|
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I once broached the subject of creating a Metamagic Ring, with Silent and Still spell.
But, no matter who I spoke to, everyone said I need to make a Rod, because rods handle Metamagic, not rings.
The final answer was "Well, it's an Unwritten rule..."
I hate that answer, it's an dumb answer, it's a cheap cop out.
An Unwritten rule is not a rule at all.
So, my question is two fold.. How many have delt with this and do you know of any other silly Unwritten rules and does anyone else agree that it might be better to make a Metamagic ring?
thoughts?
I once broached the subject of creating a Metamagic Ring, with Silent and Still spell.
But, no matter who I spoke to, everyone said I need to make a Rod, because rods handle Metamagic, not rings.The final answer was "Well, it's an Unwritten rule..."
I hate that answer, it's an dumb answer, it's a cheap cop out.
An Unwritten rule is not a rule at all.
So, my question is two fold.. How many have delt with this and do you know of any other silly Unwritten rules and does anyone else agree that it might be better to make a Metamagic ring?
thoughts?
Anything the DM says is Law, written or not.
I know this from experience. I had a GM breaking all kinds of rules, but WOTC said they didn't have any court system I could take the case to.
Well there is the unwritten rule about not using the urinal next to someone else if you can help...
A metamagic ring sounds pretty cool though.
How will you write down every possible rule combination in a finite book that can realistically be published. Combinatorics can be a problem to this. How much more will you be willing to pay for a core rulebook that does this.
I get frustrated with unwritten rules too.
I actually think a metamagic ring is not overpowered at all if it takes up the item slot but will be an unusual slot item. But rods will actually be more powerful.
Well there is the unwritten rule about not using the urinal next to someone else if you can help...
A metamagic ring sounds pretty cool though.
Don't know about you but my manbook specifically states the proper behavior in the restroom.
|
I once broached the subject of creating a Metamagic Ring, with Silent and Still spell.
But, no matter who I spoke to, everyone said I need to make a Rod, because rods handle Metamagic, not rings.The final answer was "Well, it's an Unwritten rule..."
I hate that answer, it's an dumb answer, it's a cheap cop out.
An Unwritten rule is not a rule at all.
So, my question is two fold.. How many have delt with this and do you know of any other silly Unwritten rules and does anyone else agree that it might be better to make a Metamagic ring?
thoughts?
In PFRPG, the idea of a more streamlined/unified body slot tracking system was introduced/refined. All stat bump items for physical stats were belts, all for mental stats became headbands. This removed the whole stacking issue when a person has Gloves of Ogre Strength and wants to put on a Belt of Giant Strength.
Essentially, the upthread people are right. The GM is the final arbiter of their own game. PFRPG just supports their decision.
AFAIK its not exactly an unwritten rule, its body slot affinity. Metamagic doesn't have an affinity for rings, so it'd cost +50% (or is it double, I forget).
As to why metamagic feats generally don't work on rings, because they would be better and metamagic rods are pretty much a must have for spell casters as it is.
I believe it's 50% more if it's in another slot (or when it's a second ability of an item) and 100% more if it takes no slot whatsoever. (Ioun stones.)
...so I think most GMs would allow it at the 50% premium. Some might even waive that.
|
Technically it is a *written* rule that all items not explicitly listed in the book are up to the DM.
That said, if I were your DM and you had Craft Rod I'd totally let you make it in ring form. You exchange not needing to hold the item for using up a magic item slot.
<rant>
Then again, I've never been of the current crafting system. It is extremely imbalanced (especially Craft Wondrous, which can make damn near anything) and makes relatively little sense (IMO). It should probably be more like "Craft One-Use", "Craft Continuous", "Craft Charged" and "Craft Unlimited/Rechargeable". Then toss in a discount for making it usable only by casters (this turns "one use" into scroll, "charged" into wand and "rechargeable" in stave).
Maybe include a "Craft Multi-Property" for adding more than one property to the same item or other creative item crafting feats.
</rant>
Technically it is a *written* rule that all items not explicitly listed in the book are up to the DM.
That said, if I were your DM and you had Craft Rod I'd totally let you make it in ring form. You exchange not needing to hold the item for using up a magic item slot.
<rant>
Then again, I've never been of the current crafting system. It is extremely imbalanced (especially Craft Wondrous, which can make damn near anything) and makes relatively little sense (IMO). It should probably be more like "Craft One-Use", "Craft Continuous", "Craft Charged" and "Craft Unlimited/Rechargeable". Then toss in a discount for making it usable only by casters (this turns "one use" into scroll, "charged" into wand and "rechargeable" in stave).Maybe include a "Craft Multi-Property" for adding more than one property to the same item or other creative item crafting feats.
