Do I really have to keep wearing this?


Rules Questions

51 to 77 of 77 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

Valdimarian wrote:

It's right there in the FAQ, "as soon as you remove an item that grants an effect to the wearer, you are no longer the wearer"

If you're wearing something and the effect is "The wearer gains X" and you stop wearing it, you're no longer the wearer and no longer qualify.

I recognize that. That's why I wrote, "If the item's description explicitly tells you that it functions on removal, I don't see what the problem would be. It's an explicit rule that would override this more general presumption."


So the consequence of "you can remove it" would be that a ring of invisibility works for an entire party, and so on?


Ruggs wrote:
So the consequence of "you can remove it" would be that a ring of invisibility works for an entire party, and so on?

IF the rules allowed for you to continue to benefit after removing the ring then yes you could pass it around and give invisibility to the entire party.

Silver Crusade

wraithstrike wrote:
graystone wrote:
ElementalXX wrote:
Well this was probably the fastest faq ive seen

True. While I'm happy to have an answer this quick (and a well written too), I'm a bit disappointed it didn't give a reason.

It acts like a spell except when it doesn't cuz...? Balance? Tradition? Something else? Maybe Mark or another dev could comment if they have a chance.

Because the intent is for the magic item to give you the benefit of the spell as long as you wear the item not to cast the spell on you as if it was a wand or scroll.

Well, I agree, and always have. With the ring of invisibility, for example, it should 'give you the benefit of the spell as long as you wear the item', as you say. Which means it shouldn't switch off after three minutes.


Malachi Silverclaw wrote:
wraithstrike wrote:
graystone wrote:
ElementalXX wrote:
Well this was probably the fastest faq ive seen

True. While I'm happy to have an answer this quick (and a well written too), I'm a bit disappointed it didn't give a reason.

It acts like a spell except when it doesn't cuz...? Balance? Tradition? Something else? Maybe Mark or another dev could comment if they have a chance.

Because the intent is for the magic item to give you the benefit of the spell as long as you wear the item not to cast the spell on you as if it was a wand or scroll.
Well, I agree, and always have. With the ring of invisibility, for example, it should 'give you the benefit of the spell as long as you wear the item', as you say. Which means it shouldn't switch off after three minutes.

You knew what I meant. :)

Silver Crusade

So there are worn items for which 'using/activating' it is like 'casting' a spell. For those, like the FAQ says, the effect has the duration based on the spell and the item's CL.

There is another type of worn item which, when activated, affects you with a spell effect while you wear it. The FAQ in this thread addresses that kind of item.

So both FAQs are, of course, correct. But each FAQ is talking about a different kind of item: the 1st addresses items which 'cast' a spell and the 2nd FAQ addresses the kind of item which benefits the wearer.

So the only problem remaining is: which kind of item is the ring of invisibility?

If we were creating such an item, we would say the 2nd kind. It's been the 2nd kind since 1st ed, and is still the 2nd kind in 5th ed D&D. To have it workike the 1st kind is just weird! If you make it the kind of item which 'casts' invisibility on you for three minutes, then it's the 1st kind of item. And that means that it's duration is based on the spell, and is totally unaffected by removing the ring.

If the 'benefit' is that the wearer can 'cast' the spell on himself, then he is required to wear it to activate it AND to have it cast on him, but NOT to continue to be under the spell effect.

If the 'benefit' is that the wearer can be invisible when activated, then it lasts as long as you wear the activated ring.

Which kind of item is the ring of invisibility?

Liberty's Edge

It's a ring in which, to gain the benefits, it must be worn and then activated. Once activated, it lasts for 3 minutes, you attack, or you take it off.

Silver Crusade

HangarFlying wrote:
It's a ring in which, to gain the benefits, it must be worn and then activated. Once activated, it lasts for 3 minutes, you attack, or you take it off.

Why would it stop after three minutes? That's the duration of the spell, but it isn't casting the spell on the wearer, it's just that the wearer can activate it to be invisible.


Malachi Silverclaw wrote:
HangarFlying wrote:
It's a ring in which, to gain the benefits, it must be worn and then activated. Once activated, it lasts for 3 minutes, you attack, or you take it off.
Why would it stop after three minutes? That's the duration of the spell, but it isn't casting the spell on the wearer, it's just that the wearer can activate it to be invisible.

