I'm lost... lol... I don't usually do this; My players usually determine prices for crafting items).
I'm looking at the Scabbard of Keen Edges: CL 5th, PRICE 16000gp, COST 8000gp... Three times per day, it casts Keen Edge on a sword placed within it.
Now if I were to try and create a Scabbard of True Strike, with the same effects (three times per day, the scabbard would cast True Strike on a sword placed within it), how would I go about in calculating the price/cost of this item?
Is it at all possible? And if it is, what's the right way to do this?
I've tried and failed miserably (ending up with what I think are wrong answers).
Thanks guys!
Ultradan
I recall that True Strike was one of those spells that didn't lend itself well to being made a magic item -- even if you found the by-the-book price, the benefit you received would be too good for the calculated price.
Case in point, the magic item creation rules and True Strike haven't significantly changed. But Combat Maneuvers are now attack rolls instead of ability checks, which means that you can gain a +20 bonus on your next Bull Rush, Disarm, etcetera ...
Of note is that a Scabbard is a somewhat odd slot for this.
If you look at the True Strike spell, you'll notice that the target is *You*, not the weapon you are going to strike with. But with the spell working the way it is, some people may look at you funny if you stick your sword in your scabbard to gain the benefits of True Strike and somehow gain a +20 bonus to Trip.
|
I'm not sure if they carried the text over to PF from 3.5, but in 3.5 True Strike was specifically called out as being inappropriate for use with the standard spell rules for magic items.
Its not too bad if you require a standard action to use the scabbard though, its broken as hell if you allow it to work with a "free" or swift action command as many DMs interpret the Scabbard of \Keen Edges does. The standard action is the only thing that balances True Strike, its give up two standard actions for one virtual auto hit, as opposed to autohit.
I recall that True Strike was one of those spells that didn't lend itself well to being made a magic item -- even if you found the by-the-book price, the benefit you received would be too good for the calculated price.
Case in point, the magic item creation rules and True Strike haven't significantly changed. But Combat Maneuvers are now attack rolls instead of ability checks, which means that you can gain a +20 bonus on your next Bull Rush, Disarm, etcetera ...
True Strike is fine as long as your not trying to make an item with a constant effect.
Basically you are making an item that casts true strike 3 x per day with the conditions that it is cast only on the sheathed weapon and the weapon must be sheathed between uses and the activation is unsheating the weapon, like the other item.
The price for this can be worked out to extremely low or extremely high depending on how you as a GM want to balance it.
If you go as just a use activate item (drawing the weapon from the sheath, Spell level 1 x caster level 1 x 2,000 gp) with a 3/day limitation (divide price by 1.66666) the cost should work out to about 1200 gold x 2 for a magic item that does not use up a standard body slot = 2400. Using the crafting chart literally.
If that price is too low (more than likely) then you are well within your right as a GM to say that such an item requires a higher caster level to create than 1.
If you say it requires a caster level of 5 then it would cost 12,000 gold.
Drawing the weapon from the sheathe would cast true true strike on it (use activated as appropriate for the item) as per the spell. The next swing would be at +20. They would need to resheathe and redraw the weapon to get the next True Strike and it would only work three times per day total, once per round.
In the end as with any magic item but especially with True Strike, the final cost will be determined by how powerful you think the item will be in your game and how many of them you want floating around. The chart is a good guideline but the final price and limitations should always reflect the power the GM see's.
Hope this helps.
Edit: As other folks have noted, this could easily be abused on CMB rolls. I would suggest you limit the item to only altering melee or ranged 'to hit' rolls and not affect CMB rolls or, if you keep the CMB funtion to vastly increase the Caster Level/cost required to make the item.
Of note is that a Scabbard is a somewhat odd slot for this.
If you look at the True Strike spell, you'll notice that the target is *You*, not the weapon you are going to strike with. But with the spell working the way it is, some people may look at you funny if you stick your sword in your scabbard to gain the benefits of True Strike and somehow gain a +20 bonus to Trip.
Good point. I have deleted my post because of this. I don't beleive this can be made into a magic item effect because of this.
From an article Skip Williams created for D&D 3.5:
Use the Correct Formula: One item people frequently ask me about is a ring oftrue strike. The spell provides a whopping +20 insight bonus on attack rolls and negates miss chances arising from concealed targets. It's only 1st level, however, because it is a personal range spell with a duration of 1 round. That means you can normally manage one attack every 2 rounds when using the spell. Also, you can't bestow it on an ally (except for a familiar or animal companion) because of its personal range.
