Phantasmagoric Crystal
Okay. So, it's a crystal probably having something to do with phastasm-based illusion stuff. Let's see if I'm right...
Aura moderate divination and illusion; CL 11th
The two auras are appropriate for an item relying on clairaudience/clairvoyance and programmed image. The CL fits for the highest level spell effect being 6th level.
Slot —; Price 19,000 gp; Weight 6 lbs.
Slotless makes sense for a crystal. In terms of pricing, however, it really isn't fully "slotless"...i.e., you'll have to hold the crystal in your hand to use it. The crystal's weight seems a bit excessive. I was imagining a smaller crystal in the palm of your hand rather than something weighing almost as much as an actual crystal ball.
Description
Greatly coveted by illusionists, this 6-inch polyhedral crystal emits a myriad of pale colors when held before a light source. Once per day, the possessor can activate the crystal to create a floating, invisible mote in the possessor’s location.
Now the item's weight starts to make more sense. A 6-inch crystal is big enough to weigh 6 lbs., I guess. However, one thing that greatly irks us as judges is when writers lead off with phrases like "Greatly coveted by illusionists..." As Sean pointed out during the discussion of this item, even the robe of the archmagi doesn't start out with "Greatly coveted by arcane spellcasters..." Statements like that are really just needless window dressing for an author who's searching for his "voice" in describing an item. If an editor got hold of this, they'd probably just strike that entire phrase, save on the word count, and move on. So, just be aware of that kind of thing in your writing. When we talk about something being "tightly written," we mean something that doesn't waste words while remaining as clear, concise, and relevant as possible to the topic at hand.
As long as the crystal and the mote are on the same plane, the possessor can peer into the crystal to see and hear events in the mote’s location. The user can view in all directions from the mote, but magically or supernaturally enhanced senses do not work through it. While the phantasmagoric crystal is activated, any illusion (figment) spells cast by the possessor that have a range greater than touch may originate from the mote instead of from the caster’s location. The spells otherwise function normally.
This immediately raises game balance concerns. Casting spells through a scrying device is a huge deal. The crystal ball doesn't even explore that concept until you get to 50,000 gp and above. Even then, it restricts the spell effects to a single spell, usually something based on further divination effects, not an attack spell. So, this is a big no-no, even though you tried to restrict it down to ranged figments.
Also, consider the project image spell. It's an illusion (shadow) that lets you cast any spell through it for a short period of time. It's a 7th level spell. And, if you designed a wondrous item around something like that...even if you just limited it to a small suite of spells like you attempted to do here...it would cost you a lot more than 19,000 gp. So, your item definitely got the pricing "wrong." Even if it got the pricing "right," I think we'd still question the game balance of it. At best, it'd be project image-in-a-can, but with far greater range and utility due to the invisible scrying motes.
Creatures in the mote’s location can detect its presence with see invisibility, true seeing, or similar means. A targeted dispel magic will dismiss the mote, as will an antimagic field or a mage’s disjunction spell. Alternatively, the possessor of the crystal can dismiss the mote as a free action. Dismissal of the mote prevents the caster from maintaining concentration on any ongoing spells cast through the crystal, but does not otherwise interfere with those spells.
The judges had a lot of discussion about whether or not the crystal could create (and maintain) only one mote at a time. As worded, you left it open-ended. It sounds as though a user could visit any number of locations, create an invisible mote, leave it behind, go off adventuring, scry on any of those locations whenever he wanted, and even create illusion (figments) to "attack" those locations and anyone he sees there. This too made the item come off as way overpowered.
Construction
Requirements Craft Wondrous Item, clairaudience/clairvoyance, programmed image; Cost 9,500 gp
Your presentation is correct. In fact, you did a great job of following the provided template and giving your item design a professional polish. Unfortunately, this is a flawed idea. It threatens game balance. It mechanically overreaches. And I'm not sure why you chose to include programmed image in the construction requirements. Maybe you meant to use project image but got them crossed up? Regardless, this item design was really a non-starter for all the issues cited above.
Summary:
Okay, somewhat bland name.
Flawed idea, very abusable.
Mechanically overreaches, even outstrips the restrictions placed on project image
Decent writing (except for that lead-off phrase) and consideration for game terminology
Mostly perfect presentation (forgot to italicize antimagic field)
Hmmm...this item was all kinds of broken. It's a more powerful example of that kind of problem than some others reviewed here already, so I'll give it a go.
Phantasmagoric Crystal
I'm curious... If this remote casting ability is broken, which I agree it is (as written), is there a way to limit it so that it is not?
What if the mote had to be within a mile? Probably still broken.
What if the mote had to be within long range?
Medium range?
Close range?
Is it broken to have a spell originate from somewhere other than the caster? And if so, at what distance does this become broken? I'm assuming it becomes broken when the caster is not at any risk, and expends or risks nothing in the casting other than the spell being cast. Or is it just an all around no no?
Just out of curiosity, I'd like to discuss this. Neil?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Just out of curiosity, I'd like to discuss this. Neil?
I really don't intend to go fully under the hood on these designs. Sean's doing some of that with his feedback for the designers whose entries made the Keep pile. But I'd rather avoid a protracted discussion on any of these topics. In this particular case, I'll just refer you to the project image spell. It lets you remotely cast ANY spell through it with minimal to no risk to yourself. That's why it's a 7th level spell. If you designed a wondrous item around duplicating that spell effect (and you really shouldn't for RPG Superstar as it'd come across as a SIAC if you did), project image is the spell (and mechanics) you'd want to duplicate/reference.
Even so, such an item would still be pretty game breaking. And, I suspect that's probably why we don't see a wondrous item like that already in the game. When you start venturing into the really high level spell effects, sometimes it's better not to define a magic item around them. That way, you can keep that kind of power in the hands of only those who are willing to play a certain class and prepare a spell slot with it. Or, maybe they prepare a scroll for it. And so on. Each of those situations have some built-in constraints around them. First and foremost, you have to be a specific class to gain access to that kind of magic, you can't just buy it up anywhere and easily make use of it (unless you're really good at Use Magic Device and can afford a scroll of the spell in question). Or, if you're already the requisite class, you've got to spend one of your known spell slots on it if you're a sorcerer. Or, you've got to track down the spell, add it to your spellbook, and (most likely) prepare it ahead of time, which means it's using up a high level spell slot you could have used for something else. Or, if you've prepared it on a scroll ahead of time, you've still got to spend an in-round action to retrieve it and use it.
Most magic items don't come with constraints like that. Usually, they're either constant use, one-time consumables, or function a certain number of times per day. Additionally, just about anyone can make use of them. I think the wisest designers recognize the pull-and-tug within the framework of class abilities vs. spells vs. skill checks vs. magic item functionality...and they instinctively realize when a certain idea just isn't fit for a magic item. That's why certain abilities are only found in the form of spells. Or as a class-specific ability. And that's also why it's important for wondrous items to avoid poaching from class abilities or just going with SIAC effects a certain number of times per day. Not all powers are equal within the underlying game mechanics, character class/spell limitations, action economies, etc. That's really what most overpowered magic items boil down to...i.e., they either don't belong in the form of a magic item (but might be fair game for an artifact, class ability, or high-level spell effect)...or, they're actually so overpowered and game-breaking that they don't belong in the game at all. In my opinion, this particular effect belongs exactly where it's at...i.e., as a 7th level wizard/sorcerer spell with all the limitations ascribed to project image.
Where one wizard/sorcerer might choose to prepare that spell (and use it in his combat tactics), another might opt for limited wish instead. Yet, if magic items existed that gave you easy access to those spells, the hard choices for wizards/sorcerers in managing their spell allotments goes away. You don't want to design too many magic items that take away that dynamic from the game.
But that's only my two cents,
--Neil
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Vest of Seven Pockets
A name involving a clothing item with multiple pockets immediately raises my shields. Almost invariably, these items try to turn pockets into extra-dimensional storage spaces akin to a bag of holding. Now, while some items that do something new and interesting with extra-dimensional storage spaces might be worth exploring for a new book of magic items, the idea isn't really all that innovative. That's because it leans on an innovative item that already exists in the game...i.e., the bag of holding. So, just giving us a variation of a bag of holding isn't a wise design path for someone who wants their designer's resume to stand out enough to vault them into consideration for RPG Superstar.
Now, thankfully, we didn't just get a bag of holding variation with this item. The seven pockets to this vest explore extra-dimensional portals between locations. Sounds neat on the surface, but it also opens a whole host of problems...
Aura Strong Conjuration; CL 13th
Your aura needs to be lowercase. The school of magic seem appropriate for an item relying on plane shift as the foundation for what it can do. I'm not sure why you went for CL 13th, though. If you're basing it on the sorcerer/wizard version of the spell, it makes sense (i.e., 13th level caster for a 7th level spell). But a 9th level cleric can just as easily create this item by casting plane shift as a 5th level spell. In item crafting, it's best to go with the least common denominator among spell options, because that ensures you build it using the most economical means necessary.
Slot Chest; Price 20,000 gp; Weight 2 lbs.
Again, your slot needs to be lowercase. The item's location and weight seem reasonable for a vest. Maybe a bit on the heavy side for such a limited garment, but okay. The price is kind of a non-starter for me, because the item's premise makes it way more valuable than 20,000 gp. Given what the vest can do, I don't know anyone who wouldn't buy one of them at that price.
Description
This gaudy red velvet and gold-trimmed waistcoat boasts pockets at the breast, waist, and inner side, each just large enough to admit a human hand. Any person other than the wearer who reaches into the pockets finds they are silk-lined, going about six inches deep. Only when one dons the vest before reaching into the pockets is the item's true nature revealed.
Good lead-off descriptive text. Runs a bit longish...but you kind of need that to distinguish the two different perspectives on the vest's pockets depending on whether you're actually wearing it or not...
I will note that it's apparent that you're putting two spaces after every sentence's period. You don't need to do that anymore. It's a habit you'll want to break. Since the advent of word processing software and font sizing, you only need a single space after each sentence now.