</rant>
Or you could be like me and my DMs where you can craft anything without the feats as long as you have access to the required components - and the ability to use them.
|
|
Anything the DM says is Law, written or not.
I know this from experience. I had a GM breaking all kinds of rules, but WOTC said they didn't have any court system I could take the case to.
Noted, but I did not mention GM's, did I, this is about Rules, or the lack there of.
AFAIK its not exactly an unwritten rule, its body slot affinity. Metamagic doesn't have an affinity for rings, so it'd cost +50% (or is it double, I forget).
As to why metamagic feats generally don't work on rings, because they would be better and metamagic rods are pretty much a must have for spell casters as it is.
What page is that on?
Well there is the unwritten rule about not using the urinal next to someone else if you can help...
Ya know, *adjust bra* I have never had this problem at all.
Now, to make sure we are all on the same page. I am tal;king about Pathfinder the table top RPG.
If you have a Rule, make sure to quote a page and let's all agree that the GM is the final word.
But again, this is not about a GM an his/her rules.. but the books themselves.
How will you write down every possible rule combination in a finite book that can realistically be published. Combinatorics can be a problem to this. How much more will you be willing to pay for a core rulebook that does this.
Very good point, Easy answer: Other books and FAQ's.
That which is forgotten in the first go, can be made clear in future prints or game aids.| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Don't metamagic rods not take up a body slot and thus are more expensive then a slotted item by 100 percent. But then addinge 50 precent more to that shouldn't creating an irregular slotted item shouldn't it be 3/4 the price of the rod if using those numbers.
|
|
Don't metamagic rods not take up a body slot and thus are more expensive then a slotted item by 100 percent. But then addinge 50 precent more to that shouldn't creating an irregular slotted item shouldn't it be 3/4 the price of the rod if using those numbers.
Interesting thought.
Let's say Doctor Wu has Gloves of Storing, That takes up the Hand slot.
But you get an awesome Rod of Smote Dragons! .. How do you use it?
If Rod's take up a slot, an I don't see where they do.. that would be the Hand. Unless you want to get creative, Use the mouth?.. I shall leave other body parts out of this for modesty sake.
Edit: A Rod is an occasional item, You do not use that rod 24/7. Gloves of Strength, storing.. you wear them a lot.. sort of have to while on the job.
My Wizard keeps her Rod of Might in a custom made holster on her hip, along with assorted spell scroll cases.
The standard rules don`t envision Rings of Metamagic that you can buy or craft.
There are Rods of Metamagic. Allowing Rings of MM would be a GM house-rule.
This type of thing is totally dis-allowed in PFS for example.
There is some info on general guidelines about how magic items are priced, but that isn`t free reign to use those whenever and however you want. For one, you can easily make `better`/cheaper versions of tons of Core magic items if you use those rules. As such, those rules are a guideline for *IF* the GM is inclined to allow such creative crafting. And yes, the GM is specifically referenced in the rules :-)
Don't metamagic rods not take up a body slot and thus are more expensive then a slotted item by 100 percent. But then addinge 50 precent more to that shouldn't creating an irregular slotted item shouldn't it be 3/4 the price of the rod if using those numbers.Interesting thought.
Let's say Doctor Wu has Gloves of Storing, That takes up the Hand slot.
But you get an awesome Rod of Smote Dragons! .. How do you use it?If Rod's take up a slot, an I don't see where they do.. that would be the Hand. Unless you want to get creative, Use the mouth?.. I shall leave other body parts out of this for modesty sake.
I bolded the important part of his post... 8-]
Hand slot has nothing to do with weapons or rods or other items that you HOLD in your hand, it has to do with GLOVES and things like that (maybe fancy hand jewelry is included, etc). Rods (and weapons, alchemical flasks, etc) don`t use body item slots, but an obvious aspect of the game balance surrounding rods is the number of hands you have to hold them, and the action economy of drawing/holstering them.
Well there is the unwritten rule about not using the urinal next to someone else if you can help...
That rule is actually a written one.
You will find it in Maddox's Alphabet of Manliness
I wouldn't have a problem with a metamagic ring. I'm not much for the affinities anyway, so I'd just base the cost on the cost for the same metamagic rod. Ultimately, you're giving up a slot for a usually unslotted item, but I base my pricing on utility more than anything else. If it works the same as a particular item, it generally costs the same as that particular item.
