Magic Item Creation


Rules Questions

1 to 50 of 89 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

Can you add a permanent spell effect to an item through enchanting? EX. could I add the permanent effect of mage armor to a robe? if so what would the cost be? I've found a table for the cost of adding a spell to an item if it has charges, but what about a permanent effect?


With these sorts of enchantments it actually falls more into the GM/house rule. It is possible to enchant items with the formula of "spell level x caster level x 2000 gp = item price" but using just this would lend to seriously broken items.

It's been *discussed* that robes are apparently a valid option for enchanting with an AC bonus. For balance you'd have to consider that the closest equivalent to Mage Armour is a +4 enchantment (otherwise paying less for the same benefit would be ridiculous).

Alternatively you could just make/buy a ring/amulet with +4 dodge.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

Gunn wrote:
I've found a table for the cost ... what about a permanent effect?

If you found the table, then you jumped to the "last step" in item creation.

The first couple steps are price like similar items and price like similar power, so an item that grants 4 AC should be price similar to Bracers of Armor. Using the same slot and same cost.


Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

For robes that grant an AC bonus, you can treat them as "+0 armor" (per the description in magic vestment) and add an armor enhancement bonus (bonus squared x 1,000 gp). Note that such robes do not protect against incorporeal touch attacks like mage armor or bracers of armor, since the bonus to AC is an armor enhancement bonus and not a force effect.

Also, keep in mind stacking prohibitions (only the highest armor bonus applies), as well as the fact that enhancement bonuses are tied to specific items and not "floating/independent" (mage armor or bracers of armor provide their own armor bonuses and are not improved by enhancement bonuses on robes or actual armor, nor will the robes' enhancement bonus increase the protective value of any worn armor).


The Robe of the Archmagi actually has such an enchantment on it.

As a rule of thumb, Bracers of Armor are the item that you want, if you want another slot to have that effect, you would have to add in the price of that item, plus you would have to double the price because of the whole body slot doubling up on magic item effects thing.


Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

The "x2 market price" is only applied for items that don't use an item slot ("No space limitation").


Dragonchess Player wrote:
The "x2 market price" is only applied for items that don't use an item slot ("No space limitation").

Or for items with multiple different abilities, that is if he is trying to get one item (his robe slot) to carry the benefits of his other item as well as the mage armor.

Myself, I don't like home brewing items in this manner as it really just allows you to cheese up your item slots so you can technically get away with having 2 arm items at the same time, which is something pathfinder tried very hard to avoid. That said, there is already precedent of it existing so yeah.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

Further rulebooks specifically state that you cannot cheese the magic item creation system by making the item have a spell effect so you can reduce its cost. In fact, I think Ultimate Magic or Game Mastery Guide specifically says you can't make an item with mage armor on it so you can get a cheap +4 bracers of armor.

Deadalready wrote:


Alternatively you could just make/buy a ring/amulet with +4 dodge.

Spells and magic items should never directly give you a dodge bonus.


The haste spell notwithstanding.

Just use the cost for bracers of armor and put it on your robe. Done.


master_marshmallow wrote:
Dragonchess Player wrote:
The "x2 market price" is only applied for items that don't use an item slot ("No space limitation").

Or for items with multiple different abilities, that is if he is trying to get one item (his robe slot) to carry the benefits of his other item as well as the mage armor.

Myself, I don't like home brewing items in this manner as it really just allows you to cheese up your item slots so you can technically get away with having 2 arm items at the same time, which is something pathfinder tried very hard to avoid. That said, there is already precedent of it existing so yeah.

2x = slotless

1.5X = multiple abilities

For a Robe +2 (saves) with +4 AC (mage armor) the price would be either:
Resistance with AC added:
+2 Resistance = 4,000
+4 AC = 16,000 * 1.5
Total = 4,000 + 16,000*1.5 = 28,000

AC with Resistance added:
+4 AC = 1,6000
+2 Resistance = 4,000 * 1.5
Total = 1,6000 + 4,000*1.5 = 22,000

Because the order of enchanting IS important in PF (but not 3.5), you want the most expensive enchantment to be the first enchantment.

While PF indicates certain slots are for certain things, it does not actually list what things belong in what slots. You have to figure it out by what examples you can find.

If you want to use 3.5 material, the Magic Item Compendium had a nice table in the back listing what bonus could be placed where, and if you wanted to add an invalid bonus into a slot, it added 50% to the cost for that bonus. It basically meant that adding an invalid bonus to an item that was already enchanted was the same price as slotless, thus making it pointless unless it was the only or cheapest enchantment.

/cevah


Um... I'm pretty sure that order doesn't matter. The total price of an item that combines two effects is 1x the more expensive and 1.5x the less expensive. So regardless of what order the price should be the same.

Multiple Different Abilities:
Multiple different abilities Multiply lower item cost by 1.5 Helm of brilliance


Correct. Order never matters. Use the formulas as appropriate when crafting an item with multiple abilities. When upgrading an item, recalculate the item's cost, then pay the difference between current and final.

This is particularly important with staves, as otherwise one could literally reduce the cost of the staff by adding another spell to it.


Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber
master_marshmallow wrote:
Dragonchess Player wrote:
The "x2 market price" is only applied for items that don't use an item slot ("No space limitation").
Or for items with multiple different abilities, that is if he is trying to get one item (his robe slot) to carry the benefits of his other item as well as the mage armor.
PRD wrote:
Multiple Different Abilities: Abilities such as an attack roll bonus or saving throw bonus and a spell-like function are not similar, and their values are simply added together to determine the cost. For items that take up a space on a character's body, each additional power not only has no discount but instead has a 50% increase in price.

Anyway, the difference between a protective robe and bracers of armor:

For a straight enhancement bonus to the robes (normally "+0 armor"), it's bonus squared x 1,000 gp (max. bonus +5). The armor bonus does not apply to incorporeal touch attacks. The magical robes with an armor bonus use this pricing scheme (I've broken down the calculations to "reverse engineer" variants in the past).

For a force effect (applies vs. incorporeal touch; i.e., like the ghost touch armor ability, normally an extra +3 equivalent), then use the same pricing as bracers of armor.

This applies the "similar item" rule the most closely to the effect.


Chess Pwn wrote:
Um... I'm pretty sure that order doesn't matter. The total price of an item that combines two effects is 1x the more expensive and 1.5x the less expensive. So regardless of what order the price should be the same.
blahpers wrote:

Correct. Order never matters. Use the formulas as appropriate when crafting an item with multiple abilities. When upgrading an item, recalculate the item's cost, then pay the difference between current and final.

This is particularly important with staves, as otherwise one could literally reduce the cost of the staff by adding another spell to it.

