To those who are suggesting pricing it as something other than following the formula, remember that it's only because the formula exists that you can even talk about creating them in the first place.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Bobson wrote:


To those who are suggesting pricing it as something other than following the formula, remember that it's only because the formula exists that you can even talk about creating them in the first place.

Huh?

Grand Lodge

Bobson wrote:

Remember, your character doesn't know his own statistics. He has no way to say "I want this belt to give me a +3 instead of a +2". He has no way to know that getting a +3 would increase his modifier by two steps and a +2 would only increase it by one.

This one makes the most sense to me. How, in game, do you ask a wizard to create a +3 item? Essentially, it seems easy enough to ask for a belt of strength, a greater belt of strength, or a master's belt of strength, but how would you ask for one kinda between a belt of strength and a greater belt of strength? I would think that a wizard would look at you as if you were nuts.

Of course, on the flip side, how do you ask for a Tome of Clear Thought +1, +2, +3, +4, or +5? The only thought that I can come up with is:

"I would like a Tome of Clear Thought."

"How much money do you have?"/"How much are you willing to spend?"

"X gp"

"Well, here ya go!"

My 2 cents... ;p


Items already exist in the game that vary in usefulness depending on the character. There are items keyed to class, alignment, level and race. A NG halfing cleric has a different list of items that are useful to them than a CE orc barbarian.

Staves are an entire category of items that vary depending upon the user.


Remember that the Table for Estimating Magic Item Gold Piece Values are more guidelines then they are rules. They are guidelines to help GMs create new magic items.

All custom magic items are strictly subject to GM approval, including price.

That said, I would recommend against including odd-bonus ability score items.

Shadow Lodge

Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Companion, Maps, Pawns, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Bobson wrote:
Remember, your character doesn't know his own statistics. He has no way to say "I want this belt to give me a +3 instead of a +2". He has no way to know that getting a +3 would increase his modifier by two steps and a +2 would only increase it by one.

Sure, but there is a measurable difference between each increment of an ability score *in the game world*, just not enough of one to make a difference to your modifier. The modifier is an additional layer of abstraction.

For example, a 15 strength is measurably better than a 14 strength: the carrying capacity is higher. A 15 intelligence is measurably better than a 14 intelligence: they can understand more difficult spells. A 15 dexterity is measurably better than a 14 dexterity: they win initiative ties. (Or is that a house rule?)

A character would definitely be able to tell the difference of a raise to that odd ability score. It's only on the metagaming level of modifiers that it seems to not make a difference.


It might be easier to just get a +1 DEX book.


Harrison wrote:
It might be easier to just get a +1 DEX book.

Ah, such a waste since you can't sell it back when you get better DEX books.


The biggest exploit to +odd number stat items is that the system was built around giving a bonus to characters buying odd numbered stats at character creation. Most games use stat buy rather than rolling stats so this is a big deal.

One of the developers has weighed in. His opinion is spot on, IMO.


Bobson wrote:
Remember, your character doesn't know his own statistics. He has no way to say "I want this belt to give me a +3 instead of a +2". He has no way to know that getting a +3 would increase his modifier by two steps and a +2 would only increase it by one.
Aeshuura wrote:
This one makes the most sense to me. How, in game, do you ask a wizard to create a +3 item? Essentially, it seems easy enough to ask for a belt of strength, a greater belt of strength, or a master's belt of strength, but how would you ask for one kinda between a belt of strength and a greater belt of strength? I would think that a wizard would look at you as if you were nuts.

Indeed there is an aspect of metagaming to it but then again asking questions like "How would you ask a wizard for x" is kind of silly when we're not actually in the game world. I'm sure that within the world itself they have discovered ways of quantifying ability scores. I mean we have that in the real world don't we? We just call it something else.

"I can bench press 200 lbs"

"My reaction time is 255 ms"

"My I.Q. is 121"

While we don't know what they are outside the world, from within the world after experiencing the items firsthand we can judge for ourselves to an extent how much we want to change.

For instance say you lift weights, after weeks and weeks of lifting 100 lbs you suddenly notice that theres no change. Your body handles the weight fine and you understand that 100 lbs is no longer a challenge to you. What do you do then? You increase the weight; too much and you can't lift the bar; too little and there is no relative change.

