I must not understand the costing rules for crafting staves, because every time I try, I get numbers way different than the ones in the SRD.
Here's what I've been doing
750*(spell level)*(CL of that spell)*(multiplier)/(# charges that spell takes)
...where "multiplier" is either 100%, 75%, or 50% depending on whether it's the most costly, second most costly, or less than second most costly ability.
That seems like it'd work, but my results are way off.
for Staff of Weather I get 43562, which isn't too far off. (44200)
for Staff of Healing I get 19125, which is worse. (29600)
for Staff of Frost, I get 29625, which is way off. (41400)
What am I doing wrong?
Is there a link that explains this somewhere?
for Staff of Weather I get 43562, which isn't too far off. (44200)
for Staff of Healing I get 19125, which is worse. (29600)
for Staff of Frost, I get 29625, which is way off. (41400)What am I doing wrong?
Is there a link that explains this somewhere?
I haven't done the math, but I would suspect that you have made the calculation on minimal caster level. Staff need a caster level of at least 8, which should bump the price up a bit.
Well you've corrected my first error (not looking up the farging craft staff rules) but I still can't get it to work.
Staff of Weather
(spell) - (level) - (CL) - (charges) - (lvl*cl/charges) - multiplier - total
Fog Cloud - 2 - 8 - 1 - 16 - 200 - 3200
Gust of Wind - 2 - 8 - 1 - 16 - 200 - 3200
Ice Storm - 4 - 8 - 2 - 16 - 200 - 3200
Sleet Storm - 3 - 8 - 2 - 12 - 200 - 2400
Wind Wall - 3 - 8 - 2 - 24 - 300 - 7200
Control Weather - 7 - 13 - 3 - 30.33 - 400 - 12133
Total cost for the staff is 31,333 as calculated, and is 44,200 in the book.
Where'd I go wrong?
If I replace the CL of each spell with 13 then I get 43,333. Closer but still not "right."
Rereading the thread linked above, looks like the CL is of the staff, not of the spell. But I still can't get that to work.
Staff of Healing: (CL8)
Cure Serious Wounds: 400*3*8/1=9600
Lesser Restoration: 400*2*8/1=6400
Remove Blind/Deaf: 400*3*8/2=4800
Remove Disease: 400*3*8/3=3200
9600+0.75*6400+0.5*4800+0.5*3200 = 16,800
Book says 29,600.
Even if I give the staff a CL of 11, which is the minimum level to take "Craft Staff" (still don't know why there's CL8 staves in the rules) then it's 23,100, not 29,600.
*headdesk*
The staff of healing was created without calculating the reduction in cost due to multiple charges.
Edit: Or... it could be that and it should be Restoration instead of Lesser Restoration...
Cure Serious Wounds SL 3, CL 8
Restoration SL 4, CL 8
Remove Blind/Deaf SL 3, CL 8
Remove Disease SL 3, CL 8
Restoration: 400 * 4 * 8 = 12800
Cure Seri W: 300 * 3 * 8 = 7200
Remove B/D : 200 * 3 * 8 = 4800
Remove Dis.: 200 * 3 * 8 = 4800
12800 + 7200 + 4800 + 4800 = 29600gp
Alright, here we go.
Cure Serious Wounds . SL 3, CL 8, 1 charge
Lesser Restoration ..... SL 2, CL 8, 1 charge
Remove Blind/Deaf ...... SL 3, CL 8, 2 charges
Remove Disease ........ SL 3, CL 8, 3 charges
CSW, Remove B/D, and Remove D all have a base cost of 9600gp (LR has a base of 6400gp), making them all equally likely to be the "highest level spell" on the staff. If you put Remove D in the top spot, you can cut this cost by a third due to the 3 charges.
