Player is looking at taking craft feats. I have little to no experience with them. He asked about a gauntlet of shocking grasp, with unlimited use. Meaning no daily limit, no charges, nothing. He wants it at 5 CL, so it does its max damage (5d6).
I either see a 7500 base price or a 2000 base price. I get the first from the 50 charges, spell trigger entry, doubling it (since it has unlimited use). The latter, from the Use-activated or continuous entry (with no need to double it).
Either way, I have no clue. I could be completely wrong.
NOTE: I don't want this to degrade into a "magic item rules are broken" or "those are just GUIDELINES, just price it how you want" or even a "well, you need to tell him to just get a wand" - I know all of that, I know that I will be taking any answers with a grain of salt. I appreciate anyone who will help me, though. It's as good a time as any to learn these rules.
If you make the gauntlets use-activated or constant, then they will reset every round. And automatically discharge on the first object he touches. Each and every round.
I would make them command word activated (standard action) which also makes it slightly less expensive: 9,000 gp. Now, that is the price for 5 charges per day. This item has can be used 14,400 times per day, so if you wanted to be evil (and technically correct), divide 9,000 gp by (5 divided 14,400). 25,920,000 gp.
I hear the jaws dropping out there. Heh. Technically, this item does have charges per day: it can be activated once per round, every round, all day long. That is ten rounds per minute, 600 rounds per hour, 14,400 rounds per day. There is no clause under charges per day that says you can only reduce the price; 6 or more charges and the price actually goes up.
Now, your player might not like this (and he is probably not going to be able to afford 25.9 million gp; well, 12.95 since he is crafting it), but point out this is how it technically works. And then ask him to pick a reasonable number of times per day he can activate the item. 5/day would be 9,000 gp. 10/day would 18,000 gp. 20/day would 36,000 gp. And so on and so on.
Now, I'm just going to say this: if you are running the game, then it is your job as DM to run it. That means you have every right to say NO. I would recommend this: NO . . . BUT . . . and start a dialogue. Find out what he really wants, see if it fits in your game, explain to him your problems with it and seek out a compromise.
Just my thoughts.
Master Arminas
My bad, I wrote the wrong price. I knew it was 10,000gp.
I follow you, Arminas, and I would prefer it to be a x/day item. It might end up being that.
As a disclaimer, this player did not demand in any way that I allow this item. In fact, I think he was just looking up the crafting rules for a potential new wizard and tried to recreate a weapon from a TV series (The Legend of Korra, which is awesome, btw), since it would be fun to play with as a character. He didn't know how to price it, and I didn't either. I just don't want to give the impression that he is being pushy in any way. It is a mutual confusion that we want to resolve.
Anyway, yeah, I can't help but compare this item to Ring of Invisibility. It is a <CL 3, 2nd level spell, unlimited use>. It is 20,000gp. 10,000gp for a <CL 5, 1st level spell, unlimited use> doesn't seem terribly under priced, though <CL 5, 1st level spell, 5/day> for 9,000gp does seem a big on the higher up.
I'm just not sure where to go with it, though. 5d6 electricity damage is pretty decent, but is it really that big, to cut its uses from all day, every day, down to 5 (which would be one, maybe two encounters if he focused on using it)?
|
5d6 every round is solid to start, but it's very meh later on. Fighters can do 17+ damage quite easily from level 6 (or earlier) from their 1st attack, usually around a +15 attack or so, with Power Attack + Furious Focus. Touch attack matters, but this item is mainly for medium and/or low BAB classes looking for some extra punch sometimes. If this is a primary attack, but level 10 or so they will not be very happy to dish out 5d6 and then taking a full attack back at about 50+ damage every round.
Vendis: A Ring of invisibility is calculated at 10,800gp (command activation, unlimited charges, 2*3*1800=10800gp). However, it is priced at 20,000gp The rationale is the usefulness of the ring is much higher than the pricing the chart would otherwise give.
Command activated, unlimited use = 1*5*1800 = 9000gp
I do not think it would be eligible for use activated since it's duration is instantaneous.
To compare it to an existing item: A +1 weapon with 1d6 electricity damage would cost 8,000gp and require a normal attack roll (as opposed to a touch attack). As a result I believe that 9000gp is underpriced. I would increase it to about 13,000gp for an unlimited use item.
- Gauss
I can see that, Gauss. I think if we decide to put this in the game, 13,000gp or so will be around where it is at.
Vendis: A Ring of invisibility is calculated at 10,800gp (command activation, unlimited charges, 2*3*1800=10800gp). However, it is priced at 20,000gp The rationale is the usefulness of the ring is much higher than the pricing the chart would otherwise give.
Command activated, unlimited use = 1*5*1800 = 9000gp
I do not think it would be eligible for use activated since it's duration is instantaneous.
To compare it to an existing item: A +1 weapon with 1d6 electricity damage would cost 8,000gp and require a normal attack roll (as opposed to a touch attack). As a result I believe that 9000gp is underpriced. I would increase it to about 13,000gp for an unlimited use item.
- Gauss
Ring of Invisibility is actualy cheaper than it should be. Multiply by 2 for spells with a duration in min/lv.