In truth, each of the seven pockets is a nine-inch diameter portal which may open onto any location on any plane. Only the wearer of the vest may activate these portals, moving her hand—and any item she holds in her hand—freely through in either direction. There are no restrictions on what may pass through the portals, other than that it must be held in the wearer's hand. Depositing an item through one of the portals is a move action, while retrieving an item is a standard action.
Herein lies this item's greatest problem. It's actually worse than a bag of holding or a portable hole in the sense that there's no end to what you can effectively "store" within it. For example, let's say I decide to set up 7 separate bases of operation where my friendly allies and henchmen can guard all my cool loot...most of which weighs far too much for me to easily take it with me on an adventure. While I'm out in the wilds and determine that I really need that "widget of cool usefulness" I left behind at the castle, all I have to do is send a quick message (i.e., animal messenger, sending, or whispering wind anyone?) to my friendly henchmen and they'll be sure to have the item I need on hand, ready to pass it to me like a doctor asking for a scalpel when I put my hand in my vest pocket.
So, the answer to Gollum's riddle as to "What's it got in its pocketses?" is basically anything the wearer of this vest wants, including anything he needs to send someone to buy at the local temple or marketplace so he doesn't have to bother teleporting or traveling back to civilization to get it himself. And that's not good for the game. It makes adventuring far too easy to create a lifeline like that back to civilization and your secure, heavily-defended stronghold. I've seen many items propose this concept just based on a single pair of boxes, one back home and one that you take with you. But this vest does it with seven(!) such portals to seven unique locations. And that's just madness...
The location of each portal is fixed by the vest's maker at the time of creation, and cannot thereafter be changed. To anchor the portals, the creator must specially treat an Immovable Rod, which is then activated at each of the seven locations. The Immovable Rod can afterword be safely deactivated and removed, leaving behind no indication (other than a faint conjuration aura) that the portals exist.
This kind of annoys me, too. Creating an interplay between your new proposed wondrous item and a pre-existing item is very rarely a good thing. I mean, it's possible you could set up an innovative relationship between two related items, but if yours is relying on some other cool item that's already in the game to make your item cool, that's not going to be seen as very Superstar.
Additionally, if you're going to reference a magic item (even the one you're describing) in your descriptive text, you need to lowercase and italicize its name. So, it should be immovable rod, not Immovable Rod. And the fact that you don't have to actually expend one to set up these portals, but get to keep reusing a single immovable rod over and over again is really a throwaway reference to this item. It has no real bearing on the vest of seven pockets. Instead, it comes across more like the author is a tremendous fan of the immovable rod (which is fine in and of itself), and just had to work it into his own item's function. It really doesn't add much to the equation.
There exist versions of the Vest of Seven Pockets tailored for small-sized creatures. In such cases, the pockets are still large enough to admit a human hand, and the portals are still nine inches in diameter.
Same deal here about referncing your magic item's name. It should be lowercase and italicized. On the other hand, when you reference a creature's size, that's an actual game term. As such, something like "small-sized creatures" should actually be "Small creatures." Personally, I wouldn't recommend re-tailoring your item's size based on creature size anyway. Just say it magically alters to fit and leave it at that. If an editor got hold of this, they could probably cut this paragraph in half and save you more word count.
Construction
Requirements Craft Wondrous Item, Plane Shift, creator must have access to an Immovable Rod; Cost 10,000 gp
You're seemingly in love with capitalizing every possible game term. That's just not how you set text off in every instance. Yes, the Craft Wondrous Item feat should be represented that way, but not a spell name. And not the reference to the immovable rod either. In fact, you really shouldn't layer in additional material components in your item's creation requirements at all unless they're an exceedingly costly material component for one of the spells involved in an item's constuction.
Summary:
Lackluster, worrisome name.
Bad idea, abusable, makes adventuring too easy.
Mechanically suspect, no need for reliance on the immovable rod element.
Suspect writing (relies on forms of the verb "to be" in well over half the sentences)
Flawed presentation (lots of missteps in the template and when referencing game terms)
Firefly Headband
What an awesome little item!!!
With the voting closed and the winner announced, I'll stir this pot one last time before the lights go down on this year's Superstar contest. If anyone would still like an in-depth review for their wondrous item and I never got to it...or, even if I initially passed on it because it retread the same ground from a prior review...you can now post a request here and I'll do my best to serve up some feedback on it. I still can't promise I'll get to all of them. It just depends on how many come in. But I can certainly take them here and there as the mood strikes me.
Just so everyone knows, I've also discussed holding another RPG Superstar panel discussion at this year's PaizoCon. This one will focus a bit more on "how to be more creative" with not only your wondrous item designs, but also in every round thereafter. Last year, we spent a session talking about the technical execution and did an audience participation exercise to get people to collectively come up with a promising wondrous item concept. This year, we'll spin it from the other direction and see what kinds of tips, tricks, etc. we can provide on how to jumpstart your mojo, think outside the box, and basically bring the cool ideas. Paired with last year's seminar, that should hopefully give you the tools to excel at both aspects of wondrous item design. And, hopefully, it'll give you a platform from which to improve all your future designs, as well.
Additionally, I've floated the idea of hosting a second seminar at PaizoCon focusing exclusively on adventure design...everything from pacing and storytelling to mapmaking and character development, stat-blocking and naming to common pitfalls you want to avoid, and even how to choose different types of encounters and challenges to give the underlying premise of your adventure the right amount of "pop!" to entertain and draw in your audience. Paizo may already have something in the works for this latter seminar. If not, I'll volunteer to sit in the lobby and talk the ears off anyone who cares to listen, if necessary.
So, I hope to see everyone at PaizoCon. And, again, if you'd like more feedback specifically on your item submission this year, let me know here and I'll do my best to help out with some coaching and constructive criticism.
I'd love to hear that second panel, Neil.
I was going to propose, once the Nine Blazing Months thread was created, some threads for other aspects (i.e. the final round) of the contest. It occurred to me that most of the adventures I run would probably be more akin to a Dragon adventure/PFS scenario, as opposed to a full-length module. I'm trying to think in grander terms for some of my next ideas (plus including my own monster and magic item) ... if only I weren't suffering a crippling case of writer's block at the moment.
With the voting closed and the winner announced, I'll stir this pot one last time before the lights go down on this year's Superstar contest. If anyone would still like an in-depth review for their wondrous item and I never got to it...or, even if I initially passed on it because it retread the same ground from a prior review...you can now post a request here and I'll do my best to serve up some feedback on it.
Oooooh. I never turn down an offer of feedback.
Aura moderate transmutation; CL 11th
Slot --; Price 20,100 gp; Weight 2 lbs.
The bone-carved handles of these masterwork thieves’ tools are rough to the touch. Wisps of energy form along the lockpicks’ edges with every motion, trailing briefly in the air before fading away.When employed to disarm a trap, the intricate motions of the tools tease forth lingering spirits, victims of the trap and its surroundings. The user hears their whispers and murmurings all about her, telling of their deaths and granting the user a +3 Insight bonus to her Disable Device check.
Once a day, upon a successful Disable Device check to disarm a trap, the lockpicks can bind these spirits into the trap’s mechanism. The trap becomes possessed, controlled at the user’s behest. The spirits reveal to her the trap’s nature and area of effect. The trap’s normal trigger is suspended; the user may trigger it as though using the Cunning Trigger rogue talent (she may thus choose to bypass the trap). Whenever prying inside the trap’s workings with the lockpicks (a standard action), the user may select one target creature within line of sight. The spirits reach out to this target, attempting drag the target towards the trap’s area of effect (a drag combat maneuver via telekinesis, CMB +15). The user controls the trap and its components with great finesse; foes suffer -2 circumstance penalties to AC and saving throws against the trap once triggered.
The spirits possess the trap as long as the user remains within 30 feet of it; should she go farther, they disperse, ending the effect. The lockpicks work only on traps which have remained in place for two weeks or longer.
Requirements Craft Wondrous Item, speak with dead, telekinesis; Cost 10,000 gp
I'd particularly appreciate any constructive advice you might be able to offer for possibly fixing this item. I feel like I had a promising idea here - your judges' snippets keyed in both on the of doing something interesting with magical lockpicks, and the theme of raising spirits previously killed by the traps. I'm wondering what might have been done with these ideas, which were appreciated, to turn it into a final item that might perhaps be more worthy of appreciation :)
And much thanks in any case!
I wouldn't mind some extra feedback on my item Neil.
Specifically I'm interested in learning:
Pricing: Taking out the breath weapon bit which seemed to be the big problem is the pricing right?
Core Idea/Power (transforming magical properties on weapons): Is this the sort of superstar level of idea and creativity that you're looking for. From other critiques and the pre-competition podcast and threads I often hear/read you're looking for things that step outside or break the rules without destroying game balance. Is this in that ball park?
Requirements: I had "bone from a dragon of at least the adult age category", which drew a judges comment as being a common mistake putting in a material component. I had thought putting the age requirement made sense as a Wyrmling bone shouldn't be capable of such.
The knockout reason: From the review by the judges its pretty clear that the main reason for rejection was the Breath Weapon on a critical hit. I wonder what if the item:
* didn't have that part, how would it have faired. Would it have been strong enough without it and if so would dragon's breath still be appropriate requirement (or should it be Greater Magic Weapon in that case)
* alternatively only weapon's with a total modifier of +4 or greater got the Dragon's Breath ability. Is that more balancing since they would be losing that additional ability or high powered ability (Haste/Vorpal).
* or what if the Dragon's Breath ability could be used just once and instantly ended the effect of the Dragon Bone Whetstone on the weapon.
* Obviously (now) the Dragon's Breath bit is too powerful, but is the idea of having the breath weapon add to the theme/appeal or is it just too much and unnecessary?
I must admit I spent most of my time working on the wording for the core power which was the transforming of special abilities to ensure it was clear how it worked. Was this section clear enough or did it take a few reads to get what the item did? After submitting I wondered if it would have been better to limit it to just the one dragon type, say Red Dragon, and transforming to flaming and flaming burst (rather than all the energy types determined by dragon type).
After I submitted it I thought to myself, "why-o-why didn't you make it a claw/tooth instead of bone...". I know its a small thing but would that have made it a stronger submission. Or was it not even a factor when weighing it all up. I didn't see anything in the comments about it, but I wonder if it was something that played on the judges mind or were you all like me and just found the words "bone" and "whetstone" just worked and rolled off the tongue nicely?