You know the intent. Do you want them to actually errata the rules more? I think they are clear enough with the current FAQ in place. I actually thought they were clear before the FAQ. If you would like errata that presents RAI better why not suggest it and FAQ it?


I agree that the intent is clear. IMO, it highlights an inconsistency with the rules in that activating a magic item is like casting a spell for duration, and yet that duration has a limitation that the item must continue to be worn (or possessed).

The FAQ says that if the description 'says' wearer, than the effect will cease if the item is removed, yet there are no game mechanics to differentiate these text specifications during magic item construction.

For example, let's say that I want to create a ring of invisibility that _does_ cast the spell on the wearer for 3 minutes, where the description _does not_ say anything about having to wear the item to gain the benefit of invisibility.

For that matter, let's say that my ring of 'invisibility casting' has a range of touch, so I can actually choose different targets.

How do I build such an item? Does it cost any different? Do I follow the same spell level x caster level pricing rules?


_Ozy_ wrote:

I agree that the intent is clear. IMO, it highlights an inconsistency with the rules in that activating a magic item is like casting a spell for duration, and yet that duration has a limitation that the item must continue to be worn (or possessed).

The FAQ says that if the description 'says' wearer, than the effect will cease if the item is removed, yet there are no game mechanics to differentiate these text specifications during magic item construction.

For example, let's say that I want to create a ring of invisibility that _does_ cast the spell on the wearer for 3 minutes, where the description _does not_ say anything about having to wear the item to gain the benefit of invisibility.

For that matter, let's say that my ring of 'invisibility casting' has a range of touch, so I can actually choose different targets.

How do I build such an item? Does it cost any different? Do I follow the same spell level x caster level pricing rules?

First things first, talk to your GM. Because ultimately, all that matters is how your GM is going to adjudicate this sort of thing.

Other than that, you'd probably create it just like you'd create any other item you'd want to actually cast a spell.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Malachi Silverclaw wrote:
HangarFlying wrote:
It's a ring in which, to gain the benefits, it must be worn and then activated. Once activated, it lasts for 3 minutes, you attack, or you take it off.
Why would it stop after three minutes? That's the duration of the spell, but it isn't casting the spell on the wearer, it's just that the wearer can activate it to be invisible.

Because it's a magical item with a caster level created to duplicate the effects of a spell by providing the benefits of that spell to the wearer of the magical item. It follows along with the spell for pretty much every other reason; why not this one, too?

And ultimately, even if you want to keep asking, "But why?" the answer at some point boils down to, "Because the people who are responsible for making the rules of the game said so." They're the people charged with creating the rules, all of which are arbitrary. If you don't like how they arbitrarily decided one aspect because it differs from how you would arbitrarily decide that aspect, feel free to change it for your own games.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I would think of it like so…

A wand is an item that grants you the use of a spell.

A wondrous item or piece of magical jewelry is magical, and extends the effect to you so long as you continue to use it.

Skimming through the magic items, I don't see any so far that do the former without also specifying that they only work for "the wearer". The ring of invisibility has the magical ability of turning invisible. It just so happens to also make anyone wearing it invisible as well, so long as they wear it. If they take it off, the ring has no will of its own to stay invisible, so it stops. It never cast invisibility on you. You were just along for the ride.

To use a different ring as the example, look at the Ring of Feather Falling (emphasis added):

Quote:
This ring is crafted with a feather pattern all around its edge. It acts exactly like a feather fall spell, activated immediately if the wearer falls more than 5 feet.

This ring acts if the wearer falls. It doesn't say it casts Feather Fall on you and it doesn't say it acts without a wearer, so if you took the ring off in mid-air to try passing it to a friend, you would immediately begin to fall faster, and if you dropped it off a roof without anyone wearing it, it would plummet without activating itself.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
fretgod99 wrote:
Malachi Silverclaw wrote:
HangarFlying wrote:
It's a ring in which, to gain the benefits, it must be worn and then activated. Once activated, it lasts for 3 minutes, you attack, or you take it off.
Why would it stop after three minutes? That's the duration of the spell, but it isn't casting the spell on the wearer, it's just that the wearer can activate it to be invisible.