2*3*1800*2=21,600
a +1 weapon also gets +1 to hit and damage, plus weapon damage, plus weapon training/spec, plus power attack, plus you can take weapon focus an improved crit.
Not a similar item.
Also you have to keep in mind that at a paltry CL of 5th, against anything with significant SR the gauntlet of zapping touch becomes about worthless. (SR 15 = 50/50 shot for the grasp to get through, decreasing rapidly above 15.)
Heh. Technically, this item does have charges per day...
Not really... An item with 14,400 charges per day can only be used 14,400 times before it has to be recharged.
On a planet or plane with longer days an unlimited use item can be used more than that. Heck, take it to a timeless plane and the charged item will never recharge, but the unlimited use item will keep on going.
Also, really? Don't be absurd. :P
Really, though, OP, I'm not sure if I'd be comfortable with an unlimited damaging spell item. Yeah, 17 damage isn't much compared to other classes, even as a touch attack, but players will find a way to break it.
Find out what he really wants, see if it fits in your game, explain to him your problems with it and seek out a compromise.
This.
I think I'd have the player build it as a +1 gauntlet weapon with the shock additional ability, but that only does 1d6 electrical damage.
If I was feeling exceptionally nice, I might let him increase the damage and require chain lightning as the spell requirement to create the item. This would bump the it up to CL 11. Additionally, I'd count each 1d6 damage as a +1 bonus for item creation purposes.
End result: +1 extreme shocking gauntlet (5d6 electrical damage), cost 72,000gp (6 squared *2000).
Also, I have no problem letting the player make a touch attack with this weapon...they just wouldn't get the non-electrical damage.
Quantum Steve, I have said this once Ive said it a hundred times. You cannot apply duration multipliers to command activated items. That superscript is ONLY for continuous or use activated items.
If you look at table 15-29 you will see that the superscript 2 is ONLY on the line for Use-Activated or Continuous.
This is borne out by the actual text:
If a continuous item has an effect based on a spell with a duration measured in rounds, multiply the cost by 4. If the duration of the spell is 1 minute/level, multiply the cost by 2, and if the duration is 10 minutes/level, multiply the cost by 1.5. If the spell has a 24-hour duration or greater, divide the cost in half.
Thus the Ring of Invisibility is 10,800gp by formula NOT 21,600gp (which the developers then bumped up to 20,000gp). Honestly, the WoTC developers discussed this back on thier 3.x boards and the information did not change in the move to Pathfinder.
- Gauss
Quantum Steve, I have said this once Ive said it a hundred times. You cannot apply duration multipliers to command activated items. That superscript is ONLY for continuous or use activated items.
If you look at table 15-29 you will see that the superscript 2 is ONLY on the line for Use-Activated or Continuous.
This is borne out by the actual text:
If a continuous item has an effect based on a spell with a duration measured in rounds, multiply the cost by 4. If the duration of the spell is 1 minute/level, multiply the cost by 2, and if the duration is 10 minutes/level, multiply the cost by 1.5. If the spell has a 24-hour duration or greater, divide the cost in half.Thus the Ring of Invisibility is 10,800gp by formula NOT 21,600gp (which the developers then bumped up to 20,000gp). Honestly, the WoTC developers discussed this back on thier 3.x boards and the information did not change in the move to Pathfinder.
- Gauss
Oh. Good to know.
Didn't mean to exasperate you so thoroughly. Sorry.
Quantum Steve:
No worries, but it is one of the most common mistakes I see people make. Often when I throw out the Ring of Invisibility example I get it thrown back at me just like you did.
- Gauss
If you make the gauntlets use-activated or constant, then they will reset every round. And automatically discharge on the first object he touches. Each and every round.
I would make them command word activated (standard action) which also makes it slightly less expensive: 9,000 gp. Now, that is the price for 5 charges per day. This item has can be used 14,400 times per day, so if you wanted to be evil (and technically correct), divide 9,000 gp by (5 divided 14,400). 25,920,000 gp.
I hear the jaws dropping out there. Heh. Technically, this item does have charges per day: it can be activated once per round, every round, all day long. That is ten rounds per minute, 600 rounds per hour, 14,400 rounds per day. There is no clause under charges per day that says you can only reduce the price; 6 or more charges and the price actually goes up.
Now, your player might not like this (and he is probably not going to be able to afford 25.9 million gp; well, 12.95 since he is crafting it), but point out this is how it technically works. And then ask him to pick a reasonable number of times per day he can activate the item. 5/day would be 9,000 gp. 10/day would 18,000 gp. 20/day would 36,000 gp. And so on and so on.
Now, I'm just going to say this: if you are running the game, then it is your job as DM to run it. That means you have every right to say NO. I would recommend this: NO . . . BUT . . . and start a dialogue. Find out what he really wants, see if it fits in your game, explain to him your problems with it and seek out a compromise.
Just my thoughts.
Master Arminas
I keep suggesting this as a work-around for those people that dislike unlimited items (though you'd probably want to make it a blanket house-rule, rather than try and go case-by-case). 10 uses a day would probably be plenty for someone that presumably doesn't want to be in melee combat anyway. (And if you do make use of this, it's fairly simple to upgrade later.)