And finally what tweaks would you have done with this idea?
Cheers for this Neil, much appreciated.
Item Name Dragon Bone Whetstone
Aura moderate transmutation; CL 7th
Slot none; Price 3,000 gp; Weight 1 lb.
Description
Made from the bones of dragons, these whetstones temporarily transform the magical abilities on bladed weapons to the elemental energy abilities of the dragon. Using the whetstone provokes an attack of opportunity and takes a standard action when used on one melee weapon or one minute on up to 50 bladed pieces of ammunition. By expending at least one charge when honing a blade, the whetstone transforms special abilities with a base modifier of +1 to the corrosive, flaming, frost, or shock special ability that matches the dragon type of the whetstone. Blades with special abilities or multiple abilities adding up to +2 in base modifiers have those abilities transformed to the corrosive burst , flaming burst, icy burst, or shocking burst special ability. Those with abilities or multiple abilities greater than +3 gain the keen special ability in addition to the matching energy burst ability. Brilliant energy weapons are unaffected by the whetstone.
In addition to the transformation, on a successful critical hit, a blade under the effects of the whetstone unleashes a blast of dragon’s breath dealing 1d6 points of energy damage plus 1d6 per base modifier of special abilities transformed (DC16 Reflex save for half). The dragon’s breath can be directed as the wielder of the weapon chooses, but must include the opponent struck by the attack.
The transformation from the whetstone lasts for one minute per charge expended when honing the blade. A newly created dragon bone whetstone has 10 charges. When all the charges are expended, the whetstone becomes a nonmagical item.
Construction
Requirements Craft Wondrous Item, dragon’s breath, keen edge, bone from a dragon of at least the adult age category; Cost 1,500 gp
Hi Neil, mine was the Skin Mask of Spell Meddling. I believe you have covered its mains problems: the judges saw it as overpowered, and there were some issues with action economy; also, someone said it was gross, I think, though that is not what I was aiming for). Still, I´d love to se your in-depth feedback if you are willing. I know your focus is game design, of course, but as a non-native english speaker I would also appreciate some input on writing and style; I am aware there are many foreigners who take part in the competition and even though we study the language it's often hard to be completeley confident about what we write in english (well, at least it is for me). Naming is specially hard.
Thanks a lot, the kind of fedback you guys offer to the community is amazing, and it is duly appreciated. :)
Aura moderate abjuration and evocation; CL 7th
Slot head; Price 23,000 gp; Weight 1/2 lbs.
Description
This diminutive, elastic mask feels like skin to the touch and resembles a hollow jinkin head. It easily stretches to fit any skull shape, matching the wearer’s facial features but lending a gruesome gremlin-like aspect to his countenance.
The mask allows its wearer to tamper with the magic of others. Once a day, when the wearer successfully identifies a spell being cast within 30 feet, he may activate the mask as an immediate action to sabotage that spell, either weakening or replacing it. To fuel the mask’s powers, the wearer chooses and expends one spell from his daily allotment. The chosen spell cannot have costly material components or a casting time that is more than 1 round, and must be of the same level as the target spell.
All variable, numeric effects of the target spell are minimized. Saving throws and opposed rolls are not affected.
Alternatively, if the wearer has the target spell on his class list, he can switch spells with the target creature. Both spells must be of the same type (arcane or divine). The mask captures the target spell, and the target creature knowingly casts the spell previously chosen by the wearer. If the creature cannot meet the component requirements for the chosen spell, its action is lost. The wearer may cast the captured spell once during the next hour as long as he keeps the mask on. Removing the mask wastes the captured spell.
A successful Will save negates the mask’s effects (DC 10 + 1/2 the wearer’s caster level + the wearer’s spellcasting ability score modifier).
Construction
Requirements Craft Wondrous Item, Quicken Spell, dispel magic, imbue with spell ability; Cost 11,500 gp
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Murmuring Lockpicks of Trapped Spirits
Hmmm...kind of an ostentatious name. Basically, it's a really long mouthful. And trust me, I know all about long wondrous item names. The last leaves of the autumn dryad was stretching the limit even for me. If you're going to go with an adjective-noun-of-adjective-noun type of name for your wondrous item, try to make sure the adjectives and nouns are short syllable words so they don't come off sounding unwieldy.
Now, that said, I thought the promise held forth by this item's name was pretty cool. You don't see magic lockpicks everyday. And, if you do, they're usually pretty boring +X to Disable Device skill-bonus-in-a-can items. So, seeing something related to "trapped spirits" and the use of the word "murmurring" to describe the lockpicks kind of piqued my interest.
Bottom line: Long, unwieldy name. But kind of intriguing just the same. Yes, that's a rhyme. Moving on... ;-)
Aura moderate transmutation; CL 11th
The aura makes sense for an item using telekinesis. But I'd have figured necromancy and/or divination could apply here, too, with the reference to speak with dead and the trapped spirits mojo in this item.
The caster level seemed a little high, as well. Not a big deal. But, typically, I'd expect an item relying on telekinesis to have a CL 9th since it's a 5th level spell. That's the minimum caster level the item crafter would need to cast all the required spells in its construction. Why go higher than that? Typically, when you do go higher, it's because you're wanting to establish a higher CL in the event someone tries to nullify the item's power with a dispel magic and you want to make it tougher for that spell to overcome the opposed check. It doesn't really seem warranted here. So, I thought I'd point that out.
Slot --; Price 20,100 gp; Weight 2 lbs.
Sean is often a big stickler for wacky pricing like 20,100 gp. In his words, why not just make it 20,000gp? Is there really a need to tack on another 100 gp just to give the impression that it's been priced all the way down to some specific chart of wondrous item costing? This is where that "art" of pricing wondrous items enters the picture. Unless there's a compelling reason for tacking on something like that, just round it...as 100 gp compared to 20,000 gp is no big deal.
Slot seems fine. Weight is questionable as I didn't so much see this as a collection of lockpicks as a single, specialized lockpick one might include in a regular set of lockpicks. I think this is important, because where would you ultimately dictate that the magic lies in a collection of lockpicks? Do they all bear the enchantment? Are they consumable? No. There's no reason to believe so. I too ran into this problem with my last leaves of the autumn dryad when they really should have been a single, last leaf instead.
Description
The bone-carved handles of these masterwork thieves’ tools are rough to the touch. Wisps of energy form along the lockpicks’ edges with every motion, trailing briefly in the air before fading away.
Nifty, evocative language to describe the item. I still think it should be a single lockpick.
When employed to disarm a trap, the intricate motions of the tools tease forth lingering spirits, victims of the trap and its surroundings. The user hears their whispers and murmurings all about her, telling of their deaths and granting the user a +3 Insight bonus to her Disable Device check.
Hmmm. Okay. There's a number of things here that vex me. First, it should be an "insight" bonus...i.e., lowercase it. Secondly, lockpicks aren't used to disarm traps. Thieves' tools are. That may seem like a unecessary distinction, but the description of thieves' tools from the Equipment chapter in the Core Rulebook states that they contain "...lockpicks and other tools you need to use the Disable Device skill." The "other tools" refers to what you'd generally need to disarm traps. The lockpicks are the tools you'd need to pick a lock. So, calling your item a lockpick and then saying it impacts the disarming of traps just feels a bit odd and misplaced to me. Of course, calling them murmurring thieves' tools of trapped spirits isn't helping your item's allure either. Honestly, I'm not sure what else I'd have called it. But I probably wouldn't have called it a lockpick if it's primary power is meant to affect traps.
Other than that, I do like how you've described the item drawing forth the whispers and murmurrings of those whose lives have been claimed by any given trap. It does make me wonder, however, what happens if a trap has never killed anyone and it's the first time the owner of these lockpicks has encountered it? What then? No insight bonus, because there are no whispers and murmurrings? Do you waste your one use per day by attempting to disarm the trap with them?
Once a day, upon a successful Disable Device check to disarm a trap, the lockpicks can bind these spirits into the trap’s mechanism. The trap becomes possessed, controlled at the user’s behest. The spirits reveal to her the trap’s nature and area of effect. The trap’s normal trigger is suspended; the user may trigger it as though using the Cunning Trigger rogue talent (she may thus choose to bypass the trap).
I thought this power was kind of clever. Invoking the cunning trigger rogue talent (which should be lowercase) was kind of nice, even though it poaches a class ability. Someone who isn't a rogue, who put a bunch of ranks into Disable Device, could conceivably purchase these lockpicks and gain access to a rogue talent that would otherwise normally be denied them.
Additionally, I was kind of put off by the notion that a given trap's normal trigger is suspended by the magic of the lockpicks. Does that include all triggers? Magical symbols, glyphs, and sigils included? It's seems like a bit of a stretch to suppress everything and make it so that only the owner of the lockpicks can activate it now. I think it would have come off better if you made it so that the bound spirits served as an additional trigger rather than a replacement one. That way, someone using this item doesn't gain complete control over a trap. They just gain the ability to remotely trigger one they themselves didn't set.
Whenever prying inside the trap’s workings with the lockpicks (a standard action), the user may select one target creature within line of sight. The spirits reach out to this target, attempting drag the target towards the trap’s area of effect (a drag combat maneuver via telekinesis, CMB +15). The user controls the trap and its components with great finesse; foes suffer -2 circumstance penalties to AC and saving throws against the trap once triggered.
The judges were kind of torn on this ability. Sean liked it. I had concerns about it. Mostly, it felt a little too convenient. But, looking back on it, I can see some of the novelty and innovation here. Basically, this item gives a rogue a reason to use a trap rather than just deactivate it and bypass it for his party. There are all kinds of tactical options that then open up if they can lure other victims into it. The use of telekinesis and the drag combat maneuver are very appropriate. And, making the victim of such an attack more vulnerable to the trap's effect once it triggers is both logical and cool design.
The spirits possess the trap as long as the user remains within 30 feet of it; should she go farther, they disperse, ending the effect.
