|
I was just looking through the PHB and the DMG and i noticed somthing funny. Continuous + 20 to attack.
DMG- Making magic item pg.285
Use-activated or continuous---
Spell level x caster level x 2,000 gp (*NOTE2)
True Strike 1 x Caster min 1 x 2,000 gp = 2,000 GP
-or-
True Strike 1 x Caster min 1 x 2,000 gp x 4(duration) = 8,000 GP
Note--
2) If a continuous item has an effect based on a spell with a duration measured in rounds, multiply the cost by 4. If the duration of the spell is 1 minute/level, multiply the cost by 2, and if the duration is 10 minutes/level, multiply the cost by 1.5. If the spell has a 24-hour duration or greater, divide the cost in half.
PHB-- TRUE STRIKE Spell pg.296
True Strike
Divination
Level: Sor/Wiz 1
Components: V, F
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Range: Personal
Target: You
Duration: See text
You gain temporary, intuitive insight into
the immediate future during your next
attack. Your next single attack roll (if it is
made before the end of the next round)
gains a +20 insight bonus. Additionally,
you are not affected by the miss chance
that applies to attackers trying to strike a
concealed target.
(use spoilers to read i didnt wanna clump information)
well this would be a wonderous item that would theoretically give you a +20 to attack rolls all the time. The true strike spell duration is the next attack by the next round so i see that as a duration of 1/round. Let me know if i did this right
The duration of the next attack that occurs prior to the end of your next round is not at all the same as 1 round per level. For this reason this spell does not qualify to be made into a continuous effect. The effect is more along the lines of a charge for a touch attack then a continuous effect. To illustrate this, realize that this spell could end well before a full round has gone by if an AoO were to present itself.
Sean Mahoney
Not the first one to notice this, and even thinking about continuous true strike weapons have commonly been ruled to cause "Your character disintegrates. Make a new one." reaction on DM :)
Varying degrees of in-game logic has been used to explain why it doesn't work, but it all comes down to one thing: that's a game-breaker and thus unacceptable.
Short answer: I would not allow it. Period.
Long answer: have a look at this topic from WoTC Archives (under the header 'Some Things to Avoid') and price the Ring of True Strike as an Epic Item with a cost of 400.000 gp (as suggested in the explanation) or a cost of 4.000.000 gp (the explanation given by Skip Williams does not apply the 'multiply x10 cost of an item which gives an enhancement bonus higher than +5').
There is an evil GM part of me that would want to allow the item to made, but the first time it is used declare that the charge has been spent and it is now no longer magical.
Sean Mahoney
Part of the item creation rules is the rule that all items are subject to DM adjudication. Unlimited True Strike is like unlimited healing spells, wishes and other game breakers.
Anything that's too powerful is generally better, for balance purposes, as a charged item.
An easy rule for DMs on items that are too broken with unlimited uses is to note that unlimited use is the same price by the rules as five charges per day. A ring of true strike five times per day is hardly a game-breaker.
|
As was already mentioned, this was addressed by WotC. In a nutshell, pretty much any item that gives a specific type of bonus (enhancement, luck, etc.) with a very specific numerical value (+2, +4, etc.) then the said item should be made with those rules as opposed to the rules for putting a spell on an item -- even if an "equivalent" spell is found. There are a number of things that they did with that spell to keep it from being abused like making it a personal spell and giving it a duration of 1 round. Of course some of these things can be worked around, but it feels fairly obvious to me that they did not want a fighter type character to be using this all the time.
|
RPG Superstar 2008 Top 32, 2011 Top 16
|
I've allowed a ring of true strike, modeled after the ring of invisibility. I think I priced it at 10K, but like the ROI, it required a standard action to activate, just like the spell. This effectively reduced attacks to every other round, and my players weren't too keen on that. When they wanted to get an always on, or free action activation version, I pointed out that a quickened true strike was a 5th level spell, and they'd have to price the item based on that. They passed.
Please note that the magic item creation table is set up in a specific order for a reason. Spell effect creation rules should only be considered after using the bonus rules (or if using the spell effect X times per day, charges, etc.).
So a constant +20 insight bonus to attacks should not be built by "1st level spell, constant effect." Now, you could make a charged true strike item or a Quickened true strike X times per day item.
And once the PCs get +20 attack roll items, the NPCs are going to get them too--and that +20 to AC item (wings of the dragon? Ring of avoidance?).
