I guess we'll agree to disagree. I've seen the arguments about true strike rings, but it's so far beyond reason that I don't give them credence.
Any fairly rules-heavy system is going to have issues in spots. The DM needs to deal with those when they arise. I feel terrible for any DM who is so soft that players will try to take advantage of them....not because being soft is bad, but because having players who are seeking to unbalance the game and willing to get pouty over being told "no" by the DM are people I wouldn't want to be around.
That said, every game that is in the least bit individual or unique will have things that are "broken" that need to be defined, so that's always going to be part of the DMs job, unless you just play rules-heavy war games.
That said, I'd love to see an attempt to rectify this in a logical, coherent, and NOT voluminous and cumbersome manner. If it's so easy, anyone got a link for me? That's not snark, I'd genuinely like to check it out.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Someone tried arguing a Truestrike item with me once. I told him, "If you really want a Ring of Truestrike, then you can have one. But remember, if you've got one, so will everyone else. I guarantee you can't get your AC high enough in a fast enough time to counter a Ring of Truestrike."
|
It's a broken, crappy mess. Period. Putting GMs in the position of making arbitrary house rules just to keep your game from being totally broken is not high praise for the game designers.
Sadly true. Simply dragging the 3.5 magic item creation rules into Pathfinder did not do anyone any favors.
Kickstarter project to completely revamp Pathfinder magic item creation rules, anyone?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The damage you lose by spending a round activating Gravity Bow is WAY more than gravitybow will even give you over the course of a combat in most occasions. An archer's full attack is deadly, spending one round NOT doing it to add 2.5 damage per attack is a waste of a LOT of damage.
Adding 2.5 (well, more because of crits actually) damage per attack is too good for an 8k gp item. Especially with all the previously made arguments about how it is not subject to energy resistance, non-escalating price, etc.
I think we're arguing the same thing and we both agree that Gravity bow at 4k is silly, and even 8k is dangerous.
That said, as Obirandiath pointed out that the damage actually is significantly more than just 2.5 because of the bell curve you get by rolling 2 dice per shot.
So, the game rules essentially force the GM into saying "WHOAHH!!!! No WAY you can do all that, so here's the deal... " leading to potential claims of GM gimping of characters, GM's deliberately clamping down on PC fun, GM's not wanting to follow the rules....
This is why D20 players get such a bad rap. They make a GM afraid to use their judgement. The system I played most of my life is Hero which is a point based game like GRUPS. You don't have levels, you just buy your stats and abilities. There are also no spells, you build them with points also. You won't see Fireball, what you will have is a thing called Blast that costs so many point per damage die, then you can add advantages to it like Area of Effect, to create a fireball. When you have a system such as this, it is rife with potential abuse. Anyone who plays Hero (or GURPS) understands this, and is prepared for a GM to veto any and everything (Sure, you can afford a 62 in your DEX but that's too high for this game) and players just accept that. Heck, Hero specifically says that just because something is rules legal, doesn't mean it should be allowed.
In D20 games, you tell a player they can't do something that the rules allow and stand by for the nukes to start launching. I think the devs for Pathfinder write the rules with Hero Players in mind. They include things, that are useful and can be done well, but have the potential for abuse they expect the GM's to control. I think we as d20 players need to really take those types of lessons to heart. A GM needs to ensure everyone has fun, either you trust that he has everyone's best interest in mind when he tells you that's not going to work in his game, or you don't. If you don't trust your GM, you're probably playing in the wrong game.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This is why I would only allow gravity bow to be added to a weapon, not a person, and as a permanent enchantment it would be a +1 modifier to a weapon enchantment cost. By itself, 2K, added to an already enchanted weapon, it would cost whatever the next +1 would cost.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
For 8000, i can have the googgles of true strike. Or not?no and its stupid posts like this that make things degrade quickly.
It's not Alex's fault the rules suggest he could have those goggles for 4,000g Nephril.
This is one of the most common player/GM conflicts in the game.
Player: "I don't understand. Why can't I use the magic item guidelines to make the most obvious magic items exactly according to their cost guidelines?"
GM: "Because that's stupid."
Player: "But that's what the rules say!"