But all magic item crafting of stuff not in the books is pretty much up to DM approval. I just don't see a problem with approving it.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
+1 to the above.
There's a more fundamental reason why metamagic can only go on rods. Metamagic rods are the only metamagic magic items that exist.[1]
Take a look at the rules for creating magic items. You can choose to create an existing item, in which case you follow the requirements specifically listed for it, or you create your own.
When you create your own, these are the options you have:
"Ability bonus (enhancement), Armor bonus (enhancement), Bonus spell, AC bonus (deflection), AC bonus (other), Natural armor bonus (enhancement), Save bonus (resistance), Save bonus (other), Skill bonus (competence), Spell resistance, Weapon bonus (enhancement), Spell Effect."
Check it out yourself. The magic item pricing table does not support anything else. You won't find feats or class abilities priced on that table, and that's on purpose. Feats and class abilities are meant to be special. You can't create a ring of metamagic any more than you can create a cloak of sneak attack or a belt of improved critical.
Your GM, of course, may do what they like, but the reason you can't create a ring of metamagic is because no such item has ever been created before (thus there's no rules for it), and no rules exist for creating a new item with that power.
[1] Unless, of course, your GM creates something different.
Note that in this specific case, I personally would allow another item at the same cost, because rods are already a slotless item that must be wielded so there's no gain in it. I would not allow someone to create a different item at a lower cost; no matter what form it took, it would cost the same as a metamagic rod, even if they made it as a slotted item such as a ring.
There's no rule FORBIDDING you from it, because there's no rule ALLOWING you to, just like there's no rule forbidding you from keeping a pet mind flayer - there just are no mind flayers in the game, so if you want them, you have to invent them and get the DM to okay it and okay you having one as a pet. There's guidelines for how to best create monsters and items but no rule allowing your _character_ to do that.
EDIT: This post is not meant to be snarky, though I realize it can be read that way. The parallell is just to illustrate how it works, not to be demeaning.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Just for the record, affinity slots went away when we strayed from 3.5 and into PF. (Yay!)
|
|
While there doesn't seem to be any direct guidelines on how to make a Metamagic Ring, it does seem balanced when you consider that your character can only make use of two (or three with a Hand of Glory) ring slots. I wouldn't give it a discount, however, since you could use it without having to draw or stow it.
I personally would allow it. Rulebooks are fine to discuss, but every good game has a GM who knows when a rule needs bending, or when a new rule is needed (especially when it comes to adding something flavorful, but not overpowered to the campaign).
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
there's no rule forbidding you from keeping a pet mind flayer - there just are no mind flayers in the game, so if you want them, you have to invent them and get the DM to okay it and okay you having one as a pet.
Shhh, don't listen to the mean man, Squidbilly. Of course you exist. There's a good fellow. Now go play with your squeaky brain...
|
|
I've taken the stance that the various crafting feats open up certain item abilities. Rings of meta-magic stuff require craft rod, not craft ring. continuous or powerful command word items are craft ring. spell-trigger items are craft wand, spell completion are scribe scroll, and so on.
The feats effect action economy and max spell level. Wondrous items are 'submit idea, get feedback'.
I feel like, really, a big limitation of metamagic rods is that while they're not exactly slotted, you have to hold them in a hand to use them. That really limits their usefulness if you also want to use a two handed weapon, if you need to pull one while grappled, etc.
I probably wouldn't let an alternate metamagic item exist that would get around that restriction. Shortsword +1 of 3x day lesser silent spell? Sure, why not. Ring of lesser silent spell? Only if you plan on taking an action to hold it to use it.
Dire Mongoose makes the very good point of the actual slot being the most valuable one of all "Held".
Aside from that, there are no "Still" metamagic rods, because the use of the rod is considered a somatic component. Thus anyone who is tied up (unable to use somatic components), cannot use a metamagic rod. A ring that bypassed that would be *significantly* more powerful than a rod.
Dire Mongoose makes the very good point of the actual slot being the most valuable one of all "Held".
Aside from that, there are no "Still" metamagic rods, because the use of the rod is considered a somatic component. Thus anyone who is tied up (unable to use somatic components), cannot use a metamagic rod. A ring that bypassed that would be *significantly* more powerful than a rod.
Many excellent points - and that's why in my campaign all manufactured items are spells - period. No funky stuff, either by the PCs or NPCs.
Personally, I think the biggest mistake in the item creation system is allowing non-enhancement bonuses for armor and weapons, thus allowing people to attempt that +20 item foolishness. Maybe it was +25. No matter; as far as I'm concerned it is a +20 item and would cost 4,000,000 gp, not whatever such claimants say it 'has' to cost.
