Is there any reason not to have a belt that gives +2 to one Stat and +4 to another?
It would be a custom magic reason but I don't see any reason why it would not be permitted. Pretty easy to calculate the cost.
CRB p553, "Adding New Abilities" covers this. It is not really a custom item (except in PFS which has its own rules).
It is the rule that is being used when Paizo made the +4 to two (or three) ability score Belts.
Agreed, it would cost 22K for this belt; 16K for the +4 stat, 6K for the +2 (4K + 2K for the 50% increase for adding another ability)...
Thanks you all for the answeres.
It's for a home game, so no PFS limitations.
CRB p553, "Adding New Abilities" covers this. It is not really a custom item (except in PFS which has its own rules).
It is the rule that is being used when Paizo made the +4 to two (or three) ability score Belts.
*everything* that isn't already published is a custom item requiring positive GM approval.
Casual Viking, that is an opinion and it is not stated anywhere in the rules.
What is stated in the rules is how to add additional abilities to an item. This is used extensively by Paizo to make items such as a Belt of Str/Dex/Con.
Combining items is not really custom. Creating brand new items which did not exist IS custom.
In any case, ALL magic items, in the book or not, require GM approval. So your statement is really quite pointless.
Adding additional abilities to items is prefaced byCasual Viking, that is an opinion and it is not stated anywhere in the rules.
What is stated in the rules is how to add additional abilities to an item. This is used extensively by Paizo to make items such as a Belt of Str/Dex/Con.
Combining items is not really custom. Creating brand new items which did not exist IS custom.
In any case, ALL magic items, in the book or not, require GM approval. So your statement is really quite pointless.
Many factors must be considered when determining the price of new magic items. 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. Otherwise, use the guidelines summarized on Table 15-29and post-faced with
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...other items require at least some judgment calls.
The rules don't actually use the term "custom", they use "new", so I was technically wrong there. But the modifier for combining items is absolutely part of the rules for new items.
The rules for new magic items are couched as "guidelines" that require "some judgement calls". It doesn't explicitly say GM permission required, but that is what it means.
And no, all magic items do not require GM approval. Given the feats, skills, time, market access and other requirements mentioned in the magic crafting section, you absolutely don't need GM permission to craft any pre-designed magic item, any more than you need your GMs permission to prepare spells in the morning or attempt to climb a wall. A GM who wants to fight against the proliferation of CLW wands needs to keep either a completely ridiculous pacing (and even that won't really work) or institute houserules.
You are quoting from the wrong section. The section on "Adding New Abilities" is not prefaced by that.
The rule I am referencing is on page 553, not the rules on pages 549-550. The rule on page 553 is a basic rule to upgrading magic items.
Please, do not conflate the two sections. They are very very different. The section you are quoting from covers what are true custom items. The one I am quoting from covers upgrading equipment, not making custom equipment.
Simply put: you are in the wrong section of the rules, not the section I am discussing.
You are quoting from the wrong section. The section on "Adding New Abilities" is not prefaced by that.
The page I am referencing is on page 553, not the rules on pages 549-550. The rule on page 553 is a basic rule to upgrading magic items.
Please, do not conflate the two sections. They are very very different. The section you are quoting from covers what are true custom items. The one I am quoting from covers upgrading equipment, not making custom equipment.
Simply put: you are in the wrong section of the rules, not the section I am discussing.
...Huh. You're right.
I should be able to use those rules to add secondary enchantment "tracks" to a weapon.
Not sure what you mean by secondary enchantment "tracks".
Not sure what you mean by secondary enchantment "tracks".
Instead of adding Dancing to my +1 Vorpal weapon (128.000 gp), I add the abilies of a +1 Dancing weapon to my +1 Vorpal weapon (50.000+50%, 75.000 gp).
That you couldn't do. There is no provision for adding separate enhancement "tracks" like you are thinking.
What you can do is upgrade your +1 Vorpal weapon to a +1 Dancing Vorpal weapon. That is within the rules on page 553.
The +50% is for other types of magic items such as combining a Ring of Invisibility with a Ring of Protection (to use the example from the book).
How that applies to this topic is that when you look at how the Belt of Physical Might is priced it is clear that it is priced using two Belts and applying +50% to the second belt as per the rule on p553 (for +2 it is 4k+4k*1.5 = 10k).
Thus, you can have a Belt that grants +4 Strength (+4 Belt of Giant Strength @16k) and +2 Dexterity (+2 Belt of Incredible Dexterity @4k*1.5=6k).
That you couldn't do. There is no provision for adding separate enhancement "tracks" like you are thinking.
What you can do is upgrade your +1 Vorpal weapon to a +1 Dancing Vorpal weapon. That is within the rules on page 553.
The +50% is for other types of magic items such as combining a Ring of Invisibility with a Ring of Protection (to use the example from the book).
And exploiting the table to get a cheaper price on an already existing or similar item is explicitly called out in the second paragraph after "Magic Item Gold Piece Values".
Edit: This is meant to be about Casual Viking's two-track enhancement idea.
Barathos, I am not sure how your comment is relevant.
1) That table is not being used in this discussion.
2) The price is not cheaper, it is 50% more expensive.
Or are you referencing Casual Viking's comment about doing multiple enhancement tracks?
Barathos, I am not sure how your comment is relevant.
1) That table is not being used in this discussion.
2) The price is not cheaper, it is 50% more expensive.Or are you referencing Casual Viking's comment about doing multiple enhancement tracks?
Casual Viking's. I should have specified.
Ahhh, ok. :)