What I see as a +1/+3/+5 item is the adventurer going to a magical item crafter and them sitting in the back room while he tailors the item to the person, slowly notching the magic up until it "feels" right.


Okay, regardless of the intent of the rules or the intent of the game designers the matter at hand was whether it was against the rules. I have read through the posts made here including those made by Sean K Reynolds and not one quoted a page from the rules that said "Odd Numbered Items aren't allowed".

I mean if this is such a big balance issue as people are making it out to be why isn't it given space in the book?

Contributor

8 people marked this as a favorite.

Perhaps you should instead look at it as, "why, in the 12 year lifespan of 3rd edition D&D + Pathfinder, has there never been an official product from Wizards or Paizo that has an odd-plus ability score boosting item? If the intent was that such a thing is allowed, why is that unexplored game niche still left alone by the game designers?"


Indeed even by designers who do not work directly for WotC or Paizo have never included such an item.


Heck even spells don't do this anymore.

They used to back in 3.0 but notice how instead of the random 1d4+1 for the stat spells it turned into +4 there is probably a reason for it.

Sczarni

Personally, I would take the cost of increasing it to +4 and halve it. That way they are paying the same price, just half at a time. No biggie in my book if they want to do this. The only real difference is that when and if they even out their stats, they need to pay the other +1 (again, half of what it costs to go from 2 to 4) to get any benefit from it. Is there real incentive to even out your stats? No. But at the same time, the magic item cannot be sold as a +4 item either. It would be sold as a +2 item. That is where I would make the PC pay - if they ever sold it, they can either pay the full +4 upgrade, then sell it, or they can sell it as +2.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Card Game Subscriber
Lune wrote:
Indeed even by designers who do not work directly for WotC or Paizo have never included such an item.

Don't know if this counts or not, but Dungeons and Dragons online has odd ability score bonus items. Not saying I agree with it or not, especially considering some of the other stuff in that game.


So there are no official items that grant an odd ability bonus (besides the tomes that grant an inherent bonus). And? Are we limited to only crafting/using officially designed items? If so, then why include rules/guidelines for custom items?

Just because there are no official items that grant an odd bonus, doesn't mean there can't be. (There are very good balance reason why there aren't any in this case, but thats beside the point. There is nothing prohibiting an odd-number ability enhancer.)


Sean K Reynolds wrote:
There's also the element of having an incentive for a character to spend an ability score point on an odd-numbered ability score vs. an even one.

But the character in question did buy the odd ability score. I always allow it as it's in the magic item creation rules...and it allows a more linear advancement, as characters can afford an ability score increase at 4th level, a +1 ability score item is affordable. at 8th the +3 should be available. The game has an issue with odd numbers for some reason it seems.

Just my 2 coppers.

Andoran

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Companion, Modules, Pawns, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Bobson wrote:
Shar Tahl wrote:
Jeraa wrote:
Sean K Reynolds wrote:
Odd-bonus ability score items are deliberately not in the game.
But nothing in the rules actually prevents it. They are still generally a bad idea, however. You either have what is effectively an expensive +2 item (if your ability score is even), or a cheap +4 item (if your score is odd).

I think that is the reason. They would have a different mechanical effect on two different characters if one had odd and one had even, effectively seeming like two different items.

Adamantine Dragon wrote:

The purpose of the +2/+4/+6 progression is that it is a guaranteed improvement no matter who puts it on. It bumps you up a tier on the attribute bonus chart.

Odd numbered bonuses create a disparity in the progression. Since magic items are priced at the square of their bonuses, a +3 belt is much cheaper than a +4 belt but for someone with an odd attribute provides the same benefit as a +4 belt.

These two quotes really nailed it.

Remember, your character doesn't know his own statistics. He has no way to say "I want this belt to give me a +3 instead of a +2". He has no way to know that getting a +3 would increase his modifier by two steps and a +2 would only increase it by one.

To those who are suggesting pricing it as something other than following the formula, remember that it's only because the formula exists that you can even talk about creating them in the first place.

