In order to suggest a "right" approach, I would first have to be convinced that "the big six" are some kind of evil that should be prevented at all costs.
I am not yet convinced of such a thing.The Big Six items, in general, aren't problematic. The problem, as I see it, is the ease of obtaining them - meaning the magic item creation and sales, along with the relative pricing of items, is the main problem.
In all editions of D&D, players have wanted to pursue a strategy of improving AC, weapon attacks, saving throws, and (since it was the main boost available), strength. The difference between 1e/2e and 3e+ is that in 1e/2e, that strategy could not be rationally pursued. The PCs pretty much had to wait for those items to drop into an adventure to be recovered. So, players made do with a lot of other stuff they recovered.
Once the ground assumption was that virtually all items were available with relatively little effort and the primary gate keeper was price (much lower if crafting yourself), the strategy came into the fore. Now, what's the point of keeping a ring of shooting stars? It's only marginally useful in uncommon circumstances, yet it's worth a chunk of change. So, now the rational strategy is to sell it and invest in Big Six items. They're simply too useful for the price to overlook. This is also a notable issue if the GM inserts useful items early in a campaign on the assumption they will come in useful later - Paizo APs have been known to do this. But a player pursuing the Big Six strategy, probably sells the item to invest in his bonuses.
Actually this post is pretty insightful. Running around blind with no way to find the things you're looking for is frustrating. However, just being able to buy the items takes the adventure out of it. In the first scenario you're waiting for luck to spill out the good stuff, in the second scenario you just have to wait till appropriate WBL to kick in so you can buy your gear.
What there needs to be is a reasonable way to find the items without it being simple and readily available. Players should have the ability to ask about the town for item with X properties and get a plot hook to find the item or the materials for it to be crafted. That is, if you have any desire to simulate the fantasy genre.
Nerf the wizard. Then fix the Big Six. Simple as that. Want to fix the fighter? Nerf the wizard. Want to make the rogue viable? Nerf the wizard.
Want to fix the Monk? Ok...that's a different story.
Don't get me wrong, I love wizards. I usually play them above all other classes, but they have sooo many advantages because of their internalized magic. Any "serious" fix to the Big Six, or warrior/mage balance has to involve the nerfing of the mage, or else it'll just be another "I gave the fighter more skill points! Now he is fixed" thing.
You can make the numbers bigger for everyone (thus "removing" the big six), but it won't change anything. People will find a new big six. Trust me. People instinctively go for whatever is the best in the widest amount of situations. There is a reason that the ring of climbing and swimming is unloved in comparison to the ring of feather falling. There is a reason why people never really buy the Broach of Shielding.
|
The difference between 1e/2e and 3e+ is that in 1e/2e, that strategy could not be rationally pursued. The PCs pretty much had to wait for those items to drop into an adventure to be recovered. So, players made do with a lot of other stuff they recovered.
This is the environment I have always run my home games in. As such, I've never had an issue with the "big six."
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This is a good starting point.
By making the bonuses "training bonuses" (as opposed to enhancement, natural armor, etc. bonuses), this suggestion exacerbates the problem instead of ameliorating it. Because if my wizard could pick up both a headband of intellect +6 AND a training bonus to Int, he'd be stupid not to.
If you want to provide incentive for the PC to get something else for that head slot, change the "training bonus to Int" to an enhancement bonus to Int. Now it doesn't stack with the headband of intellect, and we're where we want to be.
|
|
I believe in the original thread where the idea was created training bonuses and enhancement bonuses didn't stack.
It still does not solve the problem. Now I'm stacking all my training bonuses in one area while focusing my income on another.
Instead of having a +1 sword and +1 armor, I now have a +2 training bonus to armor and have purchased a +2 sword.
It still does not solve the problem. Now I'm stacking all my training bonuses in one area while focusing my income on another. Instead of having a +1 sword and +1 armor, I now have a +2 training bonus to armor and have purchased a +2 sword.
I see where you're headed, but the math doesn't work well enough for that to be quite as broken as it seems.
+1 sword and +1 armor = 3,000 gp.+2 sword = 8,000 gp.
I believe in the original thread where the idea was created training bonuses and enhancement bonuses didn't stack.It still does not solve the problem. Now I'm stacking all my training bonuses in one area while focusing my income on another.