This gave everyone pause, including Sean. As innovative as the battle option of dragging your foes into nearby traps sounds, the fact that a rogue (or whoever owns this item) has to hunker down within 30 feet of a possessed trap to utilize it in this manner is way more limiting...especially considering that most intelligent creatures who live in the area probably already know about the trap and how to avoid it.
As I read over this item again today, a new thought occurred to me that might make it better. Perhaps if the lockpicks/tools/whatever allowed the owner to define a new, separate trigger for a trap where he could set the parameters for the possessing spirits to activate it, that would allow adventurers to move past a trap and reset it to guard against enemies following after them (or attempting to circle behind). That would give the lockpicks greater utility, while still enabling the scenario you've imagined here. Additionally, if you wanted to get really innovative, it could let you change a trap's trigger from one type to another...i.e., from a touch-based or location-based trigger to proximity, sound-based, visual cues, or even on a timer. That would an innovative trap altering item with the "trappings" of the former victims serving as the flavorful reason behind everything.
The lockpicks work only on traps which have remained in place for two weeks or longer.
This is kind of an odd stipulation. I assume you're suggesting this so can build in enough time for the trap to have actually claimed a victim or two. This is one of the perceived weaknesses in your backstory for this item. You were banging up really hard on word count (at 299 words), so you didn't really have room to define what happens for a trap that's never been triggered before. But, eliminating a statement like this one would have given you room to explore that condition and define it for us.
Construction
Requirements Craft Wondrous Item, speak with dead, telekinesis; Cost 10,000 gp
Well done here. Everything's presented correctly, except your cost should always be half your item's price unless there's a specific, costly material component required for one of its spell effects. I'm assuming you tacked on an extra 100 gp for a set of masterwork thieves' tools or something? That's fine, but you'd want to then set your cost at 10,050 gp.
Summary:
Long-winded, worrisome name; wrong item choice for its powers/abilities.
Really intriguing idea (especially with the spirits), but too limited in scope and execution.
Mechanically worrisome, somewhat poaches a class ability.
Good writing, fairly evocative and creative.
A handful of missteps in presentation and game terminology.
Well, since you're still offering, I'd love to see a more detailed review of my orb of mists. There had been a good amount of discussion on it in the judges forums, and I think I know where I missed the superstar boat on it, but more feedback is better right? ;)
Item Name Dragon Bone Whetstone
The name is kind of meh. Nothing super-inspired, but nothing terrible either. The part that leaves me kind of lukewarm about it is that there's two competing visual images in there. The mind conjures up a picture of a dragon bone. Then, it conjures up a whetstone. The two don't really mesh all that well. I get what you're going for...i.e., that this bone (or a tooth or claw if you'd substituted that) acting as a whetstone for a weapon. It's conceivable, of course. But it doesn't knock my socks off either.
Aura moderate transmutation; CL 7th
This is an interesting conundrum regarding the item's aura. Since you've based the item on the spells for dragon's breath and keen edge, you're looking at evocation and transmutation, in that order. And, likewise, if you look at the weapon properties for flaming burst, icy burst, etc., they too all rely on evocation effects. So, I'd like to see that aura referenced in addition to the transmutation effect. It's not a big deal, however, because...at its core...this item is about transmuting existing effects on a weapon to turn them into these other evocation-based effects. There's some reasoning as to why it might be transmutation-only. But I'd prefer to see both called out.
The caster level seems reasonable given that dragon's breath is the highest level spell effect in the item's construction requirements. It's a 4th level spell and should take a 7th level wizard to cast it.
Slot none; Price 3,000 gp; Weight 1 lb.
Slot and weight are fine, but the price is just way too low for what this item can do. I'll get into that more below.
Description
Made from the bones of dragons, these whetstones temporarily transform the magical abilities on bladed weapons to the elemental energy abilities of the dragon.
Interesting lead-off sentence. It's kind of sparse on the description. It's just a whetstone made from a dragon's bone. Is it especially innovative or creative to imagine a dragon's bone acting as a whetstone to warp a magic weapon's enhancements to mimic its elemental energy? Eh. Maybe? I'm not bowled over by it.
I'm also not won over by the writing here. There's no real indication of the ability to inspire and evoke imagery for the reader. And, as judges, we'd really like to get a sense of what you can do in that regard as a writer. This lead-off description doesn't give us much to go by in our assessment of that.
Using the whetstone provokes an attack of opportunity and takes a standard action when used on one melee weapon or one minute on up to 50 bladed pieces of ammunition.
Wow. Only a minute to do 50 bladed pieces of ammunition? That's exceptionally quick. So, that's 1.2 seconds per arrow or bolt or shuriken? That's a fast sharpener.
At this point, I also notice that you're putting two spaces after every sentence. You need to break that habit. You've got some other spacing problems that crept in between your BBCode tags. When posted here, everyone's web browser automatically compresses those double-spaces down to a single space. But, if you did this in an actual turnover, it would cause your editors and layout people all kinds of problems. Basically, they'd have to search-and-replace to correct it before going to print. So, if you can clean that up, you'll make their jobs easier. And, when you make their jobs easier, that's when you get more work as a freelancer. Of course, you also have to bring compelling ideas and some good writing ability/execution...so, let's see how you measure up there...
By expending at least one charge when honing a blade, the whetstone transforms special abilities with a base modifier of +1 to the corrosive, flaming, frost, or shock special ability that matches the dragon type of the whetstone. Blades with special abilities or multiple abilities adding up to +2 in base modifiers have those abilities transformed to the corrosive burst , flaming burst, icy burst, or shocking burst special ability. Those with abilities or multiple abilities greater than +3 gain the keen special ability in addition to the matching energy burst ability. Brilliant energy weapons are unaffected by the whetstone.
At this point, I got a little more excited by this idea. You don't know how many wondrous item submissions we get that allow the user to add a weapon property to their weapons...usually for a certain amount of time, X times/day. That's really poor design, because weapon properties increase a weapon's value exponentially compared to other magic item pricing charts. If you start out with a +1 keen longsword (which is a +2 equivalency for the pricing chart) and then create an item that lets a user layer the flaming burst property on top of it, you immediately kick up the value of that weapon to a +4 equivalency. The value of that doesn't increase linearly. It increases exponentially. And, because you never know what kind of base enhancement abilities might already be on a weapon before your wondrous item gets to layer on more, you never really know how to price the value of such wondrous items.
What got me excited about your design is that you sidestepped that issue by replacing the equivalent abilities with your whetstone's elemental aspects from the appropriate dragon. That's the way to handle weapon property "stacking"...i.e., you don't stack it. Instead, you temporarily overwrite it with something equivalent. Thus, your wondrous item idea suddenly held a lot more promise for me.
In addition to the transformation, on a successful critical hit, a blade under the effects of the whetstone unleashes a blast of dragon’s breath dealing 1d6 points of energy damage plus 1d6 per base modifier of special abilities transformed (DC16 Reflex save for half). The dragon’s breath can be directed as the wielder of the weapon chooses, but must include the opponent struck by the attack.
Unfortunately, this is where the item design came off the rails. Inflicting dragon's breath damage on a critical hit is overkill. The flaming burst and icy burst types of weapon properties are already going to provide that. What your item is doing differently is that you're providing a Reflex save to avoid it (which is very odd, because critical hit powers generally shouldn't carry Reflex saves to avoid them...it's already a critical hit...how can you miss with the follow-up ability?). Additionally, your item is shooting forth that critical hit damage in a 30-ft. cone or 60-ft. line in whatever direction the wielder desires to threaten even more targets. All that for just 3,000 gp in a 10-charge item? Sure, it may not come into play if you don't get an actual critical hit during the 1-minute duration of the whetstone's transmuted effect. But still, it's overkill, both in damage and in capability.
Also, in terms of presentation here, it should be "DC 16 Reflex save" and not "DC16 Reflex save." This is an indication that you didn't proofread your submission very well.
The transformation from the whetstone lasts for one minute per charge expended when honing the blade. A newly created dragon bone whetstone has 10 charges. When all the charges are expended, the whetstone becomes a nonmagical item.
This was a vital, necessary step to rein back this item. Making it a consumable was very wise. It still needs a higher price. For comparison, an elixir of fire breath can unleash 4d6 damage (DC 13 Reflex save for half) against someone within 25 feet...and a single bottle lets you do that three times. Your whetstone is going to immediately grant a weapon a +1d6 elemental damage on every successful hit for 1-minute duration and can be used 10 times before being depleted. On a critical hit, it can then magnify that damage with the dragon's breath ability and target not just the victim of the critical hit, but everyone in the path of the 30-ft. cone or 60-ft. line...and they'll require a much more difficult DC 16 Reflex save. If someone happens to have a really wide critical hit range (say with a rapier, etc.) along with Improved Critical, keen, etc. the odds of pulling off multiple critical hits with a full-attack action goes way up. So, this whetstone way overshoots the 3-use elixir of fire breath with a single 1-minute application. Your item costs 300 gp per use. The elixir of fire breath is 1,100 gp...or about 400 gp per use. That's a pretty big disparity. Not simply in price, but also in capability for that price.
Construction
Requirements Craft Wondrous Item, dragon’s breath, keen edge, bone from a dragon of at least the adult age category; Cost 1,500 gp
Ah, the material component. Don't do this. Seriously. There are virtually no items in the entire wondrous item listing that include material components in their construction requirements. Why? Because they're already assumed to be part of the item's cost. You don't need to define expensive, difficult-to-get components that PCs have to adventure to acquire or stumble across some kind of black market where dragon bones are sold. Just handwave that. We don't need to define an entire table full of material components used in item crafting and assign costs to them in addition to your item's gp cost. I understand how you wanted to designate that the bones of an older dragon are used in the crafting. But it's just not necessary. Leave that as an implied thing. Don't include it in what's essentially your wondrous item's stat-block here. It doesn't demonstrate creativity or innovation by including it. Instead, it just demonstrates that you don't understand how wondrous items are presented in the Core Rulebook.
The rest of the presentation is fine here. Good attention to detail. The cost is still way too low for what this item allows.
Summary:
Okay name. Nothing that stands out. But understandable for what the item does.
Initially promising idea for temporarily transmuting item properties; just went too far.
Mechanically innovative for dodging the weapon property stacking issue.
