And many thanks to everyone who's posted kind words and kudos. I should be submitting my monster tomorrow, and I hope you all find it truly monstrous. This item is bright and ephemeral, so I'm attempting to demonstrate my ability to swing the other way for Round 2. Bye-bye selfless Chinese mysticism, hello ergot-ridden Brythonic nightmares!
Should it be Byrthonic? (assuming you meant Byron + Cthtonic)
Aura faint transmutation CL 3rd
Slot —; Price 300 gp; Weight —
This small silken pouch contains fresh, bright flower petals. If a handful are thrown or scattered, the pouch unravels as countless petals swarm forth. The seven thousand blossoms coalesce into a path 5 feet wide and 60 feet long, which can traverse empty space but is cut short by any barrier. If thrown at an angle, the path travels 40 feet horizontally and 40 feet vertically. If thrown up or down, a tight spiral ascends or descends 30 feet. Though the petals seem suspended by a gentle breeze and are too sparse to provide cover or concealment, they act as a firm and stable surface for creatures and attended objects. Those who walk the seven thousand blossoms are protected from any effects generated by terrain below. The path lasts for one minute, after which the petals lose their magic and disperse. Strong winds disperse the petals in half the time. One round of exposure to severe wind counts as five rounds of the blossoms' duration, and more powerful winds disperse them immediately.
Requirements Craft Wondrous Item, air walk; Cost 150 gp
I like the flavour of the item, though I'd like to have the actual effect of the item more clearly stated and somewhat separated from the fluff.
It is a flavourful party friendly item.
Star Voter Season 6, Star Voter Season 8
|
Actually, I can see a druid going ballistic over this item. After all, hundreds of flowers had to die for it to be made. And, when you think about how you'd collect these flowers, you'd either be de-flowering an entire field or industrial farming flowers for the petals. I can definitely see druids coming to blows over this item.
But the item does not say anything about needing to harvest flowers at all. Magic can create a wall of stone or thorns, why not petals? :)
Item creation rules for magic items generally require an object as its base: a stick for a wand, a glove for a Glove of Ability Bonus, etc.
|
Star Voter Season 6, Star Voter Season 8
|
Item creation rules for magic items generally require an object as its base: a stick for a wand, a glove for a Glove of Ability Bonus, etc.
Base: one petal and one strip of leather.
I think we may be getting a bit of track though. This really is a nice item and I can't wait to see it in an AP or find it as random loot.
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
The item is pretty - simple and sweet, with a useful effect that is evocatively described and much more than a spell in a can - it's a bridge in a BUSH!
Actually, the thought I had as far as a magic item related to this would be a literal potted flower that shed these blossoms once per day. Might be an amusing and different take on magic items, rather like "potion fruits" from Dark Sun.
Overall: Very nice - the description is terrific and the effect clean, useful, and fun.
|
I love the imagery. I was wondering if I'd seen it before, but didn't see it in the Top 32 from the previous two years and gave up before reading the Clark-review threads. (And I was concerned that I was conflating it with my own Satchel of Seawalking, which was a water-walk version of the same item.)
This is, IMO, how a 'spell in a can' should be done, as it's 10,000 times cooler than 'boots that cast Air Walk.'
Should it be Byrthonic? (assuming you meant Byron + Cthtonic)
Haha, no, but that's almost accurate too. :) Brythonic is a language group native to the island of Britain; the surviving members are Welsh and Breton, dead ones include Cornish and Cumbrish. People in the area came up with some seriously creepy fairy tales, which is what I was trying to get at.
Actually, the thought I had as far as a magic item related to this would be a literal potted flower that shed these blossoms once per day. Might be an amusing and different take on magic items, rather like "potion fruits" from Dark Sun.
That reminds me of a really cool article Dragon ran in one of its last issues with Paizo.
D&D assumes that all magic is manufactured, turning work + raw materials into a finished product in a straightforward fashion. There's a whole second hemisphere of ideas to be explored in the notion that it is alive, planted and nurtured rather than built.
Boy, I really loved this item. The imagery is beautiful, and the results very functional for low level parties. I would steal this if only I had a campaign to steal it for. Look forwarded to see what you do in round 2!
This item is awesome!