Math:
Remove Disease ......... 9600 * 1.00 / 3= 3200
Remove Blind/Deaf ...... 9600 * 0.75 / 2= 3600
Cure Serious Wounds . 9600 * 0.5 / 1= 4800
Lesser Restoration ..... 6400 * 0.5 / 1= 3200
-----
3200+3600+4800+3200 = 14800 * 2 = 29600gp
Edit: Clarified math a bit.
Well, the best answer I can give, is that the magic items in the book isn't priced by the formulae, but by the devs opinion of the items worth. Furthermore the items and their price is carried on from earlier editions, and written at a time before those earlier editions actually made rules for magic item creation.
There are a lot of items, that doesn't fit the calculations for magic item creation. But for staves it does seem odd that they don't, as they have the most uniform creation rules (as well as scrolls, wands and potions).
Alright, here we go.
Cure Serious Wounds . SL 3, CL 8, 1 charge
Lesser Restoration ..... SL 2, CL 8, 1 charge
Remove Blind/Deaf ...... SL 3, CL 8, 2 charges
Remove Disease ........ SL 3, CL 8, 3 chargesCSW, Remove B/D, and Remove D all have a base cost of 9600gp (LR has a base of 6400gp), making them all equally likely to be the "highest level spell" on the staff. If you put Remove D in the top spot, you can cut this cost by a third due to the 3 charges.
Math:
Remove Disease ......... 9600 * 1.00 / 3= 3200
Remove Blind/Deaf ...... 9600 * 0.75 / 2= 3600
Cure Serious Wounds . 9600 * 0.5 / 1= 4800
Lesser Restoration ..... 6400 * 0.5 / 1= 3200
-----
3200+3600+4800+3200 = 14800 * 2 = 29600gpEdit: Clarified math a bit.
Well okay, should have actually read your post:)
That fits the bill, and is according to rules (although a clarification on which highest level spell to price first would be lovely).
If it, like the book does it, is allowed to use charge-expensive spells as the first and second spell, you can exploit this to gain a discount on the staff. With two spells of the highest level using 10 charges per use, you'll save yourself at a third of the price, or at around 230 *spell level*caster level for items with multiple spells.
Staff of Remove blind(10 ch) Remove disease (10 ch) Cure Serious Wounds (1 ch):
400*3*8/10
300*3*8/10
200*3*8
= 270*3*8 = 6480
Staff of Cure Serious Wounds (1 ch):
400*3*8
= 9600
While a quick glance at the math shows no flaws, it seems to me that this is a gross exploit of the rules. Of course i am presuming this "discount" staff was made with the intent of only using the cure serious.
I fully agree that it is an exploit of the rules, and I would encourage GMs to disallow it.
I posted the example and raised the issue, because I find it problematic that the staves in the book (or some of them) follow this design. In my opinion the most costly spell - after adjusting for charges - should be the primary spell to price the item off, but as of now that isn't the case.
As a side note, i just noticed a line removed from table 15-29 "Estimating Magic Item GP Value" (specifically, i am noting a difference between wands and staffs)
In 3.x, wands and other 4th level or lower cost items had a gp multiplier of 750, while 5th lvl plus and staffs were x900. It seems that a flat 750 either way is now the standard. It may correct some item calculations i previously thought to be flawed, but to lazy to do any more math tonight.
Well the table does not include staves as far as I can see. But the 'Creating staves' section writes 400 * spell level * caster level, for creating them.
So the market value gets a gp modifier of 800 (dropping to 600 and 400 for additional spells).As far as I can see 3.5 had a gp modifier of 375 in creation, thus the 750 gp in market price.
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
Alright, here we go.
Cure Serious Wounds . SL 3, CL 8, 1 charge
Lesser Restoration ..... SL 2, CL 8, 1 charge
Remove Blind/Deaf ...... SL 3, CL 8, 2 charges
Remove Disease ........ SL 3, CL 8, 3 chargesCSW, Remove B/D, and Remove D all have a base cost of 9600gp (LR has a base of 6400gp), making them all equally likely to be the "highest level spell" on the staff. If you put Remove D in the top spot, you can cut this cost by a third due to the 3 charges.