Not correct.

Multiple Different Abilities wrote:
Abilities such as an attack roll bonus or saving throw bonus and a spell-like function are not similar, and their values are simply added together to determine the cost. For items that take up a space on a character’s body, each additional power not only has no discount but instead has a 50% increase in price.

It states additional abilities cost extra, not least expensive abilities. This is a change from 3.5.

/cevah


When I'm the GM:
if a player creates an item like this without telling me - s/he can no longer create magical items other than straight book items.
if a player brings the idea of what they want to do to me, I will determine if the price is fair (EX a use activated bow of true strike should cost more than 1,800g; a robes of continuous mage armor or shield should cost more than 4,000g, etc.)

I agree with the piggy Blahpers. Order does not matter. There are three different scenarios that I do not wish to explain. One increases price over time, two keeps the price the same over time, three decreases price over time. The one that occurs depends on whether the item takes up a body slot and whether the bonuses contribute to the exact same thing (like AC or Attack).

If the first enhancement costs 5,000g, the 2nd enhancement costs 1,000g, and the third enhancement costs 3,000g AND the price is going up over time, then the prices are as follows:
1,000g + 3,000gx(lowest increase in price) + 5,000gx(second lowest increase in price)

If the first enhancement costs 5,000g, the 2nd enhancement costs 1,000g, and the third enhancement costs 3,000g AND the price is going down over time, then the prices are as follows:

5,000g + 3,000gx(lowest decrease in price) + 1,000gx(second lowest decrease in price)

Does this make sense?


To reply to the OP, I would price robes of mage armor at 16,000g, because that is the price of bracers of armor 4 - which does the exact same thing.


James Risner wrote:
Gunn wrote:
I've found a table for the cost ... what about a permanent effect?

If you found the table, then you jumped to the "last step" in item creation.

The first couple steps are price like similar items and price like similar power, so an item that grants 4 AC should be price similar to Bracers of Armor. Using the same slot and same cost.

I've never attempted to create magic items, I've always just played with ones in the books or modules. And I always presumed that those items were created by the use of game rules that dictated and governed overall balance in relation to the games overall balance.

I've been trying...I wonder why....to create a wondrous item...and I'm frustrated and disappointed, to say the least, to discover that there really is no "system" for creating magic items. as best I can tell its based on a persons whimsical fancy. I say this because I've taken the time to study several existing items, and with very few exceptions, the math in the chart and the cost of the items don't add up. so where did those costs come from in the first place?

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

builder_chris wrote:
very few exceptions, the math in the chart and the cost of the items don't add up. so where did those costs come from in the first place?

Magic item creation is an "art" not a science.

To boil it down to a chart, you would need a separate chart item for each spell or effect. This would be unsustainable fast.

The basic logic behind magic item creation is this:
49% of PC's think it is too cheap and 49% think it costs too much.


James Risner wrote:


Magic item creation is an "art" not a science.

To boil it down to a chart, you would need a separate chart item for each spell or effect. This would be unsustainable fast.

Have you ever read page 63 of the D&D 3.5 Rules Compendium? It’s basically a one page article about “Rules and Fun”. It’s written by designer James Wyatt. He says it better than I ever could and what he says in a nut shell…and I quote…is this “Rules limit…escalation and enforce balance.”

Without rules a roll playing game is basically diminished to a children’s playground activity where there are no limits and bounds and everyone is a god that is only limited by how fast and vast their imagination is; there is no balance in that. That is not a game.

Don’t get me wrong, I’m all for the art that comes with roll playing games, but games need rules in order to create balance. How are we to believe that this games overall mechanics are balanced when the process for creating magic items, a large part of the game, is simply left up to the artful interpretation of each individual magic items creator? Where is the balance in that? where is the fun in playing the game if its not a fair and balanced game?

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

1 person marked this as a favorite.
builder_chris wrote:

Without rules a roll playing game is basically diminished to a children’s playground activity

I’m all for the art that comes with roll playing games

One of us is confused, I'm not sure if it is me or you.

What I meant by art is that the rules are hard (or near impossible) to codify for abstract things like item price cost.

It is hard to write "price it so it hurts to buy" because sometimes people think that 1000 gp is too much to pay for "at will cure light wounds" and others think that is 1,000,000 gp or more.

It is basically an artform to price an item at the proper breaking point where most people won't buy it because it costs too much.


builder_chris wrote:
I've been trying...I wonder why....to create a wondrous item...and I'm frustrated and disappointed, to say the least, to discover that there really is no "system" for creating magic items. as best I can tell its based on a persons whimsical fancy. I say this because I've taken the time to study several existing items, and with very few exceptions, the math in the chart and the cost of the items don't add up. so where did those costs come from in the first place?

The prices, and even definitions, of magic items have evolved from previous editions. Over 30 years of playing has found the sweet spot for most standard items, and with that base, similar items were piced at a similar value. In 2.0, they started to come up with formulas to ballpark the prices. In 3.0, they decided to try to come up with standard formulas to get even more exact prices. However, due to game balance issues, some items are under or over priced relative to the formula. Additional rules were put in place to keep obvious cheese out, like the ring-of-true-strike for 1,800. It is instead closer to 200,000.

/cevah


I see this one too much. True strike cannot ever be made into a magic item other than a daily usage item. X charges per day.

The rules of spell casting clearly state the pricing of items based on the duration of the spell. There is no pricing for instantaneous spells and as such cannot be made into anything other than X charges per day items.


Khrysaor wrote:

I see this one too much. True strike cannot ever be made into a magic item other than a daily usage item. X charges per day.

The rules of spell casting clearly state the pricing of items based on the duration of the spell. There is no pricing for instantaneous spells and as such cannot be made into anything other than X charges per day items.

It is instant, so you cannot make a continuous version. You can, however, make a version that is on command. That is where the 1,800 comes from. However, because it gives a +20 BAB, it gets priced at 400,000, but then halved since it does not give damage. At least that is how it was priced in 3.5.

/cevah


Cevah wrote:
Khrysaor wrote:

I see this one too much. True strike cannot ever be made into a magic item other than a daily usage item. X charges per day.

The rules of spell casting clearly state the pricing of items based on the duration of the spell. There is no pricing for instantaneous spells and as such cannot be made into anything other than X charges per day items.

It is instant, so you cannot make a continuous version. You can, however, make a version that is on command. That is where the 1,800 comes from. However, because it gives a +20 BAB, it gets priced at 400,000, but then halved since it does not give damage. At least that is how it was priced in 3.5.

/cevah

The price is only 360gp for a once per day item of command word true strike. This takes a standard action to use as per the command word activation rules. Hardly game breaking.

