Clark, Please Give Me Feedback On My Item!

[The_Minstrel_Wyrm]

Hello Clark and everyone.
I have mine (originally) posted on page 4 (third one from the top) but I thought I'd re-post it and if anyone (official judge or otherwise) would like to give me feedback on my magic item, that'd be cool.

Regards,
The Minstrel_Wyrm...
Okay here it is;

Figurine of Wondrous Power, Iron Tiger
Aura moderate transmutation; CL 11th
Slot ---; Price 19,200 gp; Weight ---

Description
This rough chunk of iron ore has a distinct outline of a tiger, crouched as if poised to pounce. When animated, an iron tiger becomes a normal adult male tiger (MM 281-282) under the command of its possessor. The item can be used once per day for up to 1 hour per day. A separate command word enables the possessor to call upon a dire tiger instead (MM 65) however, after three transformations into dire tiger form, the figurine loses all its magical properties. In addition, once per day, the iron tiger (in either form) may emit a roar (as per the shout spell, CL 11th PH 278). Although it behaves as a living creature, the iron tiger retains its iron-like consistency which grants it hardness 10. (This renders it vulnerable to rust monster attacks, as well as spell effects like rusting grasp.) If slain while animated it reverts to statuette form and cannot be used until 1 full week has passed.

Construction
Requirements Craft Wondrous Item, animate objects, shout; Cost 9,600 gp, 768 XP

*I think, upon reflection, I realize some of the flaws in my item. Of course, like many others, I intend to enter RPG Superstar 2010, and anything you can provide to help me along to better Wondrous Item design would be truly appreciated.* Heh heh... I still really liked my Figurine of Wondrous Power... those have always been favorites of mine.

Thanks to Clark, Wolfgang, Sean and all the judges.
And of course, congrats to the top 32 and the alts. I will be watching these next rounds with interest.
Good Luck everyone!

[Dale McCoy Jr]

Mind if I take an attempt?

>>Figurine of Wondrous Power, Iron Tiger
First off, the name doesn't grab me. I'd consider a name of a magic item found in the DMG, not something cool that just smacks of awesome right from the get go.

>>(MM 281-282), (MM 65), ...PH 278),
No need for the page numbers, esp when this is suppose to be based on Pathfinder and not the Players Handbook.

>>This rough chunk of iron ore has a distinct outline of a tiger, crouched as if poised to pounce.
Good visual, gives a quality mental picture. And you kept it to a single sentence. Kudos.

>>When animated, an iron tiger becomes a normal adult male tiger (MM 281-282) under the command of its possessor.
Reaction 1) How do you animate it (command word, pushing a button, etc)? Reaction 2) Monster-in-a-box. How is this different?

>>A separate command word enables the possessor to call upon a dire tiger instead (MM 65) however, after three transformations into dire tiger form, the figurine loses all its magical properties.
Ok, so command word, but ... this simply encouraging the Monster-in-a-Box idea.

>>In addition, once per day, the iron tiger (in either form) may emit a roar (as per the shout spell, CL 11th PH 278).
Hmm, cool idea, thematic. I like this part. Only down side is that the CL should not be listed here since it is listed above.

>>Although it behaves as a living creature, the iron tiger retains its iron-like consistency which grants it hardness 10. (This renders it vulnerable to rust monster attacks, as well as spell effects like rusting grasp.)
This basickly reads like a template to be applied. Sorry, but it only serves to reinforce the MitB idea.

Final Analysis: This is a good basis for a wonderous item, but it needs work. Remember, superstar doesn't just mean how cool your idea is but also about your presentation. Give this baby a spit polish and it'll be a thing of beauty.

[Steven Helt]

terraleon wrote:

Eibom’s Ineffable Headstone

The idea of chaining yourself to a headstone to channel its grave properties is evocative, but your item leaves me with a couple of unanswered questions that muchkin players will definitely ask.

1. What happens to controlled undead if the manacles are damaged or severed, but still worn? (meaning the manacles are intact but the connection to the stone is broken)
2. Can the stone be uprooted or carried so long as it touches earth? Use of telekinesis, floating disk, or levitation makes this a pretty potent item.

Also, the item suffers from mediocre presentation. Most items wouldn't say it can be activated four times per day: and then list its abilities. Check out other items for how they present that same kind of limitation. Also, most items woudn't say "Undead within a Desecrate automatically fail." They might instead say "The headstone allows no Will save to undead if planted within the area of a desecrate spell. Also - what about undead who start outside the area of the desecrate spell and enter it when summoned to the stone?

In general, giving someone a class feature is a poor idea. Let them take ten levels of cleric to get this power - the cleric had to, after all. And if you think there should be an exception that loans out the undead turning ability...that's already in the SRD.

Increasing the DC of any ability by three four times per day is incredibly powerful. Suppose I surround myself with a platoon of wights, and then use the stone to cast mass inflict serious wounds when my mini-army gets into combat. All of us heal a minimum 3d8+13 points, and the DC for my enemies is in the neighborhood of 26-30. I've just dealt as much as 481 points of damage! At minimum caster level!

Scratch that. I love this item, and when I swing it at my players, I'm going to give them your name and address.

So, you see this also impacts cost, which is not enough. And if I determine to break it open like that in a few seconds, imagine when my very motivated players get ahold of it and decide to give me a taste of my own medicine. There's nothing 6 gamers won't do to make their DM pay for using an item like this against them. They'll use it for extended implosions while pouring mercury onto your slice of pizza.

[Steven Helt]

The_Minstrel_Wyrm wrote:

Figurine of Wondrous Power, Iron Tiger

I agree with everything above, but I wanted to add that it doesn't really challenge you to come up with yet another animal for a figurine of wondrous power. It is just not an item I think can create excitement for Superstar judges. Pick an item not yet used, and think o the animal for a few seconds. You're already halfway to creating your magic item and you haven't had to be creative yet.

Next year, I would try to come up wth something new, that breaks the rules in a fun way. Don't spend time on something you know your whole gaming table can develop.

[Clark Peterson]

metagaia wrote:

Bag of Surreptitious Switching:

This backpack, designed to look like an ordinary non-magical black leather rucksack has the ability to duplicate any other nearby container.

OK, here we go again. All the way back to page 2...

Oh man I am going to need some aspirin.

For this item, Wolf and Sean nuked it before I got to it. Essentially, they felt it was just a competence bonus to theivery with some FX. Not that inspired.

Plus, the formatting was the wrong format. Not fatal, but it doesnt help.

Up the voltage next year!

[Clark Peterson]

Nermal2097 wrote:

Duellers Polishing Cloth

Aura Faint Evocation; CL 3rd
Slot --; Weight --

This one caught all three of us in a giddy mood. I made a joke about a french accent and duelling. Its not that funny. But the bottom line is that it had some easily corrected goofs, was in the wrong format and was "good but not great"tm, which happens a lot.

Up the voltage next year. Dont go gonzo, but inspire us with something really cool.

[Clark Peterson]

BV210 wrote:

Here's mine.

LOAD BEARING PACK

... please be gentle ...

Uh oh, I'm not good at gentle... Let's see...

Wolf said it was practical but htat he would pass. I was a bit more mean: "Hey look it's more bags from an MMO! Buffing carry capacity isn't epic or heroic. Isn't that what tenser's disk is for? Reject."

I was more goofing than being serious. But I agree with Wolfgang that this is practical but not interesting.

[Clark Peterson]

Theodoric The Red wrote:

GARRECH'S PLANAR ABRAXAS

Aura - strong abjuration; CL - 15th
Slot - neck; Price - 135,000 gp; Weight - N/A

DESCRIPTION

This abraxas is a disk of cold iron...

Oh you were close. I dont know if you were top 62 but you were at least briefly in the kept folder.