Average writing, nothing especially evocative or visually inspiring.
Fairly well-done presentation; just a small misstep here or there.
Murmuring Lockpicks of Trapped Spirits
Neil, thanks a million for this. This is helpful, and also very nice to hear :) I feel like I successfully hit some really good notes; that's very encouraging.
Thanks particularly for the suggestion for improvement. It doesn't have the whizz-bang immediacy of pulling a foe into a trap, but I certainly see how it overcomes the core usability issue; that's a neat direction to twist it in.
Some minor comments, spoilered so as not to derail the thread. Not expecting responses on these, but Neil, I think you'll like the first one...
The point's been made many times that each of you has a different approach and a different style. What I suddenly noticed is that (a) I strongly feel the difference between the different judges and styles, and (b) I like 'em all, very very much.
So kudos, you guys. You are a diverse group, and each one of you encourages me to impress you - each in your own way. I think that's pretty awesome :)
This is a point I've seen with other items - having the item be affected by something "fluffy" can make it extremely cool and interesting, but then that effect needs to be adjudicated. You can leave it up to GM's discretion, but I recall that's not much appreciated in game material - it might work great in a home campaign, but for general use, there's too much potential for somebody's beloved power to be nerfed by GM fiat.
Obviously, there's a balancing act to be done here; that said, I thought I'd managed to reduce it here to a simple call, while keeping the delicious fluffy flavor. Are you saying that approximations like this one are still problematic? Or is this a good way to go?
I've got a very different interpretation of thieves' tools than you do. Lockpicking and trap disarming are both fiddling around with a huge variety of mechanisms (mostly, but not only, mechanical ones). A lockpick is simply a tool for manipulating a delicate mechanism; in this sense, a lockpick is certainly a viable tool for disarming traps. (It's just not the only one you'll need.) Consider the classic locked door with a poisoned needle springing out when inside the lock - both the lock and the trap are part of the locking mechanism; the lockpick serves both purposes here.
I can even quote the same line: ; to me, this phrasing indicates clearly that lockpicks are among the tools needed.
Beyond the name issue, the idea of a single enchanted tool makes no sense to me at all; frankly, I'm a bit surprised at the suggestion. Traps come in all shapes and sizes; you need a different combination of tools for each one. That's why thieves' tools come as a set; you can't buy a single tool, or one masterwork lockpick. (e.g., one of the advantages of masterwork tools is that they contain extra tools.) A single enchanted tool would be like having a single enchanted screwdriver - great if you happen to be working on something that happens to need that particular size screw, not very helpful if you're hammering nails.
I don't think this poaches the cunning trigger ability - it's used very differently. To wit, cunning trigger applies only to traps you've constructed yourself - i.e. probably not ones that've been lying around for a while, at least not if you're a PC. So cunning trigger doesn't work when the lockpicks do, and (for PCs) the lockpicks usually won't work where cunning trigger would. The immediate effect is obviously identical, but it's not duplicating the original talent by any means.
Neil, thanks a million for this.
You're welcome.
Re: What I'd been wondering:
The point's been made many times that each of you has a different approach and a different style. What I suddenly noticed is that (a) I strongly feel the difference between the different judges and styles, and (b) I like 'em all, very very much.
I'm quite pleased with it, as well. I think we each provide insights from a different perspective. And, each of those perspectives can be very valuable. If you can win over all four of us, you just might be a Superstar designer.
Re: Fluff-dependent triggers:
So, as to the whole "when does this work and when doesn't it" issue. You're saying the "two week" stipulation didn't work for you...
Clearly, you need a means for designating if some spirits are available from a trap's history. Just because it's two weeks old doesn't mean it's been triggered any more than a trap that's two days old or two years old. Is it GM discretion to say a trap has or hasn't killed someone before? Perhaps. But I didn't see it as a particularly burdensome thing to them. Usually, when stuff comes up like that we'll cite it as "making the GM's job harder." But, traps are a bit easier to decide that about.
Even so, if you wanted to avoid this situation, you could make the item something other than a set of lockpicks that are dependent on the spirits of a given trap being available. For instance, you could have made it a portable bear trap and associate the spirits with the device rather than all the various traps you encountered. Or, you could have designated it as a special vial on a necklace containing the ashes of a slain rogue whose spirit would emerge and advise the wearer...
Bottom line: You had options here if you wanted to avoid the dependency on all the traps in the world to provide your item with spirits. That's kind of a corner you paint yourself into when you set up situational stuff like that.
Re: Lockpicks and thieves' tools:
I've got a very different interpretation of thieves' tools than you do....Beyond the name issue, the idea of a single enchanted tool makes no sense to me at all....A single enchanted tool would be like having a single enchanted screwdriver - great if you happen to be working on something that happens to need that particular size screw, not very helpful if you're hammering nails.
This is the point where you can say it's a magic, one-size-fits-all lockpick or trap-disarming tool. If magical gauntlets and gloves and boots can resize to fit the wearer, you can easily have a magical lockpick or other tool that resizes for the task at hand.
Re: Poaching rogue talents:
I don't think this poaches the cunning trigger ability - it's used very differently....The immediate effect is obviously identical, but it's not duplicating the original talent by any means.
Actually, it is. You're thinking in micro terms. Pull your view of the situation back up to the macro level. In essence, you're giving someone the ability to remotely trigger a trap. That's what the cunning trigger lets you do (for the rogue class only). The fact that the normal cunning trigger ability only works for traps that a rogue has constructed himself is irrelevant. Your item essentially gives its owner mastery over a trap they've encountered as if they'd constructed it themselves and they can now trigger it remotely. It's the same end result. There's also nothing preventing someone from crafting their own trap, setting it in place, and then using your item to disarm it and gain remote control over it, as well. So, this item still poaches a class ability. In fact, it goes even further than the rogue's cunning trigger ability because it allows its owner to take over traps they didn't construct, which means you're allowing everyone to outdo a rogue with the cunning trigger ability. You're not just poaching now, you're outstripping a given class.
When looking at a given situation in wondrous item design just ask yourself this question. Does my item make it so I don't have to be class X in order to do action or ability Y anymore? If the answer is yes, your item poaches a class ability.
Hope that helps,
--Neil
If anyone would still like an in-depth review for their wondrous item and I never got to it...or, even if I initially passed on it because it retread the same ground from a prior review...you can now post a request here and I'll do my best to serve up some feedback on it.
I am surprised that this thread hasn't exploded with posts yet. I would appreciate it Neil if you tore this one apart. I can handle criticism, so have fun.
Helm of Eternal Hunger
Aura moderate varied; CL 7th
Slot head; Price 45,000 gp; Weight 3 lbs.
Description
Cold, pallid, and leathery pieces of flesh are stitched together to create this helm. Sporting sharp teeth, pointed ears, and blood red eyes, the helm conforms to the wearer making him appear gaunt and predatory. The helm may be activated once a day for 10 rounds, causing many long tentacle-like tongues to explode from the wearer’s mouth to grapple creatures in a 20-foot cone. The multitude of tongues use the a CMB +14 and CMD of 23 or those of the wearer, whichever is higher. Barbs and hooks cover the tongues and constantly rip and tear grappled creatures, causing 1D6+4 damage, until the effect ends. The helm also grants the ability for the wearer to make natural bite attacks which deal 1d6 damage, assuming the wearer is medium, plus his full strength modifier. The wearer may also melee touch attack with his tongue, ten times per day and with a 10-foot reach, that can paralyze opponents (DC 16 Fort save negates) for D6+1 rounds. The tongue has 10 hit points, hardness 0, and if destroyed, may regenerate after the wearer consumes raw humanoid flesh. Those wearing the helm are also constantly hungry for the flesh, particularly decaying flesh, of other humanoids. This hunger is never sated, no matter how much flesh is eaten. When outside of combat, the wearer must make a Will save (DC 10+1 for every successful save since the last feeding) to resist stopping and eating any dead humanoid he encounters. The wearer will continue eating the flesh until he passes the failed Will save amount minus one for every round he devours the flesh.
Construction
Requirements Craft Wondrous Item, animate rope, black tentacles, ghoul’s touch; Cost 22,500 GP
Skin Mask of Spell Meddling
Eesh. Yeah, I wasn't a fan of this name. Skin masks can come off kind of like a designer is reaching for a gross-out factor just to somehow make an item more appealing. Obviously, that's not what you were going for...but, that's kind of the trick. You can't just look at things from your point of view. You need a different perspective, either by checking with your friends, or by putting yourself in the judges' shoes and asking how they'd likely interpret it.
Additionally, the "spell meddling" part felt kind of forced. As a non-native speaker, I'm guessing you just looked for a translation of some non-English word that didn't come out quite right. To me, "meddling" sounds more like what those crazy kids from the Scooby Doo mysteries do all the time. I'm not sure if you'll get the reference, but the bottom line is that "spell meddling" conjured up too many clashing images for me. I just wasn't a fan of the item's name and that put me in a bit of a foul mood from the get-go.
Aura moderate abjuration and evocation; CL 7th
Your aura makes sense based on the use of dispel magic and imbue with spell ability in your construction requirements. Caster level seems fine as well, since your highest level spell effect is 4th level and a minimum 7th level caster would be needed for that. This is actually an item where a higher CL might be worth pursuing since we're looking at an abjurative, spell-stealing type of item where its CL could prove important if someone tried to disrupt this item with an opposed caster level check on a targeted dispel magic of their own. Something to consider, at least.
Slot head; Price 23,000 gp; Weight 1/2 lbs.
Slot seems obvious. Price is debatable. Weight seems a bit heavy for a skin-tight, skin mask.
Description
This diminutive, elastic mask feels like skin to the touch and resembles a hollow jinkin head. It easily stretches to fit any skull shape, matching the wearer’s facial features but lending a gruesome gremlin-like aspect to his countenance.
Good lead-off descriptive text. You've done a good job of invoking an additional sense (i.e., touch) rather than just relying on a visual description alone. I'm not necessarily a big fan of the gremlin mask as a wondrous item, but that's more a personal preference than a legitimate knock against your design. It can work. And you've written the introduction of your item in a very evocative and easy-flowing manner. Well done.