GM: "The rules also say I get final say."
Player: "So you're just being a jerk then."
GM: "NO! I'm trying to protect the integrity of the game."
Player: "Sure you are."
GMs should not be put into this position at all, much less time and time again as players request rings of gravity bow, goggles of true seeing, headbands of haste.... whatever...
Again, I sincerely hope they are working on a reasonably playable set of magic item guidelines for the next release.
|
i just have a serious problem with ANYONE who thinks +20 to every attack they ever make is worth 8k. 16k. 100k. whatever. every attack always hits. it would take natural 1s to miss with that kind of a bonus. if you are a brand new player chances are you are not going through the item creation mess and trying to build yourself a ring of x spell. you are content with the stuff presented in the book. if you are an experienced player and you come across this obvious oversight and try to argue its legitimacy that just IRK my chain. i understand that common sense is not common. i also understand that this is a world of magic and anything is possible. but come the freak (u know what i mean) on people. that one post made by someone who i am sure is not a new player has completely thrown this thread off topic. yes some spells are OBVIOUSLY to powerful to be constant. especially low level spells. constant hide from undead. constant prot from evil, constant alot of things could be very overpowering when made constant. what you need to do in this case is use that brain in your head and ask yourself a question "if the dm gave this item to a monster and he killed me with it would i throw the biggest tissy anyone has ever seen" if the answer is yes you cant have it. if the answer is "no because on the off chance i kill it i get super ring" then your answer was actually a yes and your just being a pain.
remember the dm has final say on everything including rules straight out of the book.. if your not playing pfs i.e. home game or shop game the dm can say "you know what pathfinder grapple is ugly and i dont like it we will use this instead" or "i think you should be able to crit on a sunder attempt" or 'every time you roll a natural 1 you fall down" its there rule there game and thats how it goes. while those 3 are a bit extreme understanding that every gm who hopes for his game to thrive will watch closely the magic items he allows to enter his game.
gravity bow increases your weapons damage as if it had grown a size category. enlarge person increases your size and your gear. the argument that one is better than the other is situational. gravity bow lets you stay the same size thats cool. enlarge lets you gain reach. gravity bow has no stat change, enlarge gives you str and u lose dex. for a melee character enlarge is great and gravity bow would be a waste. for a ranged character all he loses with enlarge is -2 dex and -1 attack so thats -2 attack total for the same damage increase. why should he have to take a -2 to attack rolls to gain less advantage from a spell of the same level than a melee character.
to say gravity bow is "broken" is a huge stretch. and to compare it to a feat like weapon specialization is pointless. there aer lots of magic items that do more than feats for much less. belt of giant strength +2 is equal to 1.5 feats. weapon focus and 1/2 weapon specialization. for 16 k i can gain 3 feats belt of giant strength +4 is weapon focus greater weapon focus and weapon specizliation and +2 to skill checks and tons of other stuff. dont compare magic items value against that of a feat its apples and oranges people.
|
Items that add untyped pure damage to ranged attacks that are NOT part of the weapon itself are few and far between and not cheap. I think its safe to say an inexperienced GM should not allow an item like this in his game, since if it causes problems he (or she) would be less equipped to deal with the fallout. It is different than enlarge because ranged attackers are going to far more frequently full attack and they get far more attacks per round than your average melee combat character.
|
|
Let's start with "bracers of true strike". Now I've got a permanent +20 to my attack rolls. Not bad. Pretty much now I need to roll a 1 to miss anything.
True Strike wouldn't add +20 to every hit, just the first hit in a given round. It specifies that it effects the next single attack roll. It doesn't auto-reset between your shots in a given round, just because you shoot faster than your Level 1 version of yourself.
Still, I agree with your point. The Item Creation rules are a bit...er, wonky.
-Uriel
How would a permanent Enlarge be any different in damage with a permanent Gravity Bow?
Enlarge Person / Reduce Person is still waiting for errata. Right now Enlarge STILL does not help projectile damage. And it DOES cost you two points to hit due to size and dex loss.
"Any enlarged item that leaves an enlarged creature's possession (including a projectile or thrown weapon) instantly returns to its normal size. This means that thrown and projectile weapons deal their normal damage."