I once broached the subject of creating a Metamagic Ring, with Silent and Still spell.
But, no matter who I spoke to, everyone said I need to make a Rod, because rods handle Metamagic, not rings.The final answer was "Well, it's an Unwritten rule..."
I hate that answer, it's an dumb answer, it's a cheap cop out.
An Unwritten rule is not a rule at all.
So, my question is two fold.. How many have delt with this and do you know of any other silly Unwritten rules and does anyone else agree that it might be better to make a Metamagic ring?
thoughts?
He is being silly.
Rings are every slot. Yes, every slot. You can't get charged for more or not be able to use it: because it is every slot.
You are limited to 2 rings, but they can get any slots ability. It costs double to use the Energy protection ring abilities in armor because armor is not a good slot.
Rings are the right slot for every occasion.
So yes, you can have Metamagic rings, but you'd be limited to wearing 2 (rings).
There is no unwritten rule. Never was. DMs can make rulings, but that isn't a unwritten rule.
Pricing: exactly same as correct cost. But crafting requires Craft ring now.
There is no unwritten rule.
Just like there's no unwritten rule that you can't have a mind flayer as a pet. There simply are no mind flayers, just like there's no rings of metamagic. There's guidelines for inventing them both though - but that doesn't mean it's free for all and in any way "being silly" for a DM to say that you can't get one.
I think that every GM should think about this aspect of magic items. If you can create your own, maybe very different from original items, then all item creation feat is like craft wondrous items (except create weapons and armors). Btw, craft wondrous items is overpowered. Why you shouldn't have a bracelet that copy an existing magic ring? The difference between items is only the body slot they occupy?
Noted, but I did not mention GM's, did I, this is about Rules, or the lack there of.
Let me put it more clear...
In simpler words, it doesn't matter what the book says if the GM says otherwise.
He can call it an "unwritten rule" as an excuse if he wants - it doesn't matter. He's the master, and you're the player.
To answer your question about the rules, my answer is the same. If it's so obscure that you have to dig for it, then I wouldn't bother wasting my time digging - it's the GM's call.
Unless the GM says to ask the forums what they think - that's a different story.
Just for the record, affinity slots went away when we strayed from 3.5 and into PF. (Yay!)
Yes, but....
If you use the custom magic item rules without any GM discretion, you can get a ring of permenant shield that gives you +4 AC and immunity to magic missles for 2000 gold(level 1 spell, level 1 caster, continuous effect). The formulas are guidelines, not rules.
From the rules on creating magic custom magic items.
Not all items adhere to these formulas. First and foremost, these few formulas aren't enough to truly gauge the exact differences between items. The price of a magic item may be modified based on its actual worth. The formulas only provide a starting point. The pricing of scrolls assumes that, whenever possible, a wizard or cleric created it. Potions and wands follow the formulas exactly. Staves follow the formulas closely, and other items require at least some judgment calls.
Custom magic items are clearly under the realm of GM discretion. There are more than a few DM who don't allow them at all. If a DM want to allow custom items, but require the player to use the body slot affinity rules from 3.5, that is their call as well.
Just for the record, affinity slots went away when we strayed from 3.5 and into PF. (Yay!)Yes, but....
If you use the cutsom magic item rules without any GM discretion, you can get a ring of permenant shield that gives you +4 AC and immunity to magic missles for 2000 gold(level 1 spell, level 1 caster, continuous effect).
Nope, the guidelines says compare the price to similar effects.
So to get +4 Shields AC is closest to Ring of Force shield.Bumping price to 2000+ 4, 250. But we must increase price as Ring shield grants +2.
So using enhancement cost: +4K?
But the AC bonus is a secondary cost?
So final price 2000 gp + 16500 gp= 18250 gp.
Or Assuming AC is primary: 8250 gp + 3000 = 11, 250 gp.
Either way, ring of permenant shield that gives you +4 AC and immunity to magic missles for 11, 250 gp gold (level 1 spell, level 1 caster, continuous effect). Easy to Dispel, but at least we got it.
Those are the RAW figures by following the guidelines. You are forced to compare existing magic items. You forgot to. So you weren't following rules.
Just for the record, affinity slots went away when we strayed from 3.5 and into PF. (Yay!)Yes, but....
If you use the cutsom magic item rules without any GM discretion, you can get a ring of permenant shield that gives you +4 AC and immunity to magic missles for 2000 gold(level 1 spell, level 1 caster, continuous effect).