Work both ways. How you define a +2/+4+/6 belt. The name is meaningless at it don't define anything real if you assume that the character don't know its scores and don't what scores are associated with the name of the belt. Call a belt of strength the "Belt of Conan" and another "the belt of Hercules" (or substitute appropriate Golarion heroes in the name), what give the better enhancement? You could improve them later but they will still be called the belt of Conan an Hercules.

So what the character know is that when he don the belt he fell stronger and that a +3 belt make him feel stronger than a +2 and less than a +4.
So, as I see it, the caster enchanting the belt would call the buyer for fitting every time he reach a threshold (i.e., increase the characteristic bonus modifier) in the item creation and stop enchanting it when the buyer say he feel comfortable with the item enhancement.

All the item enhancement (plus of the weapon and armors, deflection bonuses and so on) are "intangibles" as far as the character are concerned as they refer to game mechanics.

Or you can go the other way around: Detect magic and a spellcraft check allow the caster to identify a magic item properties, included the numbers in the bonuses. So the spellcasters have defined a metric for the pluses of weapons, armor, deflection items and so on. Maybe a +1 give out a red aura and a +6 a indigo one.

Both ways you are assuming that the wearer of the belt will not be capable to recognise the difference between wearing a +2 and a +3 belt, while I think he would.

If you can talk of a item bonuses only in out of game terms and a in game character can't recognize the difference I have a wonderful belt of giant strength that will make your combat prowess unmatched. It cost 36.000 gp. It is only +2 but you will never notice that.

Andoran

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Companion, Modules, Pawns, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Sean K Reynolds wrote:
Perhaps you should instead look at it as, "why, in the 12 year lifespan of 3rd edition D&D + Pathfinder, has there never been an official product from Wizards or Paizo that has an odd-plus ability score boosting item? If the intent was that such a thing is allowed, why is that unexplored game niche still left alone by the game designers?"

Wishes and tomes Sean. They increase your stats by an even or odd number depending of the number of spell cast or the bonus of the tome, so we have a "common" magic item that give odd stat increases.

For the game developers it make perfect sense not to include the customized items that work only for some character, it could lead conflicts at the gaming table with the player that will benefit most from the item arguing for a low price as "it is weaker" while other players will claim it should be priced at or near the price of an item with a higher bonus "as it give the same bonus to you".
In a home brew campaign where you know your players and their characters the GM can give them out as treasure or allow their the creation or purchase as he know his game balance.

The biggest issue is with intelligence boosting items, as it will mess with the skills the character has, but, as I use different rules for the skills granted by an increase in intelligence, that isn' a problem for me.


"It's always been this way" is a flawed reason to continue doing something. It stifles innovation. If, after reexamining balance and gameplay, the reasons for a lack of odd-numbered enhancement bonuses still stand, then keep them out. Otherwise, why not let them in?

Sean K Reynolds wrote:
Perhaps you should instead look at it as, "why, in the 12 year lifespan of 3rd edition D&D + Pathfinder, has there never been an official product from Wizards or Paizo that has an odd-plus ability score boosting item? If the intent was that such a thing is allowed, why is that unexplored game niche still left alone by the game designers?"

This is a good question, one I'd like to hear a game developer weigh in on. Was this void considered during the creation of Pathfinder?

We can discuss pros and cons in this threads all we want, but it'd be nice to hear what a developer actually has to say about the odd-numbered enhancement bonus, or even a few reasons why it was left out.


Roshan wrote:
I have a belt of dexterity +2, at the most recent level I increased my dexterity from an even score to an odd one. Is there anything stopping me from increasing my belt of dexterity from +2 to +3?

No, there is not. RAW, you will need to increase the market cost from 4,000 gp to 9,000 gp and pay the appropriate differences when crafting the item (it would cost 2,500 gp to upgrade with an item creation feat).

The game was built with the assumption that you can indeed have odd ability score items. It's entirely understood that someone with a 17 Dexterity is slightly better than someone with a 16 Dexterity, but beyond game examples such as this, that slight improvement is never evident unless it's used for feats you may or may not care anything about to begin with. A magic item that increases your attribute slightly would be able to push you over the next plateau. It also is why having a 15 stat is better than a 14 stat (it gets you where you want to go faster).

When I say the game was built with the assumption that this is possible, I mean the actual d20 game itself. There was an official Wizards of the Coast downloadable adventure for low level characters which you can download (and I think still download...yes, here: A Dark and Stormy Knight) which features some gauntlets that grant a +1 Strength bonus.