Sean and Wolf both thought this was a bit narrow in focus. I wrote:

"That is actually a really cool item, in my view. However, it sure does goof up some higher level encounters and DM plot devices. :) I'm inclined to keep. Though I agree with Sean about dimensional lock being a more primary power than is detailed. I also think the intro part is over-written."

You got close. You're on the right track. You caught our attention, and that means you are doing something right!!!

[Clark Peterson]

pdzoch wrote:

When you have the time, I am interested in your feedback. Especially anything regarding the mechanics.

Powdered Fire
Aura Moderate ; CL 7th
Slot ----; Price 1,400 gp; Weight 1 lb.

OK, lets see...

Spell in a can, good idea bad execution. All three of us rejected it. Wolf thought it had good flavor and wished you had done a bit more, but you didnt.

Sorry! Hope that helps for next year.

[Clark Peterson]

Elizabeth Cougill wrote:

Rouge of the Vengeful Mistress

Aura Moderate Conjuration CL 7th
Slot —; Price 4750gp; Weight —

We had a couple makeup items. I happend to love the name of this one. I read that name and I know I am in trouble. I mean, really, can anything screw you over more than a vengeful mistress? Uh, the answer is NO! That is a great, great name.

Lemme check.

I cant find our comments on this. I remember this item, or at least the Calistria's kiss power part. But I seriously cannot find this post in the judges chambers.

Sorry :(

[Clark Peterson]

Jesse Benner wrote:

Trickster’s Tunic
Aura Moderate Conjuration and Illusion ; CL 7th
Slot Chest; Price 7,100 ; Weight –

OK, I was a little hard on this one.

Here is my first post:

"So here is my question, who rolls the Disguise check for the switcheroo? And what is the bonus to that roll? Does it come from the wearer of the shirt? I guess I dont mind the idea in a sense. Its clever. But this is way more 4E in feel than it is 3E--switching places and teleporting around the game board. In the end, I just dont want this item in my game and I am having a hard time getting past this. I dont want combats where the rogue is switching places with the bad guy. I have this horrid vision of really fun epic fights turning into "he's the bad guy," "no, he's the bad guy!" A Superstar doesnt make an item that turns epic heroic D&D into a Three Stooges episode. Not digging it. Reject."

Then, after Sean chimed in I rejected it with some Stooges references:

"And just like that the "Shirt of Nyuk Nyuk Nyuk, Look-at-the-grouse! Look-at-the-grouse!" is rejected! Wububububububub! Boink!"

As you can see, we had fun doing this. Sorry this time it was at your item's expense. Again, remember, this is at your ITEM's expense, not yours. This is not a comment on you as a person. We just didnt like the item, that's all.

Clark

[Clark Peterson]

taig wrote:

Bring it on, Clark! I'm not afraid! (OK, maybe a little)

Amulet of Discord

Your wish is my command.... ;)

OK, you said you werent afraid so I am giving it to you.

I wrote:

"I just dont want fights like this. I dont like the ally-enemy swap. That is just un-fun. I'm sorry. Reject."

The others were equally unimpressed. In fact, this one was noted as one of the worst of the contest.

You asked for it :)

Normally I would have edited that. But those are some of the comments we make. That is why we dont just make our judges boards public. We dont want to bruise feelings.

Please remember, we are talking about ITEMS here not PEOPLE. We are not commenting on you as a person. Just your item and its relative merit in this contest. That's all. In fact, as you know, I am very impressed with everyone who enters. We are talking about sorting out items in a pretty elite group--those with the cajones to enter this contest. You did that. Your item just didnt make the cut. But we cant take away from you the fact that you entered which in and of itself is awesome. I hope you come back next year dedicated to knocking our socks off and saying "take that you fiend!" (bonus points if you get the reference)

[Erik Anderson]

Clark Peterson wrote:

(bonus points if you get the reference)

I don't know what the reference is, but it sounds like a pretty cool phrase to shout out if one were to cast a basic attack spell at someone who is EXTREMELY ANCIENT.

[Clark Peterson]

Tunnels and Trolls. Its the name of a spell.

[Vic Wertz]

Clark Peterson wrote:

Elizabeth Cougill wrote:

Rouge of the Vengeful Mistress

We had a couple makeup items. I happend to love the name of this one. I read that name and I know I am in trouble. I mean, really, can anything screw you over more than a vengeful mistress? Uh, the answer is NO! That is a great, great name.

Lemme check.

I cant find our comments on this. I remember this item, or at least the Calistria's kiss power part. But I seriously cannot find this post in the judges chambers.

Sorry :(

That's 'cause it was submitted as "Rouge of Venemous Vengeance," not "Rouge of the Vengeful Mistress." (The latter, in my opinion, is a much better name, and not just because "Venomous" is misspelled...)

[Mike Welham]

Clark Peterson wrote:

taig wrote:

Bring it on, Clark! I'm not afraid! (OK, maybe a little)

Amulet of Discord

Your wish is my command.... ;)

OK, you said you werent afraid so I am giving it to you.

I wrote:

"I just dont want fights like this. I dont like the ally-enemy swap. That is just un-fun. I'm sorry. Reject."

The others were equally unimpressed. In fact, this one was noted as one of the worst of the contest.

You asked for it :)

Normally I would have edited that. But those are some of the comments we make. That is why we dont just make our judges boards public. We dont want to bruise feelings.

Please remember, we are talking about ITEMS here not PEOPLE. We are not commenting on you as a person. Just your item and its relative merit in this contest. That's all. In fact, as you know, I am very impressed with everyone who enters. We are talking about sorting out items in a pretty elite group--those with the cajones to enter this contest. You did that. Your item just didnt make the cut. But we cant take away from you the fact that you entered which in and of itself is awesome. I hope you come back next year dedicated to knocking our socks off and saying "take that you fiend!" (bonus points if you get the reference)

Oof! I did ask for it. If I'd known it was going to be one of the worst in the contest, I would have defined a word too. :-)

I'm glad I made an impression, even if it was in the course of failing spectacularly.

I will be back next year. I'm not sure if that's a promise or a warning.

[Mike Welham]

I didn't say this earlier, but I do appreciate the candid feedback, and I appreciate the time you're taking out of your schedule to provide it.

[Gerald Andrews]

Clark, I was wondering if you'd give my re-post of the Spell-Catch Gauntlet a look and tell me what you think. Thanks!

[Keith Duperreault]

Clark Peterson wrote:

Elizabeth Cougill wrote:

Rouge of the Vengeful Mistress

Aura Moderate Conjuration CL 7th
Slot —; Price 4750gp; Weight —

I happend to love the name of this one. I read that name and I know I am in trouble. I mean, really, can anything screw you over more than a vengeful mistress?

A vengeful wife sir......definately a vengeful wife...

[Steven Helt]

Maybe Clark could wade through the first-time requests forst, and then much later, if he is inclined, he can ask us about edited versions. Otherwise, we risk cluttering the thread with redundant requests by the time he reaches page four.

Maybe we can do more reviewing and less asking, and give the man a little space. We're all curious, but none of us want to take advantage, yes?

[Steven Helt]

Keith Duperreault wrote:

Clark Peterson wrote:

Elizabeth Cougill wrote:

Rouge of the Vengeful Mistress

Aura Moderate Conjuration CL 7th
Slot —; Price 4750gp; Weight —

I happend to love the name of this one. I read that name and I know I am in trouble. I mean, really, can anything screw you over more than a vengeful mistress?

A vengeful wife sir......definately a vengeful wife...

No way. Commonly, the mistress can damage anything in your life including your marriage. Your wife is the marriage, so she can damage anything in your life, but only including your side-dish. So unless your side-dish is, say, Megan Fox....

[The Hell Fencer]

My item was WAY BACK on page 3... Still no feedback. I'm still waiting patiently for Clark, but until then, does anyone else want to remark on my item? I realize already that wizards owns the term Illithid (so unless you are Clark, please don't mention it). I mostly wish to see whether I have an interesting / usable item or not.