Math:
Remove Disease ......... 9600 * 1.00 / 3= 3200
Remove Blind/Deaf ...... 9600 * 0.75 / 2= 3600
Cure Serious Wounds . 9600 * 0.5 / 1= 4800
Lesser Restoration ..... 6400 * 0.5 / 1= 3200
-----
3200+3600+4800+3200 = 14800 * 2 = 29600gpEdit: Clarified math a bit.
Why'd you multiply by 2 at the end? Isn't the cost determined in the procedure supposed to be the market value? For instance, Staff of Weather: (using druid spell levels since they're cheaper)
Staff of Weather - CL 13
Fog Cloud Level 2 base cost = 13*2*400=10400
Gust of Wind Level 2 base cost = 13*2*400=10400
Wind Wall Level 3 base cost = 13*3*400=15600
Ice Storm Level 4 base cost = 13*4*400=20800
Sleet Storm Level 3 base cost = 13*3*400=15600
Control Weather Level 7 base cost = 13*7*400=36400
Give Control Weather the 100% and Ice Storm the 75%, then divide by charges and you get this:
Fog Cloud = 10400*.5/1=5200
Gust of Wind = 10400*.5/1=5200
Wind Wall = 15600*.5/1=7800
Ice Storm = 20800*.75/2=7800
Sleet Storm = 15600*.5/2=3900
Control Weather = 36400*1/3=12133
Net cost of 42,033 if we price it out. Do I double it like you did?
Book says Staff of Weather is 22,100 to create, 44,200 to buy. May be some slight level differences due to Druid/Mage, but not a lot.
Staff Stealth costs out to 18,400 using the above rules, which is exactly the market value listed in the book, and twice the cost to create listed in the book. Staff of Shrieking is the same deal. Follow the procedure and you get the full market value, not the cost to create.
Where's that x2 coming from?
edit: I'm starting to think Staff of Healing was a typeo.
edit 2: Staff of Frost comes out like Staff of Healing, where the procedure produces the crafting cost instead of the market cost.
edit 3: Staff of Necromancy comes out like Frost and Healing - the procedure produces the crafting cost, not the market value.
Did someone at Paizo screw up? It's starting to look like all the original staves were costed out to produce the "crafting cost" and were marked up double for the market value, and all the APG staves were costed out to produce the "market value," and the crafting cost was taken as half the market value.
edit 4: Ugh, that's not even the screwup. Staff of Many Rays (APG) costs out at 28600, which is the listed craft price, not market price.
So some staves have their costed price listed as the market value price, and some staves have their costed price listed as the crafting price, and there seems to be no rhyme or reason of which is which.
Any help?
If it, like the book does it, is allowed to use charge-expensive spells as the first and second spell, you can exploit this to gain a discount on the staff. With two spells of the highest level using 10 charges per use, you'll save yourself at a third of the price, or at around 230 *spell level*caster level for items with multiple spells.
Yes, this is true, and yes, it's dumb. I pointed this out during the playtest as well (although I didn't consider the possibility of using a multiple-charge spell in favour of a single charge spell in the case of a tie in spell levels, which is extra-dumb).
I agree to a good extent here.The only thing I'd say is that the pricing guide for staves is far too high as it is when you start talking about multiple spells. The added flexibility is not worth the scaling in the price.
Rather than add 2 spells to a staff you could have an entire other staff of either of the two spells. That seems.. well off.
If they are going to redo staves (and I think that they should) imho the 'best' way to do so would be to make 'templates' for staves (x spells at x level, etc) that you could just decide what spells to fit in where.
-James
I am not sure, I quite follow you here.
As it is, the price is scaling downwards, for multiple spells in a staff. So having one will be cheaper than two at any time.
Templates could give a great baseline for building staves. Especially as an alternative to rules that is unhelpful.
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
Loopholes aside,
Is there any guidance about why some staves are half price in the rules? Is that a Paizo editing error?