Being large also has a big impact on moving in an even slightly crowded battlefield.
But it is a good point that the damage boost of Gravity bow would stack with enlarge person if it is ever errated, so that's one more thing to watch out for if allowing a gravity bow item.
Still, I agree with your point. The Item Creation rules are a bit...er, wonky.
Pricing a magic item is not G.U.R.P.S. character creation. T table is just a guidelines for estimating item costs. The first step in pricing custom items is to compare them to exiting items.
Magic Item Gold Piece Values
Many factors must be considered when determining the price of new magic items. The easiest way to come up with a price is to compare the new item to an item that is already priced, using that price as a guide. Otherwise, use the guidelines summarized on Table: Estimating Magic Item
I'd say continuous Gravity bow is on par, maybe slightly weaker than Greater Bracers of Archery, a 25000 gp item.
The rules for how much custom items should cost are described in, uh, themselves as being sort of a last-ditch method for eyeballing how much something should maybe cost if you otherwise can't base it on the price of an existing item, and note that nearly any custom item requires judgment calls. The Bracers of True Strike are an old joke used to demonstrate that the formulae are not universally applicable. In particular, the rules do not say "An item of continuous spell effect X costs Y GP unless your DM puts his foot down." They say "as a starting point, you can use this formula to get an idea of what an item might cost, but you should then modify that based on it's actual worth."
I thought crafting items was subject to DM approval. So I don't understand the point of this conservation.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I cannot believe anyone is defending the magic item rules. I mean seriously?
I'm not saying they are good I'm just saying the DM can stop any abuse. This ranting about the magic system should be its own topic. Please don't derail the thread and be more respectful to others. As for ways to get a permanent gravity bow I would talk to your DM. He can probably fix a price for your desires.
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm not saying they are good I'm just saying the DM can stop any abuse. This ranting about the magic system should be its own topic. Please don't derail the thread and be more respectful to others. As for ways to get a permanent gravity bow I would talk to your DM. He can probably fix a price for your desires.
The title of this thread is "a way to have gravity bow at will" Robespierre. That means it is specifically asking about how to craft an item that gives gravity bow at will. Since there is no such magic item, that means the thread is about magic item rules and how to interpret them.
Also, I am not the OP who is asking for it. I am just discussing how you would do it. You know, since he asked. And since the "guidelines" as written for an item like this are obviously broken (4,000K g for it?) then that means the discussion necessarily veers into a discussion of what a fair price actually is. Which is where the whole "wow, there really aren't any guidelines at all for this, are there?" realization comes from.
Which leads to your solution which is "let the GM sort it out."
And whether you think it's disrespectful or not (and how disrespectful is it to call someone disrespectful Robespierre? What makes you the arbiter of what is respectful or not anyway?) the bottom line is that I personally am sick and tired of having to fix the damn game since the game designers apparently don't care to fix it themselves.
"Let the GM sort it out" is no excuse, and a game that has to rely on the game masters constantly making rulings that aren't supported by the actual, you know, RULES does nothing but create GM/Player conflict.
Your entire "solution" to this mess is actually the friggin' problem in the first place.
And the response is, just as the CRB says, that the DM also has the final say and that its too powerful given the bonus(es) for that price.
Your argument is that the rules are broken. The arguments presented in reply have basically been that there will always be broken things, and thats why you have a DM with the final answer not the player.
The only other real option is to just remove the ability to make any sort of original item. *no matter what rule* you create there will be loop holes in it. What they've done is to provide the basic frame work and then trust the players and the DM to not do stupid things.
Myself? I like that approach. If your DM isn't going to moderate such crap at his (or her) table then they need to let someone else sit behind the screen.