Instead of having a +1 sword and +1 armor, I now have a +2 training bonus to armor and have purchased a +2 sword.
As author of said thread, I will point out that a key premise of the thread is to eliminate the connection of money to magic items. Non-consumables cant be crafted by normal means, and permanent magic items are not able to be bought and sold given that they are essentially priceless. In addition, there is no such thing as a +2 sword. There is a flaming sword (with no +x) or a keen axe, but no +2.
As author of said thread, I will point out that a key premise of the thread is to eliminate the connection of money to magic items. Non-consumables cant be crafted by normal means, and permanent magic items are not able to be bought and sold given that they are essentially priceless. In addition, there is no such thing as a +2 sword. There is a flaming sword (with no +x) or a keen axe, but no +2.I believe in the original thread where the idea was created training bonuses and enhancement bonuses didn't stack.It still does not solve the problem. Now I'm stacking all my training bonuses in one area while focusing my income on another.
Instead of having a +1 sword and +1 armor, I now have a +2 training bonus to armor and have purchased a +2 sword.
I dislike this, I like swords that hit harder and better. Taking away numerical bonuses doesn't add flavor. You have to add flavor.
That ring also negates a large number of control spells from the full casters arsenal. Something that is very much to the benefit of martial classes.Ring of Freedom of Movement = Ring of outright negating one third of all available martial class builds.
It's not the items, it's the full casters.
Getting completely negated by a ring as a non-caster melee class using a build that cost you four feats and a heavy focus on strength: "Meh, I'm useless now."
Getting completely negated by a ring as a primary caster using a build that cost you one feat and three or four spell slots: "OK, let's try Dominate."
I dislike this, I like swords that hit harder and better. Taking away numerical bonuses doesn't add flavor. You have to add flavor.As author of said thread, I will point out that a key premise of the thread is to eliminate the connection of money to magic items. Non-consumables cant be crafted by normal means, and permanent magic items are not able to be bought and sold given that they are essentially priceless. In addition, there is no such thing as a +2 sword. There is a flaming sword (with no +x) or a keen axe, but no +2.I believe in the original thread where the idea was created training bonuses and enhancement bonuses didn't stack.It still does not solve the problem. Now I'm stacking all my training bonuses in one area while focusing my income on another.
Instead of having a +1 sword and +1 armor, I now have a +2 training bonus to armor and have purchased a +2 sword.
I also like magic swords that are superior to normal ones, hence the reason why you can still have Ignus, the flaming, keen sword. Which will undoubtably hit harder and better then a mundane sword. In addition you wont have to trade Ignus in in 4 levels for the +3 unnamed sword the 13th level npc is carrying because its plainly better then Ignus.
That ring also negates a large number of control spells from the full casters arsenal. Something that is very much to the benefit of martial classes.Ring of Freedom of Movement = Ring of outright negating one third of all available martial class builds.
It's not the items, it's the full casters.Getting completely negated by a ring as a non-caster melee class using a build that cost you four feats and a heavy focus on strength: "Meh, I'm useless now."
Getting completely negated by a ring as a primary caster using a build that cost you one feat and three or four spell slots: "OK, let's try Dominate."
To be fair, if a character is so focused in Grappling that she becomes useless when it can't be done, she deserves to fail. Just like a Trip-focused character with no other tricks would fail when facing a flying opponent.
|
|
Getting completely negated by a ring as a non-caster melee class using a build that cost you four feats and a heavy focus on strength: "Meh, I'm useless now."
Getting completely negated by a ring as a primary caster using a build that cost you one feat and three or four spell slots: "OK, let's try Dominate."
If your build is so completely lacking in versatility that you are rendered useless by the countering of a single tactic, you need to look in the mirror for the source of the problem.
All one-trick-ponies fail when their one trick is countered.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I like how in the Tomes (variant 3.5) rules, there are no "+1 swords," just "magic swords" -- the enhancement bonus automatically scales with the wielder's base attack bonus. So the same sword might be +1 for Carl the Conscript, and +5 for Invictus the Invincible. An "artifact" is defined as an item that has its own level, instead of being dependent on the user's.
Remind me to never ever attempt hyperbole with you people again.