Assuming such a ring worked whenever it was needed and has a caster level of 1st, it would cost a mere 2,000 gp by the formula for a use-activated spell effect (in this case, 1 x 1 x 2,000 gp). Sharp-eyed readers will note that any continuously functioning item has a cost adjustment of x4 (see the footnotes to Table 7-33), which bumps up the ring's cost to 8,000 gp. That's a real bargain for an item that provides so much boost to a user's combat power. Much too great a bargain.
So, what would our example ring of true strike be worth? Insight bonuses aren't included on Table 7-33, but a weapon bonus has a cost equal to the bonus squared x 2,000 gp, so a +20 weapon would cost 800,000 gp. One can argue that the ring isn't quite as good as a +20 weapon because it doesn't provide a damage bonus. That, however, ignores the very potent ability to negate most miss chances. Also, the ring's insight bonus works with any sort of attack the wearer makes. On top of all that, the insight bonus stacks with any enhancement bonus from a magic weapon the wearer might wield. Still, 800,000 gp is a lot of cash and the lack of a damage bonus is significant, so some price reduction is in order. A 50% reduction might be in order, or 400,000 gp for the ring.
I guess this implies though, that you can enchant items with a target of "you"/"personal".
Since yours has charges associated you would now use the following formula:
200,000gp / (5 / 3 per day) = 120,000 gp
Just don't do it.
Just don't do it.
Sean, while I have until now agreed 100% with your posts I am going to have to discent here.
While I agree that anything with True Strike should be handled like an armed nuclear device, a competent GM can add in properly limited items which allow true strike uses that will in no way break their games.
I say do it, but make sure it is extremely limited or requires extremly hard to get and/or expensive special ingredients to make, if you think such an item is good in your game.
Of note is that a Scabbard is a somewhat odd slot for this.
If you look at the True Strike spell, you'll notice that the target is *You*, not the weapon you are going to strike with. But with the spell working the way it is, some people may look at you funny if you stick your sword in your scabbard to gain the benefits of True Strike and somehow gain a +20 bonus to Trip.
Excellent deduction!
Ok then, say we were to create a headband or a helmet (since the spell is of the school of divination), that gives the wearer the ability to cast true strike on himself 3x per day (as boots of teleportation gives the wearer the ability to teleport 3 times per day)
Working on THAT now... lol
Just don't do it.
The deserves an
"END OF LINE"
Of note is that a Scabbard is a somewhat odd slot for this.
If you look at the True Strike spell, you'll notice that the target is *You*, not the weapon you are going to strike with. But with the spell working the way it is, some people may look at you funny if you stick your sword in your scabbard to gain the benefits of True Strike and somehow gain a +20 bonus to Trip.
Excellent deduction!
Ok then, say we were to create a headband or a helmet (since the spell is of the school of divination), that gives the wearer the ability to cast true strike on himself 3x per day (as boots of teleportation gives the wearer the ability to teleport 3 times per day)
Working on THAT now... lol
Also remember that magic items do not always have to be exact duplicates of the spells that go into making them. The Scabbard of Keen Edges is a perfect example of this concept.
IMO I would say make the item you originally had envisioned. It is as appropriate as the Keen Edges is IMO. Just make sure you want the item in your game and if you do, make sure it is priced correctly and sufficiantly difficult to make that they don't become common.
Perhaps say it requires the spirit of a powerful Demon of accuracy to make it, thus vastly limiting availablity.
Just don't do it.Sean, while I have until now agreed 100% with your posts I am going to have to discent here.
While I agree that anything with True Strike should be handled like an armed nuclear device, a competent GM can add in properly limited items which allow true strike uses that will in no way break their games.
I say do it, but make sure it is extremely limited or requires extremly hard to get and/or expensive special ingredients to make, if you think such an item is good in your game.
Then why, in the 11-year history of D&D 3E and Pathfinder, has a reasonable multi-use not-spell-trigger-or-limited-charges true strike item never appeared in an official Wizards or Paizo product?
Because the designers realize that giving combat-oriented characters routine and easy access to a +20 attack bonus is a big, big problem, and pricing an unlimited-use version of that spell pushes well beyond the 200,000 gp maximum value for most wondrous items.
That said, do what you want in your campaign.
Just don't do it.
Heed the wise words of Sean!