Thank you in advance!

CROWN OF THE ILLITHID
Aura strong enchantment; CL 10th
Slot Helmet; Price 190,000 gp; Weight 3 lb.

Description
This helm is the hollowed out, carved skull of an illithid. It is sized just large enough to fit a medium sized creature, though it must be fitted in each case. While wearing the skull one is able to use the following psionic powers at will: Charm Monster, Detect Thoughts, Levitate, Plane Shift and Suggestion. The save DCs are based on the character's charisma score. Because these powers come from preserving a portion of the illithid's mind, they come with a price. Any time a power is activated the character must make a DC 15 will save, with the DC increasing by two for every usage of a power. Failure means the helmet sends a passive Suggestion to the character telling them to commit an evil act. The save DCs reset to 15 after no powers have been used for eight hours. Additionally, when one of these powers are used, the character may choose to take 1d3 temporary Intelligence damage to increase his DC on a 1:1 basis.

Construction
Requirements Craft Wondrous Item, CL 13th; Cost 95,000 gp

[Dale McCoy Jr]

I'll take a stab...

>>CROWN OF THE ILLITHID
Nice title (despire having the forementioned problem).

>>"CL 10th" at the top vs "CL 13th" at the bottom.
Confusing. Simple error but enough to earn it a reject.

>>Requirements Craft Wondrous Item, CL 13th
No spells listed would get it rejected. CL at the bottom isn't the proper format; not something that would help.

>>This helm is the hollowed out, carved skull of an illithid.
Very nice visual. Brownie points earned.

>>It is sized just large enough to fit a medium sized creature, though it must be fitted in each case.
Magic items always resize to fit the user.

>>While wearing the skull one is able to use the following psionic powers at will: Charm Monster, Detect Thoughts, Levitate, Plane Shift and Suggestion.
Hmmm, Psionics are not "Wonderous Items". Cool, thematic, but not arcane/divine.

>>Because these powers come from preserving a portion of the illithid's mind, they come with a price. Any time a power is activated the character must make a DC 15 will save, with the DC increasing by two for every usage of a power. Failure means the helmet sends a passive Suggestion to the character telling them to commit an evil act. The save DCs reset to 15 after no powers have been used for eight hours. Additionally, when one of these powers are used, the character may choose to take 1d3 temporary Intelligence damage to increase his DC on a 1:1 basis.
Ouch. This isn't a wonderous item, its an intelligent item or artifact.

Final thoughts: This is a cool item. But suffers some major problems that are more technical in nature than your actual idea. The core concept of this would be great for an artifact, but it would require notable changes to be a magic item.

[Neil Spicer]

digression wrote:

...I'm still waiting patiently for Clark, but until then, does anyone else want to remark on my item?

I'll try to lend a hand, as well. And, like everytime I offer feedback on something, let me start out with the statement that I'm a very analytical/critical kind of person. So I can go overboard sometimes in the bits and pieces that I nitpick over. Please understand, that's my own character flaw...and not a reflection on you. Anything I have to say about your item is meant as constructive feedback.

digression wrote:

CROWN OF THE ILLITHID

I know you don't want anyone other than Clark pointing it out, but I feel like I have to say something here. Clearly, including WotC's intellectual property in your item name, would have been a killer right away. I doubt the judges even bothered to read the rest of your item, because of that. Aside from that, however, the illithid has always been a really cool creature. So it's somewhat understandable you (and others) might want to craft an item with a connection to the mind flayer.

digression wrote:

Aura strong enchantment; CL 10th

Slot Helmet; Price 190,000 gp; Weight 3 lb.

It seems a little odd to me that the primary (and only?) aura for this item is "enchantment." Granted, you've given it access to charm monster and suggestion, but you've also got more powerful spell effects woven in there like plane shift...which isn't part of the enchantment school. Same goes for detect thoughts and levitate. So, at the very least, I would expect this item to have more auras going for it than just enchantment.

After that, the price is really high. I haven't crunched the numbers, but it makes sense it would be a really expensive item given that it can do so many spell effects at-will. The user probably won't risk overusing it, though, because of the escalating Will save backlash that's necessary. But still, seems like an overpowered item bordering on minor artifact status than a wondrous magic item because of that.

digression wrote:

Description

This helm is the hollowed out, carved skull of an illithid. It is sized just large enough to fit a medium sized creature, though it must be fitted in each case.

This seemed a little odd to me as I read it. First, I don't imagine a mind flayer's skull is all that much larger than any other Medium-sized creature. So, the notion that you can hollow one out and then put it over a Medium-sized creature's head like a helmet kind of stretches the realm of credibility for me as a reader. The concept of a skull-as-helmet isn't inherently bad. I'm just saying this particular skull seems more fitting as a helmet for a Small creature instead.

digression wrote:

While wearing the skull one is able to use the following psionic powers at will: Charm Monster, Detect Thoughts, Levitate, Plane Shift and Suggestion.

The first thing that jumps out here is that you needed to italicize and lowercase the spell names...even if they are referencing psionic powers, instead.

Secondly, I looked, but I can't find psionic versions of all the spell effects you listed for this device. I don't suppose it's necessary, as you can just have all of them work like the spells, themselves. But, if there's any variance between spell vs. psionic power, that could be important. I don't use psionics a lot, so I'm not as familiar with them. I do recall that psionics requires a pool of points that you spend to activate them. Yet, this device ignores that mechanic and simply makes them at-will, it seems. I'm not sure that's a good design choice.

Thirdly, given how much psionic blast is such an iconic mind flayer ability, I'm somewhat surprised this item fails to duplicate that power as one of its effects.

And lastly, wow...that's a lot of powerful at-will effects to give in a single item. It makes it a spell-in-a-can as well as a swiss-army knife. Neither are good things when it comes to wondrous item design. I realize you've tried to rein in some of the abuse such an item could create in a game, but I think the mechanics for dealing with that are too involved. See below...

digression wrote:

Any time a power is activated the character must make a DC 15 will save, with the DC increasing by two for every usage of a power.

This mechanic feels too wonky to me. You'll wind up forcing the DM or the player whose PC uses this device to engage in bookkeeping on how often he's used it just to determine the DC necessary to avoid its nasty after-effect.

digression wrote:

Failure means the helmet sends a passive Suggestion to the character telling them to commit an evil act.

This is far too open-ended. What exactly is the definition of "an evil act?" What's evil "enough" to qualify? Can a PC satisfy this requirement by simply stealing something from his allies...or is he required to murder one of them in their sleep? Without clarification, the mechanic for using this item is further broken, in my opinion.

digression wrote:

The save DCs reset to 15 after no powers have been used for eight hours. Additionally, when one of these powers are used, the character may choose to take 1d3 temporary Intelligence damage to increase his DC on a 1:1 basis.

These mechanics further complicate things. As such, it makes the item a nightmare to adjudicate in a game. So I think it's a poor design choice to weave these elements into it. A lot of players would sell the item just so they can avoid the hassle of trying to keep up with it.

digression wrote:

Construction

Requirements Craft Wondrous Item, CL 13th; Cost 95,000 gp

You seem to have listed a different caster level in the construction requirements than what you listed at the beginning. Is it CL 13th or CL 10th? Also, it might be more interesting to include some kind of psionic power as a construction requirement on top of everything else. But you definitely need to list something along the lines of the spells necessary to built it.

In summary, I can recognize what you're trying to build in this item. It grants great abilities, but at the risk of the psionic "residue" remaining in the illithid's skull influencing the owner if he overuses it. I think you've got a lot of technical errors in following the correct format (i.e., lowercase spelling of spell effects, italicize spell effects, construction requirements, etc.). The mechanics are also very shaky from a design standpoint, leaving too many things undefined. And, of course, the item depends on a creature that's off-limits to describe its backstory. So it falls down in three key areas for me.

