Is there anything preventing a Sorceror (Arcane Bloodline) or a Wizard from putting as many magical effects as they can afford into their bonded item? I can't find any limitation in the rules and just wanted quick clarification.
Thanks in advance.
Well, there's effectively a 50% "surtax" on having multiple abilities in one item. But as long as you have the money, I don't think there's any other limitation (other than the DM limiting custom magic items in the first place).
Well, there's effectively a 50% "surtax" on having multiple abilities in one item. But as long as you have the money, I don't think there's any other limitation (other than the DM limiting custom magic items in the first place).
That, plus the general limit of 200,000 for non-epic items. I don't think "considered to have the feats" includes Forge Epic Ring for instance...
On the other hand, if he's got the 360K gold to spend on a ring of protection +6 at 6th level, I don't think arcane bond is the game's biggest problem.
Well, there's effectively a 50% "surtax" on having multiple abilities in one item. But as long as you have the money, I don't think there's any other limitation (other than the DM limiting custom magic items in the first place).That, plus the general limit of 200,000 for non-epic items. I don't think "considered to have the feats" includes Forge Epic Ring for instance...
On the other hand, if he's got the 360K gold to spend on a ring of protection +6 at 6th level, I don't think arcane bond is the game's biggest problem.
I'm not interested in limiting the ability, I think it works fine. I think the difference that I'm seeing is that my arcane caster players like the idea of putting all their magic item eggs into the bonded item basket.
It's their risk I guess.
I'm not interested in limiting the ability, I think it works fine. I think the difference that I'm seeing is that my arcane caster players like the idea of putting all their magic item eggs into the bonded item basket.Well, there's effectively a 50% "surtax" on having multiple abilities in one item. But as long as you have the money, I don't think there's any other limitation (other than the DM limiting custom magic items in the first place).That, plus the general limit of 200,000 for non-epic items. I don't think "considered to have the feats" includes Forge Epic Ring for instance...
On the other hand, if he's got the 360K gold to spend on a ring of protection +6 at 6th level, I don't think arcane bond is the game's biggest problem.
As long as they're paying the extra 50% cost for multiple abilities in one item (and maybe the extra 50% cost for putting abilities in the wrong slot as well), I don't think there should be a problem.
Also, there's the appropriate body slot limitation. You couldn't put a +6 enhancement bonus to Int on your magic arcane bonded ring, since that has to be in the headband slot, etc.
Is that an absolute? I figured as long as they imbue the item with the same ability, it didn't matter. In other words, you don't have to imitate an existing magic item.
Also, there's the appropriate body slot limitation. You couldn't put a +6 enhancement bonus to Int on your magic arcane bonded ring, since that has to be in the headband slot, etc.Is that an absolute? I figured as long as they imbue the item with the same ability, it didn't matter. In other words, you don't have to imitate an existing magic item.
Not absolute - you *can* imbue it elsewhere, but generally that costs an additional 50% for not matching the body slot.
Frankly I'd be amenable to making an allowance on that for the *first* effect only. But definitely need to charge extra if they go and do Int +6, Wis +6, & Cha +6 (Wis and Cha would be double actually - +50% for 2nd effect, +50% for off body-spot).
Also, there's the appropriate body slot limitation. You couldn't put a +6 enhancement bonus to Int on your magic arcane bonded ring, since that has to be in the headband slot, etc.Is that an absolute? I figured as long as they imbue the item with the same ability, it didn't matter. In other words, you don't have to imitate an existing magic item.
Well, if you're the DM, then if you allow it, it should be fine. But in general I think the general idea is that an Amulet of Intelligence +2 should cost 50% more than a Headband of Intelligence +2 (because then your head slot is free to wear a different hat/helmet/headband).
I seriously doubt Bonded Item will be in the same form in the final version as it is in Beta...