A player once, came to me with this idea, i was young and naive, and i accepted (this was back in 3.0), calculated the price and boost it a little. Since he wanted a 3/day item. I´m not sure, this was a long time ago, but i think that i charged him around 15k / 7.5 for creation-
It was indeed a little overpowerwed for a 10 lvl wiz, but back in the day i didnt care that much. Yet, some lvls later the same wiz asked for making a new, permament one (I told him, that it will only affect his 1st attack, and he paid around 75k or so / ghalf for creat.) That was insane, he became a pain. Good thing for me that he Blasted a guy shielded with spell reflection with some maximized and empowered energy orbs a few encounters later.-
Long story short. As a 3/day item, that needs a Standard action to activate, it may work, dont even think about making it a permanent effect.-
Because the designers realize that giving combat-oriented characters routine and easy access to a +20 attack bonus is a big, big problem, and pricing an unlimited-use version of that spell pushes well beyond the 200,000 gp maximum value for most wondrous items.
That said, do what you want in your campaign.
Sean, I do not in any way disagree with anything you said. I also whole heartedly agree that a True Strike item with constant effect should never, ever appear in any game anywhere, no matter what as it will break play nor should 'routine and easy access' to true strike be a staple for any melee character.
I simply don't agree that ref's should not be able to hand out True Strike in some magic item form if it is well thought out, properly limited, and made to be rare for their home games.
Every campaign varies as do peoples play styles and some folks games will not be broken by the inclusion of a true strike item.
Then why, in the 11-year history of D&D 3E and Pathfinder, has a reasonable multi-use not-spell-trigger-or-limited-charges true strike item never appeared in an official Wizards or Paizo product?
Simply because game designers cannot afford to put stupid stuff in their products that will then be considered standard or canon for their customers.
Home rule games have the luxury of being able to create potentially broken things and only affecting their own tables, which could be fine if their table style has fun that way. Game develpers like yourslef do NOT have the luxury of introducing broken items with silly effects into their game cannon/products if they want themselves to be taken seriously and to be known for quality products with good balance in game play, like Paizo does.
While I can see how Pathfinder/Paizo would never (rightly so) and should never produce such an item as it then goes into the rules as a standard, home games should, IMO, never be told don't do it. They should be told WHY they shouldn't, but then have their question answered on how they could if they really wanted to.
Nothing but respect for you and Paizo in any case. You guys saved the pastime I have loved since 1979, IMO. Sorry if I stepped on a nerve.
In the same sense that you should never put a handgun in the hands of a 5 year old child, I say "you shouldn't put a true strike item in your game." Yes, if you know your 5yo very well and know he or she can handle it responsibly, that's up to you, but rather than adding that caveat every single time this comes up (and I've addressed it many, many times), it's easier and simpler to say "don't do it, it's dangerous."
In the same sense that you should never put a handgun in the hands of a 5 year old child, I say "you shouldn't put a true strike item in your game." Yes, if you know your 5yo very well and know he or she can handle it responsibly, that's up to you, but rather than adding that caveat every single time this comes up (and I've addressed it many, many times), it's easier and simpler to say "don't do it, it's dangerous."
Luckily I don't play with 5 year olds. I assume most here don't hence why I answered the original post.
As well I attempted to include the steps for creation since the OP seemed to want help with item creation and I like to help folks learn the system. While the result of this item creation question may not be something he will actually want in his game, he may take the knowledge with him to answer his own questions later.
How about a BLINDFOLD of True Strike?
Characters would have to wear it to activate it, so it would become pretty useless in a melee, as one would first have to retreive the blindfold and actually put it on... It could be used by an archer who's actually out of the fight to target the big-bad-guy in the back of the enemy ranks (or something like that).
Price : 14 400 gp
Spell level: 1
x Caster level: x 3 (to even have Create Wouderous Item)
x Use-Activated: x 2000 gp
Total: 6000 gp
x since item has an effect based on a spell with a duration measured in rounds): 4
Total: 24 000 gp
devided by Charges per Day (5/3): 1.6666
Grand Total: 14 000 gp
How about THAT?
Ultradan
x since item has an effect based on a spell with a duration measured in rounds): 4
Total: 24 000 gp
I believe that multiplier only counts for continuous use items if I am reading the footnote correctly, and I am sure NO ONE is advocating a continuous use True Strike.
The category of Use Activated/Continuous Use is a two categories that are priced the same I think so listed on one line for space saving, since the foot note referances Continuous Use but not Use Activated.
