Onestep's page

So after reading through this, and speaking to my DM, it seems like yes, I'm free to use any appropriate magic item I find as my bonded object, but he is also of the opinion that if I use any kind of significant artifact as my bonded object then very powerful individuals will likely have an interest in me very fast as well.

Onestep wrote:

Wait, I need to have the crafting feats to make an existing magic item my Bonded Item? I knew that I'd need them if I wanted to further enhance it (beyond its existing stats and being bonded), but I didn't read anywhere that I needed them just to make the bond.

If there's a misunderstanding going on, then to clarify, I already have the Ring of Protection +2. I don't need to make one or enhance my bonded item into one. I'm planning on making the Fireseeker's Ring (homebrew magic item the DM made) into my new bonded item.

I'm aware but I gave an close example of a seventh level wizard creating a +2 then at 9th a +3 ring.

I detailed that the wizard needs to meet the level of the crafting feat and the item. That's it. He does not need the feat to create the bonded object.

However, to save invested cash when bonding a new object (like an existing magic item), it is best to upgrade the old one into a regular magic item and for that you should have the feat.

There are 3 processes. 1) Bonding an object (the ritual). 2) Giving the Bonded Object Magical properties (crafting/upgrading). 3) Crafting/upgrading a Bonded Object into a standard Magic Item (as you only paid half thus it only works for you but as a standard Magic Item it works for anyone and sticks around). Ignoring #3 means you throw thousands of gp away IF you Bond a new item.

My advice/example is for anyone playing a wizard with a bonded object so they know what to do.

You have a mwk Bonded blob ($0)[ring], a +2 ring of protection ($8000)[ring] CL 6, a Fireseeker's Ring(Homebrew) ($?)[ring] CL ?
Bonding the Fireseeker's Ring means you have to do the ritual. You should have to meet it's creation caster level but it is highly likely your GM will give you a pass.

Oh, so let me get this straight, because I'm a little confused. You've been very patient, but there's a fair bit of information coming my way and I'm not sure if I'm interpreting what you're saying and how it all connects correctly. So to summarise:

1)If I just want to make an existing magic item (as an example, the Fireseeker's Ring/ Ring of Protection +2) my bond and use it as standard (and don't care about the previous bonded item or money wasted etc etc), then I can do with the Arcane Bond ritual, as per usual.

2)You're giving me general advice for swapping bonded items in general, that I should upgrade bonded item effects (which can be created without feats) into full magical item effects (which require feats) before swapping, so that they remain even after they are no longer my Arcane Bond and I don't waste whatever money I poured into the bonded item. To do this, I need the feat. Is that correct?

3)I've never heard of needing to match the creation caster level to make an item my bonded item. Could I ask where you got this info from? It isn't mentioned in the Arcane Bond Wizard Class description or anywhere I can see in guides magic item creation. Given it's a homebrew item, I'd have to check with the DM. I'm sure he will, as you say, give me a pass if it comes up. If I've misunderstood what you've said again, then my apologies.

Thanks!

Review the Section on Bonded Objects (it's a bit verbose and non-sequential). Caster Level of the Crafting feat AND Magic Item is a requirement. This puts artifacts and such out of reach from a RAW perspective, it's up to your GM to allow it.

Wizard 7: he needs two things; 1) crafting item feat Forge Ring has a minimum of 7th level. 2) Ring of Protection +2 requirement of 6th level (= 3*2).
You start with a bonded mwk blob. The ring can be replaced/remade for $200*Wiz plus magic item cost of $(magic item price/2) (ignoring special materials) taking 1 week. IF you have the magic item item it replaces the magic item cost above. If you want a fancy ring, say Platinum(Pt) with 100gp diamond and poison pill compartment at $170 (Focus Magic Jar and Shield Other), you have to buy that before you start the ritual. A masterwork tool is 55gp. Masterwork is generally 50gp. There's considerable planning involved with PF1.
There is also upgrading an item. The basics is final cost - initial cost. This would be when you initially go from a mwk blob to +2 Ring of protection at Wiz 7 for 4000gp taking 8 days(standard crafting time). Then again from +2($8000) to +3($18000) at Wiz 9 paying 5000gp taking 10 days. This avoids the $200*Wiz cost and 1 week ritual.
As mentioned, if you want to use a nicer/fancy mwk item it's best to switch to it a low level to reduce the cost.

When/If you change to a new item it is sensible to pay the other half to upgrade your existing bonded object into a regular magic item to save the investment and wear it on another finger. You should have the Forge Ring crafting feat to do this.

ADVICE:
In general it is better to choose Bonded Object Amulet. Lower crafting feat requirement of 3rd and more varied choices (Aegis of recovery -> Amulet of Spellcunning -> Amulet of Spellmastery).
It is best to switch to a fancy mwk item early...

Wait, I need to have the crafting feats to make an existing magic item my Bonded Item? I knew that I'd need them if I wanted to further enhance it (beyond its existing stats and being bonded), but I didn't read anywhere that I needed them just to make the bond.

If there's a misunderstanding going on, then to clarify, I already have the Ring of Protection +2. I don't need to make one or enhance my bonded item into one. I'm planning on making the Fireseeker's Ring (homebrew magic item the DM made) into my new bonded item.

So here's my situation and, eventually, question. In my latest campaign, the party has stumbled across an extremely nice magic ring that grants additional spell slots, among other things. Given that my two ring slots consists of a perfectly functional Ring of Protection +2 and my current Arcane Bond ring (which is this far entirely unenchanted/buffed etc etc), I'm keen to make the new ring my new Arcane Bond.