But that's just my two-cents,
--Neil

[Theodoric The Red]

Clark Peterson wrote:

Theodoric The Red wrote:

GARRECH'S PLANAR ABRAXAS

Aura - strong abjuration; CL - 15th
Slot - neck; Price - 135,000 gp; Weight - N/A

DESCRIPTION

This abraxas is a disk of cold iron...

Oh you were close. I dont know if you were top 62 but you were at least briefly in the kept folder.

Sean and Wolf both thought this was a bit narrow in focus. I wrote:

"That is actually a really cool item, in my view. However, it sure does goof up some higher level encounters and DM plot devices. :) I'm inclined to keep. Though I agree with Sean about dimensional lock being a more primary power than is detailed. I also think the intro part is over-written."

You got close. You're on the right track. You caught our attention, and that means you are doing something right!!!

Thank you very much for the feedback and the compliments. I have a couple of other ideas for next year's competition that I almost posted to the "Also-Ran" topic...but I don't want 'em stolen. ;)

Again, this is a great contest, if for no other reason that it has rekindled my DM spark.

Thanks again!

[Steven Helt]

Tao wrote:

Myrrh Egg of Ashes

This item is a brilliant little artifact. But it's broken, undercosted, and its construction requirements are too soft.With Pathfinder not costing me eeps to make it, why not make one for all my friends?

Which would lead to abandoning my class at some point, when I'm high enough level, and taking two hit dice for every level instead.

Is that the kind of person you want to get ahold of your egg?

As I said, it is an imaginative item that makes use of a well-known staple of the fantasy game. But it is simply too poerful, too cheap, and has no down side.

But make it an artifact, with some sort of inherent, world0breaking drawback, and you could make a whole campaign out of it. It's really up there with the Rod of Seven Parts and the Head of Vecna.

Good job! Bad job! : ]

[Steven Helt]

chopswil wrote:

CAULDRON OF BLOOD

A few observations:

1: It is bad design to attract or control 'CR' of undead instead of 'HD' of undead. A full cauldron would control more zombies than could stand in its area of effect. Don't check my math on that - it's rhetorical.
2: a quarter mile radius? And it doesn't require an epic spell to function? Also..can a zombie make it to the cauldron in 80 rounds?
3: Your mechanical writing needs tweaked. Instead of your sentence being "CR 8+ undead get a Will save...", look at how published magic items express that kind of information. "Undead with eight or more hit dice may resist the effect with a DC 15 Will save."
4: Don't offer variable Will saves based on a creature's CR. The higher CR. the higher its stats or HD. Will saves are strong for undead. Let the system make those decisions for the DM instead of making his job harder. Choose the kind of undead you want to attract and set your DC accordingly. Sometimes a weaker one gets away, sometimes a stronger one gets snagged.
5: This is a great (meaning broken) trap for undead hunters. Go to the vampire crypt and summon the whole lot of them with a full cauldron, and slaughter them while they stand there. What happens if it's fired up at high noon? Shadows, wraiths, spectres and vampires just roll up and die? I know you state if attacked the effect is broken, but one free round on a half-mile circle of undead is a pretty good head start. A firestorm[/] and a [i]mass heal later, and you've rescued the entire countryside. Don't clap - just throw gold.
6: A 9th level spell and a 2nd level spell as fuel for your item is kind of incongruous. Like the requirements are off-balance. Also, your choice of spells lacks careful thought. Undead are immune to hypnotize, and summon monster spells don't summon undead. Control undead makes a lot more sense to me.

I had more, but my 2-year-old demands attention. In summary, your imagination is in the right place, but your knowledge of mechanics (or willingness to check yourself) is not yet. Good luck working through that and coming back later with a new item and good mechanics.

[Steven Helt]

Jason Beardsley wrote:

Orb of Acquiescence

my thoughts:

1: It would be neat if the Paizo rules extended to other skills as requirements to make magic items, but that might also be a big mess. For now, only Craft and Perform skills are included in Construction costs. When neither type of skill suffices, a Spellcraft skill is used instead. Finally, magic items require skill checks, and not ranks in a skill. The sorcerer who casts the required spells doesn't have to have those skills to availa herself of that magic. Why does she need a specific number of ranks in the skill?
2: Backstory is not compeeling, and therefore wastes word count. If I have to wait to hear about how the item was used to control Margaritaville before I get to read the item, that sentence needs to really evoke some excitement. Otherwise, any despot could make it, so let's not single one out.
3: Costing is a bit low for everyone you meet deciding they like you. You could get elected president with nothing more than this little orb. You could never be judged against during a trial. Granted, the thing is beaten with an easy Will save, but...see below.
4: The item uses a 5th level spell, so its Will DC should be 17. Items that don't cast spells (like wands or staves) don't often have a different save DC for every ability associated with them.
5: You might note that if the item has different save DCs and essentially just drops spel effects for you, it's a spell-in-a-can and not really challenging design.
6: How does one activate the ability to use dominate person? If I want to dominate a judge at my trial, do I have to shout out a command word in front of those assembled?
7: No italics for your spell descriptions. They should be italicized but not capitalized.

[The_Minstrel_Wyrm]

DMcCoy1693 wrote:

Mind if I take an attempt?

>>Figurine of Wondrous Power, Iron Tiger
First off, the name doesn't grab me. I'd consider a name of a magic item found in the DMG, not something cool that just smacks of awesome right from the get go.

>>(MM 281-282), (MM 65), ...PH 278),
No need for the page numbers, esp when this is suppose to be based on Pathfinder and not the Players Handbook.

>>This rough chunk of iron ore has a distinct outline of a tiger, crouched as if poised to pounce.
Good visual, gives a quality mental picture. And you kept it to a single sentence. Kudos.

>>When animated, an iron tiger becomes a normal adult male tiger (MM 281-282) under the command of its possessor.
Reaction 1) How do you animate it (command word, pushing a button, etc)? Reaction 2) Monster-in-a-box. How is this different?

>>A separate command word enables the possessor to call upon a dire tiger instead (MM 65) however, after three transformations into dire tiger form, the figurine loses all its magical properties.
Ok, so command word, but ... this simply encouraging the Monster-in-a-Box idea.

>>In addition, once per day, the iron tiger (in either form) may emit a roar (as per the shout spell, CL 11th PH 278).
Hmm, cool idea, thematic. I like this part. Only down side is that the CL should not be listed here since it is listed above.

>>Although it behaves as a living creature, the iron tiger retains its iron-like consistency which grants it hardness 10. (This renders it vulnerable to rust monster attacks, as well as spell effects like rusting grasp.)
This basickly reads like a template to be applied. Sorry, but it only serves to reinforce the MitB idea.

Final Analysis: This is a good basis for a wonderous item, but it needs work. Remember, superstar doesn't just mean how cool your idea is but also about your presentation. Give this baby a spit polish and it'll be a thing of beauty.

DMcCoy thanks for the comments. It more or less confirmed my general suspicions, I am glad you liked the one sentence description and the "roar/shout" ability (I was going for thematic with that.) It's also ironic that you mentioned "template" because after I had submitted I was reading Advanced Bestiary and saw the "Metal-Clad" template and wondered if I should have used that idea instead. Ultimately I'm not sure it would have mattered. Now... regarding your "suggestion" about giving it a "spit polish" and it'll be a thing of beauty... what should I have done differently? Not mentioned the various book/page references? Called it something other than a "Figurine of Wondrous Power"? I'm not entirely sure what I could have done differently (besides maybe referencing PFRPG instead of PH, but I'd have had to refer to MM, as the PFRPG Bestiary isn't out yet.)

Anyway... thanks for taking the time. It was helpful, somewhat.
Regards,
Dean the Minstrel_Wyrm

[The_Minstrel_Wyrm]

Steven T. Helt wrote:

The_Minstrel_Wyrm wrote:

Figurine of Wondrous Power, Iron Tiger

I agree with everything above, but I wanted to add that it doesn't really challenge you to come up with yet another animal for a figurine of wondrous power. It is just not an item I think can create excitement for Superstar judges. Pick an item not yet used, and think o the animal for a few seconds. You're already halfway to creating your magic item and you haven't had to be creative yet.