So far we've discovered this:
Staff of Weather - half price
Staff of Stealth - half price
Staff of Shrieking - half price
Staff of Healing - full price
Staff of Frost - full price
Staff of Necromancy - full price
Staff of Many Rays - full price
Someone want to check some of the other staves?
I don't know if they are half or not- I'll leave that to folk who are better at math than I.
*all* magical item creation rules though fall under "if the price is too high or low when you are done- adjust it to be in line with the power of the item". That is why reverse-engineering the items in the book doesn't always work out very well. They make the item, price it, look at the effect and the level it should be effective at, and then adjust the accordingly.
-S
I don't know if they are half or not- I'll leave that to folk who are better at math than I.
*all* magical item creation rules though fall under "if the price is too high or low when you are done- adjust it to be in line with the power of the item". That is why reverse-engineering the items in the book doesn't always work out very well. They make the item, price it, look at the effect and the level it should be effective at, and then adjust the accordingly.
-S
Well okay, but all the staves I've checked either come in at exactly the full market value listed in the book, or exactly half the market value listed in the book. (the crafting cost)
Hard to believe that's due to a power level adjustment and not either A) some other pricing structure rule we're missing, or B) a typeo. (or C- I'm screwing up somewhere)
You have a staff with 3 spells in it consider that the 'base staff'.
Now consider the price of the same staff with 2 MORE spells in it (the 'expanded staff') versus the 'base staff' plus a completely new staff with ONE of those two spells in it.
The cost vs return on multiple spells for staves is NOT worth it.
-James
Umm, I don't think that's right, unless your staves are two majorly different CLs.
With two staves of the same CL, you'd rather have it in one staff so all the spells in the other staff get the 50% multiplier, and none get the 100% or 75%. With two staves of significantly different CLs, you'd rather have them in two staves, so the lower level staff doesn't have as high a CL multiplier.
You have a staff with 3 spells in it consider that the 'base staff'.Now consider the price of the same staff with 2 MORE spells in it (the 'expanded staff') versus the 'base staff' plus a completely new staff with ONE of those two spells in it.
The cost vs return on multiple spells for staves is NOT worth it.
-James
You have a point. Especially with different spell levels, it is uninteresting to stack more on your existing staff, eventhough the price is lower.
Rechargeability is in many cases preferable to the flexibility of more spell choices, for an wizard especially.For sorcerers, I like staff to expand my repetoire.
You have a staff with 3 spells in it consider that the 'base staff'.Now consider the price of the same staff with 2 MORE spells in it (the 'expanded staff') versus the 'base staff' plus a completely new staff with ONE of those two spells in it.
The cost vs return on multiple spells for staves is NOT worth it.
-JamesYou have a point. Especially with different spell levels, it is uninteresting to stack more on your existing staff, eventhough the price is lower.
Rechargeability is in many cases preferable to the flexibility of more spell choices, for an wizard especially.For sorcerers, I like staves with multiple spells to expand my repetoire.
Staff - predicted cost via the math - Paizo listed market price - Paizo listed crafting price
(bolded indicates the closest match to the math)
Core:
Staff of Healing - 14,800 - 29,600 - 14,800
Staff of Frost - 20,667 - 41,400 - 20,700
Staff of Necromancy - 40,950 - 82,000 - 41,000
Staff of Charming - 8,800 - 17,600 - 8,800
Staff of Fire - 9,467 - 18,950 - 9,475
Staff of Evocation - 40,950 - 82,000 - 41,000
APG:
Staff of Weather - 42,033 - 44,200 - 22,100
Staff of Stealth - 18,400 - 18,400 - 9,200
Staff of Shrieking - 14,400 - 14,400 - 7,200
Staff of Many Rays - 28,600 - 52,800 - 26,400
Staff of Vision - 41,250 - 41,250 - 20,625
Staff of Traps - 20,400 - 21,200 - 10,600
I'm going off of the list prices at www.d20pfsrd.com .. are those correct?