You have to choose the number of charges you want for any command word item. Then factor the formula in.

(Spell level X caster level X 1800gp) / (5/Y). Where Y is the number of charges.

A true strike item with 50 charges costs 18000gp.

The example in the book is the cape of the mountebank. A once per day dimension door.

(4 X 7 X 1800gp) / (5/1) = 10080gp.

The book lists the price as 10800gp and is probably a mistake during entry, or maybe they threw a prestidigitation in there for the smoke effect but that still doesn't make the 720gp difference.

Honestly, the true strike item is not overpowered. It requires a standard action to use and lasts for a single attack. Rolling a 1 still misses and potentially critically.

Edit: a wand of true strike is 750gp

Liberty's Edge

builder_chris wrote:
James Risner wrote:
Gunn wrote:
I've found a table for the cost ... what about a permanent effect?

If you found the table, then you jumped to the "last step" in item creation.

The first couple steps are price like similar items and price like similar power, so an item that grants 4 AC should be price similar to Bracers of Armor. Using the same slot and same cost.

I've never attempted to create magic items, I've always just played with ones in the books or modules. And I always presumed that those items were created by the use of game rules that dictated and governed overall balance in relation to the games overall balance.

I've been trying...I wonder why....to create a wondrous item...and I'm frustrated and disappointed, to say the least, to discover that there really is no "system" for creating magic items. as best I can tell its based on a persons whimsical fancy. I say this because I've taken the time to study several existing items, and with very few exceptions, the math in the chart and the cost of the items don't add up. so where did those costs come from in the first place?

Pricing magic items rules:

First and Foremost

PRD wrote:
The easiest way to come up with a price is to compare the new item to an item that is already priced, using that price as a guide.

then if that don't work

PRD wrote:
Otherwise, use the guidelines summarized on Table: Estimating Magic Item Gold Piece Values.

I think that the first phrase is often forgotten.

- * -

About the "where the prices come from" question:
- 1st and 2nd edition prices adapted to 3rd ed, then 3.5 then Pathfinder, keeping in mind item availability and usefulness first, the spell used second;
- eyeballing the price of items that do "something" when there isn't a appropriate spell in the Core rulebook.
Example: the Feather Tokens require Major creation to be made but cost very little. Surely not a single use, use activated item (Spell level × caster level × 50 gp that for a feather token would translate in 5*9*50= 2.250 gp)

Scroll, potions and wands adhere perfectly to the rules. Even staffs do that if you discount the error in the APG that put the staves at half price.
wondrous items, rings and Rods prices are progressively more 2eyeballed".

PRD wrote:
Not all items adhere to these formulas. First and foremost, these few formulas aren't enough to truly gauge the exact differences between items. The price of a magic item may be modified based on its actual worth. The formulas only provide a starting point. The pricing of scrolls assumes that, whenever possible, a wizard or cleric created it. Potions and wands follow the formulas exactly. Staves follow the formulas closely, and other items require at least some judgment calls.

The prices aren't adjudicated by the creator, they are adjudicated by the GM.

ANY custom item should be approved by the GM and its price decided by the GM.


Khrysaor wrote:
You have to choose the number of charges you want for any command word item. Then factor the formula in.

Cite please.

I don't recall seeing that, and there are several items that can be used on command all day long. I have always thought it was on command all day long.

Khrysaor wrote:

(Spell level X caster level X 1800gp) / (5/Y). Where Y is the number of charges.

A true strike item with 50 charges costs 18000gp.

The example in the book is the cape of the mountebank. A once per day dimension door.

(4 X 7 X 1800gp) / (5/1) = 10080gp.

The book lists the price as 10800gp and is probably a mistake during entry, or maybe they threw a prestidigitation in there for the smoke effect but that still doesn't make the 720gp difference.

Well, it is actually a 3rd level summoner spell, and the caster level is 9 not 7. Plugging that in gets:

3 * 9 * 1800 / (5/1) = 9720gp.
If you instead use continuous with limited uses, you get:
3 * 9 * 2000 / (5/1) = 10800gp.

Looks like the example for command word pricing is actually not using it.

Khrysaor wrote:

Honestly, the true strike item is not overpowered. It requires a standard action to use and lasts for a single attack. Rolling a 1 still misses and potentially critically.

Edit: a wand of true strike is 750gp

True Strike 1/day is not overpowered.

True Strike on command is.

/cevah


@Cevah

There's nothing to cite. It's drawn directly from the table. Including the listed example of the cape of the mountebank.

What are some of the other items that are command word unlimited times per day?

The pricing is based on full caster spell lists if it exists on a full casters list.

The caster level of a 3rd level spell for a summoner is 7 not 9 which would have the price at 7560gp.

(3X7X1800) / (5/1)

The rules state that if you can achieve an item cheaper using another class you still use the listed price. Otherwise some classes can break markets to make money. Summoner pays half the 7560 then sells for half the 10800 and profits. This is not RAI or RAW.

A cape of the mountebank is not a continuous item with limited charges. You're not continually under the effects of dimension door with limited uses. You have limited uses that are instantaneous.

True strike on command is still not overpowered. It requires a standard action to activate it. The action economy is very bad and not conducive to using it all the time. You'll use it if you need a certain swing to hit much like casting the spell as a wizard. It's only a one swing +20 bonus. This is also why it's not comparable to a +20 enhancement bonus. It's comparable to a command use first level spell.


Khrysaor wrote:

@Cevah

There's nothing to cite. It's drawn directly from the table. Including the listed example of the cape of the mountebank.

What are some of the other items that are command word unlimited times per day?

The pricing is based on full caster spell lists if it exists on a full casters list.

The caster level of a 3rd level spell for a summoner is 7 not 9 which would have the price at 7560gp.

(3X7X1800) / (5/1)

The rules state that if you can achieve an item cheaper using another class you still use the listed price. Otherwise some classes can break markets to make money. Summoner pays half the 7560 then sells for half the 10800 and profits. This is not RAI or RAW.

A cape of the mountebank is not a continuous item with limited charges. You're not continually under the effects of dimension door with limited uses. You have limited uses that are instantaneous.

True strike on command is still not overpowered. It requires a standard action to activate it. The action economy is very bad and not conducive to using it all the time. You'll use it if you need a certain swing to hit much like casting the spell as a wizard. It's only a one swing +20 bonus. This is also why it's not comparable to a +20 enhancement bonus. It's comparable to a command use first level spell.

Look again. The rules actually specify that the pricing of an item is based off of the lowest caster level possible.

Spoiler:
Since different classes get access to certain spells at different levels, the prices for two characters to make the same item might actually be different. An item is only worth two times what the caster of the lowest possible level can make it for. Calculate the market price based on the lowest possible level caster, no matter who makes the item.
This is taken directly from CRB "Magic Item Gold Piece Value".