Next year, I would try to come up wth something new, that breaks the rules in a fun way. Don't spend time on something you know your whole gaming table can develop.

Thanks Steven.

While I agree it isn't "hard" to come up with additional figurines, I did like what I had come up with, and felt it was good. (I know you aren't saying it wasn't good... and neither was DMcCoy) and you'll be (happy) to know, should there be a RPG Superstar 2010, I have (what I hope to be) a much better idea (I actually have 4 ideas in the works.) I'm following the contest much closer this year than last year. And I hope to learn a lot from it, and be that much better next year. (I have what I feel is an awesome villain, and something not over-used, and hope that I can pass the Wondrous Item open-call next year (if that's how they do it next time) so that I can present my villain.
Thanks again for your thoughts.
Dean; the Minstrel_Wyrm

[terraleon]

Steven T. Helt wrote:

terraleon wrote:

Eibom’s Ineffable Headstone

The idea of chaining yourself to a headstone to channel its grave properties is evocative, but your item leaves me with a couple of unanswered questions that muchkin players will definitely ask.

1. What happens to controlled undead if the manacles are damaged or severed, but still worn? (meaning the manacles are intact but the connection to the stone is broken)

Well, if its damaged, its still worn, so the control is maintained. I would say that sundering the chain would allow the wearer to maintain control, but would prevent the headstone from being further activated.

Steven T. Helt wrote:

2. Can the stone be uprooted or carried so long as it touches earth? Use of telekinesis, floating disk, or levitation makes this a pretty potent item.

Your question is unclear to me. You cannot activate the headstone until it is affixed into the ground. Of course you can uproot it or carry it. It would be pretty useless if it could only be planted in a single place forever. If you want to activate it, the headstone had better be planted in the ground. If you just want to command undead you've gained control over? Keep that manacle on.

Steven T. Helt wrote:

Also, the item suffers from mediocre presentation. Most items wouldn't say it can be activated four times per day: and then list its abilities. Check out other items for how they present that same kind of limitation. Also, most items woudn't say "Undead within a Desecrate automatically fail." They might instead say "The headstone allows no Will save to undead if planted within the area of a desecrate spell. Also - what about undead who start outside the area of the desecrate spell and enter it when summoned to the stone?

*sigh* Yes, there is less delicious flavor text than I would like, but I also didn't want to color the item as completely evil. This is an item that says, "How badly do you want power? How important is it to you to control the undead or channel negative energy? Is it worth your life? Is it worth part of your life?"

And they might have worded the weakness of being in a desecrate differently, but then they probably have more wiggle room on their wordcount. If anything, the choice of "summoned" was worse, as that might imply some sort of instantaneous transportation to the bearer of the headstone-- which I did not intend.

Undead who start outside a desecrateand enter it (within 30 feet of the caster?) when summoned would automatically fail. They are, after all, undead and within the desecrate.

As far as presentation goes, given wordcount and examples like the various staves, I felt it was efficient. It doesn't say that it can be used four times a day. It says it has four charges. That's a very different mechanic, considering the hit point-to-charge option and the different charge requirements of the two main powers.

Steven T. Helt wrote:

In general, giving someone a class feature is a poor idea. Let them take ten levels of cleric to get this power - the cleric had to, after all. And if you think there should be an exception that loans out the undead turning ability...that's already in the SRD.

The undead commanding power of armor in the beta boosts the control, so there's some precedent for increasing the number and the phylactery of negative channeling increases the damage from a character that already has channeling. That's where I started looking for some baseline items, since I was covering new ground. Now I could have tried giving a blank mechanic that just targeted undead, but this wasn't the place to create a new mechanic. I used the existing mechanic because creating a new mechanic gets you rejected here.

I also made it so that everytime you see someone leading or controlling a group of undead you cannot automagically assume that person is an evil cleric. I've just expanded your story options. That's a good thing. This is a very limited loan, and one with a high cost. It's breaking a rule, but it's not a poor idea. If you want to be superstar, you find rules that can be accented in a new way, you find a niche that hasn't been well explored, or you break rules just a little bit in an interesting way. Otherwise you're just another entry in a book of magic items.

Steven T. Helt wrote:

Increasing the DC of any ability by three four times per day is incredibly powerful. Suppose I surround myself with a platoon of wights, and then use the stone to cast mass inflict serious wounds when my mini-army gets into combat. All of us heal a minimum 3d8+13 points, and the DC for my enemies is in the neighborhood of 26-30. I've just dealt as much as 481 points of damage! At minimum caster level!

*sigh*

The fact that this is listed as "part of activated power" should make it clear that you are only able to boost the DC of the listed powers of the headstone. I'm spot on for 200 words, so while adding "headstone's" in there would have been nice, and I probably should have done that, I didn't think it necessary at the time.

Now does that mean you could create the same scenario and just channel negative energy and boost the DC to 21, possibly higher if you'd like to burn your own hit points? Yes, but you can't use the headstone to boost spellcasting DCs, I'm not sure where you got that. And summing the damage from a mass spell is disingenuous. You're not doing that damage to anyone, you're doing 5d6 (average of 17.5) points of negative energy damage to any target within 30 feet. Again, how badly do you want to have the power?

Steven T. Helt wrote:

Scratch that. I love this item, and when I swing it at my players, I'm going to give them your name and address.

So, you see this also impacts cost, which is not enough. And if I determine to break it open like that in...

Except that it's actually close to the combination of the undead control armor ability (49K) and the channeling item in the beta(11K). I've given it a slight bump for channeler level and balanced that against the charge effect and the hit point cost option with the requirement that it must be worn to keep control. That should be fun, sleeping with a headstone.

This item fills a gap-- it allows for villains to be in charge of undead who are not necromancers or evil priests, and thereby sidestep the trope. It also allows necromancers and priests to increase the size of their undead retinue at a cost of being forever tied to the headstone, and thereby giving them an interesting weakness. It also drives stories by asking players how badly they want power; are they willing to burn themselves for it?

All three of those things expand and improve your story options, and as a designer, that's a win for me.

While I appreciate the commentary, the snark is unnecessary; you could have given me this entire critique without it and it wouldn't have colored your response.

-Ben.

[Dale McCoy Jr]

The_Minstrel_Wyrm wrote:

DMcCoy thanks for the comments.

No problem. Glad I could help.

The_Minstrel_Wyrm wrote:

what should I have done differently?

IMO, there are 3 things that really held you back.

1) Page numbers (don't even include them)
2) Title. Superstar title means you should have a geek-gasm just from that alone. Take a look at some of this years winners: Helm of the Golem Master, Horn of the Dark Hunt, Hurricane Gloves, Spider Hook. These evoke a raw emotion from their names alone. A "figurine of wonderous power" makes me think of a hummel figure.
3) Monster-in-a-Box. You never really answered the question as to how this is different than a wand of summon monster. I mean its got the shout ability, but that, I feel, isn't enough to really make a major difference. Remember, a wonderous item is the one kind of magic item that has almost no rules. Ask yourself, "how can I bend a spell to do something never seen before?" You've got a good basis, I just think you need to keep bending.

Lastly, the only book you were suppose to use was the Pathfinder Beta, so mentioning the Advanced Bestary would also have also gotten you rejected.

[Steven Helt]

terraleon wrote:

didn't accept a single criticism of Eibom’s Ineffable Headstone

The 'snark', as you call it, is because I am funny and don't want to shell your magic item without a little personality. Isn't that better than 'this is not good, this was a bad idea, this is wrong'?