Looks like almost all the staves in the APG are on 50% discount.
Staff - predicted cost via the math - Paizo listed market price - Paizo listed crafting price
(bolded indicates the closest match to the math)
Core:
Staff of Healing - 14,800 - 29,600 - 14,800
Staff of Frost - 20,667 - 41,400 - 20,700
Staff of Necromancy - 40,950 - 82,000 - 41,000
Staff of Charming - 8,800 - 17,600 - 8,800
Staff of Fire - 9,467 - 18,950 - 9,475
Staff of Evocation - 40,950 - 82,000 - 41,000APG:
Staff of Weather - 42,033 - 44,200 - 22,100
Staff of Stealth - 18,400 - 18,400 - 9,200
Staff of Shrieking - 14,400 - 14,400 - 7,200
Staff of Many Rays - 28,600 - 52,800 - 26,400
Staff of Vision - 41,250 - 41,250 - 20,625
Staff of Traps - 20,400 - 21,200 - 10,600I'm going off of the list prices at www.d20pfsrd.com .. are those correct?
Looks like almost all the staves in the APG are on 50% discount.
It makes sense that the person pricing the items for the APG just made a mistake in which calculation to use. Why staff of Many Rays is priced correctly then is somewhat a mystery. But it is perhaps made at an earlier time, or just by someone else.
I would say it looks like the ones in the core are at a 2x markup for some reason, judging by the math, not that the APG ones are at a discount.
So you're saying Traken is wrong above, when he multiplies by two at the end? Regardless, either one book is wrong or the other. Mainly my question is just "which is wrong and which is right" so I can know how to cost out stuff in my game.
I only checked three, but you're still clearly doing something wrong, and I don't care enough to try to personally find exactly where you did something wrong.
Nope, I'm afraid you're doing it wrong on two of yours, and we agree on the third:
Price of ability/item - (charges used) Spell Name - # level of spell
8266 - Staff of Fire CL 8
1600 - (1) Burning Hands 1
2400 - (2) Fireball 2
4266 - (3) Wall of Fire 4
Fireball gets a 75% multiplier, not a 50% multiplier like you did there. Brings fireball to 3600 and the staff to 9461, which is exactly the cost to craft from the core rules.
23100 - Staff of Many Rays CL 11
2200 - (1) Ray of Enfeeblement 1
9900 - (1) Ray of Exhaustion 3
2200 - (2) Scorching Ray 2
8800 - (3) Disintegrate 6
You're missing enervate at 75% (6600gp), which drops Exhaustion to a 50% multiplier (also 6600gp), net price is 28600, which is 2000 gp off the cost to craft in the APG. Neither of our attempts at calculating this staff give us the book value, which is curious. I can't replicate Paizo's number for that staff no matter how I monkey the multipliers around. I suspect they just got fat fingers on the calculator for that one.
40950 - Staff of Evocation CL 13
7800 - (1) Fireball 3
2600 - (1) Magic Missile 1
5200 - (1) Shatter 2
5200 - (2) Ice Storm 4
9750 - (2) Wall of Force 5
10400 - (3) Chain Lightning 6
That's the same number I calculated for Staff of Evocation, but thanks for checking it for me.
So in your opinion, does the formula produce the market value or the crafting cost? If the former, then the APG costs are mostly right and the core rules costs are doubled. If the latter, then the APG costs are half as much as they should be, with the exception (so far) of Many Rays, approximately anyway.
Well, now I know where I went wrong, but it's not because of the multiplier. I used the wrong spell level.
I just checked your work vs my spreadsheets and saw fireball was wrong and enervate was missing. (an engineer never throws a spreadsheet away) I guess I presumed you must have gotten the multiplier wrong for fireball instead of the spell level, since it's, like, the most famous 3rd level spell ever since the Carter administration. Hehe.
So APG's too cheap. Glad we got that settled.