This seems fairly straightfoward, if awkward. Destroy/lose my current ring, wait a week, ritual bond the new ring. I might ask the DM if we can just skip the week wait and I'll pay extra gold or something.

But this situation caused me to start wondering: Is if there are any real limitations (outside what item types an Arcane Bond can strictly be) to what you can make your bonded item? For example, the new ring is a homebrew magic item. It's fairly nice. But it's basically just a unique wondrous item.

But could I make an artifact my bonded item? A sapient magical item? Strictly speaking, it seems possible, RAW. Given that we're currently pursuing an amulet connected to the Outer Gods, I'm kind of wondering if I could make that my bonded item if we found it. Would that be possible? I'm just wondering if I'm missing something.

If you're attacking a monster with a ridiculously high AC, such that it can only hit on a natural 20, do abilities/spells (such as Weapon Mastery/Bless Weapon) that automatically confirm crits still function, or does the fact that you couldn't confirm a crit mean that they don't?

That is, unless a crit confirmation roll counts as an attack roll and another natural 20 would auto-crit? I'm honestly not sure if that is the case though.

Thanks for your input all. Overall, people seem to think that AM should work on demigods, but it's a risky play for either the party or demigod to try.

That's kind of where I was at in my own thoughts, so if this pops up in a campaign, that's probably what I'll run with, maybe with some caveats for mythic stuff.

Onestep wrote:

From a gameplay perspective, it's another toss up. If anti magic field does suppress demigods, then it's basically a huge button to remove many of their most powerful traits immediately and render them vulnerable to say, a bunch of NPC's with bows. Which doesn't seem that fun.

Where does it say that an Antimagic field suppresses DR?

It suppresses the magic of the arrow, so they count as mundane arrows, but Monster Damage Reduction is "Ex or Su". You should check on a case-by-case basis to see if it is affected, and most of the time the Bestiaries don't say if it is Ss or Ex.

Plus, most of the demigod's DR requires epic weapons to bypass it, and epic weapons are lesser artifacts. If it requires a lesser artifact to bypass it, there is a good argument to say that a demigod DR is equivalent to a lesser artifact and unaffected by the AM field.

Fair point on the DR not being mentioned, though my natural assumption has been to follow 3.5's example of which types of DR are supernatural and which are EX.

I'm not certain where you got 'Epic weapons are lesser artifacts' from though. You just need a weapon with a total of +6 (including the enhancement value of additional traits like Vorpal) to overcome Epic DR. By that standard, a +2 Brilliant Energy longsword would overcome Epic DR.

So I saw an interesting question posted the other day. Does Antimagic field suppress the magic and supernatural abilities of beings like Demon Lords and Empyreal Lords?

On the one hand, they're entities capable of granting divine spells, so they are technically deities. On the other hand, it's often made clear, both in lore and expectations of what players should be fighting and killing, that there is a distinct difference between a true deity and a being simply capable of granting divine spells. A player can become the latter, if you're using Mythic rules.

From a gameplay perspective, it's another toss up. If anti magic field does suppress demigods, then it's basically a huge button to remove many of their most powerful traits immediately and render them vulnerable to say, a bunch of NPC's with bows. Which doesn't seem that fun.

If it doesn't, then any given Demon Lord or Empyreal Lord could cast Antimagic field, fly into the air and be functionally immune to 95% of player builds while retaining near full lethality, which also seems kind of unfun.

What are your thoughts?

Background: The party has recovered two rings belonging to a legendary Magic Knight. The first grants an additional 2D6 Force Damage to weapon attacks. The second grants 3d6 additional Force Damage to Spells and Special Abilities. After some discussion, the party decided to split these among the primary damage dealers of the party, a Magus and the Alchemist.

Only we're not sure who get's which, as there's some debate as to what exactly a bomb is. Per RAW, a bomb seems to be a weapon. But it exists almost entirely outside normal weapon rules. Until generated by a supernatural ability, it's just a vial of fluid. It has more in common with Ray attacks than a genuine weapon. Indeed, it is the ability that affects every aspect of the 'bomb' weapon. So would an increase to the abilities damage affect the damage of the produced weapon, if we treat it as such?

Basically, my question is, should the damage of the bomb be increased by the ring that increases weapon damage, the ring that increases ability damage or both?

As per thread name, how tight are alignment restrictions on worship of a Deity, if that worship doesn't provide mechanical benefits?

I was really keen on playing a True Neutral Ascetic Wizard who worshipped Irori, who pursued that which improved himself, while casting away that which did not. But I got into a slight debate with the DM, who said that to worship Irori, said character had to be Lawful Neutral. This didn't really fit with the coldly utilitarian way I envisioned the character pursuing power.

Of course, I originally envisioned said character for a game of 1E, where the one-step alignment rule made this a non-factor.

well since the book came out 2 years after pathfinder was released probably close enough. least you thought it over. i have seen this in rise of runelords game and was just sad

Yeah, playing one in Rise of Runelords would be very odd, unless you went super-heavy on a Cyphermage background.

I was just wondering, when, lorewise, is an appropriate time to play a Thassilonian Specialist? My new group is just starting up a Kingmaker campaign, and I love the aesthetic of playing as a Greed Wizard, but given that the story of Kingmaker happens about two years after Rise of the Runelords, it feels too soon for Sin Magic to have become a thing yet.