As this is not my first rodeo, I am well aware of where it looks like you're going with the item. That is not the same as submitting an item with clear rules, tight design, and good mechanics. If your audience can't read your mind, that's not their fault. You have answers to several of my questions, but the point was, your design leaves questions unanswered. If you can't make your item work in 200 words, submit a different item. Save the lengthy one for your very own book of magic items.

Note your 'delicious flavor text' response does not address the criticism of how the desecrate sentence is presented. That sentence is purely about the mechanics of the item. If you submit an awkward sentence that doesn't match the way all other magic items in a book are presented, your sentence requires editing, and word count isn't much of an excuse. I could present an item thusly:

Bill's Bag of Sticks

It's an ugly bag full of sticks. The owner can pull a stick out of the bag and throw it to the ground to duplicate numerous spell effects related to sticks. Each ability from the bag can only be used once per week. These abilities include entangle, wood shape, tree stride, and shillalegh.

If I am under word count, but I leave behind unanswered questions about my item, I can't just sigh and explain it in an email. Certainly not in a contest called 'RPG Superstar'.

Concering other design flaws, you got my input because I'm trying to help you get to a better level of design. If you want to ignore Clark's List of Likely Design No-Nos That Lots of Other People Agree With, and give a class feature to any villain on the bases that (a)other items already exist in the game, so mine duplicates those, and (b) it lets villains that don't focus on undead have power over undead, because it's really hard to get undead into role-playing games...

Well...it was you're entry, and there must be some other reason your item didn't advance. Don't bother learning from it, just sigh and maybe someone else who has played this game for 25 years will get it and not waste your time.

Clark is AWESOME about reminding folks he's critiqued a magic item, and not an entrant. But my feeling is that when a person rattles off poor design and then doesn't accept feedback graciously, the problem really is them, because they don't want to learn or grow. With a response to criticism like yours, how would you have fared in this upcoming round, which is clearly about growth and responding to your villain getting shelled.

If you can't handle feedback, don't ask for it. Instead of getting a thank you and hoping I helped you understand design and presentation a little better, now I've wasted my time twice, when I could be offering advice on one of the 200 items people are still waiting to hear back on.

[Steven Helt]

MakeItADouble wrote:

Mantle of Subterfuge

Aura moderate conjuration; CL 7
Slot shoulders; Price 30,240gp; Weight 1lb.
The outer shell of this cloak may consist of any suitable material although most often it is found to be a subtle dark cloth. The interior of the mantle is always lined with black silk with no inside pockets. Once the properties of the cloak are known it offers upon command a special magical endowment. As a free action the cloak grants the wearer the ability to open a one foot diameter dimension door on the cloaks interior portion. The destination dimension door opens wherever the character desires within a 100 foot range of the wearer. The doorway remains open for one minute or until it is utilized. It takes one move action to manipulate an appendage through the door. Once through a character can complete one standard action before the door winks out withdrawing the characters appendage back through the door. In order to bring back an object the character must be able to lift it and it must fit through the opening. This power can be utilized twice per day.
Construction requirements; Craft wondrous item, dimension door; Cost 15,120gp

obkb:

1: A simple description of the normal cloak will suffice. If it is important to a DM or player to describe the cloak to fit their style, they'll change it for you. This is why excessive flavor or descriptive text is discouraged. One character's slinky black silk is another character's garish yellow corduroy. Get to the meat of the item and let your audience decide how they'd like to wear it.
2: It shouldn't require a command word if it's a free action.
3: This is one of those cool items that makes the wearer use his imagination and come up with crafty uses, like an immovable rod. But it leaves a lot of area open to questions. How big is the door inside the cloak? How big an object can I pull through? Can someone grab my 'appendage' (why would you use that word?) and pull me through the hole, trapping me in both places? Can a bag of holding be passed through the cloak?
4: You know this already, but italicize the spell names, and capitalize allthe words in Craft Wondrous Item.

I like the item. I think it might be a wee bit expensive, but it makes for a great low-level charlatan's tool. Just answer those questions, and I think you have a big improvement, maybe even book-worthy.

[Steven Helt]

CouncilofFools wrote:

Devotion of Fire and Ice

Aura moderate abjuration, conjuration and transmutation; CL 11th

Slot headband (ears) Price 68,200 gp; Weight; -

Description

This pair of mismatched earrings (one diamond and one ruby) holds two small elementals within each (water and fire). When donned, the wearer is under a continual endure elements spell. Once per day, the wearer may transmute into either a small fire or water elemental for 11 minutes. Twice per day, the wearer may benefit from a resist energy (cold or fire) cast at 11th level. And once per week, wearer can activate the earrings to Plane Shift to either the Elemental Plane of Fire or Water.

These earrings were the work of an old elementalist as a last gift to the small fire elemental that had served him in creating many numerous items over the years. The elemental and a water elemental that had been creating frost pictures on the window directly across from it for decades had fallen in love. They dance their game of love within the crystalline structures of the earrings.

Construction

Requirements Craft Wondrous Item, endure elements, resist elements, plane shift; Cost 34,100 gp

hmmm...

The name is unique, but the name only gets value from the backstory, which shouldn't really be lined out in this description. I would be more excited to see this story as part of a brief sidebar in an adventure text, rather than in a compendium of magic items.

Why are there 2 elementals in each earring?

This might just be personal taste, but I don't see elementals determined to spend eternity locked away in an item, by the way. I also don't see locking an elemental away into a magic item as much of a thank you for all those years of service. Finally, you don't see many items powered by elementals or other spirits being locked away. Other games might take that rout, and your home campaign might enjoy that, but I prefer the magic to come from the caster and not from something that might want to be freed. It implies an intelligence in the item, instead of it just working. Again, maybe just a personal view of how magic should work, but I bet it's a fairly common personal view.

This is a classic spell in a can, and a swiss army knife. Not only does it use readily available low-level spells to protect you from heat and cold, it also let's you travel to two inhospitable planes (how do you keep from being killed when your plane shift lands you 150 miles outside the Sargasso Doldrums in the EP of Water?), and let's you turn into an elemental for 11 minutes.

I don't get why the CL is 11. I see 9, as you generally use the lowest level of the spell available. If a wizard made it, it would be 13. Why 11?

I would drop the CL to 9, lower the cost accordingly, and work the formula to lower the cost even more. Then I'd double the cost and not take up a slot. An earring using a helmet slot seems awkward to me.

With a few corrections, I think it's a fair item to throw out as treasure in an adventure. Not really wow, and not superstar. But good luck in your development!

[Dale McCoy Jr]

I haven't seen anyone do this one yet.

Darrien wrote:

RAGE FETISH

Initial reaction: I like this. This may have made it far, but I notice several technical issues that would have kept it out of the top 32. They're all nitpicky, but they made me scratch my head enough. Also, in the inital description, you use BBCode well, it helped you stand out. Me likey (note to self: do that next year).

>>CL 8th and bear’s endurance, bull’s strength

Why 8th? These are both 2nd level spells. You could have gotten away with this as a 3rd CL item for much less?

>>This grotesque necklace most often appears to be a shrunken goblin head attached to a simple cord of leather. Other types of heads are found, as the type of head must have significance to the item creator.

Description takes 2 sentences. This should have been editted down to 1. But that's just my own thing. Plus, you have the weight as 3 lbs. That's ok when its a goblin head, but what if someone made it out of a giant's head?

>>As a standard action, the rage fetish begins howling, filling the wearer with bloodlust. The character gains a +4 bonus to his Strength and Constitution scores for 10 rounds or until the character ends the rage, a free action.

Why didn't you use the rage spell instead? It would have given more.

>>If the wearer has the rage class feature, activating the item, a standard action, allows the character to instead access the necklace’s rage. The character enters rage (see Barbarian class description) and may use any rage power that he possesses at their usual cost. The rage fetish is treated as storage device with 10 rage points, if all the points are consumed, the rage ends.

If it has a rage pool, why isn't a rage pool required for construction?