Yeah, a true strike item idea gets thrown out the window as fast as:
"Head band of Healing" Fast Heal 1; 0 level cantrip (cure minor wounds); 1000 gp
or
"Boots of Speed" +30 to move; 1st level (Expeditious Retreat) ; 2,000 gp
IIRC I did the detailed math on this once, and a ring that gave a continuous +20 insight bonus to attacks worked out to something like 400,000gp, at least.
There's a reason why the magic item pricing rules starts with "compare the item to existing items," and only if you can't find a valid comparison do you resort to "use this formula."
Ah heck sure you can have it!
Just realize many of the villains will too... and of course all the dragons (it's a coming of age present)... and Pixies will be wearing them as necklaces... wizards that you face will of course make their own too.
|
I've allowed a ring of true strike, modeled after the ring of invisibility. I think I priced it at 10K, but like the ROI, it required a standard action to activate, just like the spell. This effectively reduced attacks to every other round, and my players weren't too keen on that.
I would allow this version only, and they'd (the players) consider themselves lucky; in Magic Item Compendium there's only a "3 charges per day" item, I'd find this one far more useful, due to the fact that no full attacks are permitted one after the other, because it'd be too much. I don't like charges for items unless they're absolutely gamebreaking, like the +1 property Impaling (3 times per day the attack is against the touch AC), that's a good example.
Yeah, a true strike item idea gets thrown out the window as fast as:
"Head band of Healing" Fast Heal 1; 0 level cantrip (cure minor wounds); 1000 gp
or
"Boots of Speed" +30 to move; 1st level (Expeditious Retreat) ; 2,000 gp
Some quibbles:
The cure minor wounds headband would have to be an on command or use activated effect instead of a constant one (spell duration instantaneous), requiring a standard action to activate each time. Even at that, it's too powerful, considering that a wand of cure minor wounds has a market price of 375 gp.
The expeditious retreat boots, because of the 1 min/level duration, gets a x2 market price multiplier on a constant effect (4,000 gp). IMO, this says more about the spell than the magic item creation rules; if the spell were 2nd level, then the boots would be 12,000 gp. This would be on par with boots of speed, but only granting the movement and not the other bonuses (AC, attack roll, initiative, etc.) from haste.
IIRC, there was a Bow of True Arrows (name?) in the old first printing of Sword and Fist; it acted much like the Ring of Invisibility mentioned above, in that you had to take an action to activate it. Even then, our DM took one look at that and said "You gotta be kidding me..." And it was only around 8k gp, talk about game breaking.
It's been a pretty much given agreement between the DMs at our tables that no such item should exist without substantial limitations (charges, etc). Even using it every other round is still pretty powerful, if you take into consideration the famous "True Strike/Power Attack combo". My Duskblade typically does around 100 damage at a time in melee when he does this, and he actually casts the spell.
|
|
IIRC, there was a Bow of True Arrows (name?) in the old first printing of Sword and Fist; it acted much like the Ring of Invisibility mentioned above, in that you had to take an action to activate it. Even then, our DM took one look at that and said "You gotta be kidding me..." And it was only around 8k gp, talk about game breaking.
I'm curious what was going through the game designers' heads when they thought it up, to be honest. I'm curious as to what realm of though told them it'd be a good idea.
I mean, sure, you had to actually activate the item, but still, a 4,000 gp item that has infinite uses of a +20 to attack rolls spells. Come on.
Here's the item for those interested:
Bow of True Arrows:
This +1 mighty composite longbow (+1 Strength bonus required) stores the true strike spell, which the wielder can activate with a spell trigger (as with a wand). The wielder gains the benefits of the spell only when shooting an arrow from the bow. Unlike a wand, the bow casts the spell any number of times.
Both arcane archers and initiates of the bow favor bows of true arrows.
Caster Level: 5th; Prerequisites: Craft Magic Arms and Armor, true strike; Market Price: 4,000 gp; Cost to Create: 2,250 gp + 140 XP.
Both arcane archers and initiates of the bow favor bows of true arrows.
... along with all creatures possessing Intelligence scores. I think this actually takes the cake in terms of officially printed dumb ideas I've encountered.