In the end, if you absolutely must have a true strike item in your game, I would suggest you not use the tables and simply price it as expensive as you think it should be. As the notes state, not all spell or effects will work out from the tables, and True Strike, being so powerful in what it does, is one of those effects.
... or simply add "Spell-Storing" to the weapon in question and then put true strike on it?
This would limit it to working ONCE per day.
Ultradan
... or simply add "Spell-Storing" to the weapon in question and then put true strike on it?
This would limit it to working ONCE per day.
Ultradan
Only if you want to cast True Strike ONTO your opponent. Spell storing weapons put the stored spell onto anything they strike, not their users.
While I think this would allow you to put True Strike on an ally given the powers wording it might not be a popular method to those getting the spell to them:
Caster: Hey Bjorn want a True Strike?
Bjorn the Berserker:YA!
Caster:*STAB* There you go!
Bjorn: WTH!?...
Also Spell Storing could be used as fast as a caster could place the spell in the weapon and someone could be hit with it. The weapon ability does not give any limit to how often it can be used. A wand of True Strike and a spell storying Blackjack could be a silly way of effectively handing out True Strike.
But do you really want to do that?
|
The issue isn't just about True Strike (though that is the most egregious example), but rather the overall category of Personal spells.
There needs to be a cost multiplier for any Personal spell being put into an item, for use by any passing wielder.
Why? Simply because, if such a spell becomes able to affect persons other than the creator, then it has ceased to be the original spell.
It is a more powerful version of the spell, and thus warrants a higher spell level. Higher spell level requires higher minimum caster level.
Both factors increase the crafting price.
What would be the metamagic cost to improve a spell from Personal to Targetted? +2?
Increasing Personal True Strike from spell level 1 to Targetted True Strike at spell level 3 would increase the crafting cost by x15.
Secondly, the Table of Item Costs needs expanding to cover spells with a duration of 1 round or less. Footnote no 2 only covers as far as spells whose normal durations are 1 round/level (cost x4).
Given that x4 multiplier is assumed to be allowing a level 3 spell from a level 5 caster, lasting 5 rounds, a spell effect that is so powerful that it should only last 1 round, is an effect that is 5 times as powerful. Hence the cost of such an effect should be 5 times as much to craft.
Put both those factors together, and it is clear that any such item should cost at least (5x15)=75 times the cost of even the most generous estimate.
Which puts it over £200K gp.
Which makes it an artifact.
Luckily I don't play with 5 year olds. I assume most here don't hence why I answered the original post.
My analogy was about literally giving a literal gun to a literal 5-year-old, and how dangerous that is.
But I think I'm done here.
Whatever price you put on your "true strike item" you want it to be high enough that it dissuades people from buying/creating multiple copies of the item. A scabbard that allows true strike 3/day is still broken if it is so cheap a PC can get his hands on 10 of them.
Ok ok... lol
Ring of spell storing (3 levels of spells), and you happen to cast 3 True Strike spells on it? Would THAT work?? lol
Ultradan
Once again, having the spell cast on the weapon makes it a unique spell compared to True Strike.
Which isn't a bad thing. I'm hardly FOR 20 foot bonuses to Bull Rushes; in that sense, I'd certainly use your version of the magic item if I were forced to use any of them. But once you alter a spell in such a way, you can't really argue that it's not as broken as forecasted, because it's not really the same spell.
There was in item in the 3.5 DMG that allowed a similar affect but only 2 or 3 times per day. I will see if I can find it.
How about making the item intelligent?
I am sure a true strike 3/day would give a high ego modifier. Then even if the player wants to use it does not mean it will work if the weapon does not want to.
So they can have a weapon that gives them true strike 3/day, but only when it wants to.
Make the item insane with its goal of pissing off the wielder. Kicks in true strike then oppose will vs the wielder to strike a friend.
At first the player thinks he hit a gold mine, and in the end the cursed nature of The Sword of Discord comes into play at just the wrong time as the fighter gets +20 to attack the cleric as he attempts to cast mass cure critical.
hahahaha
How about making the item intelligent?
I am sure a true strike 3/day would give a high ego modifier. Then even if the player wants to use it does not mean it will work if the weapon does not want to.
So they can have a weapon that gives them true strike 3/day, but only when it wants to.
Make the item insane with its goal of pissing off the wielder. Kicks in true strike then oppose will vs the wielder to strike a friend.