Simply saying "you are treated as having the appropriate item creation Feat for purposes of enchanting your Bonded Item if you meet the required caster level for that Feat" with no other confusing rule over-laps seems quite a decent benefit to me (free Feat which can be switched out thru-out your career when you want a new type of Bonded Item) Whenever they want to get rid of it, they can sell it and it works just like any other enchanted item (unique additional benefits like a minor skill/saving throw/ hitpoint bonus analagous to Familiars would be unique to the Wizard with the bond)
I'm basically hoping Bonded Item falls back more in line with Familiars, for those who just don't like the flavor of cute widdle animals bouncing around them all the time, but doesn't radically out-class it (in all but utility/scouting) with "up to max level bonus spontaneous spell" type stuff, much less confusing end-runs on item creation costs/rules.
|
We treat it as a Pearl of Power of what ever level you want. That means that your interpretation is the one we are using. If you prepped it and cast it you can use the object to recall it and cast it again. The arcane bloodline Sorcerer can use it to cast 1 spell/day from any 1 level after that level of spells are exhausted.
We treat it as a Pearl of Power of what ever level you want. That means that your interpretation is the one we are using. If you prepped it and cast it you can use the object to recall it and cast it again. The arcane bloodline Sorcerer can use it to cast 1 spell/day from any 1 level after that level of spells are exhausted.
Not being snotty or anything, but is there a reason you think the spell has to be cast before you can use the bonded item to cast it?
Rather than starting a new thread, I'll bump this one and ask a question.
How are people treating the spell they can spontaneously cast from their bonded weapon.
As it stands, I'm saying that I can spontaneously cast any spell that I've prepared for the day. Other folks are saying you can spontaneously cast anything in your spell book. The rule just doesn't seem very clear to me, and I'd like some clarification, or at least opinions on how to do it.
The text says "any spell that you know and can cast." "can cast" is a the term that really trips me up.
For a sorcerer, they can cast any spell they know, so there's no problem.
For a wizard, they can know spells that they cannot cast. It's easy enough to grab a spellbook from a higher level wizard and presto, you know spells that are too high level for you to cast them.
I do not read "and can cast" as meaning that a wizard must have prepared the spell today in order to use his bonded item to cast it. I read it as "are able to cast".
This lets wizards prepare a little bit more for battle. They don't have to memorize Knock in case we find that one door the rogue can't open. They don't have to memorize Comprehend Languages in case we meet a potential ally in the dungeon but can't speak with him. Etc.
It's their once/day "oops, I didn't prepare that spell" get-out-of-jail-free card.
Sure, if they don't prepare any of these spells, they could easily find themselves needing more than one of them in a given day.
But with this interpretation, they can be more specialized (say, with combat spells) and still get one freebie usage of some utility spell without having to fill half of their slots with spells they might need "just in case".
Compared to sorcerers always having exactly what they need when they need it, letting wizards do that once/day seems fairly trivial, and at least to me, seems to be the spirit of what Arcane Bond was trying to convey.
|
|
Not being snotty or anything, but is there a reason you think the spell has to be cast before you can use the bonded item to cast it?
Well, no there isn't, however, our interpretation is that you have to have the spell prepared (If you memorize your spells). If that is your base line, then it is silly not to use the one in your head already before using your 1/day repeat a spell you have. If you wind up only needing 1 Magic missile and use the object to cast it then you have a magic missile at the end of the day in your head and no use of the object for the rest of the day. Since everyone at my table pretty much read it the same way it has become sort of a default pearl of power.
That being said, if you interpret it as any spell you can cast regardless of whether you have it memorized or not, then obviously you wouldn't have any reason to cast something out of your head first, as you didn't have the spell memorized in the first place. Still unless you absolutely know that you are going to need all the fireballs you have memorized plus another, it is a waste of its power to use it before you use the one in your head.
Gentlemen, I am very curious about this. I have the same question. Can I put 2 magical rod powers into one rod for ease of use? Same for staves, or rings, or whatever. I see this "50%" rule mentioned in this thread. Where does this rule appear?
Thank you ahead of time.
Gentlemen, I am very curious about this. I have the same question. Can I put 2 magical rod powers into one rod for ease of use? Same for staves, or rings, or whatever. I see this "50%" rule mentioned in this thread. Where does this rule appear?