As was already mentioned, this was addressed by WotC. In a nutshell, pretty much any item that gives a specific type of bonus (enhancement, luck, etc.) with a very specific numerical value (+2, +4, etc.) then the said item should be made with those rules as opposed to the rules for putting a spell on an item -- even if an "equivalent" spell is found. There are a number of things that they did with that spell to keep it from being abused like making it a personal spell and giving it a duration of 1 round. Of course some of these things can be worked around, but it feels fairly obvious to me that they did not want a fighter type character to be using this all the time.
For example, IIRC, Sword and Fist (a book known for its playtesting) had a 'Ring of Mage Armor'. Basically, it was Bracers of Armor +4 in a ring slot. For 1/16th the price.
Clearly, a flat armor bonus shouldn't be priced according to the spell.
Then there's the True Strike Bow above. Though, if you actually follow the rules for how spell completeion works, you have to spend a standard action activating the true strike first, which makes it much more reasonable. (About on par with that Arcane Archer being a Sorcerer with True Strike on their spells known list.)
And there was a 'Ring of Shocking Grasp' that acted a lot more like putting the Shocking Enhancement on your hands than delivering a touch spell.
Clearly, someone designing that book assumed the spell level pricing tables were always fair.
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
Here's the item for those interested:
** spoiler omitted **
stores the true strike spell.
With a cost of 4000 I bet the original intent was that it worked like a spell storing weapon in that it could hold 1 true strike spell, and only one at a time. A +1 bow of spell storing would be what, 8300+ cost of the bow?
An item that had to have true strike cast on it each time you wanted the unmissing missile I think would be fair at 2000 GP. Since a) you have to have the spell on your list and b) you'd have to 'charge' it yourself.
Round 0 charge the bow.
Round 1 Standard action to spell trigger the spell.
Round 2 Fire said bow.
Round 3 charge the bow.
etc.
You get 1 free shot on the second round of combat, then you're down to a 1/3 fire rate if you keep it up. 2000 GP for a 'sucker punch' isn't broken. RAW though oh yes.
That may have been the original intent (though creating a spell-specific spell-storing item is like creating a class-specific magic item to reduce price. It reeks of minmaxing to your character.)
But the description as written includes the line 'Unlike a wand, the bow casts the spell any number of times.'
Maybe the designer thought one way and the developer misunderstood?
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
That may have been the original intent (though creating a spell-specific spell-storing item is like creating a class-specific magic item to reduce price. It reeks of minmaxing to your character.)
But the description as written includes the line 'Unlike a wand, the bow casts the spell any number of times.'
Maybe the designer thought one way and the developer misunderstood?
That's what I'm hoping, or the editor did (see Abjurant cheesewhore and the Mage armour debacle)
Funny thing is, at higher levels, even if it is RAW, its usefullness declines until you factor in manyshot and feats from other *books.
Hmm, 15th level ranger, I can fire every round at +13/+13/+8/+3 or every other round at +33/+13/+8/+3.
Now that's for a bow. For a weapon you can Power attack, it's a different ballgame. (See Deep Impact for how that can go)
Both arcane archers and initiates of the bow favor bows of true arrows.... along with all creatures possessing Intelligence scores. I think this actually takes the cake in terms of officially printed dumb ideas I've encountered.
How is this worse than buying a wand of True Strike (assuming that you can use such a wand, of course)?
How is this worse than buying a wand of True Strike (assuming that you can use such a wand, of course)?
Three reasons. First, since a wand must be held but firing a bow requires two hands, even with Quick Draw and a Handy Haversack, you can't just use and wand then fire the bow every turn.
Second, a wand will eventually empty. Not that 1st level wand charge is worth that much, but it is a cost.
Third, the (badly written) wording implies that casting True Strike is part of firing the arrow, which would be broken.
How is this worse than buying a wand of True Strike (assuming that you can use such a wand, of course)?Three reasons. First, since a wand must be held but firing a bow requires two hands, even with Quick Draw and a Handy Haversack, you can't just use and wand then fire the bow every turn.
Second, a wand will eventually empty. Not that 1st level wand charge is worth that much, but it is a cost.
Third, the (badly written) wording implies that casting True Strike is part of firing the arrow, which would be broken.
1) You can't use True Strike + fire every turn with the bow either; it's a spell trigger item, so it takes a standard action (at least) to activate.
2) If your character casts True Strike more than 50 times in his entire career, I'll eat my hat.
3) See #1.
IIRC I did the detailed math on this once, and a ring that gave a continuous +20 insight bonus to attacks worked out to something like 400,000gp, at least.