Nope, the guidelines says compare the price to similar effects.
So to get +4 Shields AC is closest to Ring of Force shield.
Bumping price to 2000+ 4, 250. But we must increase price as Ring shield grants +2.So using enhancement cost: +4K?
But the AC bonus is a secondary cost?
So final price 2000 gp + 16500 gp= 18250 gp.
Or Assuming AC is primary: 8250 gp + 3000 = 11, 250 gp.
Either way, ring of permenant shield that gives you +4 AC and immunity to magic missles for 11, 250 gp gold (level 1 spell, level 1 caster, continuous effect). Easy to Dispel, but at least we got it.Those are the RAW figures by following the guidelines. You are forced to compare existing magic items. You forgot to. So you weren't following rules.
You completely missed my point. My point is that if you skip the DM's discretion part, you get stupid magic items like that. The rules specifically that the DM should compare to similar items and make judgement calls. That makes it a DM's call on what to allow and at what price to allow it. Doing it any other way would be asking for tons of munchkin stupidity.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Personally, as a DM, I'd consider a rod a slotted item. its simply the 'held' slot.
Moreover, the specific item you're requesting is far more powerful as a ring for a specific reason. The reason you want still spell generally, is when you're unable to use your hands (grappled, etc). This normally makes it very difficult to draw and use a rod....
A ring of metamagic still is more powerful than a rod, simply for that reason. Which is cool. How I'd adjudicate:
Wrong slot, +50% price. 2nd ability (both still and silent, +50% for 2nd.)
So you'd have 3000+4500 (for lesser rod/ring) for 7500x1.5= Total rod cost: 11250gp.
Seems fair to me, and you're welcome to make it. Problem solved.
Edit: also, following this logic, a rod of still spell is a pretty useless item in general. It shows smart thinking for a wizard not to try to trap themselves with it.
|
|
Personally, as a DM, I'd consider a rod a slotted item. its simply the 'held' slot.
Moreover, the specific item you're requesting is far more powerful as a ring for a specific reason. The reason you want still spell generally, is when you're unable to use your hands (grappled, etc). This normally makes it very difficult to draw and use a rod....
A ring of metamagic still is more powerful than a rod, simply for that reason. Which is cool. How I'd adjudicate:
Wrong slot, +50% price. 2nd ability (both still and silent, +50% for 2nd.)
So you'd have 3000+4500 (for lesser rod/ring) for 7500x1.5= Total rod cost: 11250gp.
Seems fair to me, and you're welcome to make it. Problem solved.
Edit: also, following this logic, a rod of still spell is a pretty useless item in general. It shows smart thinking for a wizard not to try to trap themselves with it.
The rod would also be useful for wearing armor. But yeah, kinda stupid.
even saying that, 99% of people wearing armor are also using both 'held' slots for weapons/shields. Its just as bad for them.
Yes, its theoretically useful in a very small corner case, but terrible otherwise
Making something not cost a body slot usually doubles the price. So rods should be considered to already be double price.By extension, the ring that does the same thing would be half price from the rod. However, body slot affinity dictates that price doubles, as ring is not the proper slot for metamagic
Net cost, exactly the same as the rod would cost. Problem solved :)
You're missing the point. The guidelines also state that a CR2 creature should have 14 AC - that doesn't mean a PC can come and say "hey, I've designed a CR2 creature with 14 AC, I want this as a pet."
The guidelines on pricing are for DM's creating custom items, and, if the DM should allow, for pricing a magic item the player has designed - if he even allows it, just like the guidelines on monster CR are for the DM to set an appropriate CR for a monster that he or his players have created.
It's by no means a direct formula that the player can use at his wim - or no-one would ever take any item creation feat but craft wondrous - why craft a staff when you can just craft a glove with the same properties and 12 levels earlier with less feat investment?
The guidelines are for setting an appropriate price for an item that has been designed, it's not a rule saying "any of these items can be designed".
EDIT: As further proof of this, see the difference in wording on scribe scroll/brew potion/craft wand, and craft wondrous/craft rod and the others.
The first group explicitly state that you can create a scroll/potion/wand of ANY spell you know that meets the prerequisites and gives a specific formula for this. If they hadn't, you could only create the potions/wands/scrolls listed in their respective chapter - which don't include splatbook spells.
The second group does NOT have this, because you can't create any item you want - you can create the items in the list, and then the DM might choose to design others (or allow you to design others).