Because it's a magical item with a caster level created to duplicate the effects of a spell by providing the benefits of that spell to the wearer of the magical item. It follows along with the spell for pretty much every other reason; why not this one, too?

And ultimately, even if you want to keep asking, "But why?" the answer at some point boils down to, "Because the people who are responsible for making the rules of the game said so." They're the people charged with creating the rules, all of which are arbitrary. If you don't like how they arbitrarily decided one aspect because it differs from how you would arbitrarily decide that aspect, feel free to change it for your own games.

And really at the end of the day that is the answer so if someone keeps asking why they are either asking why did they rule that way, or why is the rule not written more clearly.

The answer to the first one boils down to them thinking that is the best way for the item to work in the game. The answer to the second question is they are not technical writers, and not everyone perceives things in the same way, which is likely the main reason this section of the messageboard even exist, to get us all one the same page.


fretgod99 wrote:


Other than that, you'd probably create it just like you'd create any other item you'd want to actually cast a spell.

Those are the exact mechanics I'm looking for, where are they?

Is the pricing mechanic for 'actually cast a spell' any different than the command word 'spell effect' for the ring of invisibility?

Would a Ring of Invisibility that can cast the spell an unlimited number of times per day with range touch be the same cost as the standard item in the book?

Yeah, obviously GMs are a necessary part of custom magic items, but I'm looking for mechanics-based guidelines from the rules.


_Ozy_ wrote:
fretgod99 wrote:


Other than that, you'd probably create it just like you'd create any other item you'd want to actually cast a spell.

Those are the exact mechanics I'm looking for, where are they?

Is the pricing mechanic for 'actually cast a spell' any different than the command word 'spell effect' for the ring of invisibility?

Would a Ring of Invisibility that can cast the spell an unlimited number of times per day with range touch be the same cost as the standard item in the book?

Yeah, obviously GMs are a necessary part of custom magic items, but I'm looking for mechanics-based guidelines from the rules.

They don't exist. The mechanics based guidelines simply aren't detailed or robust enough to do as you want.

Which is a problem when trying to use them to deduce how a standard item works, but is otherwise only an issue if someone's trying to abuse them.


_Ozy_ wrote:
fretgod99 wrote:
Other than that, you'd probably create it just like you'd create any other item you'd want to actually cast a spell.

Those are the exact mechanics I'm looking for, where are they?

Is the pricing mechanic for 'actually cast a spell' any different than the command word 'spell effect' for the ring of invisibility?

Would a Ring of Invisibility that can cast the spell an unlimited number of times per day with range touch be the same cost as the standard item in the book?

Yeah, obviously GMs are a necessary part of custom magic items, but I'm looking for mechanics-based guidelines from the rules.

thejeff also addressed it pretty succinctly.

Like I said, that's "ask your GM" territory. Seriously, I'm not trying to be flippant. If you want to create a Ring of Invisibility that actually allows you to cast the spell so you can pass it around to your party, that's something the GM is going to want to know about. Whether they agree with you that the standard 20,000 Ring is priced wrong or whatever, figure out how your GM adjudicates the regular Ring and go from there.

There aren't guidelines to do precisely what you want to do, just like there really aren't guidelines to do a lot of what people can think of to do within the magic item rules. That's why they come with a pretty big "ask your GM" warning.


fretgod99 wrote:
_Ozy_ wrote:
fretgod99 wrote:
Other than that, you'd probably create it just like you'd create any other item you'd want to actually cast a spell.

Those are the exact mechanics I'm looking for, where are they?

Is the pricing mechanic for 'actually cast a spell' any different than the command word 'spell effect' for the ring of invisibility?

Would a Ring of Invisibility that can cast the spell an unlimited number of times per day with range touch be the same cost as the standard item in the book?

Yeah, obviously GMs are a necessary part of custom magic items, but I'm looking for mechanics-based guidelines from the rules.

thejeff also addressed it pretty succinctly.

Like I said, that's "ask your GM" territory. Seriously, I'm not trying to be flippant. If you want to create a Ring of Invisibility that actually allows you to cast the spell so you can pass it around to your party, that's something the GM is going to want to know about. Whether they agree with you that the standard 20,000 Ring is priced wrong or whatever, figure out how your GM adjudicates the regular Ring and go from there.