Can we at least agree on "wizards get to do more stuff, both in and out of combat"?
|
Okay, so to summarize some points involved in "solving" Big Six;
1) there will always be some items more desirable than others
2) if you can craft anything, buy anything, people will tend to repeatedly take the best choice in lieu of other flavors
3) the bonuses from the current Big Six are baked into monster CR
4) the necessity of magic items to augment a PC lead to WBL; people are defined to a significant degree by their equipment.
We can't really do anything about point 2 and 4 without doing something about point 3. Our options include
a) adjust your selection of monsters; use CR -1 monsters.
b) give Distinctions or some other scaling bonus to beef up PCs without equipment entering the picture
Another option has been suggested, rigorously enforcing town limits on what's for sale. But this has two problems;
- if a certain set of items is in high demand, production should shift to make more of those. So the market would actually favor the sale of Big Six because there's a lot of demand, while flavorful niche items are harder to get a hold of
- players can craft items if they're not for sale
|
|
Remind me to never ever attempt hyperbole with you people again.
Can we at least agree on "wizards get to do more stuff, both in and out of combat"?
No
I build my martials to be just as versatile, in and out of combat, as my wizards.
I have zero sympathy for martials that stat dump, focus everything on a very limited set of options, then complain about a lack of versatility. The problem is usually the player, not the rules.
Can we at least agree on "wizards get to do more stuff, both in and out of combat"?
Clearly you're new around here! Many members of these boards play in campaigns in which the DM selectively warps the game so that martials are coddled (i.e., enemies walk up and stand still, allowing them to full attack), and with other players who think that a fireball is somehow more powerful than a slow spell. They're not intersted in the actual rules and math underlying the game, and get hostile if you try and point them out. If you try too hard and come across as rude in going about it, you run the risk of getting banned.
So we can politely point out specific examples of the myriad areas in which martials clearly and categorically lag, but we can't laugh at people who don't realize that, after 5th level or so, the mundane classes are just plain inferior, period.
This is a good starting point.
I'm a big fan of this method of reducing item dependency. Some friends of mine and I actually spent some time creating an expanded version. The main change I made was removing the Magical Training distinctions and adding ones that mimicked items that casters use such as metamagic rods and pearls of power, but I also added in options for gaining racial feats or customizing your character's play-style.
Remind me to never ever attempt hyperbole with you people again.
Can we at least agree on "wizards get to do more stuff, both in and out of combat"?
Sure, I agree with you. That particular hyperbole of yours (item/spell X completely nullifies character Y) is a bit too common around here... It's hard to know when they are trying to make a point (as I assume was your case) or when they truly believe in that.
Speaking of hyperbole...
No
I build my martials to be just as versatile, in and out of combat, as my wizards.
I have zero sympathy for martials that stat dump, focus everything on a very limited set of options, then complain about a lack of versatility. The problem is usually the player, not the rules.
Something tells me Arthanthos here is either deluded, breaking rules or playing a very different game from the rest of us...
In order to suggest a "right" approach, I would first have to be convinced that "the big six" are some kind of evil that should be prevented at all costs.
I am not yet convinced of such a thing.
Well it might take quite a while to convince you of something I don't see anyone arguing in favor of.
I dislike this, I like swords that hit harder and better. Taking away numerical bonuses doesn't add flavor. You have to add flavor.
But he's not taking away numerical bonuses.
He's replacing +1 swords with +1 training. The effect is the same.
The point is not to "add flavor" the point is to reduce reliance on magic items for characters to meet the par.
I dislike this, I like swords that hit harder and better. Taking away numerical bonuses doesn't add flavor. You have to add flavor.As author of said thread, I will point out that a key premise of the thread is to eliminate the connection of money to magic items. Non-consumables cant be crafted by normal means, and permanent magic items are not able to be bought and sold given that they are essentially priceless. In addition, there is no such thing as a +2 sword. There is a flaming sword (with no +x) or a keen axe, but no +2.I believe in the original thread where the idea was created training bonuses and enhancement bonuses didn't stack.It still does not solve the problem. Now I'm stacking all my training bonuses in one area while focusing my income on another.
Instead of having a +1 sword and +1 armor, I now have a +2 training bonus to armor and have purchased a +2 sword.
I also like magic swords that are superior to normal ones, hence the reason why you can still have Ignus, the flaming, keen sword. Which will undoubtably hit harder and better then a mundane sword. In addition you wont have to trade Ignus in in 4 levels for the +3 unnamed sword the 13th level npc is carrying because its plainly better then Ignus.