Likewise, the core rules clearly state that you can derive bonuses that are not even. The argument that it's a magic item that one character gets more out of than another is stupid. Most characters get more out of certain items than others. Should Robes of the Magi not exist because they're more valuable to wizards and sorcerers than to bards and magi (ironic due to naming conventions)? No, not really.

If you have a 15 Dexterity, you should enjoy the fact that you can get to 16 for 1,000 gp, or 18 for 9,000 gp. It's one of the very, very few benefits of having an odd ability score.


Diego Rossi wrote:
Sean K Reynolds wrote:
Perhaps you should instead look at it as, "why, in the 12 year lifespan of 3rd edition D&D + Pathfinder, has there never been an official product from Wizards or Paizo that has an odd-plus ability score boosting item? If the intent was that such a thing is allowed, why is that unexplored game niche still left alone by the game designers?"

Wishes and tomes Sean. They increase your stats by an even or odd number depending of the number of spell cast or the bonus of the tome, so we have a "common" magic item that give odd stat increases.

For the game developers it make perfect sense not to include the customized items that work only for some character, it could lead conflicts at the gaming table with the player that will benefit most from the item arguing for a low price as "it is weaker" while other players will claim it should be priced at or near the price of an item with a higher bonus "as it give the same bonus to you".
In a home brew campaign where you know your players and their characters the GM can give them out as treasure or allow their the creation or purchase as he know his game balance.

The biggest issue is with intelligence boosting items, as it will mess with the skills the character has, but, as I use different rules for the skills granted by an increase in intelligence, that isn' a problem for me.

Firstly there is the fact Sean K. Reynolds is simply wrong, since I actually posted a WotC endorsed adventure that you download from their site with an item that grants a +1 enhancement bonus to Strength.

Secondly, you have to pay additional points for higher ability scores. A 15 Strength is supposed to be better than a 14 Strength. Point buy does not make you purchase points in 2s, but in 1s, but ability modifiers only arrive in 2s; but the designers clearly believe that going from 14 to 15 is worth 2 more points from your allotment. This is one reason why.

As for the Intelligence question, that isn't a question at all. The core rules specifically state that any adjustment to your Intelligence that lasts 24+ hours grants you additional skill points. The way the items are written right now, they are redundant, because the items are given the ability to grant additional ranks in specific skills but the rules themselves still apply to grant you additional skill points; so currently - RAW - donning a headband of Intelligence +4 will cause you to get 2 additional skill points for every hit die, and then max 2 skills associated with the Headband as well (a net gain of 4 skill points/level for what should be 2).

The item creation rules have nothing for the freebie that the devs put on these items. I'd recommend - highly - ignoring the kicker effect on the headbands and just go with the standard rules so you don't get extra skill points beyond what you're supposed to. It's horribly sloppy.

If a character with a 15 Intelligence dons a +1 headband, then they get 1 extra skill point per HD after 24 hours. That's RAW. It has nothing to do with the magic item itself, but everything to do with how ability scores work at their core.


Ashiel, that adventure is not produced by WotC, and you know it. "Endorsed", I suppose. (By the way, I stand corrected, I had never seen a +odd item in any product even "endorsed" by WotC.) But there is a big difference.

Ashiel wrote:
Firstly there is the fact Sean K. Reynolds is simply wrong...

What was he wrong about? He said that there has never been an official product from WotC or Paizo.

Please notice that Sean didn't say that it isn't doable by RAW. He was stating designer intention. And I think he knows a bit more about that than you. I'm sorry, Ashiel. I normally agree with your ideas but not only do I think you are wrong for allow it from a balance perspective but also for going against what is clearly against the intention of the rules. Especially as you point out the balance issues with Headbands of Intellect then state that you recommend going with the intention rather than the RAW for balance concerns. It just seems a bit hypocritical to me.


Lune wrote:

Ashiel, that adventure is not produced by WotC, and you know it. "Endorsed", I suppose. (By the way, I stand corrected, I had never seen a +odd item in any product even "endorsed" by WotC.) But there is a big difference.

Ashiel wrote:
Firstly there is the fact Sean K. Reynolds is simply wrong...