Makes me want to play in an oriental setting, and I never want to play in an oriental setting.
I think the price is bang on for a single use item, compare to potion of levitate. I appreciate flavorful magic items for low levels characters.
I think these are going to make an appearance in my home game.
I just realized this item is going to see play in my game, only it will be crafted by a goblin shamen and instead of flower pedals it will be a two dozen human hands that you walk on.
Oooh. Puts me in mind of one of my favorite scenes from Labyrinth.
Lief, this is one of my top items from this round. I knew from your entries in the 'voluntary reject' thread that whatever you went with would be pretty breathtaking; this lives up. Honestly, I don't know that from function alone that i'd ever have a character who wanted this, since the effect is easy to duplicate via other means, but from the point of view of 'how to do something in style, I would have a set of these around, just to wow the NPCs once in a while. Very elegant. Well done.
You know, stuff like this makes me hate the fly spell.
If nearly limitless vertical movement wasn't so easy in D&D I think that this would be incredibly useful at a wide range of levels. As it is, though, a potion of fly is only a few hundred GP more.
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
You know, stuff like this makes me hate the fly spell.
If nearly limitless vertical movement wasn't so easy in D&D I think that this would be incredibly useful at a wide range of levels. As it is, though, a potion of fly is only a few hundred GP more.
But a potion of fly only gets one person across a chasm. This can get the whole group across. Even with the comparable flight spell this is still useful.
There is also the beauty of being a GM. You can drop an item like this into a treasure hoard and the players can either sell them for 150gp or keep it and find a creative use for it.
it made me think of bleach at first, but obviously these do not cut people apart... I suppose it wouldn't have made it through if it did ^^
But a potion of fly only gets one person across a chasm.
In combat, yes. Out of combat, one character can easily carry the rest across one at a time.
I love this item, I'm just grumbling that the system doesn't leave more room for such effects.
Thanks again, everyone. I'm rather pleased to see that according to volume of posts, only the goblin skull bomb and the steadfast gut-stone have provoked a similar amount of commentary! :D
A few notes now that round 2 submissions are complete: for starters, pricing has been questioned a few times. I came to the conclusion that this was roughly equivalent to a 2nd level spell. It's obviously not as good (or good in as many ways) as fly, and while it's far better at what it does than levitate, the latter has many other uses.
Version 1.0 was called the spring blossom path, and was an unlimited-use item. The mechanics were identical except that it only created 30 feet per use; of course, you could just stand at the end of the path and toss another handful. At 12,000gp value, it was still 25% cheaper than winged boots and still had the advantage of functioning for the whole party. I just didn't like it as much. For starters, it would lose its sparkle if you had access to it in every situation. The beauty would quickly fade behind the utility; it would become less wondrous and more just practical. Meanwhile, becoming a single-use item gave it a much wider window of applicability! You can easily pass a couple of these out to a 1st-level party and not worry about breaking anything, and it remains useful for a very long time.
The one mechanical thing I think may not be 100% clear is that the path is always 60 feet long, unless cut short. That is, the diagonal and vertical versions still require 60 feet of movement to cover the entire distance, even though they don't actually travel as far.
The bit about the blossoms supporting attended objects, by the way, was added specifically to allow carts and carriages to cross. Better hope you've got a well-trained donkey, though. :)
The dark way spell was pointed out to me before I submitted this, but after I'd already made the call on power level. There are some notable differences between this effect and that spell: dark way creates a genuinely solid object, essentially a miniature wall of force which requires two solid anchors. It provides cover, you can leave objects on it unattended, etc. It's not even required to be horizontal, in fact; you really can use it as a narrow wall of force if you've got the anchors. Ironically, the almost certainly unintended tactical uses of dark way make me question its 2nd-level status.
So how did you get to the actual Seven Thousand Blossoms title? Seriously, the Tao te Ching came to mind when I saw the title, which made me read it sooner than others.
So how did you get to the actual Seven Thousand Blossoms title? Seriously, the Tao te Ching came to mind when I saw the title, which made me read it sooner than others.
Oh, right! Haha, I meant to mention that. Fact is, while I'm familiar with many of the concepts, I haven't actually read a lot of Chinese philosophical literature. So I totally faked it.