The mask allows its wearer to tamper with the magic of others. Once a day, when the wearer successfully identifies a spell being cast within 30 feet, he may activate the mask as an immediate action to sabotage that spell, either weakening or replacing it. To fuel the mask’s powers, the wearer chooses and expends one spell from his daily allotment. The chosen spell cannot have costly material components or a casting time that is more than 1 round, and must be of the same level as the target spell.
Tamper! That's the word you should have reached for in the item name. I like something involving tampering more than meddling. Not sure why. But spell tampering sounds a little less campy than spell meddling.
Uh-oh...you're relying on an immediate action. That's not good. Counterspelling normally requires you to ready an action. Often, the judges will praise items for "breaking the rules"...but, when we do so, we're looking for items that break them in an innovative way. Not in a way that breaks the "economy of actions" the game is built upon. I know the temptation is there for would-be designers to think their item is so awesome at what it does that it just has to carry off its effect as an immediate, swift, or free action. And, it's honestly not necessary in most cases. Think of it this way: If the wearer of your skin mask of spell meddling could use its power as an immediate action to disrupt (or steal) one spell, there's nothing preventing him from spending his standard action to counterspell another spellcaster in the exact same round. That's powerful and potentially abusable. So, this goes too far.
Now, what about the "replacing" of a spell. That could lead to some humorous, useful, and possibly abusable situations as well. As long as you have a spell of the same level, you can potentially replace an opposing's spellcaster's spell with it? So, if he's trying to cast limited wish, I can have him cast instant summons instead? Do I get to decide what item he instantly summons? Because that could be fun...and abusable, depending on what I sent into his hand. Or, suppose he's trying to cast transformation to become a sword-wielding powerhouse and I change it to become flesh to stone. Does that mean I get to make him target himself with a petrifying spell instead of the beneficial one he intended? This opens up a whole can of worms with the "replacing" aspect. If it were straight-up counterspelling, it'd be fine...although it'd also be kind of boring as a Superstar item idea.
All variable, numeric effects of the target spell are minimized. Saving throws and opposed rolls are not affected.
Honestly, this was the most exciting element of your wondrous item idea. If you'd built something around this power (i.e., the minimizing of variable, numeric effects of a target's spell), you'd have been onto something. Kind of like a reverse-metamagic item. Properly presented, that could have had potential.
Alternatively, if the wearer has the target spell on his class list, he can switch spells with the target creature. Both spells must be of the same type (arcane or divine). The mask captures the target spell, and the target creature knowingly casts the spell previously chosen by the wearer. If the creature cannot meet the component requirements for the chosen spell, its action is lost. The wearer may cast the captured spell once during the next hour as long as he keeps the mask on. Removing the mask wastes the captured spell.
So, what does "knowingly casts the spell" mean in terms of this item's operation. In the example I cited earlier, if the guy is about to cast flesh to stone on himself because I stole his transformation spell, can he "knowingly" stop himself? As worded, I'm unclear. And, this item's use would wind up causing arguments at the gaming table.
Additionally, let's consider what happens if a druid (who carries an entirely different set of material component considerations with his divine focus) steals away a spell from an opposing cleric whose divine focus isn't anywhere near comparable. The druid gets to basically nerf the cleric over and over again, because he won't be able to cast any of the spells the druid chooses for replacement. They both cast divine spells, after all. But they come from completely different foci. This is another abusable aspect of this item. And it's already beyond saving.
Lastly, the writing in this paragraph became a bit of a mindbender to try and sort out. It's a complicated consideration to ponder. At least one judge got held up by the phrase "the spell previously chosen by the wearer" and what that meant. He assumed it was the one you expended from your own prepared spells in order to meddle with the other spellcaster. But, as worded, it could have used more clarity.
A successful Will save negates the mask’s effects (DC 10 + 1/2 the wearer’s caster level + the wearer’s spellcasting ability score modifier).
Basing an item like this on the wearer's HD/CL and ability score modifier is a big no-no. Essentially, that means the item operates differently for different people. Therefore, it's impossible to price. What's it worth to someone? Well, it depends on their CL and their ability modifier. This is a really poor design choice which demonstrates a lack of understanding for the fundamentals of the game's mechanics.
Construction
Requirements Craft Wondrous Item, Quicken Spell, dispel magic, imbue with spell ability; Cost 11,500 gp
This was tightly presented. Great use of the template. But the price/cost is way off for what this item can do. And, because of how you've defined the item's DC, you can't calculate its price anyway.
Also, I'm a bit surprised that you've made Quicken Spell a requirement, but you didn't include Improved Counterspell. Wouldn't the latter be a bit more paramount in what this item does rather than just quickening a spell?
...I believe you have covered its main problems: the judges saw it as overpowered, and there were some issues with action economy; also, someone said it was gross, I think, though that is not what I was aiming for.
Yep. You picked up on most everything we had to say about it. This item took only two judges to reject. You had one redeeming element buried inside it (with the minimizing effect), but way too many problem areas.
...as a non-native English speaker I would also appreciate some input on writing and style; I am aware there are many foreigners who take part in the competition and even though we study the language it's often hard to be completeley confident about what we write in english (well, at least it is for me). Naming is specially hard.
Aside from the name and that one paragraph describing the spell swapping, your writing generally flowed okay. This item had far greater problems than its creative writing ability. You need to go back to work on item concepting and its mechanical underpinnings first. And then, worry about giving it a fitting name and tweaking your writing so it's as clear as possible.
Summary:
Bland, ineffectual name.
Broken idea; tries to do too much, should have "minimized" a few things.
Mechanically broken; abusable.
Somewhat okay writing, evocative lead-off text; poor name; but confusing at times.
Good presentation; followed the template well.
Thanks a lot, Neil! It's very interesting to see your take on some of my decisions and look back at the design process to observe where things kind of went off the tracks. That's very insightful, and I take it to heart.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Orb of mists
Hmmm. Interesting name. Very concrete, both with the orb and the mist reference. Eager to read on. Small stylistic point: Capitalize "mists" since it's part of your title for the item.
Aura moderate abjuration and conjuration; CL 9th
Interesting choice on the aura. Your highest level spell effect in the construction requirements is mnemonic enhancer, which is a transmutation effect. Your overall item idea has a lot of transmutation overtones, as well. As such, I think it's probably more important to denote that than the abjuration and conjuration of dispel magic and obscuring mist. But maybe that's just me...
Caster level is also set a bit higher than normal for the required spells in the orb's construction. Normally, only 7th level would be required. You're making a case for something higher. Maybe it's warranted, given what the item allows you to do to other cloud/mist-based spell effects.
Slot --; Price 15,000gp; Weight 6 lbs.
Slot and weight are appropriate for an orb. Price is debatable, but seems okay on its surface. We'll examine it more as we go along.
Description
Looking past the gold filigree etched into this glass orb, a swirling vortex of mist can be seen inside. In fact, the mist within stretches even beyond the limits of its glass prison, causing the orb to constantly emit a thin, white mist.
Hmmm. Kind of a weak lead-off statement because of the reliance on "can be seen..." Why not rephrase that to: "A swirling vortex of mist appears beyond the gold filigree of this etched, glass orb." I think it comes off a little stronger that way, but you could keep playing with it. Regardless, I'd pretty much avoid any use of a "to be" verb in my very first bit of descriptive text for a Superstar item. This is your chance to showcase some evocative, action-oriented writing. So don't clutter it up with a "to be" verb or anything else which could come across as passive.
This mist is naturally drawn in from the air and clouds without the orb, and once per day the wielder can absorb any other mists nearby into the orb as well - up to a 120 ft. radius sphere of naturally occurring mist, or any single spell effect with fog, mist or cloud in the name - drawing it into the orb and storing it there.
Interesting idea. This could become an air clearing item for all those concealing mists, clouds, fogs, etc. What about gas attacks? Or other noxious vapor abilities from the breath weapons of various creatures? There might be some room for tinkering there. I'm not sure I'd want anyone storing up a dragon's breath weapon, of course. My thoughts just naturally extended beyond the "any single spell effect with fog, mist, or cloud in the name." It seems like there could be more to this orb than just that. For instance, what if it also halved the damage of cloud-based breath weapons for the owner, even though it couldn't store them? Or provide a circumstance bonus against gas-related saving throws? And so on...
Hmmmm...my next quibble: that 120 ft. radius sphere seems like a lot. That's a 240-ft. diameter, which pretty much means every tabletop map you're ever going to draw. Personally, I'd prefer to see that nerfed back down a little to create more room for tactical considerations...i.e., I can "save" this area from being impacted by stinking cloud or acid fog, but not those areas over there. Without some kind of limitation that'll come into play more often, this orb starts coming across like the definitive anti-fog/cloud/mist device. And I personally prefer items that don't deal in absolutes. This one threatens to be based on its description.
To absorb a spell effect, the orb must make a dispel check at +9 against the spell it is attempting to contain, with success immediately ending the effect and charging the orb - though a caster may willingly relinquish the spell into the orb should she choose. Spell effects absorbed in this way last for one hour per spell level before fading away, leaving the orb uncharged once again.
Interesting mechanic. The bonus on the spell check lets you scale the item with its owner, so it has continued relevance all along an adventurer's career. That's a wise design decision.
I also like that you limited the amount of time in which the orb can hold the charge after absorbing such a spell. Otherwise, you'd have spellcasters charging this up with their own spells and then camping to reprepare those slots again. Another wise design decision.
Three times per day, the wielder of the orb of mists can release the mists trapped within. This effectively allows the wielder to re-cast the spell trapped within the orb, as a 9th level caster. Without a spell effect currently absorbed in the orb, the released mists act as obscuring mist, as cast by a 9th level caster.
Interesting choice to go with a 9th level caster. Why? Is that more of an effort to contain the abusability of the spell effect? Why not store it at the same CL of the original spell it absorbed? Or, in the case of an obscuring mist effect that wasn't the result of an absorbed spell, let it function at the item's CL (which could be 7th based on the minimum needed for its construction). Just a thought...
You did a good job making sure that this item only lets you recast the absorbed spell (with a standard action). The mist-theme is strong, but it works. You can create them and you can get them out of the way or protect against them. It's also transferable, in that, you could store one of these clouds and give it to a non-spellcasting companion to release on your behalf while you're freed up to keep casting other spells in a combat.