That actually means that you should base item value based on the summoner if that is the lowest caster level possible, which for haste it is (just as an example). That is what RAW tells us.
I would NEVER run it like that though. I would always base the price off of full casters and only in circumstances where only hybrids gets access to a certain spell or the like would I consider basing it off of hybrid spellcasting.


The caster level for dimension door for a summoner is 7. The caster level for the wizard is 7. The lowest caster level is 7, but the spell level is lower. There will be others that are different like haste.

The rules for making magic items are in the CRB. Other classes like summoner came with the APG. Although I don't know the publishing dates of each book my guess is the CRB came first establishing the rules of the game followed by other supplemental books. You wouldn't rewrite items and systems if some aspects don't fit perfectly in the rules.

I was wrong with the wording in the CRB but I'm sure I saw an official response to this in another thread I've been in on magic item crafting years ago saying classes like summoner can't make items cheaper.

A wand of haste cost 11250gp. When the summoner class came out they didn't drop to 6000gp.


James Risner wrote:
builder_chris wrote:

Without rules a roll playing game is basically diminished to a children’s playground activity

I’m all for the art that comes with roll playing games

One of us is confused, I'm not sure if it is me or you.

What I meant by art is that the rules are hard (or near impossible) to codify for abstract things like item price cost.

It is hard to write "price it so it hurts to buy" because sometimes people think that 1000 gp is too much to pay for "at will cure light wounds" and others think that is 1,000,000 gp or more.

It is basically an artform to price an item at the proper breaking point where most people won't buy it because it costs too much.

most likely, its me that's confused.

I'm not trying to be difficult, and perhaps the problem is just my simple construction minded thinking, but I don't understand how the CREATION COST of any magic item is an abstract thing when its based off of prerequisites that are fixed numbers. for example, in this formula, spell level x caster level x 2,000 GP*. both the spell lvl and caster lvl are fixed numbers based on the level of the spell used to create the item and the minimum level required of a caster to cast that spell; in other words, the higher the level of the spell and the higher the level required to cast that spell dictates how difficult that item is to create when compared to other magic items. The 2,000 gp is also a fixed number, established by what means I'm not sure, but lets presume its just a number picked out of thin air simply to make all items (of a particular type) cost comparable. Those are all fixed numbers, so how is magic item CREATION COST an abstract thing?

now MARKET PRICE, sure I can see that being an abstract thing; I run into it all the time in my profession. people want a building, they know the size of it and the details of it but they ALWAYS want to negotiate the price they are willing to pay for it. BUT simply because they might not want to pay a certain amount doesn't change what it costs to build something. For example, if you want a concrete slab built that is 10 feet wide x 10 feet long x 1 foot thick = you need 100 cubic feet of concrete. and if concrete costs $10 a cubic foot, the cost , just for the material, is $1,000...regardless of what you might want to pay for it. now if I want/need to charge you 2,000 to build it, you might want to only pay 1,500. so the market price is abstract based on what you want to pay for it and what I am willing to sell it to you for. But, again, the material needed to make the item is a fixed cost based on how large or small or detailed you want the thing to be.

you want a simple magic item like a potion, created with a simple 1st level spell castable by a 1st level wizard, its dirt cheap to build it. you want a wondrous item, created with a high level spell that can only be cast by a high level spell caster, that item is going to have a high creation cost. a concrete slab that is 1,000 feet wide x 1,000 feet long x 1 foot thick require more material than a smaller slab...clean and simple...nothing abstract about that.


builder_chris wrote:


most likely, its me that's confused.

I'm not trying to be difficult, and perhaps the problem is just my simple construction minded thinking, but I don't understand how the CREATION COST of any magic item is an abstract thing when its based off of prerequisites that are fixed numbers. for example, in this formula, spell level x caster level x 2,000 GP*. both the spell lvl and caster lvl are fixed numbers based on the level of the spell used to create the item and the minimum level required of a caster to cast that spell; in other words, the higher the level of the spell and the higher the level required to cast that spell dictates how difficult that item is to create when compared to other magic items. The 2,000 gp is also a fixed number, established by what means I'm not sure, but lets presume its just a number picked out of thin air simply to make all items (of a particular type) cost comparable. Those are all fixed numbers, so how is magic item CREATION COST an abstract thing?

Creation cost is an abstract thing because it reflects the value of an object to the party, as does market price. A game-altering item should have a game altering cost even if you make it yourself.


Cevah wrote:
builder_chris wrote:
I've been trying...I wonder why....to create a wondrous item...and I'm frustrated and disappointed, to say the least, to discover that there really is no "system" for creating magic items. as best I can tell its based on a persons whimsical fancy. I say this because I've taken the time to study several existing items, and with very few exceptions, the math in the chart and the cost of the items don't add up. so where did those costs come from in the first place?

The prices, and even definitions, of magic items have evolved from previous editions. Over 30 years of playing has found the sweet spot for most standard items, and with that base, similar items were piced at a similar value. In 2.0, they started to come up with formulas to ballpark the prices. In 3.0, they decided to try to come up with standard formulas to get even more exact prices. However, due to game balance issues, some items are under or over priced relative to the formula. Additional rules were put in place to keep obvious cheese out, like the ring-of-true-strike for 1,800. It is instead closer to 200,000.

/cevah

when you say "found the sweet spot" I presume you mean found the ideal price that players (PCs) are WILLING to pay for an item not the actual construction cost of it.

the construction cost should be simple to figure out since most, if not all magic items, are based off of spell levels and caster levels and types of items. If a spell exists, it has already been incorporated into he game at a certain level of difficulty. so, again, if you want a simple item (a potion) made from a simple low level spell, created by a low level caster it will be calculated to a simple low cost that is comparable to other simple low level potions. And, if you want a very difficult to create magic item (say a wondrous item) made from a high level spell, cast by a high level spell caster, the cost by default, is a high cost item....regardless of the price you might want to pay for it. when you compare the cost of those two things, simple low level potions, to difficult high level wondrous items, the costs will be proportionality comparable...balanced off of mechanics instead of play whim...i.e. "what I want to pay for it".

I'll wager that a Lamborghini is not priced on what they think the sweet spot is that people will be willing to pay for it with a total disregard to what it cost to create it. I doubt they based the price of their sports car to what people are paying for "similar" sports cars.

Liberty's Edge

Khrysaor wrote:

@Cevah

There's nothing to cite. It's drawn directly from the table.

