I seem to recall there being a rule to the effect of magic items for animals being half the cost, but I can't seem to find it any where. Can someone point me in the right direction?
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Any humanoid-wearable item can work on an animal, assuming the animal has an equivalent body part. A dog could wear a necklace, a cloak, even a shirt or vest, though a robe, bracers, shoes, or helm would be a problem.
Conversely, any animal-wearable item should work on a humanoid, assuming the humanoid has an equivalent body part.
Thus, there's no reason to discount the item's price just because you made it for an animal.
Now, if you wanted a discount for an item that ONLY worked on an animal, that's like wanting a discount for an item that only works on elves--not really a drawback to the person who can wear it, but detrimental to the sale price for someone who can't.
So an amulet of natural armor +1 that only works on animals is probably going to cost you just as much to buy (or create) as one that works on anyone. If you had one and were trying to sell it to an NPC you might not be able to sell it for as much because the NPC might not be able to use it (or might think it has less of a potential market than an unrestricted item).
Otherwise Ezren could cheaply make magic items that only work when used by "gray-haired bearded male irreligious old humans born in Absalom," which oddly enough have the exact same powers as a similar item that works on anyone. :p
Thanks for the reply SKR!
I concur with the logic (There's certainly ample room for abuse.), but why are some magic items so cheap, to wit:
Horseshoes of Speed
These iron shoes come in sets of four like ordinary horseshoes. When affixed to an animal’s hooves, they increase the animal’s base land speed by 30 feet; this counts as an enhancement bonus. As with other effects that increase speed, jumping distances increase proportionally. All four shoes must be worn by the same animal for the magic to be effective.
Faint transmutation; CL 3rd; Craft Wondrous Item, haste; Price 3,000 gp; Weight 12 lb. (for four).
I really thought I saw this somewhere, but maybe it's a carry over from 3E or some house rule.
bunch of nonsense
psh what do you know? ;P
A dog could wear a necklace, a cloak, even a shirt or vest, though a robe, bracers, shoes, or helm would be a problem.
Not really. People can put little shoes on their dogs(dog-sledders do this to protect the dogs paws), helms can be built for dogs(or taken from gnolls), a raincoat could be considered a robe, and I see no reason a dogs can have bracers.
Conversely, any animal-wearable item should work on a humanoid, assuming the humanoid has an equivalent body part.
Thanks for the reply SKR!
I concur with the logic (There's certainly ample room for abuse.), but why are some magic items so cheap, to wit:
Horseshoes of Speed
These iron shoes come in sets of four like ordinary horseshoes. When affixed to an animal’s hooves, they increase the animal’s base land speed by 30 feet; this counts as an enhancement bonus. As with other effects that increase speed, jumping distances increase proportionally. All four shoes must be worn by the same animal for the magic to be effective.
Faint transmutation; CL 3rd; Craft Wondrous Item, haste; Price 3,000 gp; Weight 12 lb. (for four).
I really thought I saw this somewhere, but maybe it's a carry over from 3E or some house rule.
Much more odd when you compare it to the only equivalent item, the boots of striding and springing (which I think should just give +5 to acrobatics to avoid confusion - it costs just as much). A +10 versus a +30 for roughly double-triple the cost.
There are also the horseshoes of the Zephyr, as compared to a ring of levitation.
Does the half cost for animal magic items sound familiar to any one else, of am I getting senile?
Does the half cost for animal magic items sound familiar to any one else, of am I getting senile?
I do remember something about that, probably from a 3.0 book.
At some level, it does make sense. Animals tend to be fairly weak creatures, and if a high level party is going to have an animal around all the time, it likely needs either significant help or a GM who forgets to do anything to it.
Consider a 12th level mounted fighter. Let's assume that for role playing reasons, he wants go fight on a horse rather than a magical beast. (Yes, if he's power-gaming, he should have some sort of magical beast/animal companion for a mount, but not everyone power games.) The toughest horse in the SRD is a heavy warhorse, at CR 2 with 30 hit points. It probably drops the first time an opponent attacks it. Which could easily be the first round, if the opponents are aware of how effective the fighter is.
Enough magic items to keep a CR 2 animal alive in a 12th level battle could easily be a 12th level character's entire wealth. Give it a ring of evasion, +5 save booster, +6 dex and con booster, +5 amulet of natural armor and a +5 ring of protection and you have horse that will survive notably longer. With an attack bonus of +6, it's not a threat, but it survives long enough to let the mounted character actually be mounted. That's also probably more wealth than the entire party has. In this case, it's reasonable for the GM to allow "animal-only" items with a steep discount.