What's unclear here (based on the description) is whether or not you can cast the absorbed spell up to 3 times/day...or, if you can only do that for the obscuring mist effect. In other words, if I absorb cloudkill with this thing, do I get to expend it three times? Or just the one time, thereby leaving 2 other "charges" in the item so I can do a couple of obscuring mists, as well?
Construction
Requirements Craft Wondrous Item, dispel magic, mnemonic enhancer, obscuring mist, caster level 9th; Cost 7,500gp
Tight presentation. You've got the template mostly down. You still need a space between your numbers and "gp" in the price and cost sections. That would add a couple of more words to your word count. And, if it had carried you over the limit, you would have been auto-DQ'ed. Thankfully, you left plenty of room for that oversight. Still, it is an oversight.
I'm also still put off by the "caster level 9th" requirement for the orb. I didn't see any real basis for that, but maybe I'm missing something. It seemed kind of arbitrary so it would match up with +9 bonus on the dispel check and the item's CL. Yes, some items do require a certain caster level in their construction requirements. Most don't. And, when they do, there's usually a very specific reason for it. Otherwise, the assumed caster level is determined by the highest spell effect in the construction requirements. When you deviate from that, there should be a clear reason why. And I'm just not seeing it.
Summary:
Okay name; missed some capitalization on it, but otherwise fine.
Tightly themed idea and a bit niche, but it works enough for consideration; not sure it makes Top 32, though.
Mechanically savvy; you dodged a lot of concerns with some design choices, but left a hole with the 3/day thing.
Writing is moderately sufficient; could be punched up some, more evocative and clear.
Decent presentation; mostly on target, but a small misstep here and there.
Helm of Eternal Hunger
Okay name. Not super excited about it or anything. "Eternal hunger" is usually the first thing people reach for in describing undead creatures like vampires and ghouls and such. Your item is pretty much par for the course on that. But, sometimes, it's good to give people what they expect from a name. You've certainly done that.
Aura moderate varied; CL 7th
A moderate "varied" aura pretty much tells us nothing. If this item literally came in different versions of itself, whereby each individual effect relied on a different school of magic, I could understand that choice. But if you're going with "varied" because you've layered in spell effects from three or four different schools of magic, that's just the lazy designer's way of saying, "Eh, there's too many here. I can't pick one. So, I'll just say it 'varies'..." And that's not a good impression to leave. Also, if it "varies" so much, how do you know it remains consistently "moderate"...?
Caster level seems on target for an item whose highest spell effect relies on black tentacles.
Slot head; Price 40,000 gp; Weight 3 lbs.
Slot and weight makes sense for a helmet. Price is quite high, but that's often the case for magical helms. It'll be interesting to see if this one is warranted.
Stylistic note: You've got one too many spaces between your "Price" tag and "40,000 gp"...when it should only be one.
Description
Cold, pallid, and leathery pieces of flesh are stitched together to create this helm. Sporting sharp teeth, pointed ears, and blood red eyes, the helm conforms to the wearer making him appear gaunt and predatory.
You're leading off with a statement that relies on a "to be" verb. That's not always bad. But it's usually not optimum either. Your writing would be stronger if you found a more active/evocative way of describing things. Even if you just went with something like "Cold, pallid pieces of flesh form this leathery helm..." it would come off better, I think.
Setting that aside, I'm a bit put off by the use of something as grotesque as a helmet made of cold, pallid flesh. For the flesh to remain that way, I'm assuming its not as "leathery" as you'd expect. And who wants to go around wearing dead flesh on themselves all the time? This item's form borders on being gross for grossness' sake. It doesn't really add as much as it detracts from the design for me. But, I'm sure others who are more comfortable with the macabre would be just fine with it. That said, you need to know your audience. For every person who thinks, "That's cool!", there's probably another who thinks, "That's gross!" You need to find a way to win them both over. And, based on where the rest of your item's design takes us, I'm fairly certain you're going to lose that latter group about halfway in. But more on that later...
Lastly, I'll note that you included a paragraph indent in your submission. Much like the spacing issue I mentioned earlier, everyone's browser automatically parses that out of the HTML presentation here on the messageboards, but it's still a part of your turnover. As such, it would never fly if you were working on a real assignment for Paizo. Their style guide will certainly help you, but your writing would be stronger overall if you can eliminate this kind of thing beforehand.
The helm may be activated once a day for 10 rounds, causing many long tentacle-like tongues to explode from the wearer’s mouth to grapple creatures in a 20-foot cone. The multitude of tongues use the a CMB +14 and CMD of 23 or those of the wearer, whichever is higher.
Okay, this is bad mechanical design. Don't vary the performance of an item on someone's derived statistics like CMB/CMD. Sitting behind those stats on the character sheet are your Str and Dex modifiers. These will always vary between users of your item. That means it's impossible to price, because it's better in one person's hands than another's. Don't go down that rabbit hole. Wondrous items need to establish flat modifier at which they work. Or, they need to scale equally for all users.
Additionally, a 20-foot cone (which should be represented as a "20-ft. cone" by the way) is a pretty wide area to allow this many grapple attacks all at once. Essentially, if a villain is wearing one of these helmets, he gets to grapple an entire party of PCs in front of him. The "economy of actions" gets skewed when you allow that many attacks with no risk/debilitation to the one conducting them. This just comes across as powergaming abuse potential, particularly for someone who is already a maxed-out grappler.
Barbs and hooks cover the tongues and constantly rip and tear grappled creatures, causing 1D6+4 damage, until the effect ends.
It should be "1d6+4 damage"...
Oversights like these kill an entry pretty quickly as it doesn't just come across as a mere typo. If repeated, it demonstrates that you really don't know how to present game terminology in a written work for publication.
The helm also grants the ability for the wearer to make natural bite attacks which deal 1d6 damage, assuming the wearer is medium, plus his full strength modifier.
Hmmm. So, we give the wearer another attack form on top of the once/day multi-grapple. How does this natural bite attack work in relation to the wearer's other melee attacks? Can he employ it while also swinging a sword? What kind of modifiers (i.e., -5?) apply if he does so.
Additionally, it should be "Medium" when you reference a creature's size and "Strength modifier" when you're referencing an ability score. Again, this is a demonstration that you don't know how to properly present game terminology.
The wearer may also melee touch attack with his tongue, ten times per day and with a 10-foot reach, that can paralyze opponents (DC 15 Fort save negates) for D6+1 rounds.
Another attack form? One that's even easier to carry out (i.e., with a melee touch attack) but still carries a Fortitude save? Hmmm. Just DC 15? As a 40,000 gp item, I doubt anyone who can wear this thing is facing creatures that will routinely succumb to a DC 15 Fortitude save. Certainly nothing you'd fear all that much if it did.
Also, you've gone with "D6+1" rounds when it should be "d6+1"...so this gives me more concerns that you're not ready to write for the game industry.
The tongue has 10 hit points, hardness 0, and if destroyed, may regenerate after the wearer consumes raw humanoid flesh. Those wearing the helm are also constantly hungry for the flesh, particularly decaying flesh, of other humanoids. This hunger is never sated, no matter how much flesh is eaten. While outside of combat, the wearer must make a Will save (DC 10+1 for every successful save since the last feeding) to resist stopping and eating any dead humanoid he encounters. The wearer will continue eating the flesh until he passes the failed Will save amount minus one for every round he devours the flesh.
Ugh. Honestly? You think it's a good idea to create a wondrous item that forces people to eat the decaying flesh of other humanoids? Sorry. I'll pass. And, I suspect at least half your audience would, as well. While I understand the "flavorful" inclusion of this effect, you spend way too many words on it. Overall, it really adds very little to the item's appeal. You've also defined the stats for a single tongue, where earlier, you called out that the item had multiple tongues it could use to grapple everyone within a 20-ft. cone. So, it seems like you've got several mish-mashed tongue-helmet ideas in mind and you just sort of threw them altogether in the hopes they'd build a theme strong enough to win over the judges. I can't speak for the others, but this would rarely work with me.
Construction
Requirements Craft Wondrous Item, animate rope, black tentacles, ghoul’s touch; Cost 20,000 gp
Hmmm...animate rope? Just because of the grappling tongue? You've kind of got that covered already with black tentacles. Why cloud the issue? The inclusion of ghoul's touch is there to build on the ghoulish theme of eating dead flesh and also to explain the paralytic tongue attack. Meh. It's a bit more SIAC than anything. But, at least you followed the template and used it well. Unfortunately, this is a case where presentation is the least weighted element in evaluating your item.
Summary:
Predictable, okay name.
Flawed idea, particularly the gross-out elements.
Mechanically broken in a multitude of ways.
Lackluster writing; okay at times, but lots of wasted words.
Flawed presentation; followed the template okay, but really missing the boat on proper use of game terminology.
Ugh, that dreaded 'required CL 9th'. Yes, the whole point was that I wanted to limit the power of the item to the equivalent of a 9th level caster because I thought 7 was too low, and I debated over whether or not to add it in the requirements line. Really, I should have just left it at the minimum level of 7 for those spells and spared myself the headache.
Thanks for the feedback, though. Especially those template missteps, because I was deliberately doing it that way because I thought that was right. Well, except the title capitalization - that's just a silly mistake.
Thanks Neil, I am glad that I at least grossed you out lol. Feedback like this does help me know what you guys are looking for in items and writing assignments. Thanks for going to task on my item.
Hey Neil, if you're still looking at this thread and have a few moments, I would be grateful just for confirmation that I understand the flaws in my item.
Octopus Wraps
Aura moderate conjuration; CL 7th
Slot hands; Price 10,440 gp; Weight 1 lb.
Description
These rubbery black hand wraps smell faintly of the ocean. On command, once per day, large tentacles burst from the hand wraps and extend to grapple a single target while an inky black mist coalesces around the wearer.
The tentacles have a range of 20’ with a CMB+5 and CMD+5 of the wearer. A grappled foe takes 1d6+4 damage and continues to take 1d6+4 damage for each subsequent round that it remains grappled. Each round, as a standard action, the wearer may continue a grapple, attempt a new grapple or dismiss the tentacles. The tentacles cannot be damaged, however they can be dispelled. The tentacles last for 7 rounds.