It won't hit better, it will hit harder and with more pop, but it won't be easier to hit things, which for me is half the appeal of a magic weapon in the first place.
It won't hit better, it will hit harder and with more pop, but it won't be easier to hit things, which for me is half the appeal of a magic weapon in the first place.I dislike this, I like swords that hit harder and better. Taking away numerical bonuses doesn't add flavor. You have to add flavor.As author of said thread, I will point out that a key premise of the thread is to eliminate the connection of money to magic items. Non-consumables cant be crafted by normal means, and permanent magic items are not able to be bought and sold given that they are essentially priceless. In addition, there is no such thing as a +2 sword. There is a flaming sword (with no +x) or a keen axe, but no +2.I believe in the original thread where the idea was created training bonuses and enhancement bonuses didn't stack.It still does not solve the problem. Now I'm stacking all my training bonuses in one area while focusing my income on another.
Instead of having a +1 sword and +1 armor, I now have a +2 training bonus to armor and have purchased a +2 sword.
I also like magic swords that are superior to normal ones, hence the reason why you can still have Ignus, the flaming, keen sword. Which will undoubtably hit harder and better then a mundane sword. In addition you wont have to trade Ignus in in 4 levels for the +3 unnamed sword the 13th level npc is carrying because its plainly better then Ignus.
Fair enough, then the heroic distinction/training bonus system is not for you. The whole point is to allow characters to be able to operate normally with or without magic items by replacing those numerical bonuses with inherent bonuses you get as you level up.
|
|
This is a good starting point.I'm a big fan of this method of reducing item dependency. Some friends of mine and I actually spent some time creating an expanded version. The main change I made was removing the Magical Training distinctions and adding ones that mimicked items that casters use such as metamagic rods and pearls of power, but I also added in options for gaining racial feats or customizing your character's play-style.
This is a pretty nice list.. some interesting options in there.
I don't entirely like some of the distinctions though - the ones that grant you natural armor, for example, just seem a bit weird. If it's training, it makes more sense for it to be a Dodge bonus perhaps. Likewise, Deflection bonuses are weird - how do you train that?
I don't entirely like some of the distinctions though - the ones that grant you natural armor, for example, just seem a bit weird. If it's training, it makes more sense for it to be a Dodge bonus perhaps. Likewise, Deflection bonuses are weird - how do you train that?
At a guess, it would have to do with the way bonus types stack. Only a deflection bonus supersedes a ring of protection -- a dodge bonus would stack with it, meaning you haven't actually accomplished anything except to make everyone's AC higher. If it hurts your sense of "realism," think of it as a "dodge bonus that specifically does not stack with deflection bonuses -- hereafter referred to as a 'deflection bonus' for short."
It won't hit better, it will hit harder and with more pop, but it won't be easier to hit things, which for me is half the appeal of a magic weapon in the first place.
It will hit just as often if the player has the appropriate Offensive Training Heroic Distinction though. Whether you like the bonus to hit/damage to come from the weapon or the character itself is, of course, simply a matter of taste.
I would personally apply the Offensive Training Distinction to all attacks/(hp) damage from the character rather than limiting it to one weapon, but that's just me.
This is a pretty nice list.. some interesting options in there.
I don't entirely like some of the distinctions though - the ones that grant you natural armor, for example, just seem a bit weird. If it's training, it makes more sense for it to be a Dodge bonus perhaps. Likewise, Deflection bonuses are weird - how do you train that?
Thanks! And yea, I agree that some of these things kind of push what you should be able to do with just training. However, I wanted to make sure that the list was able to replace any of the "big six", and that includes things like natural armor and deflection bonuses. One player may want to get the training deflection bonus so he can have two unusual rings, while another may want to get the training natural armor bonus so he could use an amulet of the planes instead of an amulet of natural armor.
This is a good starting point.I'm a big fan of this method of reducing item dependency. Some friends of mine and I actually spent some time creating an expanded version. The main change I made was removing the Magical Training distinctions and adding ones that mimicked items that casters use such as metamagic rods and pearls of power, but I also added in options for gaining racial feats or customizing your character's play-style.This is a pretty nice list.. some interesting options in there.
I don't entirely like some of the distinctions though - the ones that grant you natural armor, for example, just seem a bit weird. If it's training, it makes more sense for it to be a Dodge bonus perhaps. Likewise, Deflection bonuses are weird - how do you train that?