What was he wrong about? He said that there has never been an official product from WotC or Paizo.

Please notice that Sean didn't say that it isn't doable by RAW. He was stating designer intention. And I think he knows a bit more about that than you. I'm sorry, Ashiel. I normally agree with your ideas but not only do I think you are wrong for allow it from a balance perspective but also for going against what is clearly against the intention of the rules. Especially as you point out the balance issues with Headbands of Intellect then state that you recommend going with the intention rather than the RAW for balance concerns. It just seems a bit hypocritical to me.

An adventure that WotC has for download on its website seems pretty official to me. Open the pdf and look at the first page. It has all the WotC Logos on it, as well as licensing and copywrite information, notes that none of it is Open Game Content, and so on and so forth. It is most definitely an official Wizards of the Coast product.

EDIT: Just to nail this thing down, here is a quote for purposes of criticsm here:

A Dark and Stormy Knight wrote:
This Wizards of the Coast game product contains no Open Game Content.

As for the RAW vs Intention, I suggested what I would do, because I see it as heinously redundant and you're getting more than what you are paying for by RAW. RAW, the value of a +enhancement item is bonus squared times 1,000 gp. However with the headband, you are getting an enhancement bonus plus extra skill points that you already get from the enhancement bonus due to the way ability scores work in the core rules. It's sloppy design; so I made a suggestion after I pointed out the RAW. Lots of people tend to do that. Many of us say "Well it works like this, but I advise a house rule".

As for designer intention, I don't really have a dog in that fight. I've lost most of my faith in "designer intention". What works and what doesn't, by RAW, is all that matters to me until house rules are concerned. I might have more faith if it wasn't for the designers demonstrating to us design problems (Antagonize, Vow of Suck, Monks, some FAQ entries that directly contradict the actual rules, etc).

But that doesn't change that there have been odd-numbered enhancement bonuses in official WotC products. Might be a good lesson to not use blanket statements. I know we all do it from time to time, but it's a habit I'm trying to break.


Apparently you "missed" this:

Quote:

About the Authors

Owen Kirker Clifford Stephens was born in 1970 in Norman, Oklahoma. He attended the TSR Writer's Workshop held at the Wizards of the Coast Game Center in 1997 and moved to the Seattle area in 2000, after accepting a job as a Game Designer at Wizards of the Coast, Inc. Fourteen months later, he returned to Oklahoma with his wife and three cats to pick up his freelance writer/developer career. He has author and coauthor credits on numerous Star Wars, d20 Modern, and EverQuest projects, as well as Bastards and Bloodlines from Green Ronin. He also has producer credits for various IDA products, including the Stand-Ins printable figures.

The writer is freelance. He was once an employee of WotC but not at the time of writing that adventure. I really think you already knew this and were conveniently leaving it out rather than simply missing it though. I could be wrong.

Speaking of which, Sean was an "offical" WotC developer as well. I'm going to go ahead and say that I think he knows what he is talking about when he is refering to developer intention behind their products as well. Personally, I respect Sean's work quiet a bit and have even interviewed him about it. Whether you have faith in his intentions or not does not invalidate them. Making rules that directly contradict what the designer's intentions were is still your perogative, though.

Ashiel wrote:
As for designer intention, I don't really have a dog in that fight.

I disagree because what you quoted Sean saying was designer intent. That is the point you tried to argue against. He even mentioned "intent" in the section you quoted that you argued against. No takesy backsies. ;) He never once said that it wasn't RAW. Its a strawman arguement. Your trying to put words in his mouth that he did not say.

Ashiel wrote:
But that doesn't change that there have been odd-numbered enhancement bonuses in official WotC products. Might be a good lesson to not use blanket statements. I know we all do it from time to time, but it's a habit I'm trying to break.

Official? No, I still disagree. Unless you can find it in an adventure that was actually produced by WotC, not by a freelancer via a submission to their site. Also, it is good that you say that we all (including yourself) shouldn't use blanket statements being that you appear to be guilty of that yourself.


Sean K Reynolds wrote:
Odd-bonus ability score items are deliberately not in the game.

Oh really! Didn't know that.