When it changed to single-use, it seemed like it should have a less open-ended name. I looked up the Chinese numbering system on Wikipedia to see what might make for a simple and appealing set of characters, and my first idea was "Ten Thousand Blossoms." What changed it to seven?
Err...
High on the sacred mountain
Up the seven thousand stairs
In the golden light of autumn
There was magic in the air
...a Rush song. :P
Up the seven thousand stairs
In the golden light of autumn
There was magic in the air
The clouds surrounded the summit
The wind blew strong and cold
Among the silent temples
And the writings carved in gold
Somewhere in my instincts
The primitive took hold.
I stood at the top of the mountain
And China sang to me
In the peaceful haze of harvest time
A song of eternity
If you raise your hands to heaven
You will live a hundred years
I stood there like a mystic
Lost in the atmosphere
The clouds were suddenly parted
For a moment I could see
The patterns of the landscape
Reaching to the eastern sea
I looked upon a presence
Spanning forty centuries.
I stood at the top of the mountain
And China sang to me
In the peaceful haze of harvest time
A song of eternity
I thought of time and distance
The hardships of history
I heard the hope and the hunger
When China sang to me.
High on the sacred mountain
Up the seven thousand stairs
In the golden light of autumn
There was magic in the air...a Rush song. :P
** spoiler omitted **
Because we all know Rush and RPG's don't go hand in hand.....But i really enjoyed the item and look forward to finding a way to break it.
You get bonus points for drawing inspiration from Rush.
RPG Superstar 2008 Top 32, 2011 Top 16
,
Star Voter Season 6, Star Voter Season 7, Star Voter Season 8, Star Voter Season 9
aka JoelF847
|
Great job on making the top 32! What a great, evocative, yet simple item. Other than that, I've got nothing to say - there's nothing I can think of that leaves questions unanswered or that needed criticism!
One thing I love about the item is that the description of the item can lead to cool role play opportunities. Sure, the monk or nature lover will enjoy the serene and natural visuals and theme of the item, but at the same time, I can see the tough dwarf, macho fighter, etc. saying "you want me to walk across a bunch of flowers? Why can't you magic up a path made out of broken weapons, solid stone, or at least something that doesn't look like a pixie sneezed!"
|
Contributor
,
Marathon Voter Season 6, Marathon Voter Season 7, Dedicated Voter Season 8, Star Voter Season 9
aka Boxhead
|
This is a very stylish item with a simple purpose- I love it for that. It has a very oriental feel for sure, but also a very heavy mythic feel. This is the kind of item that a legendary character uses and then is copied by imitators-usually in a watered down version. That's just my opinion, of course, but I could easily see this scaled up into an artifact, just widening the appeal.
This is a very cool item! I love the tactical implications it offers and that it's very much a "team" item. IMO, there aren't enough low-cost wondrous items from which an entire party can benefit. Your design is elegant and brief (under 200 words?), and very well written. Bravo!
Kudos and good luck in R2!
...A creator can create an item at a lower caster level than her own, but never lower than then minimum level needed to cast the needed spell...
I've posted three or four times, in various places, why this is wrong... starting before I even entered this contest. (The rules text itself needs errata. That restriction should probably apply only to spell completion and spell trigger items; maybe pure spells-in-cans.) Why is it wrong? Because there are published wondrous items in the core rulebook which violate it. Folding boat, bracelet of friends as a wizard, cloak of the bat, and I haven't even made it to D yet.
Is it possible that it's all of those items which are in error? Yes. But the section of the rules that you quoted is known to have had some long-standing issues, inherited all the way back from pre-errata 3.0, and that particular paragraph wasn't changed with PF. When multiple applied examples within a specific category contradict non-specific a header paragraph, I side with the designers, not the editors (sorry James!).
And again, I've stated exactly this in response to others' confusion on multiple occasions, here on the forums. I didn't overlook anything, I set those numbers as they were knowing that the prerequisite spell required level 7 to cast, but since I was not actually producing that spell's effect, it didn't matter. "Rules-fu" requires seeing the forest and the trees.