PRD wrote:

Command word Spell level × caster level × 1,800 gp Cape of the mountebank

Use-activated or continuous Spell level × caster level × 2,000 gp2 Lantern of revealing

There is nothing forcing you to have a limited number of uses in a day, it is simply a way to get a cheaper item.

Example item from the CRB

PRD wrote:


Hand of the Mage
Aura faint transmutation; CL 2nd
Slot neck; Price 900 gp; Weight 2 lbs.
Description
This mummified elf hand hangs by a golden chain around a character's neck (taking up space as a magic necklace would). It allows the wearer to utilize the spell mage hand at will.
Construction
Requirements Craft Wondrous Item, mage hand; Cost 450 gp[/quote+

Price. 1.800x0.5x minimum CL of 1 = 900 (command word x cantrip x CL)

The actual item printed in the CRB get even a bonus,as it has a CL of 2 while the price is that for a item with a CL of 1. Probably because the difference between a CL of 1 and 2 is 5' of range.

Another one:

PRD wrote:


Medallion of Thoughts

Aura faint divination; CL 5th

Slot neck; Price 12,000 gp; Weight —

Description

This appears to be a normal pendant disk hung from a neck chain. Usually fashioned from bronze, copper, or silver, the medallion allows the wearer to read the thoughts of others, as with the spell detect thoughts.

Construction

Requirements Craft Wondrous Item, detect thoughts; Cost 6,000 gp

2.000*2*3= 12.000 gp

As 2 is minimum level to cast the spell and with an effect you can use at will the Cl don't matter, so, as for the relevant FAQ, the item is priced as minimum level as increasing the CL don't affect its usefulness.

- * -

It is better to leave the Summoner spell list out of this discussion, it didn't existed when the magic items were created, an it is so particular that it will throw all the item prices out of the window if used.


Cevah wrote:
Khrysaor wrote:

I see this one too much. True strike cannot ever be made into a magic item other than a daily usage item. X charges per day.

The rules of spell casting clearly state the pricing of items based on the duration of the spell. There is no pricing for instantaneous spells and as such cannot be made into anything other than X charges per day items.

It is instant, so you cannot make a continuous version. You can, however, make a version that is on command. That is where the 1,800 comes from. However, because it gives a +20 BAB, it gets priced at 400,000, but then halved since it does not give damage. At least that is how it was priced in 3.5.

/cevah

wow, 30 years of evolution and the question of if a spell with a duration of instant can or can not be made into a magic item isn't crystal clear?

Liberty's Edge

builder_chris wrote:
James Risner wrote:
builder_chris wrote:

Without rules a roll playing game is basically diminished to a children’s playground activity

I’m all for the art that comes with roll playing games

One of us is confused, I'm not sure if it is me or you.

What I meant by art is that the rules are hard (or near impossible) to codify for abstract things like item price cost.

It is hard to write "price it so it hurts to buy" because sometimes people think that 1000 gp is too much to pay for "at will cure light wounds" and others think that is 1,000,000 gp or more.

It is basically an artform to price an item at the proper breaking point where most people won't buy it because it costs too much.

most likely, its me that's confused.

I'm not trying to be difficult, and perhaps the problem is just my simple construction minded thinking, but I don't understand how the CREATION COST of any magic item is an abstract thing when its based off of prerequisites that are fixed numbers. for example, in this formula, spell level x caster level x 2,000 GP*. both the spell lvl and caster lvl are fixed numbers based on the level of the spell used to create the item and the minimum level required of a caster to cast that spell; in other words, the higher the level of the spell and the higher the level required to cast that spell dictates how difficult that item is to create when compared to other magic items. The 2,000 gp is also a fixed number, established by what means I'm not sure, but lets presume its just a number picked out of thin air simply to make all items (of a particular type) cost comparable. Those are all fixed numbers, so how is magic item CREATION COST an abstract thing?

now MARKET PRICE, sure I can see that being an abstract thing; I run into it all the time in my profession. people want a building, they know the size of it and the details of it but they ALWAYS want to negotiate the price they are willing to pay for it. BUT simply because they might not want to pay a...

Concrete buildings aren't my field, but I think I can make an example that you will get.

You say: "For example, if you want a concrete slab built that is 10 feet wide x 10 feet long x 1 foot thick = you need 100 cubic feet of concrete. and if concrete costs $10 a cubic foot, the cost , just for the material, is $1,000...regardless of what you might want to pay for it." AFAIK that is not completely true.
What kind of concrete are you using? Portland cement? Energetically modified cement? Pozzolan-lime cements? The kind of cement used by Renzo Piano in the Kimbell museum? Other kinds of cements?
Your concrete slab will be a wall, a pavement or something different?
You will build it in the middle of a city with full access to water and energy or in a desert where you have to bring all the material?
And so on.
The final characteristics required for your slab of cement will change the production price.

Unless you are working with a very basic item (scroll, wand, potion) the tables are only guidelines, and guidelines that take a back seat to the pricing of similar, already existing, items.

To give a complete guide to the creation of magic items you would need an analysis of each spell, with prices to put it in each kind of magic item. As that is too much work for little return, we have the current guidelines.


Hand of the Mage is at will. At will doesn't require a command word. You just do it. A paladin can use detect evil at will. He concentrates as a move action. Command word items use a standard action to activate speaking a command word.

Medallion of thoughts is based on the spell detect thoughts. It's a 1 minute per level spell and as such is subject to the footnote to double the price.

(2X3X2000gp) X (2) = 24000gp

There's more to both of these items than you're giving credit for.


Orfamay Quest wrote:
builder_chris wrote:


most likely, its me that's confused.

I'm not trying to be difficult, and perhaps the problem is just my simple construction minded thinking, but I don't understand how the CREATION COST of any magic item is an abstract thing when its based off of prerequisites that are fixed numbers. for example, in this formula, spell level x caster level x 2,000 GP*. both the spell lvl and caster lvl are fixed numbers based on the level of the spell used to create the item and the minimum level required of a caster to cast that spell; in other words, the higher the level of the spell and the higher the level required to cast that spell dictates how difficult that item is to create when compared to other magic items. The 2,000 gp is also a fixed number, established by what means I'm not sure, but lets presume its just a number picked out of thin air simply to make all items (of a particular type) cost comparable. Those are all fixed numbers, so how is magic item CREATION COST an abstract thing?

Creation cost is an abstract thing because it reflects the value of an object to the party, as does market price. A game-altering item should have a game altering cost even if you make it yourself.

I agree, a game altering item should have a game altering cost, but its value should not be based on its value to a party.

this is what I here when you say this...the value of any magic item should go up or down based on how it may or may not help your party, not how it impacts the games overall mechanics?

if an item is a game altering item, than its a game altering item...regardless of what any one party may or may not value in it. for example, an item suited for a fighter, while it might be game altering item, would most likely not have any value to a wizard, so simply because a wizard has no value for it, should the price go down? no. its a game altering item, regardless of who uses or doesn't use it.