Thank you ahead of time.
The rule appears in the 3.5 (back of the DMG) and Pathfinder Item creation rules (in the Magic Item Web Enhancement - see the Pathfinder RPG page or your "My Downloads" at the top). It's listed under "Multiple Different Abilities" if I recall correctly.
Essentially, an item that produces several effects of the same time (like a Staff), discounts the cost of the additional effects. But items (that occupy a body slot) that produce several *different* effects has an increase in cost, due to the "double-use" of the body slot space.
This is less than the +100% to cost for making it a non-slot item (like a Ioun Stone), so it generally works out in the creator's favor.
I personally use rules from the Magic Item Compendium that ignores the increase in cost for certain standard effects (ability score boosts, deflection bonuses, resistance bonuses, natural armor, etc.) - if they are in the correct body slot. About the only good thing about that book IMHO.
Gentlemen, I am very curious about this. I have the same question. Can I put 2 magical rod powers into one rod for ease of use? Same for staves, or rings, or whatever. I see this "50%" rule mentioned in this thread. Where does this rule appear?
Thank you ahead of time.
There are some hairy balance issues here.
On the one hand, nobody wants to walk around with a golf-bag full of rods, wands, and magic weapons for all occasions.
If they do, they generally must spend some time switching. If you have your Metamagic Rod (Maximize) in hand, and decide to switch to your Metamagic Rod (Extend), you need a move action to put one away, and another to draw the correct rod (and sneaky DMs may have you spend another sorting through your golf-bag to find the right rod). You could drop the one in-hand as a free action, but now it's on the ground were an enemy might get it, or you might have to move and then later in the same fight decide you want that rod but now it's too far away.
Of course, you could just get a Handy Haversack Ehlona's Quiver to pop the item you want directly into your hand, but that is a bit of an extra cost.
On the other hand, you could have one rod that has all your Metamagic abilities on it. No need to switch. Way more convenient.
So, the game mecahnics penalize you for the increased efficiency by making you pay extra gold (and extra XP in 3.x) to make the item.
Likewise, if you want to wear rings of Regeneration, Free Action, and Spell Turning, you can't. Unless you put two of those abilities into one ring. Very handy (pardon the pun). But now you have to pay the price for that handiness. And then you decide to add a Ring of Wizardry to the mix...
If you remove the 50% cost increase, then you're telling your players to go ahead and cheat the system.
Want to wear Gloves of Storing and Gauntlets of Strength? No problem, just turn those Gauntlets of Strength into Boots of Strength. What, you're wearing Boots of Speed? No problem, now they're Boots of Speed & Strength.
See where that's going?
Maybe you want this for your campaign. It's you campaign, do as you wish.
Just be aware of where it's going, especially at higher levels when your player's have lots of gold to throw around.
Holy cow! It's my campaign? I'll tell the GM that. Then he'll have to let me do it! Seriously, though, thanks for the info everyone.
Back to the original question, kind of...
If a wizard is enchanting his own bonded item, doesn't he immediately claim this 30% discount?
Item Requires Specific Class or Alignment to Use: Even more
restrictive than requiring a skill, this limitation cuts the cost
by 30%.
Not only does it require a wizard to use it, it requires a specific wizard to use it. The argument could be made that it should qualify for an even bigger discount. Say 50%?
If a wizard is enchanting his own bonded item
If I know what you mean wink wink nudge nudge
Back to the original question, kind of...
If a wizard is enchanting his own bonded item, doesn't he immediately claim this 30% discount?
Item Requires Specific Class or Alignment to Use: Even more
restrictive than requiring a skill, this limitation cuts the cost
by 30%.Not only does it require a wizard to use it, it requires a specific wizard to use it. The argument could be made that it should qualify for an even bigger discount. Say 50%?
My thought is that getting essentially the free feat to enchant the bonded item is enough benefit without getting a 30% (or 50%) discount on the cost of enchanting the item.
However one big downside of stacking everything in one item is if you get hit with a greater dispel magic, or worse, a disjunction you could lose everything at once.