Thank you


Lune wrote:
Official? No, I still disagree. Unless you can find it in an adventure that was actually produced by WotC, not by a freelancer via a submission to their site. Also, it is good that you say that we all (including yourself) shouldn't use blanket statements being that you appear to be guilty of that yourself.

On the first page:

Quote:

©2005 Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc.

All rights reserved.
Made in the U.S.A.
This product is a work of fiction.
Any similarity to actual people, organizations, places,
or events is purely coincidental.
This Wizards of the Coast game product contains no Open Game Content

WotC owns the adventure. They paid the author for his work. They published and distributed it. Being a freelance author doesn't mean his work isn't official. It has WotC's copyright on it. It doesn't say "©2005 Owen Stephens".

I would agree, it wasn't written by any of the major designers, like Skip Williams, Rich Baker or any of the others, but that is moving the goalposts. WotC, the official publisher of D&D, has in fact published an adventure that included a +1 Strength item. It is not a well known adventure, and it appears to be isolated though. Also note, the item is not considered part of the OGL license, though if the issue were to go to court, it would be a case WotC would lose.

Grand Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber

Why are you harping on this? All SKR said is that the items aren't in the game. And they aren't in any of the core rules. He did not say that the magic item creation rules would stop you from building one only that it's up to DM's option to allow, disallow, or price appropriately.

So unless this is a PFS question, the ball is now in your home game court. IF it is a PFS question it's a nonstarter, as it's a custom item, and the only way you'd ever get one would be for it to show up in a Chronicle. Don't hold your breath on seeing one though.


Really, a pissing contest?

History aside, it breaks the Pricing of a magic item since there's squaring (exponential) in the formula.

As a DM, I'd just put a minimum of 2,000 gp (basically doubling for +1) and be done with it. This is just to you can't by a +1 stat bonus for 1000 gp (or make it for 500 gp).

It would also de-incentivize "point spend" in the point buy system. When you change bonuses, that's when the point buy cost increases.

It would be just as valide to say a +1, +3, +5 item is worth less to a character with even stats.

With the lower cap for +1, I think it's passable.

As mentioned, it will not appear in the game (looking forward), so it's totally up to the DM and their interpretation of the Creation rules. Now, if the DM is a paranoid, uptight, fearful individual and thinks the whole system would just fall apart... eh.

But, honestly it's part of the benefit of being able to craft the item how you want it.

On a side note, maybe a House Rule trait "Precise Crafter" able to create items with odd bonuses (minimum gp still applies).

Also, a party of 4 has about 8 odd attributes in total? What are they going to do... sit there, crafting +1 attribute items for everyone at level 3? There are so many other utility items to create, that can give you better bonuses for specific tasks/roles, why waste the effort?

It's a novelty, an exception... not a big deal. DM's first rule... be magnanimous (even if I spelled it wrong!)!

Peace.


Irontruth: You and Ashiel can try to play symantics all you want but it will get you nowhere. Sean said "official product" and I stand by my point that the product you are refering to was not officially produced by WotC. That, I think, is the whole point behind him saying "official product". Whether they "paid the author for his work", "published and distrubuted" or "owns the adventure" or not does not matter. It was not made by WotC. They simply own the rights to it. It was created by a freelance artist for use by WotC.

I think everyone here would agree that if the developers at Paizo started using corner cases presented in non-official Paizo products that they simply "endorse", "publish and distribute" or "paid the author for his work" to justify rules that such a thing wouldn't fly. Why then would anyone possibly think that they are using these to prove why rules shouldn't exist? The fact is that Sean used an exclusitory statement in what he said and I don't think that was an accident. He purposefully excluded such works as they aren't an "official product from WotC or Paizo".

Further, I think you guys all need to back off our Devs when they are making a statement on developer intent. No one really has any grounds to argue what their intent was. No one is going to know their intent more than them. Arguing intent with a developer is a practice in futility.

And again, note that Sean never said that it isn't RAW.

1 to 50 of 231 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>
Paizo / Messageboards / Paizo Publishing / Pathfinder® / Pathfinder RPG / Rules Questions / Belt of Incredible Dexterity +3 All Messageboards

©2002–2014 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours: Monday–Friday, 10 AM–5 PM Pacific Time. View our privacy policy. Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc., and Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Online, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.