There's a reason why the magic item pricing rules starts with "compare the item to existing items," and only if you can't find a valid comparison do you resort to "use this formula."
Yeah. As I recall, the ring of true strike was also one of the cardinal sins we briefly discussed at the spells and magic item seminar we did at Gen Con a few years back.
In general, any spell that has a duration of 1 round or instantaneous is completely inappropriate except as a charged (exhaustible charges, or per day) item. This was something that should have been considered in the original formula, wasn't, and has led to this kind of "ooh, can I get away with this?" conversations at countless tables ever since.
As a general rule, if you'd conceivably use a given item more than the baseline 5 times per day* (which is what the formula is really based on), you should construct the item differently
*See also chalice of cure light wounds.
1) You can't use True Strike + fire every turn with the bow either; it's a spell trigger item, so it takes a standard action (at least) to activate.
I should have said every other round. With the bow, your actions are Truestrike, shoot, truestrike, shoot, etc.
With a normal bow and a wand, your actions are
Truestrike, stow wand, shoot, draw wand, truestrike, etc.
Dropping the wand would be a free action, but then its more work to pick up again. Quick draw lets you draw as a free action, but stowing is still a move action (I suppose you can still get off one shot per turn, though, but not your secondary shots on a full attack.)
2) If your character casts True Strike more than 50 times in his entire career, I'll eat my hat.
Since we're discussing folks trying to break the system by getting true strike for free, its worth mentioning. (In other words, if your build depends on getting a True Strike before every attack, then its safe to say you'll be casting it more than 50 times.)
3) See #1.
I understand that, but the text for the item is very poorly written and makes it sound otherwise.
One cannot also forget the bladed gauntlets!
Exotic small (would be 'light' in 3.5, I believe) one-handed weapons that did 1d6 damage with a 17-20/x2 crit range.
Man, that's was always one of my favorite weapons! I was so pissed when they nerfed it in the reprint of Sword and Fist (1d6 dmg, 19-20X2 crit). But, I can sort of understand why they did it.
I actually made a character back in 3.0 that used those gauntlets, the Keen enchantment(double crit range) and took Improved crit feat, so essentially my crit range was 9-20 X2 lol! Things sure have changed since then... All errata aside, it still made for a cool "Wolverine" style weapon that allowed you to hold an item in your hand while equipped.
But anyways, back on topic, there really is no easy justification for having anything with unlimited uses of True Strike, without some kind of per-day cap. I play a high-level Duskblade and I cast True Strike at least 3-5 times before resting each day. At least with a wand, or knowing the spell, there's some kind of sacrifice. Wands run out, and you may run into the problem of finding a place that can even make one; you can make it yourself but it costs XP. Point being, there's some kind of give, not just a unlimited +20 free for all.
IIRC I did the detailed math on this once, and a ring that gave a continuous +20 insight bonus to attacks worked out to something like 400,000gp, at least.
There's a reason why the magic item pricing rules starts with "compare the item to existing items," and only if you can't find a valid comparison do you resort to "use this formula."
Yeah. As I recall, the ring of true strike was also one of the cardinal sins we briefly discussed at the spells and magic item seminar we did at Gen Con a few years back.
In general, any spell that has a duration of 1 round or instantaneous is completely inappropriate except as a charged (exhaustible charges, or per day) item. This was something that should have been considered in the original formula, wasn't, and has led to this kind of "ooh, can I get away with this?" conversations at countless tables ever since.
As a general rule, if you'd conceivably use a given item more than the baseline 5 times per day* (which is what the formula is really based on), you should construct the item differently
*See also chalice of cure light wounds.
If you instituted such a rule, I believe it would ban the Ring of Feather Falling (hardly a broken item), stuff based on the Jump spell and so on.
I think it's a better idea to put all combat and healing items in a separate bin from the other items, since the brokenation tends to occur when spells which are intended to have some small limited window suddenly get used by fighting featmonkeys with ever feat and power that lets you cram a dozen actions into that tiny window.
Except Feather Fall, and Jump both have a longer duration than one round, they are discharging spells.
Actually that would be a good term to add to the spell lexicon: Discharging
IIRC, there was a Bow of True Arrows (name?) in the old first printing of Sword and Fist; it acted much like the Ring of Invisibility mentioned above, in that you had to take an action to activate it. Even then, our DM took one look at that and said "You gotta be kidding me..." And it was only around 8k gp, talk about game breaking.