If the party has two druids and the standard combat is "everyone buff the animal companions while they eat anything that moves", then discounting animal-only magic items isn't something the GM should allow.
I don't know of anything dealing with magic items but you might be confusing it with cost of non-magic items like barding. Those have a size based price multiplier which can make a big impact. As such, magical barding price can be greatly varied depending on size on animal.
I don't believe that impacts the cost of enhancing the item, say making your mounts barding +1. I believe that only effects the base item cost.
Does the half cost for animal magic items sound familiar to any one else, of am I getting senile?It does sound familiar, but it was done away with, because magic items can resize and repurpose themselves to fit the wearer as necessary.
I think it might be a 3.0 carry over too.
I was starting to get worried.
I concur with the logic (There's certainly ample room for abuse.), but why are some magic items so cheap, to wit:
Horseshoes of Speed
A horse's speed is 50ft or 60ft, the horseshoes are adding +30ft, which is around a +50% increase. Cost: 3000gp
Boots of striding and springing increase base speed by +10ft, which for most characters (speed 30ft) is a +33% increase.
The boots also give +5 to one skill, which is 2500gp.
The cost of the boots is 5500gp.
Which means the cost of the speed-boost is 5500gp-2500gp=3000gp, the same as the horseshoes (despite the % difference in speed granted)
Except you're not including the "two powers on the same item slot" markup, so actually the boots' speed power cost must be less than 3000gp, as that cost+markup = 3000gp.
So for the boots, the +33% speed increase is costing somewhat less than the +50% speed increase for the horseshoes.
So the cost for both items sounds about right.
A dog could wear a necklace, a cloak, even a shirt or vest, though a robe, bracers, shoes, or helm would be a problem.Not really. People can put little shoes on their dogs(dog-sledders do this to protect the dogs paws),
Those shoes aren't made for human feet and wouldn't fit on a toddler's feet. Likewise, dog's can't reasonably wear a toddler's shoes and expect them to remain on if the dog has to run. So, my point still stands.
helms can be built for dogs
And a helm built for a dog won't fit on the head of a Small human (if anything, the neck opening is in the wrong place). My point still stands.
(or taken from gnolls),
Despite having hyena-like heads, gnolls are humanoids, and gnoll gear fits other humanoid creatures. Even if you account for a gnoll's hyena-like elongated snout and the position of their neck relative to their collarbones, a gnoll's head is much bigger than a dog's head, and a gnoll's helmet won't fit on a dog's head.
a raincoat could be considered a robe,
Try putting a child's raincoat on a dog, or vice versa. There's a reason why most dog raincoats don't have sleeves (they're more like cloaks than shirts) and why people just don't put children's coats on their dogs in the rain.
and I see no reason a dogs can have bracers.
Dogs use their forelegs for locomotion. Strapping something to them might fit, but it would make the dog very ungainly when it tries to walk. And it wouldn't like it.
Many of my answers come down to, "yeah, you could put that on the animal, but it wouldn't put up with it and it would be hampered in battle". And vice versa for animal gear on a human.
saddles
Even a big "riding dog" like a St. Bernard has a vertical ribcage (longer from front to back than they are left to right), and a saddle designed for a dog is going to be shaped to fit that. Humans have horizontal rib cages (longer from left to right than they are from front to back) and even if you had a Small human, a dog saddle wouldn't fit them properly, any more than a horse's saddle would fit a human properly.
It seems the humor is lost on you...
Meh, I was in technical mode. If I could find a link to the old Phil Hartman SNL clip where he's trying to convince his future son-in-law to wear a saddle for him as "a test," I would....
|
Conversely, any animal-wearable item should work on a humanoid, assuming the humanoid has an equivalent body part.
A nasty DM would let a miserly PC wear Horseshoes of Speed. What's a few horseshoe nails between a PC and his gold? The PC wouldn't have any boots, gloves or gauntlets to wear anyway. No wielding weapons, no spells with somatic or material components (can't manipulate the material), Spellcraft DC against ongoing pain and damage to avoid losing the spell.
But those Horseshoes look so cool!
|
My DM wouldn't let me pierce my leopard's ear with a Ring of Feather fall, but was nice enough to allow me to put it on one of its toes.