Liberty's Edge

builder_chris wrote:
Cevah wrote:
Khrysaor wrote:

I see this one too much. True strike cannot ever be made into a magic item other than a daily usage item. X charges per day.

The rules of spell casting clearly state the pricing of items based on the duration of the spell. There is no pricing for instantaneous spells and as such cannot be made into anything other than X charges per day items.

It is instant, so you cannot make a continuous version. You can, however, make a version that is on command. That is where the 1,800 comes from. However, because it gives a +20 BAB, it gets priced at 400,000, but then halved since it does not give damage. At least that is how it was priced in 3.5.

/cevah

wow, 30 years of evolution and the question of if a spell with a duration of instant can or can not be made into a magic item isn't crystal clear?

NECKLACE OF FIREBALL, just to cite an example.

Strand of prayers beads, Bead of healing "Wearer can cast his choice of cure serious wounds, remove blindness/deafness, or remove disease.", all instantaneous spells.

The question has been answered thousand of times. The problem is that it isn't a binary question with a yes/no answer.
The answers are at least as many as the spells with an instantaneous duration multiplied by the number of possible items in which they can be put.

A use activated item that is a healer kit that cast Cure Light Wounds when you use the Treat deadly wounds ability of the heal skill (so that you get what essentially is a casting time of 1 hour) is very different from a use activate items that is a pair of boots that cast Cure Light Wound every time you take a step.

The first item is low power and appropriate in most setting, the second kind of item is overpowered in most settings.

Liberty's Edge

Khrysaor wrote:

Hand of the Mage is at will. At will doesn't require a command word. You just do it. A paladin can use detect evil at will. He concentrates as a move action. Command word items use a standard action to activate speaking a command word.

Medallion of thoughts is based on the spell detect thoughts. It's a 1 minute per level spell and as such is subject to the footnote to double the price.

(2X3X2000gp) X (2) = 24000gp

There's more to both of these items than you're giving credit for.

PRD wrote:

Use Activated: This type of item simply has to be used in order to activate it. A character has to drink a potion, swing a sword, interpose a shield to deflect a blow in combat, look through a lens, sprinkle dust, wear a ring, or don a hat. Use activation is generally straightforward and self-explanatory.

Many use-activated items are objects that a character wears. Continually functioning items are practically always items that one wears. A few must simply be in the character's possession (meaning on his person). However, some items made for wearing must still be activated. Although this activation sometimes requires a command word (see above), usually it means mentally willing the activation to happen. The description of an item states whether a command word is needed in such a case.

Unless stated otherwise, activating a use-activated magic item is either a standard action or not an action at all and does not provoke attacks of opportunity, unless the use involves performing an action that provokes an attack of opportunity in itself. If the use of the item takes time before a magical effect occurs, then use activation is a standard action. If the item's activation is subsumed in its use and takes no extra time use, activation is not an action at all.

Use activation doesn't mean that if you use an item, you automatically know what it can do. You must know (or at least guess) what the item can do and then use the item in order to activate it, unless the benefit of the item comes automatically, such as from drinking a potion or swinging a sword.

Having something "at will" isn't the same thing as having it "constantly".

At will Mage hand - Mage hand has a duration of Concentration, you will have to spend a standard action to activate the spell effect and you need to concentrate to maintain it.

Medallion of Thoughts say "as with the spell detect thoughts" - you are casting Detect thoughts every time you use the medallion, with its duration of 1 minute/level. You want to detect thoughts again? Another standard action to activate the medallion. Teh multiplier is for constant items.

What the paladin do isn't relevant on how "at will" abilities work. At will simply means that an ability can be used any number of times in a day, but unless they have specific rules, they are activated with a standard action.

BTW, before you get surprised while playing: A ring of invisibility cast invisibility, as the spell, 3 minutes duration,then you need to cast it again. It is not a constant item, it is a item with a unlimited number of daily uses.


And the formula for use activated is the same as continuous. So now the hand of the Mage costs 1000gp not 900gp.

Medallion of thoughts says "the medallion allows the wearer to read the thoughts of others, as with the spell detect thoughts."

Context is everything here. This isn't talking about the activation method it's referring to how the ability functions. It lets you detect thoughts as the spell detect thoughts lets you.

BTW I know full well how a ring of invisibility works. Take your condescension back to the forum rules and read some more.

At will abilities mean you can use them with no verbal or somatic component. You can do it AT WILL.

Liberty's Edge

builder_chris wrote:


I agree, a game altering item should have a game altering cost, but its value should not be based on its value to a party.

this is what I here when you say this...the value of any magic item should go up or down based on how it may or may not help your party, not how it impacts the games overall mechanics?

if an item is a game altering item, than its a game altering item...regardless of what any one party may or may not value in it. for example, an item suited for a fighter, while it might be game altering item, would most likely not have any value to a wizard, so simply because a wizard has no value for it, should the price go down? no. its a game altering item, regardless of who uses or doesn't use it.

One of the problems is that equal level spells don't have the same power.

Spells with a target of "you" or a range of "personal" generally are more powerful than spells of the same level that you can cast on another person.
Spell limited to a specific class list can be more powerful than spells that are open to all the classes.

Take the often mentioned True strike. it is a wizard/sorcerer spell. You don't find it in the Paladin or Ranger spell list?. Why?
Because giving a +20 to hit and the capacity to negate the concealment miss chance for one attack to a class with a high BAB and high damage with physical attacks can be way more powerful that giving it to a class with 1/2 BAB and weak physical attacks.
Dipping 1 level in the wizard or sorcerer class can be a way to get it for martial characters, but that has its cost. Getting a good UMD and a wand is another way to get it, but that is another set of costs.

Or take Lead Blades. Search the forum a bit, you will find plenty of attempts to get that spell in a character spell list, why? Because it is very good for plenty of builds.
An item capable to cast lead blades an unlimited number of times in a day isn't worth 2.000 gp, but that is the price you will get following the guidelines.

So items with that kind of power don't exist and the GM are strongly suggested not to allow them in their games.

Liberty's Edge

Khrysaor wrote:


At will abilities mean you can use them with no verbal or somatic component. You can do it AT WILL.

Wrong. You can use at many times in a day as you wish, but the activation method of the ability varies.


Lead blades is a first level ranger spell requiring a 4th level ranger.
(Assuming you guys are right and the base formula gives unlimited use)

(4 X 1 X 1800gp) = 7200gp

Or just apply the impact enchantment which does exactly this and more for a +2 enchantment cost. Minimum of 16000gp going from +1 to +3. The cost being more expensive due to other abilities provided or the difficulty of having a lead blades enchantment on a weapon not belonging to a ranger.