What, you've never trained yourself to focus your spiritual pressure to deflect attacks away from you?
Training is for wimps.
That's why you should always swing your sword around in one hand like you just don't give a damn.
That's why you should always swing your sword around in one hand like you just don't give a damn.
You should hold it sideways, like the gangsta wannabes hold their nines.
|
|
What, you've never trained yourself to focus your spiritual pressure to deflect attacks away from you?
This is a pretty nice list.. some interesting options in there.
I don't entirely like some of the distinctions though - the ones that grant you natural armor, for example, just seem a bit weird. If it's training, it makes more sense for it to be a Dodge bonus perhaps. Likewise, Deflection bonuses are weird - how do you train that?
I actually have (martial art with some esoteric tendencies). I'm not 100% convinced it works, but the right attitude does help you defend yourself. So if you can make people wonder if it works IRL, maybe it's not so crazy for it to really work in a fantasy universe.
|
|
Thanks! And yea, I agree that some of these things kind of push what you should be able to do with just training. However, I wanted to make sure that the list was able to replace any of the "big six", and that includes things like natural armor and deflection bonuses. One player may want to get the training deflection bonus so he can have two unusual rings, while another may want to get the training natural armor bonus so he could use an amulet of the planes instead of an amulet of natural armor.This is a pretty nice list.. some interesting options in there.
I don't entirely like some of the distinctions though - the ones that grant you natural armor, for example, just seem a bit weird. If it's training, it makes more sense for it to be a Dodge bonus perhaps. Likewise, Deflection bonuses are weird - how do you train that?
Yeah, I see the game design reason for it, I'm just not thrilled about the immersion-side of it. Although with some flavoring and descriptive window-dressing, that can be improved.
Yeah, I see the game design reason for it, I'm just not thrilled about the immersion-side of it. Although with some flavoring and descriptive window-dressing, that can be improved.
Yea, I really do need to add flavor text to more of these....
|
|
Yeah, I see the game design reason for it, I'm just not thrilled about the immersion-side of it. Although with some flavoring and descriptive window-dressing, that can be improved.Yea, I really do need to add flavor text to more of these....
I think Kolokotroni's terminology was helpful; calling it Hardened, Grizzled and Iron-Skinned (getting natural AC) evokes a certain flavor. In fact, if I was playing a robes-and-running-away wizard, that flavor might make me reconsider if that was really the distinction I should be taking.
I think Kolokotroni's terminology was helpful; calling it Hardened, Grizzled and Iron-Skinned (getting natural AC) evokes a certain flavor. In fact, if I was playing a robes-and-running-away wizard, that flavor might make me reconsider if that was really the distinction I should be taking.
I did exactly this with the Weapon Defense heroic distinction. I wanted to come up with a replacement for Bracers of Armor, but didn't want to simply say that you gain an armor bonus for taking this distinction.
Coming up with something similar (but different) for the Deflection bonus will be interesting... almost every deflection bonus in the game essentially comes from a protective barrier from a spell. Natural armor will be easy.
I'm thinking of turning it back on itself. A +1 bonus equivalent power put on a sword makes it plus one. +1 flaming sword, +2 flaming burst, ect.
A +2 cold iron sword may be a holy sword, or have other hidden powers. Maybe it channels positive energy on every crit threat.
Sorry.
I actually have (martial art with some esoteric tendencies). I'm not 100% convinced it works, but the right attitude does help you defend yourself. So if you can make people wonder if it works IRL, maybe it's not so crazy for it to really work in a fantasy universe.What, you've never trained yourself to focus your spiritual pressure to deflect attacks away from you?
This is a pretty nice list.. some interesting options in there.
I don't entirely like some of the distinctions though - the ones that grant you natural armor, for example, just seem a bit weird. If it's training, it makes more sense for it to be a Dodge bonus perhaps. Likewise, Deflection bonuses are weird - how do you train that?
Right, I was thinking of a few anime series where I've seen something similar, if you were looking for something more western/mundane you could probably get away with fluffing "Deflection" as the ability to parry attacks at the last moment + a boost to your instincts.