Actually, it was a +1 mighty (+1 Str bonus) composite longbow with spell-trigger true strike. Basically, it was a wand/weapon combo item with unlimited charges at 4,000 gp.
Masterwork mighty (+1 Str bonus) composite longbow - 500 gp
+1 weapon enchantment - 2,000 gp
1st level spell (spell-trigger) - 750 gp x 2 (unlimited charges) = 1,500 gp
Actually not that game-breaking (IMO). It required a standard action to activate each true strike effect and only applied to the first arrow fired from the bow on the wielder's next action (basically 1 shot every other round). Nice, but not overwhelming (compared to the raging, Power Attacking barbarian with a two-handed weapon).
Now, the "upgraded" version, a +4 mighty (+4 Str bonus) composite longbow with spell-trigger Quickened true strike (800 gp + 32,000 gp + 42,000 gp = 74,800 gp) is pushing it...
For example, IIRC, Sword and Fist (a book known for its playtesting) had a 'Ring of Mage Armor'. Basically, it was Bracers of Armor +4 in a ring slot. For 1/16th the price.
Ring of mage armor: This ring protects the wearer as with the mage armor spell (+4 armor bonus to AC).
Caster Level: 1st; Prerequisites: Forge Ring, mage armor; Market Price: 12,000 gp.Bracers of armor
Caster Level: 7th; Prerequisites: Craft Wondrous Item, mage armor, creator's class level must be twice that of the bonus placed in the bracers; Market Price: 16,000 gp (+4).
The ring is 4,000 gp cheaper (a 25% price break) and has lower caster level requirements. However, the Forge Ring feat can't be taken until CL 12, the ring of mage armor cannot be upgraded, and there are more rings than there are bracers (so there will be more demands for use of the ring slots).
The ring is 4,000 gp cheaper (a 25% price break) and has lower caster level requirements. However, the Forge Ring feat can't be taken until CL 12, the ring of mage armor cannot be upgraded, and there are more rings than there are bracers (so there will be more demands for use of the ring slots).
For some reason I recalled the price at 1,000 gp. However, the point still stands. And you have two rings slots, so the fact that there are more rings isn't relevant.
How is this worse than buying a wand of True Strike (assuming that you can use such a wand, of course)?Three reasons. First, since a wand must be held but firing a bow requires two hands, even with Quick Draw and a Handy Haversack, you can't just use and wand then fire the bow every turn.
Second, a wand will eventually empty. Not that 1st level wand charge is worth that much, but it is a cost.
Third, the (badly written) wording implies that casting True Strike is part of firing the arrow, which would be broken.
1) You can achieve pretty much the same functionality as a bow of true arrows with Quick Draw and a wand of true strike: Hold bow in one hand, Quick Draw wand (free action), activate true strike (standard action), store/sheathe/etc. wand (move action); next round, fire bow; rinse-repeat.
2) The cost for the unlimited use 1st level spell trigger is 1,500 gp, twice the cost of a wand and in line with the Charged (50 charges) - 1/2 unlimited use base price entry on the magic item creation table. With an unlimited use command word version at 1,800 gp, that's not unreasonable, IMO.
3) "...which the wielder can activate with a spell trigger (as with a wand). The wielder gains the benefit of the spell only when shooting an arrow from the bow." In context, this is a limitation on the true strike effect applying to arrows fired from the bow, not any other attack. I'm sorry if I offend anyone, but people who (mis)interpret that as the spell trigger happening as part of firing the arrow are willfully trying to break the game (like magic vestment bonuses stacking with mage armor).
The ring is 4,000 gp cheaper (a 25% price break) and has lower caster level requirements. However, the Forge Ring feat can't be taken until CL 12, the ring of mage armor cannot be upgraded, and there are more rings than there are bracers (so there will be more demands for use of the ring slots).For some reason I recalled the price at 1,000 gp. However, the point still stands. And you have two rings slots, so the fact that there are more rings isn't relevant.
Agreed. If it were restricted to sorcerer or wizard classes, I could see the price break (Item Requires Specific Class = 30% reduction, so 25% for either of two classes could be reasonable).