This thread inspired me into writing a program in C that calculates the price of staves.
Anyone willing to test it can email me at:
This thread inspired me into writing a program in C that calculates the price of staves.
Anyone willing to test it can email me at:
** spoiler omitted **.
Wow Leo, thanks a bunch, that's awesome.
I'll stick to my spreadsheets, but it should be a pretty handy tool for checking staff costs. Email sent.
This thread inspired me into writing a program in C that calculates the price of staves.
Anyone willing to test it can email me at:
** spoiler omitted **.Wow Leo, thanks a bunch, that's awesome.
I'll stick to my spreadsheets, but it should be a pretty handy tool for checking staff costs. Email sent.
No need for emails (i just found out how to use dropbox), here is the link. I must say that the prices may not be equal to the core's because i used integers instead of float variables (and maybe something will be lost when you divide the numbers) but i don't think that any difference will be more 10-20 gp.
No need for emails (i just found out how to use dropbox), here is the link. I must say that the prices may not be equal to the core's because i used integers instead of float variables (and maybe something will be lost when you divide the numbers) but i don't think that any difference will be more 10-20 gp.This thread inspired me into writing a program in C that calculates the price of staves.
Anyone willing to test it can email me at:
** spoiler omitted **.Wow Leo, thanks a bunch, that's awesome.
I'll stick to my spreadsheets, but it should be a pretty handy tool for checking staff costs. Email sent.
From my experience costing them above, the Paizo guys tended to round to the nearest 100 for final prices.
Neat program. Looks like it works to me.
From my experience costing them above, the Paizo guys tended to round to the nearest 100 for final prices.
Really? I hadn't noticed.
Neat program. Looks like it works to me.
Thank you.
If you find anything wrong with either the math or the language (english isn't my first language) please let me know.
From my experience costing them above, the Paizo guys tended to round to the nearest 100 for final prices.
Really? I hadn't noticed.
Neat program. Looks like it works to me.Thank you.
If you find anything wrong with either the math or the language (english isn't my first language) please let me know.
Staff of Frost costs out to 20,666.67 which is rounded to 20,700 as cost to craft in the core book, and 41,400 market value. (doubled)
...and actually, it looks like that's a bug in your program! Your software predicts 22,500 to craft and 45,000 market value.
The way Paizo did it: (also me)
spell - level - base cost - multiplier - charges - net
ice storm - 4 - 16,000 - 0.5 - 1 - 8000
wall of ice - 4 - 16,000 - 0.75 - 2 - 6000
cone of cold - 5 - 20,000 - 1.0 - 3 - 6666.67
total = 20,666.67
The way I suspect your software did it:
spell - level - base cost - multiplier - charges - net
ice storm - 4 - 16,000 - 0.75 - 1 - 12,000
wall of ice - 4 - 16,000 - 0.5 - 2 - 4,000
cone of cold - 5 - 20,000 - 1.0 - 3 - 6,666.67
total = 22,666.67
Since the crafter is allowed to choose the order of the multiplier before he applies the reduction due to charges in the case of ties, the crafter can game the system a little. Your software reported 22,500 instead of 22,667, which I suspect goes back to your comment earlier about using integer datatypes instead of real number data types in your variable definitions.
I think your software is costing it a legal way, just not necessarily the most advantageous legal way, and the Paizo numbers (when done properly) reflect the most advantageous legal way to do it.
Probably take another conditional statement or two to clean it up.
@beej67
I don't think that it's the integer's fault, but you got the other one right. When i made the programm i didn't know which one way (the most advantegeous or the other one) and i make it do it the other way (not the advantegeous way), but since staff of frost seems to use the most beneficial way i will change it back.
So when i find a little time i will change it and re-post it here.
Thank you for spotting that.
That calculator program is crap (edit: thanks for trying though!). It doesn't even let me choose the CL of the staff.
I tried making a staff with intensified burning hands, intensified shocking grasp, and [1 3rd-level spell I hadn't decided upon].