If you could just create anything following the guidelines, the first group wouldn't need to have that explicitly stated.
even saying that, 99% of people wearing armor are also using both 'held' slots for weapons/shields. Its just as bad for them.
Yes, its theoretically useful in a very small corner case, but terrible otherwise
Well, I could see many wizards with that rod "buffing up" before a big fight by putting on their fullplate.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Just for the record, affinity slots went away when we strayed from 3.5 and into PF. (Yay!)Yes, but....
If you use the custom magic item rules without any GM discretion, you can get a ring of permenant shield that gives you +4 AC and immunity to magic missles for 2000 gold(level 1 spell, level 1 caster, continuous effect). The formulas are guidelines, not rules.
Hold up - I'm not arguing for a strict 100% allowance of spells to magic items (as per your example), what I'm saying is that there's no reason you can't make (for the same cost) a Periapt of Wisdom instead of a Headband - since there is no longer such a thing as item affinity.
And, yes, obviously it's all up to GM approval -- I was only saying that the silly "That effect must be on feet, or you pay 150% for it" thing is no longer part of the rules.
well, it may not be in the rules, but current items are still priced that way. 2x cost for slotless included.
mostly cuz they were hijacked right from 3.5 srd, but it sets precedent.
If you want to spend the coin and a ring slot to make a silent/still metamagic ring, they go for it as far as I'm concerned. There is nothing that says every magic item has to be exactly as the book says it is. If you want to be able to activate them at the same time, that would take some figuring by the DM. But it could be done.
DMs should be open-minded about what the players want to make.
well, it may not be in the rules, but current items are still priced that way. 2x cost for slotless included.
mostly cuz they were hijacked right from 3.5 srd, but it sets precedent.
No, slotless being an extra cost is still in the rules. And that one I agree with, there are enough slots available that you really shouldn't need to go past that.
However, (and not sure why I keep needing to repeat what I'm saying when it was only a small observation of a change from 3.5 to PF -- and one that I full agree with): it is no longer the case that certain effects need to be in certain slots, otherwise it drives up the cost of the item. (So, by RAW, you could make old-style Gloves of Dexterity for the same cost as a Belt of Agility).
Basically, what I'm saying is that THIS no longer applies.
I once broached the subject of creating a Metamagic Ring, with Silent and Still spell.
But, no matter who I spoke to, everyone said I need to make a Rod, because rods handle Metamagic, not rings.The final answer was "Well, it's an Unwritten rule..."
I hate that answer, it's an dumb answer, it's a cheap cop out.
An Unwritten rule is not a rule at all.
So, my question is two fold.. How many have delt with this and do you know of any other silly Unwritten rules and does anyone else agree that it might be better to make a Metamagic ring?
thoughts?
What? Well there is a item creation rules for pretty much anything, and where all else fails, DM'd don't.
well, it may not be in the rules, but current items are still priced that way. 2x cost for slotless included.
mostly cuz they were hijacked right from 3.5 srd, but it sets precedent.
No, slotless being an extra cost is still in the rules. And that one I agree with, there are enough slots available that you really shouldn't need to go past that.
However, (and not sure why I keep needing to repeat what I'm saying when it was only a small observation of a change from 3.5 to PF -- and one that I full agree with): it is no longer the case that certain effects need to be in certain slots, otherwise it drives up the cost of the item. (So, by RAW, you could make old-style Gloves of Dexterity for the same cost as a Belt of Agility).
Basically, what I'm saying is that THIS no longer applies.
And i am saying that it does still exist, but it is now part of the DM's discretion if they want to use it or not.
PF changed body slot affinities from a manditory thing(bad) to an optional DM discretion thing(good).
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I once broached the subject of creating a Metamagic Ring, with Silent and Still spell.
But, no matter who I spoke to, everyone said I need to make a Rod, because rods handle Metamagic, not rings.The final answer was "Well, it's an Unwritten rule..."
I hate that answer, it's an dumb answer, it's a cheap cop out.
An Unwritten rule is not a rule at all.
So, my question is two fold.. How many have delt with this and do you know of any other silly Unwritten rules and does anyone else agree that it might be better to make a Metamagic ring?
thoughts?
I've played and GMed the last five versions of D&D, and I would have no problem with a player making a ring of metamagic.
When people said, "It's an unwritten rule," what they meant was, "It's an old rule from a previous game that I'm used to, so I still use it." The old "Slot Affinity" was left out of Pathfinder, and I don't believe it was an oversight. It was a totally unnecessary rule that was made when the entire magic item creation system was remade for 3rd edition D&D.