I think Kolokotroni's terminology was helpful; calling it Hardened, Grizzled and Iron-Skinned (getting natural AC) evokes a certain flavor. In fact, if I was playing a robes-and-running-away wizard, that flavor might make me reconsider if that was really the distinction I should be taking.I did exactly this with the Weapon Defense heroic distinction. I wanted to come up with a replacement for Bracers of Armor, but didn't want to simply say that you gain an armor bonus for taking this distinction.
Coming up with something similar (but different) for the Deflection bonus will be interesting... almost every deflection bonus in the game essentially comes from a protective barrier from a spell. Natural armor will be easy.
I've taken a look at your system, and it actual (at least at first glance) seems pretty cool.
As for the issue with flavoring the armor and deflection bonuses, I wonder if you might not be approaching them from the wrong angles. Why not try the following:
Block and Parry (Deflection AC): You learn to block your opponents incoming strikes, knocking them to the side harmlessly. You must either be wielding a weapon or have the Improved Unarmed Stike feat to benefit from this distinction.
(Armor AC): You learn to twist and flow allowing your opponent's strikes to snag in your clothing and glance harmlessly off your armor. You must be wearing some form of clothing or armor to benefit from this distinction.
And remember, a robe or bracers (or any piece of normal clothing) is considered by pathfinder to be armor with no armor check penalties and an AC bonus of +0, so there is no need to create a separate distinction for armor and clothing, such as robes or bracers. And if you are attempting to eliminate the "big six" you should also include a clause to eliminate or at least severely cap any item which grants a +x to any of those stats.
Edit: And while I realize that you were trying to get an unarmored +8 armor bonus to AC, since we are obviously working with homebrew rules here why not just craft armor with the Arcane Armor Training &/or Arcane Armor Mastery feats attached? It is not like the mage will be able to use that slot anyways, and I'm not sure the Monk's AC stacks with it anyways. Furthermore in the Magic Item Compendium from 3.5 there was a precedence for this kind of effect with Twilight armor which reduced arcane spell failure by 10%.
And remember, a robe or bracers (or any piece of normal clothing) is considered by pathfinder to be armor
I'll make sure to tell my next Monk that he has to go naked and not use Bracers of Armor or he'll lose his class features.
And remember, a robe or bracers (or any piece of normal clothing) is considered by pathfinder to be armorI'll make sure to tell my next Monk that he has to go naked and not use Bracers of Armor or he'll lose his class features.
You could do that...
Or you could just realize that it is just one of many double-standards that pathfinder places on certain rules and items (such as the fact that natural attacks and unarmed strikes are not interchangeable, even though both are inherently unarmed and use natural features of their possessors).
Or I could just say that clothing and bracers aren't armor (which they're not) and sidestep the whole quandary.
In order to suggest a "right" approach, I would first have to be convinced that "the big six" are some kind of evil that should be prevented at all costs.
I am not yet convinced of such a thing.
It's not about evil, it's about aesthetics.
Can we at least agree on "wizards get to do more stuff, both in and out of combat"?Clearly you're new around here! Many members of these boards play in campaigns in which the DM selectively warps the game so that martials are coddled (i.e., enemies walk up and stand still, allowing them to full attack), and with other players who think that a fireball is somehow more powerful than a slow spell. They're not intersted in the actual rules and math underlying the game, and get hostile if you try and point them out. If you try too hard and come across as rude in going about it, you run the risk of getting banned.
So we can politely point out specific examples of the myriad areas in which martials clearly and categorically lag, but we can't laugh at people who don't realize that, after 5th level or so, the mundane classes are just plain inferior, period.
Ah, I now see what you mean.
|
|
No
I build my martials to be just as versatile, in and out of combat, as my wizards.
I have zero sympathy for martials that stat dump, focus everything on a very limited set of options, then complain about a lack of versatility. The problem is usually the player, not the rules.
Something tells me Arthanthos here is either deluded, breaking rules or playing a very different game from the rest of us...
No, sounds like they are playing the same Pathfinder game I am. Are you sure that there isn't something wrong on your side?
@Morgen: Sounds like he's playing very limited casters to me.
My take on the Big Six: Boring but Expected bonuses.
To fix as a DM: Add non-boring effects to the big six, even if they aren't as impressive as a full item, and handwave it?
Ex. Belt of +2 Str vs. Belt of +2 Str that allows the use of Mage Hand 3/day. Instantly cooler, without being double the item. Of course you can also do true combinations with the highly increased pricing.