There aren't guidelines to do precisely what you want to do, just like there really aren't guidelines to do a lot of what people can think of to do within the magic item rules. That's why they come with a pretty big "ask your GM" warning.

I, at least, would crank the price on that one up well above the standard RoI. Though I might drop the price of the standard one or house rule it to actually be continuous, possibly at a slightly higher price.

Regardless, I'd base the cost of other invisibility variants on the cost of the existing one, since that's the official rule.


wraithstrike wrote:
fretgod99 wrote:
Malachi Silverclaw wrote:
HangarFlying wrote:
It's a ring in which, to gain the benefits, it must be worn and then activated. Once activated, it lasts for 3 minutes, you attack, or you take it off.
Why would it stop after three minutes? That's the duration of the spell, but it isn't casting the spell on the wearer, it's just that the wearer can activate it to be invisible.

Because it's a magical item with a caster level created to duplicate the effects of a spell by providing the benefits of that spell to the wearer of the magical item. It follows along with the spell for pretty much every other reason; why not this one, too?

And ultimately, even if you want to keep asking, "But why?" the answer at some point boils down to, "Because the people who are responsible for making the rules of the game said so." They're the people charged with creating the rules, all of which are arbitrary. If you don't like how they arbitrarily decided one aspect because it differs from how you would arbitrarily decide that aspect, feel free to change it for your own games.

And really at the end of the day that is the answer so if someone keeps asking why they are either asking why did they rule that way, or why is the rule not written more clearly.

The answer to the first one boils down to them thinking that is the best way for the item to work in the game. The answer to the second question is they are not technical writers, and not everyone perceives things in the same way, which is likely the main reason this section of the messageboard even exist, to get us all one the same page.

Sorry about the bad grammar. I see I missed a few commas. :)


thejeff wrote:

I, at least, would crank the price on that one up well above the standard RoI. Though I might drop the price of the standard one or house rule it to actually be continuous, possibly at a slightly higher price.

Regardless, I'd base the cost of other invisibility variants on the cost of the existing one, since that's the official rule.

If it were me, I wouldn't allow unlimited 'casting a spell' items like that at all. I would make it use charges per day, but I don't think I would bother adjusting the price over and above that.

So, 5/day would have the 'normal' price, 10/day would be double that, etc...

The normal RoI, as I've stated before, I would price as a 24k continuous, use-activated item and get rid of the command word activation every 3 minutes altogether.


I've also gone on record saying I wouldn't have a problem running the Ring as a mental activation as opposed to command word. In home games, that's probably how I'd do it. It'd work exactly as it has been clarified to work in these last couple of FAQs (activation required, 3 minute duration, tied to wearing the item), except I'd make the activation mental, as opposed to command word.

Seems like the best mix for me. But obviously YMMV. If someone in one of my groups wanted a continuous Ring, I'd probably let them make/purchase one and price it in the 28-32K range. Slight bump over the formula price, but not nearly as high as the increase from the command word calculation.


Eh, price it too much above and you're starting to approach 'Ring of Freedom of Movement' territory, which is far, far, far (did I mention far) superior to a Ring of Invisibility.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

Are we really going to have another thread click up to 900 posts and get it locked over the same subject?

The ring of invisibility has a duration per activation of 3 minutes and expires immediately upon removal. That is how the rules read according to the developers and if you don't read that out of the rules, then you may consider options such as rule 0-ing it to work any way you choose in your game. But the official RAW (whether or not you read RAW that way) is that these two facts are true.


Thanks James, what would we do without you.

Grand Lodge

Has anyone proven if it is Command Word, or Mentally activated?


blackbloodtroll wrote:
Has anyone proven if it is Command Word, or Mentally activated?

It would have to say it's mental activation. It doesn't, so it's not.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

fretgod99 wrote:
blackbloodtroll wrote:
Has anyone proven if it is Command Word, or Mentally activated?
It would have to say it's mental activation. It doesn't, so it's not.

+1 and therefore it is Command Word (I assume we are talking about Ring of Invisibility)

51 to 77 of 77 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Do I really have to keep wearing this? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.