I've really been trying to encourage you, Charles, but I've seen you spew so much thinly-veiled piss and vinegar at the top 32 (present and prior) since you didn't make the cut, that I'm starting to think you're not going to make it next year either. You're not looking for what you did wrong, you're looking for what everyone else did wrong, especially the judges. It may pad your ego to "prove" that missing the mark was the fault of mistakes made by others, not yourself; but it won't get you where you want to be. It certainly isn't making you any friends. I'm a patient person, and I'm also a forthright person. I'll say this to your face, and I won't hold a grudge if you turn it around. Others have said it behind your back, and the number who will give you a second chance will shrink rapidly if you keep up this passive-aggressive vitriol.
Charles,
I haven't participated in Superstar and I have no real inclination to do so, but I've enjoyed reading what everyone else -- those who made the cut -- and those who didn't -- have provided as their wonderous item and the upcoming R2 new monster fluff. There's a number of individuals that have been trying to be helpful in providing constructive criticism to those soliciting for them. It's probably safe to say that you and Azmahel has done the lion's share. But to use Azmahel as an example, I get a different tone when reading his responses versus reading yours. Before Lief even posted his comment upthread, I basically thought the same thing myself -- your critiquing tone has taken on a caustic, if not vitrolic voice and it really seems it comes out of the disappointment that you had with the lack of success in reaching the round of 32 in consecutive years. I've read your posts of self-doubt prior to the contest beginning as if you were already preparing yourself for defeat before you've even begun.
I have a respect for your detailed knowledge on the minuate of the pathfinder rules; it's much more than the surface I barely have scratched with whatever knowledge I currently have of the system. I think the last thing you'd really want to come across as is a bitter rulius magisterius. It's probably better to step back, take a deep breath, quaff a tasty beverage, and when you're feeling a little better, offer your observations and then offer some encouragement / positive reinforcement to improve for the following year.
And just for the record, I haven't participated in any of these third party discussions as Lief mentioned upthread; this is purely my own observation that I figured needed a reaffirmation by an unbiased impartial nonparticipant.
Sincerely,
Urizen
I should echo Urizen's opening comment, Charles - you've put out a lot of effort over the past few days, and I know that your primary motivations have been constructive. I don't think you're a bad person, and I do think you've got a lot of knowledge and the potential to do something with it. You clearly want to be helpful to others, and you've taken my reprimand graciously and at face value, both of which say a lot.
We all slip sometimes. Don't quit.
<blink>
Well..
Lief, this is a wonderful item. I don't have a bad thing to say about it; except I'm scared you're gonna win!
Just kidding, if you win you'll have earned it- and this is a great start.
Fantastic visuals and elegant design. I have every confidence you're going to 'wow' us all in Round Two.
All of those things that Jim said. Beautiful, useful, tight, not game breaking. Stellar.
Good luck in Round 2!
{The rules text itself needs errata. That restriction should probably apply only to spell completion and spell trigger items; maybe pure spells-in-cans.}
That restriction should only apply to items that actually duplicate a spell's effects. For an item like a folding boat (CL 6th but uses the fabricate spell as a prereq) the minimum caster level for the spell is irrelevant because the item isn't duplicating the effects of the spell. There's no "create a folding boat" spell, and fabricate is just an approximation of the sort of magic needed to create the boat, so the caster level of the boat is decoupled from the minimum caster level of the spell.
I personally don't think the rule is in error, it's just that people tend to apply it to circumstances (like the folding boat) where it doesn't matter. It doesn't matter if the folding boat has a CL of 6th or 9th--its effects aren't reliant upon a caster level, and the only time it would come up in play is if someone decided to cast dispel magic on it, and I wouldn't hold my breath for that to happen.
It doesn't matter whether or not you roll weapon damage against something you KNOW is going to die if you hit it (say, a common rat), but the rules don't actually say "you don't have to roll damage if you know your attack is going to kill the creature no matter what." Technically, you ARE supposed to roll weapon damage if you make a successful attack, but it doesn't matter whether you do or not--just like it doesn't really matter if the CL of the folding boat is lower than the minimum CL for fabricate.
I personally don't think the rule is in error, it's just that people tend to apply it to circumstances (like the folding boat) where it doesn't matter.
You're right... it's the kind of thing Paizo terms a clarification, not errata per se. Something to go in the FAQ, maybe? The impression Charles got is a very common one, and much as my ego would love to think otherwise, the vast majority will never read this thread. ;)