At first the player thinks he hit a gold mine, and in the end the cursed nature of The Sword of Discord comes into play at just the wrong time as the fighter gets +20 to attack the cleric as he attempts to cast mass cure critical.
hahahaha
It is actually hard to get a high ego, and the item only opposes the player when he goes against it. Giving someone something they might not really want will probably make them abandon the idea, and in that case the DM is just better off saying so.
@ the OP: I think the item was gauntlets of true strike, but I can't seem to find my copy of MiC right now.
Unfortunately, all attempts to date to create the hypothetical 'Scabbard of True Strike' have only created the accursed 'Scabbard of Seppuku.' Wizards have many theories for this, wondering if there is some integral flaw in the spell or if it is merely of such subtlety that only one who properly comprehends the magic can wield it. Regardless, the 'Scabbard of Seppuku' is a favorite of many evil wizards as a trap for their lairs, even more so because it always identifies as a 'Scabbard of True Strike.'
Because the designers realize that giving combat-oriented characters routine and easy access to a +20 attack bonus is a big, big problem, and pricing an unlimited-use version of that spell pushes well beyond the 200,000 gp maximum value for most wondrous items.
That said, do what you want in your campaign.
I agree this could be a big problem in a basic campaign. But as something that could be the <b>focus</b> of a campaign...
"The Misenchanted Sword" by Lawrence Watt-Evans. Probably more of an artifact in practice for an RPG. Half-boon, half-curse. Would require a group of players that gets along and characters that work well together, I think. Part of me has wanted to have something like this in a game since I read the book.
AJ
I love that book. Had a similar item in a game I ran long ago. But I never would let a player build and craft that item for their PC.
Unfortunately, all attempts to date to create the hypothetical 'Scabbard of True Strike' have only created the accursed 'Scabbard of Seppuku.' Wizards have many theories for this, wondering if there is some integral flaw in the spell or if it is merely of such subtlety that only one who properly comprehends the magic can wield it. Regardless, the 'Scabbard of Seppuku' is a favorite of many evil wizards as a trap for their lairs, even more so because it always identifies as a 'Scabbard of True Strike.'
I simply love this as a solution for a player who demands to craft an item that would imbalance the game. I plan to steal that idea should the need arise. Awesome idea Kevin!
|
A scabbard that casts True Strike on the person who draws a weapon from it, up to a maximum of once per day and only when in dim light or lower, sounds like the ideal winterfest present for that castle guard in the family.
Should also give a +20 bonus to sense motive, just in case whoever they just spotted tries the "Surprise inspection!" ploy.
Caster: Hey Bjorn want a True Strike?
Bjorn the Berserker:YA!
Caster:*STAB* There you go!
Bjorn: WTH!?...
I really laughed at that one. Well done, sir. Well done.
Greg
PS:
Sorry, I actually look forward to reading any of his books and only just discovered his online projects. ( I usually avoid reading author's websites, as my view of them and the reality often do not coincide.)
I see no problem with this being made into a magic item. All you are doing is casting a spell.
A Scabbard of true strike
1) Have a daily number of uses.
2) You only get the bonus on one attack. If you do not attack this round, you lose the bonus.
3) You would have to re-sheave your weapon, to reuse the spell. (i do not see any rules that putting your weapon away is a free action :)
4) Even if you did not have to re-sheave your weapon, because you made a Sword of True Strike, you are still using a spell, and as such would have a daily number of uses.
5) If the players make magic True strike weapon to use again the enemy, then the enemy will just make magic true strike weapon to use vs the players. All fair in Love and War :)
|
... or simply add "Spell-Storing" to the weapon in question and then put true strike on it?
This would limit it to working ONCE per day.
Ultradan
Only if you want to cast True Strike ONTO your opponent. Spell storing weapons put the stored spell onto anything they strike, not their users.
While I think this would allow you to put True Strike on an ally given the powers wording it might not be a popular method to those getting the spell to them:
Caster: Hey Bjorn want a True Strike?
Bjorn the Berserker:YA!
Caster:*STAB* There you go!
Bjorn: WTH!?...Also Spell Storing could be used as fast as a caster could place the spell in the weapon and someone could be hit with it. The weapon ability does not give any limit to how often it can be used. A wand of True Strike and a spell storying Blackjack could be a silly way of effectively handing out True Strike.
But do you really want to do that?
Actually...my spellsword did EXACTLY that. With spell channel, the target of the spell changes from whatever it was to person stabbed...so I was spell channeling true strike and stabbing the the archer while he took a shot at max range on a fleeing enemy :P . I also made a habit of doing the same trick with other personal buffs.