While the tentacles remain, a cloud of inky black mist envelopes the wearer and provides concealment from anyone more than 5’ away. The inky mist does not affect the wearer’s vision. Strong wind disperses the mist in 1 round.
Construction
Requirements Craft Wondrous Item, obscuring mist, black tentacles; Cost 5,220 gp
I think my mistakes were:
1) SIAC, although I tried to use a modified form of black tentacles that allowed the user to direct it at a single close range target only, it didn't deviate enough from the original spell.
2) MIAC, by using the tentacle and mist combo in an octopus theme I came too close to giving a character the abilities of a monster.
3) Not enough description of the item.
4) Improper listing of CMB/CMD benefit.
5) Incorrect order of spells in the construction requirements, it should have been alphabetical instead of by spell level.
6) And my worst mistake of all, it lacked superstar mojo. With over 100 words to spare I should have expanded the description, adjusted the abilities, and included a drawback.
Any insight would be appreciated, thanks.
Cheers for the in depth feedback Neil. Very much appreciated mate.
Octopus Wraps
Hmmmm. Octopus wraps? Very unusual name. I'm not sure I liked it all that much. The reasoning for the name is obvious. But maybe a little too obvious? It's a bit literal and hammers home the entire octopus theme a bit too loudly.
I guess the most unusual aspect of the name is that it tells us this is a set of hand-wraps. That's not something we see a lot of in the game. But, presumably, these things would favor a monk...or other unarmed combatant...and, in a lot of ways, they start to grow concerns that this might be a weapon moreso than a wondrous item. It all depends on what you choose to mechanically do with them, of course. But, as I read further, your item did start to go down that road. It's not why I chose to reject it. But, still, this is a general warning to make sure you examine your wondrous item ideas and assess them as to whether they're really more of a weapon than a wondrous item. Obviously, you want to pull it over towards the wondrous side than the weapon side of things.
Aura moderate conjuration; CL 7th
Aura and caster level are both in line for an item designed around black tentacles and obscuring mist.
Slot hands; Price 10,440 gp; Weight 1 lb.
Hand wraps for hands is a no-brainer. Weight is debatable. Just depends on how heavy the wraps are. Is a half-pound per hand reasonable? Or should they be weightless or negligible. I don't know. I'd have to research a bit to see if handwraps had been done before as a magic item and follow their lead.
Price is debatable. These things are actually pretty potent due to the aggressive combat bonus they provide, but you've limited the number of uses and duration. So...maybe it's okay. I didn't take the time to number crunch it or compare all that heavily.
Description
These rubbery black hand wraps smell faintly of the ocean.
This is kind of sparse in terms of descriptive text. Don't overspend on your word count on any given element of your wondrous item write-up, but make sure you do each part justice, too. That's because, as judges, we need to get a sense of your creative writing ability and not just your idea generation ability or ability to properly describe the mechanics of something. You want to make sure you strike all the right notes and hold them (as well as our interest) with each component of the brief symphony that makes up a wondrous item. Wow. What an anaology to reach for...but it's actually pretty appropriate, I think.
On command, once per day, large tentacles burst from the hand wraps and extend to grapple a single target while an inky black mist coalesces around the wearer.
Descriptions like this often raise my shields a bit. It's not a bad thing to include attack forms in wondrous items. Plenty of the existing ones have them, as well. You just want to make sure they're distinguished in some way from the attack forms of existing creatures in the game...otherwise, you get dinged for creating a Monster-in-a-Can or, if it matches an existing spell too much, a Spell-in-a-Can. You need to make sure your item stands on its own with something unique rather than leaning on the abilities and attack forms of what someone else has already built into the game. That's what helps you stand out as having Superstar potential. We're looking for designers who can hopefully innovate and create new stuff rather than just connect a bunch of existing pieces within the game, string them together, and call it Superstar. Because that's usually not going to come across that way unless you really hit on a specific theme or way of connecting the existing stuff together so that it actually synergizes to become more than the sum of its parts.
I hate to keep reaching for my own item as an example all the time, but the last leaves of the autumn dryad very much fall into the latter category. In Sean's eventual analysis of that item in some later advice that he gave people, he rightly cited it as mostly a SAK/SIAC. And, it is. I just managed to build that SAK with a number of SIAC effects that had never been joined together in that way before. Each one contributed to the overall theme. And, each one played off the other so it became a harmony of SIAC effects, several of which operated in slightly different ways than the individual spells would have done on their own.
Unfortunately, your item idea for the octopus wraps is counting on a reinterpretation of black tentacles (as the primary mechanic for the attack form) and obscuring mist for the inky cloud interpretation. Together, they don't really operate all that differently than the spells. Additionally, they both kind of operate very much the way a basic octopus' attack and special abilities from the Bestiary. So, you're not separating from MIAC and SIAC enough for the octopus theme to win us over by convincing us you're Superstar material for offering up this idea.
The tentacles have a range of 20’ with a CMB+5 and CMD+5 of the wearer. A grappled foe takes 1d6+4 damage and continues to take 1d6+4 damage for each subsequent round that it remains grappled. Each round, as a standard action, the wearer may continue a grapple, attempt a new grapple or dismiss the tentacles. The tentacles cannot be damaged, however they can be dispelled. The tentacles last for 7 rounds.
There are some mechanical and presentation concerns here. Never use hash-marks (') to denote feet in your descriptive text. That's not how you represent that kind of game terminology and you'll never find a hash-mark in any wondrous item description, spell description, or even monster ability description. This is either an oversight (and a hole) in your mastery of the game. Or, it's a sign of a lazy designer. Either way, an editor would have to guard against your turnovers containing this type of thing, so you need to eliminate it from your designs.
Secondly, the CMB+5 and CMD+5 is kind of a weird way to represent the item's bonus. A +5 bonus on all combat maneuvers and CMD would probably be more appropriate. And, I'd really like to know what kind of bonus it is, as well, so I can determine if it's stackable with other items that might provide the same thing. As worded, these octopus wraps are granting a universal bonus that can stack with anything. That ramps up their value and would need to adjust the item's price. Additionally, I'm kind of perplexed why you'd assign a +5 bonus to all combat maneuvers and CMD vs. all combat maneuvers. Does an octopus get a similar bonus on the Dirty Trick and Steal combat maneuvers? Not really. So, you'd have been better served to focus your mechanical bonus just on those things which a tentacle "attack" should grant you.
Additionally, if I really think this through, these handwraps come off as a likely monk-based item. I know anyone could wear them, but lets imagine the "worst case scenario" and that it's a monk focused on grappling attacks. Is it really a good (i.e., Superstar-caliber) idea to grant a monk an additional +5 bonus on CMB and CMD with this item? I'm not really a fan of that kind of thinking. The +5 bonus item is some strong mojo...probably worth a lot more than just 10,000+ gp. It also becomes the potential "I win" item. For example, if someone is using this item and decides they want to ensure the opposing BBEG spellcaster can't get off a spell, they save this item until the very end of their adventuring day so they can pull off that "victory" move everytime...with a +5 bonus...at range. To me, it's just really not a good idea. It doesn't demonstrate a Superstar level of thinking about the game and how it plays at the table. That's because, as-written, I think this item comes across as an abusable thing that pretty much nerfs every encounter against an evil spellcaster by ensuring he goes down easily. And that takes away certain kinds of encounters as being a threat anymore. Thus, it's not really an item that's all that good for the game. Obviously, there are certain classes (like a shapechanging druid) that could pull off a similar thing by wild shaping into an octopus and doing the same thing. But, that's a class specific ability. It's his schtick to pull off...not every average-Joe who happens to don these octopus wraps. So, that's my primary concern here.
Lastly, I think the real thing holding back your item design here is that it's just granting too many monster special abilities. The full-on duplication of an octopus attack form with the grapple and constrict damage isn't going to get the judges all that jazzed about your Superstar potential. You've got to show us you can do something more impressive than simply relying on those pre-existing game elements. It needs something more innovative than the ability to declare your character to have octopus-like attacks for 7 rounds once/day.
While the tentacles remain, a cloud of inky black mist envelopes the wearer and provides concealment from anyone more than 5’ away. The inky mist does not affect the wearer’s vision. Strong wind disperses the mist in 1 round.
Thematically, this ability makes sense, but again...it drives home the octopus theme with such a hammer blow that it doesn't allow us to look at it as anything other than a MIAC. You're also relying primarily on the spell mechanics of black tentacles and obscuring mist to define how these things work. And, while we can encourage that sometimes as judges so you don't have to restate something that's already defined elsewhere in the rules, you also need to be different enough that you stand out as innovative, too. So, as a potential Superstar competitor, I think it's okay to lean on rules that appear elsewhere to define how something works. But, if you don't offer at least something in your design that's new or that uses some existing mechanic in a new and innovative way, you're missing another opportunity to show us you deserve a shot...just like being sparse with your item description misses the boat on showing off your creative writing ability. For a shot at the Top 32, you've got to show us what you can do in all these areas.
Construction
Requirements Craft Wondrous Item, obscuring mist, black tentacles; Cost 5,220 gp
You've already noted your main problem here...i.e., that spell names need to be alphabetized (as well as lowercased). You got half of it right, but again, at this stage of the game...with 5 years of examples to follow...there really shouldn't be anyone (except a novice to game design) who screws up the formatting of a wondrous item design. I've called this out year after year now. So, the information on how to craft a complete wondrous item "stat-block" is well-documented now for anyone who does their research.
Summary:
Lackluster, "too literal" name.
Flawed idea, mostly just a MIAC/SIAC item.
Mechanically suspect, untyped bonus to CMB/CMD.
Unclear creative writing ability; missed opportunity.
Somewhat flawed presentation; improper use of game terminology.
Thank you Neil, as always I appreciate the time you spend on this competition! You hit the nail on the head with my lack of mastery of the game system, add to that a lack of understanding of the scope of RPG Superstar prior to following this year's competition. I pledge to learn from the lessons in these forums and to make a better presentation next year.
Cheers, Adam