>>creator must hold deep animosity toward creature type used

This really sounds more like it reflects the Favored Enemy class ability than the Rage class ability. Additional question: does this work against the one type of creature it is made out of? If the creator must genuinely hate a certain type of creature, it should stand to logic that it only works when facing a certain enemy type.

Final Reaction: I like where you're going with this item, but it needs to be tighter and have various question answered in order for this to be superstar quality.

[Steven Helt]

I agree with McCoy. But I am excited at the possibility of a set of items that use the new mechanics,and are intended for use by combined class characters.

I'm a big fan of the newer 3.5 feats that blend your multiclassing (Devoted Hunter, for example), so magic items that serve the same kind of character make me very happy.

I also like the idea of more cooperative magic item construction. Having a druid help a ranger/barbarian blend his abilities into an item sounds like fun and evokes great images.

Nice concept, with a number of details to work through.

[terraleon]

Steven T. Helt wrote:

terraleon wrote:

didn't accept a single criticism of Eibom’s Ineffable Headstone

The 'snark', as you call it, is because I am funny and don't want to shell your magic item without a little personality. Isn't that better than 'this is not good, this was a bad idea, this is wrong'?

Text does a poor job of conveying inflection. Your humor came across as snark. I've found that given a choice of clarity and humor, it's better to err on the side of clarity.

Steven T. Helt wrote:

Instead of getting a thank you and hoping I helped you understand design and presentation a little better, now I've wasted my time twice, when I could be offering advice on one of the 200 items people are still waiting to hear back on.

I did say that the commentary was appreciated. I tried to address your concerns with what I thought was apparent within the text. It's unfortunate that you perceived it otherwise.

-Ben.

[Charles Evans 25]

terraleon wrote:

...Eibom’s Ineffable Headstone

Aura moderate necromancy [evil]; CL 10th
Slot hands; Price 65,000 gp; Weight 30 lbs.
Description

A black chain adorned with a heavy manacle pierces the crown of this weathered slate headstone, engraved only with a hand pointing at a star.

Clasping the manacle about the wrist reveals the Headstone’s powers. Its four charges renew each sunset. Once affixed into the ground (a full-round action), the Headstone may be activated:

1) Attract undead within 500 feet to the Headstone, DC 15 Will save. (2 charges)
2) Channel Negative energy as a 10th level cleric. Undead make a DC 15 Will save or fall under the bearer’s command. Undead within a Desecrate automatically fail. (1 charge)
3) Increase another power’s DC by three. (1 charge, part of activated power)

While manacled, the bearer is considered a 10th Level cleric for commanding undead and may command up to 30 Hit Dice. Removing the manacle frees controlled undead.

The bearer may activate powers when no charges remain by suffering 10% of his maximum hit points in damage per charge. This damage cannot heal magically, only through rest.

Construction

Requirements Craft Wondrous Item, 10th level cleric, enthrall, animate undead; Cost 32,500 gp....

To add to comments which other posters have made on this item, given that the item is slate but only weighs '30 lb', is this a headstone for someone's favourite hunting dog? It seems much too light to me to be of any size. (*Link with information regarding size and weight of marble/granite headstones; slate may well be denser*)

Fixing a headstone into the ground as a full round action without any sort of magical assistance (move earth as an additional construction requirement?) also seems unlikely to me.
The headstone can only be activated, 'if planted in the ground', but if I have it planted in the ground and activated, can I then have my giant or dragon friend lift it and me up and carry us around without it switching off? What happens if I plant it 'in the ground' and then conjure/summon some sort of earth elemental or ooze creature to carry it around with it planted in it?
(edited)
Does 'ground' mean literal earth (or sand)? What if I'm standing on a glacier or ice-cap and actual earth is buried beneath ice dozens of feet beneath my boots, or a mile or two down on the sea floor?

There seems to me to be the basis of an interesting idea here, but it needs a lot more work.

[Freehold DM]

Daigle wrote:

Well, hell, as long as we're asking for peer review...if anyone wants to climb back to page two or three and let me know what they think about my item, rear back and let it fly.

I'm pretty sure of the reasons, but hearing them again couldn't hurt.

What he said. Except my item is different, and it's further back.

[Steven Helt]

terraleon wrote:

I did say that the commentary was appreciated. I tried to address your concerns with what I thought was apparent within the text. It's unfortunate that you perceived it otherwise.

Well, my bad. I'm not bothered, I just hope you took the advice contructively and get my point. Certainly there have been worse magic items and worse responses to feedback. Good luck next time.

[Dale McCoy Jr]

Saw a call for a peer review but didn't see anyone else take a stab. Here goes. Link to the original item

Montalve wrote:

MUSIC BOX OF LANDSCAPES

Mmmm, Omnious, Mysterous. Intriguing. My ears are peaked.

Ok, There are 2 issues I can see:
1)in the window that I am typing this reply, your description of what it looks like takes 7-1/2 lines while the mechanics take up 7 lines. While flavor is important, mechanics take presidence. I recommend no more than 1 sentence, but that's just me. For something like this, more is fine, but you still should have considerably more mechanics than fluff.

2)The effect of the thing is very cool, but when you're talking something as big as shifting planes (esp at random), that to me screams plot device. And plot device to me screams artifact, not magic item. Sorry. I can see an entire campaign built around this (something in the vein of Sliders) but I can't see this being part of a random treasure table.

Final thoughts: I loved this item. Alot. But I do not feel that it matches up with what the contest was looking for.

[Mystendanian]

CIRCLET OF ARCANE ANCESTRY
Aura strong necromancy; CL 17th
Slot head; Price varies; Weight –

Description:

This tarnished silver headband is set with a single black sapphire. When the command word is spoken within 10 feet of a sorcerer slain within the last 3 rounds, the essence of the sorcerer’s bloodline is transferred into the gem. Once worn for 24 hours, all of the slain sorcerer’s bloodline powers (up to the capacity of the item) are made available to the wearer. Speaking the command word again or destroying the item releases the essence.

A sorcerer returned to life after having their essence stolen will be without their bloodline powers until their essence is freed. Most spellcasters and creatures with spell-like abilities abhor these items and seek to destroy them at the earliest opportunity (which usually means killing the owner first).

The gp value of the black sapphire used to construct the item determines the level of bloodline power it can contain:

Capacity GP Value
1st........1000
3rd........3000
9th........9000
15th.......15000
20th.......20000

Construction:
Requirements Craft Wondrous Item; soul bind, black sapphire; Cost 5,000 gp (1st), 10,000 gp (3rd), 20,000 gp (9th), 40,000 gp (15th), 80,000 gp (20th)

[Dale McCoy Jr]

This one is interesting....

Mystendanian wrote:

CIRCLET OF ARCANE ANCESTRY

I'm not wild about the name, but it is good nonetheless. I wouldn't call it a hinderance.

>>Price varies
Cost of purchasing should be listed here. It was never actually listed. Incorrect format would probably have gotten you an instant reject.

>>This tarnished silver headband is set with a single black sapphire.
Good single sentence description.

>>When the command word is spoken within 10 feet of a sorcerer slain within the last 3 rounds, the essence of the sorcerer’s bloodline is transferred into the gem.
Just curious, but why isn't this in the construction requirements? This would seem to me as being an essential part of the item having use. If I am reading this correctly, you do not trap the whole soul, simply part of it? That seems ... odd.

>>Once worn for 24 hours, all of the slain sorcerer’s bloodline powers (up to the capacity of the item) are made available to the wearer.
Nice twist on the base spell. I like. I'd cut the "once worn for 24 hours" part, but that's just me.

>>Speaking the command word again or destroying the item releases the essence. ... A sorcerer returned to life after having their essence stolen will be without their bloodline powers until their essence is freed.
Why is this necessary? Also it raises unanswered questions: Do you have to speak the command word in order to use the headband's power? If so, then does this grant you a single use per sorcerer slain? Can you have more than 1 soul trapped in the headband at any one point in time?