-S
|
|
I'm not saying they are good I'm just saying the DM can stop any abuse. This ranting about the magic system should be its own topic. Please don't derail the thread and be more respectful to others. As for ways to get a permanent gravity bow I would talk to your DM. He can probably fix a price for your desires.
a question was asked. how do i acquire something. we said build it. the point was brought up that the craft magic item system is a bit wonky in pathfinder. and the rest of this has done a pretty adequate job of educating the original poster of everything he needs to know on how to acquire what he wants. so shut up about respect. his options as it stands are
carry a wand to save yourself the spell slots.try to talk your gm into allowing you to craft the item or have it crafted for you. since most conversations with gms take the form of arguments it is best to be prepared when you go to your gm saying id like to make this item.
another thing id like to point out. chiming in 2 pages into a debate on "how to get this guy where he wants to go" and start acting like your defending the posters honor u just come off as a troll.
and im going to give adragon a high five. if every time a player wanted an answer the only thing these forums said was "ask your dm to make it work for you" or "homebrew a solution" then wtf is the point of these forums. it is to find an educated player that might be able to lead you to a solution that is actually pathfinder supported.
people who lack the ability to think for themselves or at least the desire to find answers irritate the crap out of me. then there are people like you who take teh time out of there schedules to create a forum id just so you can tell people to have there dm fix there problems instead of supporting the "this is the raw way to fix it but there may be some issues" which has been the freaking consensus from almost every single poster in this thread.
|
|
I'm not saying they are good I'm just saying the DM can stop any abuse. This ranting about the magic system should be its own topic. Please don't derail the thread and be more respectful to others. As for ways to get a permanent gravity bow I would talk to your DM. He can probably fix a price for your desires.The title of this thread is "a way to have gravity bow at will" Robespierre. That means it is specifically asking about how to craft an item that gives gravity bow at will. Since there is no such magic item, that means the thread is about magic item rules and how to interpret them.
Also, I am not the OP who is asking for it. I am just discussing how you would do it. You know, since he asked. And since the "guidelines" as written for an item like this are obviously broken (4,000K g for it?) then that means the discussion necessarily veers into a discussion of what a fair price actually is. Which is where the whole "wow, there really aren't any guidelines at all for this, are there?" realization comes from.
Which leads to your solution which is "let the GM sort it out."
And whether you think it's disrespectful or not (and how disrespectful is it to call someone disrespectful Robespierre? What makes you the arbiter of what is respectful or not anyway?) the bottom line is that I personally am sick and tired of having to fix the damn game since the game designers apparently don't care to fix it themselves.
"Let the GM sort it out" is no excuse, and a game that has to rely on the game masters constantly making rulings that aren't supported by the actual, you know, RULES does nothing but create GM/Player conflict.
Your entire "solution" to this mess is actually the friggin' problem in the first place.
and one more thing i am faqqing this lol. i know its not the normal use for faq but i have to totally agree with this statement
the bottom line is that I personally am sick and tired of having to fix the damn game since the game designers apparently don't care to fix it themselves.BRA-FREAKING-VO SIR.
GMs should not be put into this position at all, much less time and time again as players request rings of gravity bow, goggles of true seeing, headbands of haste.... whatever...
I completely disagree, I think it's part of the job desciption. In your senario it's obvious the player doesn't trust the GM, and if that's the case, the Player is in the wrong game. If none of your players trust you, it might be time to evaluate your GM'ing style. I would have ZERO problems saying exactly that to any of the groups I've played with long term over the years.
...Which leads to your solution which is "let the GM sort it out."
And whether you think it's disrespectful or not (and how disrespectful is it to call someone disrespectful Robespierre? What makes you the arbiter of what is respectful or not anyway?) the bottom line is that I personally am sick and tired of having to fix the damn game since the game designers apparently don't care to fix it themselves.
"Let the GM sort it out" is no excuse, and a game that has to rely on the game masters constantly making rulings that aren't supported by the actual, you know, RULES does nothing but create GM/Player conflict.
Your entire "solution" to this mess is actually the friggin' problem in the first place.
The problem you're having, and will continue to have, is that you want the rules to cover every possible contingency and combination that could ever happen. That will NEVER be fixed. If the devs "fixed" it you'd be back here complaining because it costs way too much for a wand of magic missile. The only way to have everything "fair" is to let each GM decide for themselves what is fair in their games.
Is Gravity Bow as a spell too powerful? If a Ranger or Wizard were able to cast it once per with about a 1 battle duration, by itself it's okay.