He also said I could buy a belt strength? or dex? for it, but I have to find some one willing to craft it as a collar, I can't just use the one I picked off a dead humanoid body.
There is the argument, however, that all no-slot items can be used for animals, and many magical pieces of equipment resize themselves to suit the wearer.
Mammals (quadrupeds):
• A ring could fit on a tail. (Take care when removing it, however. It might require cleaning.)
• A necklace could, in effect, be a collar.
• A headband may also be considered for use as a collar, DM discretion.
• Bracers could also be allowed (making the assumption that an animal can get accustomed to wrappings around its forelegs).
• Belts around the waist or chest
• Specialized armor/barding/vest
• "Boots" can be made into wrappings and fitted onto the hind legs
• Generally, mammals aren't the greatest at holding and carrying items in their maw. They can get tripped up easily.
Avians:
• "Bracers" can go on the legs
• "Boots" can be redone as cuffs on the wings
• Specialized armor/barding/vest
• Necklace or headband around the neck
• Being able to grip, an avian can transport light items, and be trained to drop items (even onto targets)
Pseudodragons:
Same as the two above, as well as:
• Specialized gloves with the fingers cut off, if your pseudodragon doesn't do much walking (on all fours)
• Ring on two fingers, if your pseudodragon doesn't do much walking (on all fours) (doesn't stack with the one on the tail)
• "Boots" can either go on the hind legs or as cuffs on the wings
• They are generally intelligent enough to be able to use a variety of mundane items that only require gripping and not a fine magnitude of manipulation. Wands and staves may be acceptable. Like the avian, the pseudodragon can carry and transport some light itmes.
Imps:
Tiny winged humanoids. They can use almost anything suited for their size.
Hmmm, rings don't work on tails, any more than they'd work on a humanoid's toes, tongue, ears, navel, or anywhere but a finger.
Hmmm, rings don't work on tails, any more than they'd work on a humanoid's toes, tongue, ears, navel, or anywhere but a finger.
All things are up to DM discretion.
However, I did have another thought: a reverse wildshape.
Polymorph a willing creature into humanoid, dress them, and let them change back to normal form.
They wouldn't get the opportunity to use armor or shields unless they were specifically wild armor or wild shield.
Again, open for DM interpretation.
Does the half cost for animal magic items sound familiar to any one else, of am I getting senile?
In 3.0 the DMG had a sidebar called "Behind the Curtain" where they had cost reduction on magic item creation that required specific skills, alignment, classes,feats, or races. I guess Dog or Horse could be considered a race under those rules. I believe it lowered the cost by about 30% per restriction. That may be what you are getting it from. Pretty broken rule imho.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
All things are up to DM discretion.
Yes, but that's as much of a cop-out answer as explaining everything in your campaign as, "um, a wizard did it."
Creatures can only wears rings on fingers (and can only use two rings at once) for a reason in the game. Changing that requires you to think about the reason for it and the consequences of changing it.
Yes, but that's as much of a cop-out answer as explaining everything in your campaign as, "um, a wizard did it."
Creatures can only wears rings on fingers (and can only use two rings at once) for a reason in the game. Changing that requires you to think about the reason for it and the consequences of changing it.
I fail to see what I'm copping out of.
From Pathfinder Beta, description of rings.
Rings
Rings bestow magical powers upon their wearers. Only a rare few have charges. Anyone can use a ring. A character can only effectively wear two magic rings. A third magic ring doesn’t work if the wearer is already wearing two magic rings.
Furthermore, for every single ring, I see a slot description of "ring." Not "finger." Even more to the point, there is no mention in the manual that a ring has to go on a finger.
The closest argument you'll get is in the description of the hand of glory.
Hand of Glory
Aura faint varied; Cl 5th
Slot neck; Price 8,000 gp; Weight 2 lb.
Description
This mummifed human hand hangs by a leather cord around a character’s
neck (taking up space as a magic necklace would). If a magic ring is placed on one of the fngers of the hand, the wearer benefts from the ring as if wearing it herself, and it does not count against her two-ring limit. The hand can wear only one ring at a time. Even without a ring, the hand itself allows its wearer to use daylight and see invisibility each once per day.
So I see no basis in the assertion that a ring must go on a "finger" per sé. However, I personally would rule that to gain the benefits of a ring, it does have to be on a similar digit or be a non-slot item, and pay for it accordingly.