|
So it used to be that, in 3.5, the MIC introduced a method of identifying items with Spellcraft and Detect Magic. The DC for this was 10 higher than the DC to identify the aura (usually 15 + half caster level). So for some early items, this was in the high 20s, 25-30. Seemed fair for what was basically a free (no 100 GP pearl) Identify.
Reading through the skill section of the Beta, I found out this little nugget.
"If you are trained in Appraise, you can use it in conjunction with detect magic or identify to determine the properties of a magic item in your possession. The DC of this check is equal to 15 + the item's caster level. If successful, you determine the item's properties and command words."
I'm a little unsure about this right now. It's plus the full caster level, so the Appraise check for a 6th level item would be 21, while the Spellcraft check (going from the MIC) would be 28 (15+3+10). Seems like a substantial difference to me, and makes identifying items very easy early on. I don't necessarily think that's a bad thing though, spending days with unidentified magic items can be not fun. Still, I find it weird that it says this can be used in conjunction with Detect Magic OR Identify. Identify already gives you the above information, why need an Appraise check?
Does anyone else find it odd that they mention this being used in conjunction with Identify as well? Or is this a good change for a skill that few people used to take? I'm on the fence with it right now.
Well, the new Identify spell from PFRPG doesn't automatically identify a magic item; it gives instead a +10 bonus to Appraise checks to identify magic items (pag 240 of Beta). Note that it doesn't have a 100 gp cost anymore.
The DC sounds low, but note that you can't take 20 (since it's only usable once per day). So a 1st level wizard with 16 Int and a skill rank in Appraise (1 + 3 + 3 = +7 modifer) can take 10 and identify an item (with Detect Magic) up to caster level 2, or he can cast Identify and identify an item up to caster level 12. If he rolled a 20 on his check, he would be able to identify an item up to caster level 12 with Detect Magic, or any item via Identify.
Seems more or less reasonable to me, I guess. I don't feel too strongly about it one way or the other.
I always found it rather ornerous to be shelling out 100gp a pop to cast Identify. Personally, as a DM, I find the change to be refreshing and welcome.
I welcome the change. If I don't want them identifying something, I'll make them find it out manually.
|
I like the change to Identify, removing the pearl and the 1 hour casting time. Our players are using magic items they find in an adventure, and that's a noble goal.
However, I believe the DC is too low.
To identify a wand of magic missile, the DC is 16. Without identify, a 1st level wizard with +7 in Appraise (class skill +3, ranks +1, int +3) can take 10 and effortlessly identify the wand. Why bother having a DC check at that point? The rules just take up space for something that is going to be successful 95% of the time.
A 5th level wizard with +11 in Appraise (+3 class, +5 ranks, +3 int) can take 10 to identify a +1 weapon (DC 18).
This renders identify moot as well.
I think identifying magic items should be successful roughly 70% of the time without identify, if a wizard has bothered with Appraise, and 90% of the time with identify.
I would suggest the DC be either 20 or 25 minimum, and then the identify spell has use, and the skill Appraise requires some effort. With a base DC 20 + caster level of the item, a 5th level wizard can identify any CL 1 item, without identify, and a 1st level wizard can identify any CL 7 or lower item with identify, all of them taking 10. Seems reasonable to me.
I would suggest the DC be either 20 or 25 minimum, and then the identify spell has use, and the skill Appraise requires some effort. With a base DC 20 + caster level of the item, a 5th level wizard can identify any CL 1 item, without identify, and a 1st level wizard can identify any CL 7 or lower item with identify, all of them taking 10. Seems reasonable to me.
I very much like that take. A base DC of 20 would do nicely.