Now let's look at Magic Missile, is a wand of Magic Missile just as effective as a wand of Gravity Bow? I would say no. That means a Wand of Gravity bow should cost more... but they're both the same level spells. So essentially what you're asking the devs to do, is go spell by spell (and all the spells that could possibly be added later) and deterimine how much each should cost when applied to each type of magic item. It seems a lot more feasible to ask the GM's to police their own games. If this isn't what you're saying, I'd be all ears for what your proposal for a fix would be.
Now let's look at Magic Missile, is a wand of Magic Missile just as effective as a wand of Gravity Bow? I would say no. That means a Wand of Gravity bow should cost more... but they're both the same level spells. So essentially what you're asking the devs to do, is go spell by spell (and all the spells that could possibly be added later) and deterimine how much each should cost when applied to each type of magic item. It seems a lot more feasible to ask the GM's to police their own games. If this isn't what you're saying, I'd be all ears for what your proposal for a fix would be.In most respects I agree with this, but considering "personal" spells are usually the ones that cause issues, I'd rather see an official footnote added for a cost multiplier on magic items.
Yeah, I think this is key. Either something like a large modifier for creating an item which can cast a personal spell, or just saying that personal spells can't be made into items. Off hand (and I'm sure I'm wrong), I can't think of any continuous items based on a personal spell which don't also fall into one of the existing bonus categories.
I removed some posts. Don't be jerks. Also, flag it and move on.
Apologies for rezzing an old thread, but my question is pertinent to a discussion about adding effects to an efficient quiver (no, I'm not asking to add gravity bow).
I understand that if I want to add a continuous abundant ammunition effect to my efficient quiver that it would cost 4k gp.
What if I wanted it to only be usable 3 times per day? What is the basis for the cost at that point? Is it the command word price divided by 1.66667 or what is the basis for the price that is divided by the charges modifier? Just curious. Thanks!
I used the command word price of caster level (1) x spell level (1) x 1,800 multiplied by 3/5 (3 charges per day) multiplied by 2 (no inventory slot) = 2,160. Does that sound right? Thanks!
edit to add: That gives me 1 minute of abundant ammunition at the cost of a standard action 3/day. Alternatively, I could have unlimited uses without requiring a standard action for 4k gp. Hmm...
Would the cost of a continuous abundant ammunition on an efficient quiver be 4k or 8k? I think the latter...
spell level (1) x caster level (1) x 2,000 (x2 due to duration of spell being 1 min/lvl) multiplied by 2 (slotless item) = 8,000?
I think that's a more reasonable number for such an effect at least. Dissenting opinions?
And I agree with KainPen and other posters in this thread that say you have to consider the spell and its effect on your game when deciding to allow it at all and/or set a value on the effect.
How to do it? In 3.5 there was a feat that allowed personal spells to have a 24hr duration. Extend spell was a prereq and it was +4 level adjustment.
pathfinder rules:
There is a ring in the UE that allows a personal spell to be permenent (or 24 hrs I forget) if the range on the spell is personal. Gravety bow is personal and could be used with the 50k ring.
Speaking of Gravity Bow, if someone could help me figure out the following scenario it'd be much appreciated:
Human Zen Archer Monk7/Sor1
Character is wearing a Monk's Robe
Character has the following effects on him:
Gravity Bow
Enlarge Person
On the character's turn, he spends 1 ki to change the damage of his bow (a longbow) to that of his unarmed strikes. How much damage do his arrows do?
Speaking of Gravity Bow, if someone could help me figure out the following scenario it'd be much appreciated:
Human Zen Archer Monk7/Sor1
Character is wearing a Monk's Robe
Character has the following effects on him:
Gravity Bow
Enlarge PersonOn the character's turn, he spends 1 ki to change the damage of his bow (a longbow) to that of his unarmed strikes. How much damage do his arrows do?
1d8
gravity bow doesn't apply
enlarge is of no use for ranged attackEDIT: 2d6... forgot the Robe, monk
Enlarge Person is relevent because the size increase changes your unarmed damage.