True strike doesn't break anything. It's one swing. It requires a standard action to activate.

Round 1 - standard action true strike, move action
Round 2 - full attack if you can getting one swing(your full bab swing which everyone on these boards argues is an auto hit for full bab classes), your iteratives are not affected.
Round 3 - standard action true strike, move action
Round 4 - same as round 2

For a wizard:

Round 1 -true strike
Round 2 - disintegrate, polar ray, or any ranged touch attack spell that kills people.


Diego Rossi wrote:
Khrysaor wrote:


At will abilities mean you can use them with no verbal or somatic component. You can do it AT WILL.

Wrong. You can use at many times in a day as you wish, but the activation method of the ability varies.

So nice of you to presume so with nothing to validate your stance.


It varies by item. The default method of activating such an item is mentally. However, they often prescribe a command word, which is valid for Use Activated activation.


So, I think a main reason why I don’t see this the same as other is because I see that there are two approaches for creating magic items; one approach is from the perspective of the DM and the other approach is from the perspective of a PC/NPC.

The DM is looking at the creation of magic items from the outside of the game; as a god capable of creating anything.

The PC/NPC is looking at the creation of magic items from inside the game; a being restricted by the laws of the game.

On one hand, they both have to follow game rules, and yet at the same time, the DM potentially has the power to do what they wish; regardless of the games rules. And in my opinion, it’s when a DM steps outside of the games rules to create what they want to that creates things that don’t work well in the game.

I’ll try to explain:
Let’s say we want to create a magic ring.
The first thing that both the PC/NPC and the DM look at is the item type…a ring.
The rules of the game…and I quote…define a ring as….

RINGS
Rings bestow magical powers upon their wearers. Only a rare few have charges—most magic rings are permanent and potent magic items. Anyone can use a ring.

A character can only effectively wear two magic rings. A third magic ring doesn’t work if the wearer is already wearing two magic rings.

Physical Description: Rings have no appreciable weight. Although exceptions exist that are crafted from glass or bone, the vast majority of rings are forged from metal—usually precious metals such as gold, silver, and platinum. A ring has AC 13, 2 hit points, hardness 10, and a break DC of 25.

Activation: A ring’s ability is usually activated by a spoken command word (a standard action that does not provoke attacks of opportunity) or its effects work continually. Some rings have unusual activations, as mentioned in the ring’s specific description.

Special Qualities: Roll d%. A result of 01 indicates the ring is intelligent, 02–31 indicates that something (a design, inscription, or the like) provides a clue to its function, and 32–100 indicates no special qualities. Intelligent items have extra abilities and sometimes extraordinary powers and special purposes (see page 532). Rings with charges can never be intelligent.

I don’t know if you noticed, but nowhere in the description of what a ring is, did it say that it’s a circlet worn on the finger of a PC/NPCs hand. It’s apparently presumed that we all know what a ring is, since it doesn’t explicitly say that a ring is a circlet worn on a finger.

So both DM and PC are bound by the rules that define a ring as a ring. BUT…the DM…since they are god, if they wanted to, they could say…”no, the magic ring I am creating is worn on a PCs/NPCs head…not their finger” WAIT A MINUTE!!! That’s not a ring! That’s a Crown! The DM could do that; the PC could not since he is firmly restricted by the rules of the game. So, from both perspectives, DM or PC, in order to make a magic ring…in the game…that does not break the rules of the game…must follow the same rules that govern what a ring is. Otherwise, there is a bust someplace. Either the DM is stepping out of bounds or the PC is stepping out of bounds.

The same holds true, imo, of all other factors for creating ANYTHING in the game; but especially magic items. For example, if there are prerequisites required to create a magic item, both the DM and PCs should be bound by those same prerequisites.

The way the rules are, currently, give me the impression that DMs can (and should) “edit” things up or down as they see fit. That’s goofy to say the least, and downright cheating to put it nicely. Every being, creator or created, in any universe, real or imagined, should and are bound by the same laws of that universe. Their ability to manipulate elements of that universe are not bound by their ability, but rather their bound by their understanding of how those elements interact with one another in that universe. For example, steel has always been possible to create in our own universe. Man didn’t “invent it” they discovered it. But simply because they hadn’t discovered it at one point in our world’s history, doesn’t mean the laws that governed its creation didn’t exist, or changed when we learned how to make steel.

Now, granted, this is a game…BUT…if a magic item is created by the use of magic, and the magic needed to create an item is of high value (difficult to perform) than that item should also be of high value…regardless of what any PC or NPC wants to pay for it.

For example, all potions are “simple” magic items, but not all potions are simple potions so not all potions should be the same cost to create or buy/sell, and because they don’t have the same cost to create, they should not have the same market price, regardless of what PCs want to pay for potions.

A 1st level magic user might want to cast high level spells, but the cost for him to cast them is offset by the fact that he needs to increase his caster level BEFORE he can cast those spells, regardless of how bad he wants to cast those spell, the DM should not lower the requirements governed to cast that spell just to suite the PCs wants.

The formulas in the games book make clear logical sense to me, but they don’t add up with existing items in the game, and that’s what (imo) makes or breaks a magic item within the entire context of the games overall balance. If they all used the same formula, they would all be appropriately priced when compared with one another. But they’re not; some are apparently priced based on the “sweet spot” for selling them. In the real world, that’s a sure fire way to go out of business; why should it be any different in an RPG game that is designed to “mimic” reality? EVERYTHING has a fixed cost to create it, in any universe, and that fixed cost establishes its relative cost when compared to other items in that universe. Gold is valuable not because PCs want it to be, it’s valuable because when compared to other things like silver, there is less of it and so it is more valuable.


Khrysaor wrote:
Diego Rossi wrote:
Khrysaor wrote:


At will abilities mean you can use them with no verbal or somatic component. You can do it AT WILL.

Wrong. You can use at many times in a day as you wish, but the activation method of the ability varies.

So nice of you to presume so with nothing to validate your stance.

Presumptive or not, he is correct. At will means without limit as to the number of activations. You're thinking of items activated "by silent act of will" as the books used to say.

Check a Bestiary, you'll see many creatures with spell-like abilities "At Will". You'll also find some with "Constant". Here's some relevant rules as well from the Magic Item chapter.

PRD wrote:

To use a magic item, it must be activated, although sometimes activation simply means putting a ring on your finger. Some items, once donned, function constantly. In most cases, though, using an item requires a standard action that does not provoke attacks of opportunity. By contrast, spell completion items are treated like spells in combat and do provoke attacks of opportunity.