Long Sword of True Strike
Aura: Divination CL:5th
Slot: Weapon Price: 15,675 (15,360 + 315 for Masterwork Sword) Wight: 4 lb.
This +1 Long Sword of True Strike, lets the user gain a +20 insight bonus to your next single attack roll, up to 3 times per day. Additionally, you are not affected by the miss chance that applies to the attacker trying to strike concealed target, during these 3 attacks that grant the +20 bonuse.
Construction: Craft Magic Arms & Armor, True Strike;
Cost: 7,995 (7,680 + 315 for Masterwork Sword).
...................
Costs
+1 long sword = 2,000
True Strike spell 3 time per day = 13,360
Masterwork long sword = + 315
Price: 15,360 + 315 = 15,675 gold
Cost: 1/2 price + 315 = 7,995 gold
Note 1)= No space limitation not used because it does take up a space = Weapon
Note 2)= Multiple different ability not used because it is only using one ability "Spell True Strike", The +1 magic weapon is a requirement for all magic weapon, and does not add to cost unless it has another ability added.
Oliver, I believe the item has to be activated as a Standard action, yes?
Page 459 = Use Activated
Page 363
True Strike = Has a casting time of 1 standard action, Duration of See text. Text = "Your next single attack roll(if it is made before the end of the next round) gains a +20 insight bonus.
Page 458
"Activating a command word magic item is a standard action and does not provoke attacks of opportunity"
= Spell True Strike = (Spell level x caster level x 2000) = (1 x 1 x 2000) = 2,000 gold
= Charge per day 3 = Divide by (5 divided by charges per day) = 1.67 modifier x 2,000 = 3,340 gold
All things put aside, I could be mistaken but... I think you have to DIVIDE the 2000 by the modifier (2000 / 1.67 = 1198). You multiplies the modifier (giving you 3340).
By your calculation, the same weapon with 4 charges per day would cost less...
(Just confirming my way of calculating it also...)
Ultradan
= Spell True Strike = (Spell level x caster level x 2000) = (1 x 1 x 2000) = 2,000 gold
= Charge per day 3 = Divide by (5 divided by charges per day) = 1.67 modifier x 2,000 = 3,340 gold All things put aside, I could be mistaken but... I think you have to DIVIDE the 2000 by the modifier (2000 / 1.67 = 1198). You multiplies the modifier (giving you 3340).
By your calculation, the same weapon with 4 charges per day would cost less...
(Just confirming my way of calculating it also...)
Ultradan
Corrected Version
Long Sword of True Strike
Aura: Divination CL:5th
Slot: Weapon Price: 7,107 (6,792 + 315 for Masterwork Sword) Wight: 4 lb.
This +1 Long Sword of True Strike, lets the user gain a +20 insight bonus to your next single attack roll, up to 3 times per day. Additionally, you are not affected by the miss chance that applies to the attacker trying to strike concealed target, during these 3 attacks that grant the +20 bonuse.
Construction: Craft Magic Arms & Armor, True Strike;
Cost: 3,711 (3,396 + 315 for Masterwork Sword).
...................
Costs
+1 long sword = 2,000
True Strike spell 3 time per day = 4,792
Masterwork long sword = + 315
Price: 6,792 + 315 = 7,107 gold
Cost: 1/2 price + 315 = 3,711 gold
Note 1)= No space limitation not used because it does take up a space = Weapon
Note 2)= Multiple different ability not used because it is only using one ability "Spell True Strike", The +1 magic weapon is a requirement for all magic weapon, and does not add to cost unless it has another ability added.
Note 3)=Page 468=Activation= Usually a character benefits from a magic weapon in the same way a character benefits from a mundane weapon--by attack with it. If a weapon has a special ability that the user needs to activate, then the user usually needs to utter a command word (a standard action).
I have see several Gish & arcane archer build that walk around with wands of true strike or mic eternal wand of true strike ie wand that dose same thing both of witch cost 750 gp on open market 375 gp to craft.
The issue isn't just about True Strike (though that is the most egregious example), but rather the overall category of Personal spells.
There needs to be a cost multiplier for any Personal spell being put into an item, for use by any passing wielder.
I totally agree that personal spells (as opposed to touch spells) have that limitation for good reasons. You can't make potions of personal spells, for example, and fighting classes who get limited spell use rarely get them.
I think +1 or +2 spell level could work well for some, or just a +100% modifier on item cost, but certainly an additional cost of some kind.