So in other words using Ki Arrow overwrites the effect of Gravity Bow? Would it go like this then:
Lvl 7 human monk with Monk's robe does unarmed damage as a lvl 12 monk, which is 2d6. Monk gets Enlarge Person cast on him, increasing his unarmed damage from 2d6 to 3d6. Monk uses Ki Arrow ability to change the damage from his bow to his unarmed damage, so his arrows do 3d6 damage. Is this correct?
Enlarge Person is relevent because the size increase changes your unarmed damage.
So in other words using Ki Arrow overwrites the effect of Gravity Bow? Would it go like this then:
Lvl 7 human monk with Monk's robe does unarmed damage as a lvl 12 monk, which is 2d6. Monk gets Enlarge Person cast on him, increasing his unarmed damage from 2d6 to 3d6. Monk uses Ki Arrow ability to change the damage from his bow to his unarmed damage, so his arrows do 3d6 damage. Is this correct?
Monk gets Enlarge Person cast on him, increasing his unarmed MELEE damage.
You've just forgot a word... a very important word.
I don't understand what you're trying to say. Simply going from medium to large increases your unarmed damage, in the case of a 12th level monk it goes from 2d6 to 3d6 per the chart on this page: Small or Large Monk Unarmed Damage
Since Ki arrows states that by spending 1 ki your arrows do damage equal to your unarmed damage for one round it doesn't matter whatever other effects Enlarge Person has on your equipment.
Can we all please take a look at this quote, since this defines the entire purpose of the whole "RAW" standpoint.
Not all items adhere to these formulas. First and foremost, these few formulas aren't enough to truly gauge the exact differences between items. The price of a magic item may be modified based on its actual worth. The formulas only provide a starting point.
So now we go back to the whole "True Strike" ordeal, saying "HURR DURR RAW SAYS IT'S ONLY 2,000 GOLD!"
Firstly, No. RAW only provides a guideline, and RAW also says that the magic item's price may very well be adjusted by its actual worth, which we can easily say is based off of its significance. (You know of an item that can grant a +20 to a single hit? I didn't think so.) It's merely a starting point to reference magic items in general.
Secondly, RAW would also say you cannot make a True Strike item with a permanent, or in actual terms, "continuous" duration, since True Strike has no actual duration (except defined by its description, which does not fulfill the requirements needed to make it a continuous effect). So RAW, an item such as a "Ring of True Strike" with a continuous/permanent duration would be impossible.
But of course, I don't really answer the question regarding the Gravity Bow spell.
In terms of RAW, outside of a Wand or Spellcaster, you can't really utilize it. In terms of RAI regarding the guidelines, it most certainly wouldn't be worth 2,000 gold due to its overall value gained through the spell description. Maybe 10,000, but I think even that much would be a little generous...
One thing people are missing is that True Strike and Gravity Bow both have a range of Personal, meaning that only the spellcaster can use them. They are meant to enhance the combat abilities of classes that tend to be weak in combat abilities, such as Wizard and Sorcerer. It's not a big deal to allow a wizard to cast true strike... at low levels it lets him actually hit something with his crossbow. At high levels, why is he wasting his time? But he doesn't get to cast true strike on the barbarian.
I think all the Personal spells are balanced this way. They give a spellcaster a combat advantage when generally they don't want to spend too much time attacking.
If I was GMing I would probably impose a severe limitation on items that give the advantages of Personal spells. Either the spell is nerfed in an item that works for everyone, or the item only works for that type of caster or with a UMD check, in which cast it would need to be activated.
For example, the Ring of Force Shield mimics the effect of a Shield spell, but only gives +2 AC instead of +4 and has no benefit against magic missiles. It's a significant nerfing. But if you want an at-will shield spell that's basically what you get.
Amusing idea: True Strike gives you a +20 bonus on your *next* attack. A permanent True Strike is allowed but gives no bonus, because any time you attack it is not your next attack - it is the attack you are making right now. Tomorrow never comes, and neither does your next attack! XD
Peet
Sylvanite:
The number of posts just on these boards claiming that a ring of true strike should cost only 4K gold because that's what the rules "guidelines" say is enough to make it clear that just that one spell is a source of continual GM/Player debate. Throw in THIS thread's attempt to create a permanent gravity bow ring at the same price, now you've got 8K gold for +20 on your 2D6 arrows.