Activating a magic item is a standard action unless the item description indicates otherwise. However, the casting time of a spell is the time required to activate the same power in an item, regardless of the type of magic item, unless the item description specifically states otherwise.

Buri wrote:
The default method of activating such an item is mentally.

This is not true - command word is the default.

PRD wrote:
Command Word: If no activation method is suggested either in the magic item description or by the nature of the item, assume that a command word is needed to activate it. Command word activation means that a character speaks the word and the item activates. No other special knowledge is needed.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
builder_chris wrote:
The formulas in the games book make clear logical sense to me, but they don’t add up with existing items in the game, and that’s what (imo) makes or breaks a magic item within the entire context of the games overall balance. If they all used the same formula, they would all be appropriately priced when compared with one another. But they’re not; some are apparently priced based on the “sweet spot” for selling them. In the real world, that’s a sure fire way to go out of business; why should it be any different in an RPG game that is designed to “mimic” reality? EVERYTHING has a fixed cost to create it, in any universe, and that fixed cost establishes its relative cost when compared to other items in that universe. Gold is valuable not because PCs want it to be, it’s valuable because when compared to other things like silver, there is less of it and so it is more valuable.

Your premise is wrong. This game isn't designed, has never been designed, to "mimic reality" in any real sense, neither in physics, nor in economics. It's designed to be an enabler for Action Adventure and roleplaying stories, all other considerations are a distant second at best. Above all it's designed to be a GAME. If you're looking for heuristic simulations of a real economy or ecology, you're seriously barking up some wrong trees.


Diego Rossi wrote:
builder_chris wrote:


I agree, a game altering item should have a game altering cost, but its value should not be based on its value to a party.

this is what I here when you say this...the value of any magic item should go up or down based on how it may or may not help your party, not how it impacts the games overall mechanics?

if an item is a game altering item, than its a game altering item...regardless of what any one party may or may not value in it. for example, an item suited for a fighter, while it might be game altering item, would most likely not have any value to a wizard, so simply because a wizard has no value for it, should the price go down? no. its a game altering item, regardless of who uses or doesn't use it.

One of the problems is that equal level spells don't have the same power.

Spells with a target of "you" or a range of "personal" generally are more powerful than spells of the same level that you can cast on another person.
Spell limited to a specific class list can be more powerful than spells that are open to all the classes.

Take the often mentioned True strike. it is a wizard/sorcerer spell. You don't find it in the Paladin or Ranger spell list?. Why?
Because giving a +20 to hit and the capacity to negate the concealment miss chance for one attack to a class with a high BAB and high damage with physical attacks can be way more powerful that giving it to a class with 1/2 BAB and weak physical attacks.
Dipping 1 level in the wizard or sorcerer class can be a way to get it for martial characters, but that has its cost. Getting a good UMD and a wand is another way to get it, but that is another set of costs.

Or take Lead Blades. Search the forum a bit, you will find plenty of attempts to get that spell in a character spell list, why? Because it is very good for plenty of builds.
An item capable to cast lead blades an unlimited number of times in a day isn't worth 2.000 gp, but that is the price you will get following the guidelines.

So...

so...what your saying is...not all spells of the same level are equal? I see your point and at the same time...I don't see your point. if a spell is listed as a 3rd level...its a 3rd level spell. period. if its stronger or weaker then other third level spells...then its not a 3rd level spell and should be adjusted up or down in levels until it fits into that "sweet spot" for how it plays...but then...its still equal to other spells of that level. so spell level is the equalizing factor of some spells...regardless of "perceived" value of those spells. and yet, with all the variables and potential uses and outcomes of each spell, how do we really know if one spell is an equal spell when compared to another spell? fact is, we don't know and never will be able to know because there are just too many variables...SO....a simple game mechanic is to assign a spell level to them. simple. clean. clear. too many variables (imo) to start comparing if a 5th level spell equals other 5th level spells...unless you sub categorize them and have spells that are level 5.5 or 5.4 or 5.3 or 5.9. KISS...a spell of level x is equivalent in "power" to other spells in the same level.

its like the last variable on the magic item creation chart, in the case of wondrous items its 2,000 gp. that's a simple, clean, clear variable that sums up all the "stuff" required to make wondrous items. no need to break that variable down any further. one could say you need 1 oz of copper, 10 oz of steel, 4 pounds of wood, 60 pound of pillow feathers....but why...2,000 gp base "stuff" cost for wondrous items is clean and applies equally to all wondrous items just like spell level and caster levels are equalizing factors for areas of magic that have tons of variables. who is to say that a 3 level wizard played by me is the same as a 3rd level wizard played by you...even if we had all the exact same stats and gear? there are some variables, especially in games, that are not able to be quantified, but most, like spell level, caster level and GP of "stuff" required to make a ring, or wand, or wondrous item can be quantified. its those integers that should be used to calc relative value and strength when compared to one another...not..."price it to something else that YOU think is the same or similar".

ultimately, I don't know why I am doing all this debating for, I'm not a game designer with any ability to change the official game rules and the game rules right now are what they are regardless of what I think of them. but...its fun to talk about.


Majuba wrote:
Khrysaor wrote:
Diego Rossi wrote:
Khrysaor wrote:


At will abilities mean you can use them with no verbal or somatic component. You can do it AT WILL.

Wrong. You can use at many times in a day as you wish, but the activation method of the ability varies.

So nice of you to presume so with nothing to validate your stance.

Presumptive or not, he is correct. At will means without limit as to the number of activations. You're thinking of items activated "by silent act of will" as the books used to say.

Check a Bestiary, you'll see many creatures with spell-like abilities "At Will". You'll also find some with "Constant". Here's some relevant rules as well from the Magic Item chapter.

PRD wrote:

To use a magic item, it must be activated, although sometimes activation simply means putting a ring on your finger. Some items, once donned, function constantly. In most cases, though, using an item requires a standard action that does not provoke attacks of opportunity. By contrast, spell completion items are treated like spells in combat and do provoke attacks of opportunity.

Activating a magic item is a standard action unless the item description indicates otherwise. However, the casting time of a spell is the time required to activate the same power in an item, regardless of the type of magic item, unless the item description specifically states otherwise.

Buri wrote:
The default method of activating such an item is mentally.

This is not true - command word is the default.

PRD wrote:
Command Word: If no activation method is suggested either in the magic item description or by the nature of the item, assume that a command word is needed to activate it. Command word activation means that a character speaks the word and the item activates. No other special knowledge is needed.

The game also lists many abilities usable at will that require no action to activate. His argument is that at will abilities still require a standard action. The books say otherwise.

1 to 50 of 89 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Magic Item Creation All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.