Yeah, a true strike item idea gets thrown out the window as fast as:
"Head band of Healing" Fast Heal 1; 0 level cantrip (cure minor wounds); 1000 gp
Actually, I did allow my players to create what they called their "worry stones" based on cure minor wounds-use activated (I think it was in the same price range). Of course the difference from the item above was it required a standard action to activate for each point healed. At 10-12th level for the party, I didn't find it overbalancing, and freed up the priest to do other things, without really tipping things too far (my priests can't spontaneously heal for the most part). Really game in handy during grueling dungeon crawls like Nightfang Spire.
Continuous True Strike though, is right out, except maybe as a salient divine ability or something truly epic.
If you want to get technical about it. Remember the True Strike specifies the only your next strike get the bonuses (including the no miss chance). So if they whine about the pricing rules as written, let them have it. Then make it clear that the True Strike spell itself AS WRITTEN makes this a 1 shot item.
Two of the players in my campaign have rings of command word True Strike. It only cost them 1800gp (CL 1 x Spell Level 1 X 1800 for a command word activated). Of course it only lasts 1 round and takes a standard action to activate. As we've played it, it is a useful but NOT overly powerful item. In fact with the time it takes to activate they very rarely use it once combat is started.
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
If you want to get technical about it. Remember the True Strike specifies the only your next strike get the bonuses (including the no miss chance). So if they whine about the pricing rules as written, let them have it. Then make it clear that the True Strike spell itself AS WRITTEN makes this a 1 shot item.
Two of the players in my campaign have rings of command word True Strike. It only cost them 1800gp (CL 1 x Spell Level 1 X 1800 for a command word activated). Of course it only lasts 1 round and takes a standard action to activate. As we've played it, it is a useful but NOT overly powerful item. In fact with the time it takes to activate they very rarely use it once combat is started.
Your players aren't being sneaky enough.
Take your ring, add 1000 GP and now it's an intelligent item that can trigger itself, every turn. Heck add another 1000GP and it can fire off bless as well.
Take your ring, add 1000 GP and now it's an intelligent item that can trigger itself, every turn.
Except rings have a hard time making attack rolls.
Take your ring, add 1000 GP and now it's an intelligent item that can trigger itself, every turn.Except rings have a hard time making attack rolls.
I was going to say that, but I presume that the item is phrased the same as a Ring of Invisibility which makes it clear that "the wearer can benefit from invisibility", etc. (Presumably the ring is not wearing itself.)
IIRC, there was a Bow of True Arrows (name?) in the old first printing of Sword and Fist; it acted much like the Ring of Invisibility mentioned above, in that you had to take an action to activate it. Even then, our DM took one look at that and said "You gotta be kidding me..." And it was only around 8k gp, talk about game breaking.Actually, it was a +1 mighty (+1 Str bonus) composite longbow with spell-trigger true strike. Basically, it was a wand/weapon combo item with unlimited charges at 4,000 gp.
Masterwork mighty (+1 Str bonus) composite longbow - 500 gp
+1 weapon enchantment - 2,000 gp
1st level spell (spell-trigger) - 750 gp x 2 (unlimited charges) = 1,500 gpActually not that game-breaking (IMO). It required a standard action to activate each true strike effect and only applied to the first arrow fired from the bow on the wielder's next action (basically 1 shot every other round). Nice, but not overwhelming (compared to the raging, Power Attacking barbarian with a two-handed weapon).
Now, the "upgraded" version, a +4 mighty (+4 Str bonus) composite longbow with spell-trigger Quickened true strike (800 gp + 32,000 gp + 42,000 gp = 74,800 gp) is pushing it...
Well, I do agree, after seeing it broke down into formulae, but I think there's an unwritten fear that's going on with this item, and I believe it's the potential for future versions of similar weapons. It's like this big dangerous floodgate just waiting to be opened. Sure, as a bow it doesnt seem like that big of a deal. But, what's to stop a player from using the formula and making it into a greatsword? What's to stop a Rogue/fighter from using it with a Power Attack/sneak? It's not that these scenarios couldnt be dealt with, but it's just like opening a Pandora's Box of possibilities once you let the player's have a weapon that gives them +20 to an attack. Even if it can only be used to attack every other round, think about the kind of damage a Raging Barbarian would do with this thing...
I know there's dozen's of other ways to achieve the same effect. Heck, I play a Duskblade and can cast True Strike quickened, but when the ability starts falling into non-caster's hands things start getting out of whack fast. I could see maybe allowing such a weapon, but with limited uses per day like the gloves in Magic Item Compendium.