>>Most spellcasters and creatures with spell-like abilities abhor these items and seek to destroy them at the earliest opportunity (which usually means killing the owner first).
This is where the item started to lose me. This is plothook which really do not have a place in magic items.

>>The gp value of the black sapphire used to construct the item determines the level of bloodline power it can contain:

Capacity GP Value
1st........1000
3rd........3000
9th........9000
15th.......15000
20th.......20000

Even if this item was perfect up until this point, this would have earned it an instant reject. 3 reasons. 1) Why would someone use an item that requires a 17th level spell on a 1st or 3rd level character? 2) This should simply be factored in as part of the construction cost and not be spelled out here. And 3) This works great for single classed sorcerers, but what about multi-classed sorcerers? If you have a character that is Fighter 17/Sorcerer 1, you trapped the soul of an 18th level character with a 1000gp gem. Broken mechanic, sorry.

>>Cost 5,000 gp (1st), 10,000 gp (3rd), 20,000 gp (9th), 40,000 gp (15th), 80,000 gp (20th)
By my computation, these costs are for "single use" items. Unfortunately, that is not how the item is written. I read it as one use per spellcaster soul trapped in the headband. Item cost is undervalued.

Final thoughts: This item has an excellent idea but simply poorly executed. Keep trying, you'll get there. Nice use of the new bloodline mechanic for sorcerers.

[Dale McCoy Jr]

DMcCoy1693 wrote:

>>Cost 5,000 gp (1st), 10,000 gp (3rd), 20,000 gp (9th), 40,000 gp (15th), 80,000 gp (20th)

By my computation, these costs are for "single use" items. Unfortunately, that is not how the item is written. I read it as one use per spellcaster soul trapped in the headband. Item cost is undervalued.

Attempted to edit to late:

My revised computation of the cost is that the 1 HD version of this is for a single use. After that, the cost just doubles even though the HD involved do not double but increase on an uneven scale. I'd still say this item is undervalued.

[The_Minstrel_Wyrm]

DMcCoy1693 wrote:

The_Minstrel_Wyrm wrote:

DMcCoy thanks for the comments.

No problem. Glad I could help.

The_Minstrel_Wyrm wrote:

what should I have done differently?

IMO, there are 3 things that really held you back.

1) Page numbers (don't even include them)
2) Title. Superstar title means you should have a geek-gasm just from that alone. Take a look at some of this years winners: Helm of the Golem Master, Horn of the Dark Hunt, Hurricane Gloves, Spider Hook. These evoke a raw emotion from their names alone. A "figurine of wonderous power" makes me think of a hummel figure.
3) Monster-in-a-Box. You never really answered the question as to how this is different than a wand of summon monster. I mean its got the shout ability, but that, I feel, isn't enough to really make a major difference. Remember, a wonderous item is the one kind of magic item that has almost no rules. Ask yourself, "how can I bend a spell to do something never seen before?" You've got a good basis, I just think you need to keep bending.

Lastly, the only book you were suppose to use was the Pathfinder Beta, so mentioning the Advanced Bestary would also have also gotten you rejected.

DMcCoy... something you mentioned got me to thinking... and here is how the Iron Tiger is different from a wand of summon monster... you wouldn't be able to get a "tiger" with a summon monster wand, wands are still limited to 4th level spells... right? (Summon Monster lists "fiendish tiger" at 5th level and "fiendish dire tiger" at 8th level.) So no way you'd get them from a wand. (Regular spell casting sure.) Now Summon Nature's Ally you could get a tiger at 4th level (and thus a wand of summon nature's ally.) But they wouldn't have an iron-like consistency, or shout. ;)

I know it's not much, but to me, it's enough. And that's how it's different.
(No figurines of wondrous power next year though...)

[Set]

The_Minstrel_Wyrm wrote:

(No figurines of wondrous power next year though...)

Sounds like a good plan. The Iron Tiger was a neat idea, but Figurines of Wondrous Power pretty much write themselves. Critter shaped construct, made of wood/stone/bone/metal, usable X hours / day/week/whatever.

Even something funkier, like a sheaf of paper that can be folded with a Dex check as a full-round action (or with a Craft: Paperfolding check as a move action) into the form of a Tiger that transforms into a construct made of paper (tiger damage, but easy to kill) would be just another variation of the 'Figurine of Wondrous Power,' despite having charges, a skill / ability check to activate and a puntastic name.

That's my kryptonite, puns. If I were to go the Figurine route, it would have to be a Paper Tiger or an Iron Butterfly or something. I'd not only get disqualified, but possibly even suffer retaliation from the Paizo gninjas.

[Maurice de Mare]

deinol wrote:

I wasn't sure I wanted to post mine here, but here goes. I really liked my name and theme, but I didn't have time to tighten the mechanics as much as I would have liked.

deinol wrote:

Whisk of the Saucerer

Aura faint transmutation; CL 3rd
Slot -; Price 6,000 gp; Weight ½ lb.

Description
Three times per day this mithral whisk allows the user to combine two potions together without harmful effect. Drinking the new potion activates the benefits of both of the original potions. Once mixed, a combined potion cannot be further blended. While the concoction remains delicious for much longer, it must be used within one day or the magical properties of the potion are lost. In addition to this blending ability, this whisk allows the user to mix potions into food. Eating the prepared food activates the benefits of the potion. The wielder can cook with a +5 competence bonus on Craft (cooking) checks.

Construction
Requirements Craft Wondrous Item, mending, creator must have 5 ranks in the Craft (cooking) skill; Cost 3,000 gp

Don't know if this one has been reviewed already, but I am going to give it a shot.

1) name, saucerer or sorcerer? If it is the former than your whisk doesn't really life up to its name because no sauce is mentioned. If you meant sorcerer, well then you made an error.

2) combining potions, not a problem.

3) mixing it with food, does this cost a charge? And what happens if more than 1 person eats the food? You don't provide a guideline for this very likely event.

4) +5 craft bonus, I think cooking is a profession.

In the end it is a nice item, it has some problems though.

[allen trussell]

Darkjoy wrote:

deinol wrote:

I wasn't sure I wanted to post mine here, but here goes. I really liked my name and theme, but I didn't have time to tighten the mechanics as much as I would have liked.

deinol wrote:

Whisk of the Saucerer

Aura faint transmutation; CL 3rd
Slot -; Price 6,000 gp; Weight ½ lb.

Description
Three times per day this mithral whisk allows the user to combine two potions together without harmful effect. Drinking the new potion activates the benefits of both of the original potions. Once mixed, a combined potion cannot be further blended. While the concoction remains delicious for much longer, it must be used within one day or the magical properties of the potion are lost. In addition to this blending ability, this whisk allows the user to mix potions into food. Eating the prepared food activates the benefits of the potion. The wielder can cook with a +5 competence bonus on Craft (cooking) checks.

Construction
Requirements Craft Wondrous Item, mending, creator must have 5 ranks in the Craft (cooking) skill; Cost 3,000 gp

Don't know if this one has been reviewed already, but I am going to give it a shot.

1) name, saucerer or sorcerer? If it is the former than your whisk doesn't really life up to its name because no sauce is mentioned. If you meant sorcerer, well then you made an error.

2) combining potions, not a problem.

3) mixing it with food, does this cost a charge? And what happens if more than 1 person eats the food? You don't provide a guideline for this very likely event.

4) +5 craft bonus, I think cooking is a profession.

In the end it is a nice item, it has some problems though.

Perhaps "Whisk of the Saucier"? A saucier is a chef specializing in sauces. Bon appetit!

[Maurice de Mare]

allen trussell wrote:

Perhaps "Whisk of the Saucier"? A saucier is a chef specializing in sauces. Bon appetit!

That was the word I was looking for, thank you. But then it fails to live up to its name, no sauce ;>