Yes, many players will agree that 4K for a ring of true strike is broken. What bout 4K for permanent gravity bow? How many posts above are arguing exactly that? Another 4K for permanent aspect of falcon, another 8K for permanent versatile weapon...
Forcing the GM to constantly say "no" not only creates a conflict between player and GM, it actually flies in the face of the actual Paizo recommendation which is for GMs to say "yes" as much as possible, FURTHER increasing the GM/Player conflict.
It's a broken, crappy mess. Period. Putting GMs in the position of making arbitrary house rules just to keep your game from being totally broken is not high praise for the game designers.
But, as with most things, we can always take solace in the fact that 4e's magic item system is broken even worse.
The bolded part is true, and really should be addressed by the devs.
Just because a DM can "fix" (houserule) something doesn't mean it wasn't broken to begin with.
Side note how would you rule gravity bow works with permanency? Personally i would rule it as the other personal effects as it can't be cast on other people and if that is the case could you not get a scroll and some friends to skill buff your UMD high enough to cast it on yourself?
How to do it? In 3.5 there was a feat that allowed personal spells to have a 24hr duration. Extend spell was a prereq and it was +4 level adjustment.
pathfinder rules:
There is a ring in the UE that allows a personal spell to be permenent (or 24 hrs I forget) if the range on the spell is personal. Gravety bow is personal and could be used with the 50k ring.The ring of Continuation doesn't function with Gravity Bow.
It needs a personnal spell AND duration of 10 mn per level or greater.
Gravity Bow is only 1 mn/level...
pshaw! Only if you pay attention to the errata.
I don't understand what you're trying to say. Simply going from medium to large increases your unarmed damage, in the case of a 12th level monk it goes from 2d6 to 3d6 per the chart on this page: Small or Large Monk Unarmed Damage
Since Ki arrows states that by spending 1 ki your arrows do damage equal to your unarmed damage for one round it doesn't matter whatever other effects Enlarge Person has on your equipment.
I'm trying to say you search a way to exploit a "hole" in a rule.
When they have written Enlarge, they couldn't think at all the cases, but the intent was clear, if something leaves your enlarged body, it loses Enlarge's magic.And by spending 1 ki, PRD "to change the damage dice of arrows he shoots to that of his unarmed strikes", it's NOT the same that you say "your arrows do damage equal to your unarmed damage".
You replace the damage dice by those of unarmed, in the ex. case 2d6, and as the monk is enlarged the damage dice becomes 3d6: the monk shoots and as soon as the arrow leaves the monk, the magic of Enlarge vanishes so damage dice of arrow reverts to 2d6.
I disagree with this interpretation, so I'm going to start a new thread about this instead of continuing to derail this one.
Edit: Actually that discussion has already occurred here so it seems redundant to start a new thread about it.
i don't understand what you mean.
Information comes from PRD
Gravity Bow PRD
What would you say by "Only if you pay attention to the errata."?????
I don't have the UE onhand, but I don't believe that there was a restriction to be a personal spell and 10+min per level for the ring of continuation, until it was errata'd.
I guess no one remembers when the designers of 3.5 answered the ring of true strike jibba jabba going on here saying that it would cost 780,000 gold for a ring of continuous true strike.
Crazy larpers.. get out of my neighborhood.
<casts "Raise Thread">
Hi. Just my 2 cents worth:
I'm playing in a fairly high powered / very high magic campaign (which I usually run - taking a playcation) and have found that the high damages being thrown about by PC and NPC alike are not so much to do with the base damage of the weapon but more the enhancements, feats, strength of the wielder, etc.
For example, let's say I'm a level 12 fighter...
If I am using a +4 two handed sword (2d6+4) with a lowly strength of 18 (+6) with greater weapon specialization (+4), an augment gem of fire (1d6) and power attack (+12).
That's 2d6 +26 +1d6(fire) on a successful hit.
I don't think the base damage of the weapon going from 2d6 to 3d6 would be a big, game breaking, deal.
Admittedly this is a melee example but the principle still holds for ranged weapons (deadly aim, composite bows, etc).
And, yes, it's a 32 grand sword.
But you see my point?
(apologies for the thread necromancy)