It set it to the minimum caster level (8) instead of where I wanted it (10, to take full advantage of intensified).
My excel work sheet I made for v3.5 is still valid and works better. It also covers other magic item types.
That calculator program is crap (edit: thanks for trying though!). It doesn't even let me choose the CL of the staff.
I tried making a staff with intensified burning hands, intensified shocking grasp, and [1 3rd-level spell I hadn't decided upon].
It set it to the minimum caster level (8) instead of where I wanted it (10, to take full advantage of intensified).
My excel work sheet I made for v3.5 is still valid and works better. It also covers other magic item types.
It's not crap. It asks you whether a wiz, sorc, or bard is making it, and it knows the highest spell level in the staff, so it figures CL out on its own.
For christ's sake, it's free user generated content written in C, what do you want flash animation and a windows GUI or something?
So it's got a bug, big deal.
Excel sheet you say? Wanna pop it up on google docs?
For christ's sake, it's free user generated content written in C, what do you want flash animation and a windows GUI or something?So it's got a bug, big deal.
Unfortunately i am learning flash in this semester (that means it might take some time before i can meke anything other than colored objects that move) and i haven't really ever worked GUI up until now.
So it's got a bug, big deal.
I think i might have found how to repair the thing with the price, i am running some tests now.
@Ravingdork
I haven't really thought about metamagic feats applied (since you can just insert the modified spell level), now the reason i didn't make the program asking for a CL because i couldn't think of any reason for anyone wanting to craft a staff at a higher CL than necessary (since it would cost much more). Aperantly i was wrong on two things, the first one is that i forgot about the intensified spell feat and the second is that i thought that staves use the user's CL at all times and not only when the user's CL is higher than the stave's. Anyway thank you for pointing this out for me, i will add an entry about CL (if you want to create it with higher CL).
Also the problem i have with excel is that you must have (meaning pay) microsoft office in order to do a good work and since i don't have it in my home PC, i can only use the microsoft office when i am at the university.
I tried making a staff with intensified burning hands, intensified shocking grasp, and [1 3rd-level spell I hadn't decided upon].
Can you point me towards any rules concerning crafting metamagic feats into magic items? I wasn't aware that it is legal, but if I am wrong, then I am glad to learn.
Can you point me towards any rules concerning crafting metamagic feats into magic items? I wasn't aware that it is legal, but if I am wrong, then I am glad to learn.
I tried making a staff with intensified burning hands, intensified shocking grasp, and [1 3rd-level spell I hadn't decided upon].
There are core staves and wondrous items that use metamagic in their construction.
Take a look at the crown of major blasting and the staff of power.
@beej67
I think i corrected the costing order thing, can you (or anyone else) check it?
Here
Excel sheet you say? Wanna pop it up on google docs?
I haven't really figured out Google docs yet.
@Ravingdork
I put an option about setting a higher caster level on the staff. Do you want to try it?Here
Excel sheet you say? Wanna pop it up on google docs?I haven't really figured out Google docs yet.
It's pretty cool -
get gmail account
go to 'docs' tab
upload excel file
set sharing restrictions
copy/paste link into thread
cloud computing yay
You should be able to rig it so people can't edit yours but can copy it into their own google docs folder. If your spreadsheet is too pimped out with macros/etc it might not upload cleanly.
@Ravingdork
I put an option about setting a higher caster level on the staff. Do you want to try it?Here
It looks like it works, but it points out another Paizo error. When I calculated Staff of Frost I used an ICL10 because that's what's shown in the book, when technically there's no reason the staff couldn't have been ICL9, had all the spells, and been cheaper.
I have a separate question ravingdork:
It set it to the minimum caster level (8) instead of where I wanted it (10, to take full advantage of intensified).
Why would you need to do this? Spells from staves come out at the wielder's CL, not the staff's CL. The only thing CL is used for in a staff is the cost.