72,000 is way too much for something like this though. I don't think anyone would rather have a 5d6 electric melee touch over a +6 equivalent weapon (or more likely, a +4 or +5 weapon and some other gear). I don't really see the problem at allowing it for 9k or 10k.
Also, can you make iterative/opportunity attacks with a use-activated item? Isn't it a standard action to use, even if that action is touching someone? With command-word, you definitely can't.
|
|
If you make the gauntlets use-activated or constant, then they will reset every round. And automatically discharge on the first object he touches. Each and every round.
This isn't true. Use-activated could involve something like grasping while holding a button down on the side of the gauntlet.
10,000 gp for unlimited 5d6 shocking damage isn't overpowered, by the way. Especially given Turin's comment about spell resistance. Sure, he'll be able to scare mooks with it, but by the time he can reasonably afford to create something like this, it's not that big a deal.
Keep in mind that a wand of Shocking Grasp (CL 5) costs 3,750 gp. It would only have 50 charges (not to mention being a spell trigger item), but in my experience 50 charges is practically unlimited in terms of a PC's career (with the possible exception of wands of Cure Light Wounds).
Hogarth, your experiences and mine must vary widely. In one of my games the wizard has burned through all of one wand of MM and halfway through another in only a few levels of play. It is his go-to attack when he isnt throwing out spells (he is a buffer/debuffer and not all combats warrant his best spells).
- Gauss
Hogarth, your experiences and mine must vary widely. In one of my games the wizard has burned through all of one wand of MM and halfway through another in only a few levels of play. It is his go-to attack when he isnt throwing out spells (he is a buffer/debuffer and not all combats warrant his best spells).
What caster level are those wands?
I think I've seen a wand of Magic Missile get half-used, but I've never seen anyone actually burn through 50 charges. Most spellcasters in games I've played in use most of their actions to cast spells or use a level 1 "pew pew laser" ability (at low levels).
The caster level is the maximum he can craft (started at 5th, his new wand is 7th).
He gets most of his buffs off before combat usually. Has a few debuffs for BBEGs but otherwise saves his debuffs. It is basically his 'I have have nothing better to do so here' spell. He also uses it to determine what creatures has SR. Considering it is (on average) about 20combats per level, even if he fires it just once per combat to determine if (up to) 5 creatures have SR that is still 40charges per 2 levels.
- Gauss
I can see that, Gauss. I think if we decide to put this in the game, 13,000gp or so will be around where it is at.
don fergit da marcup street valyou. Us orcses costs a lot fer prott...perte...watchin yer shiniez
20% mark up is a reasonable amou...errrr...make da total costs 15600 and tro me the diffrinse
(orc rogue: sometimes not as dumb as you think!)
Actually, I didn't want this for my character. It is a coincidence that I started building this character when the idea for this item came to me. The "gauntlet of shocking grasp" is purely speculative design for an item I'd like to see more of (along with things like a "gauntlet of burning hands"), perhaps in my own homebrew games.
That the item is constructed at CL 5 was an arbitrary decision and really has no significant importance outside of setting a number to calculate with.
Were I to design this to be used as a standard "weapon" for a character, the design would change drastically, as shocking grasp is a touch attack and is subject to SR; not ideal mechanics for melee combat IMO.
TL;DR: It's just theorycraft right now... sorry. Lots of good answers though.
EDIT: Since we're on it though, what about burning hands, and cone of cold? Any other cool spells that would make interesting "weapons?"
Anything with destruction or horrid wilting come readily to mind. My personal favorite was an unholy symbol packing a few charges of destruction at CL 20th by command word.
A mage sword item that is wielded. I'm thinking back to the 1e wand of force that in 3e parlance becomes a rod of force.
"Grenades" of caustic eruption (conjuration [acid] spells that don't permit SR are just all kinds of nasty)
A bow of acid arrow intrigues me as well.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
LazarX, it is very clear to me you didn't read the replies in the thread. What you said is not relevant at all. The player in question (Foghammer) even came on and clarified it was just theorycrafting.
Just tell he no make him buy a wand CL 5 for 3750 GP
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Next time I run a PF game, I'm going to just say up front "Ok. Item crafting is open. Use the table however you want." Somehow, I doubt it will break the game.
MagiMaster: is that a challenge I hear? An invitation to break your game? :D
J/K
- Gauss
Two things:
- First, while I say open, I think I'd actually include two caveats: use the table from the top down (covers true strike), and possibly no personal spell items. (I'd have to look into the second one.)
- Second, I think I know the item creation rules better than most of the people I play with, since I seem to be the only one really interested in them. And the bad guys get cool toys too. :)
MagiMaster, of course top down :) IE: no true strike, mage armor, etc items. However, that leaves ALOT open. Turning spells into items can really mess with game balance. Anyhow, Im not one of your players. :)
- Gauss
A bow of acid arrow intrigues me as well.
I am not too fond of sticking to the magical item creation rules, especially since they are guidelines I am likely to alter the items slightly to ignore SR, reduce spell effect accordingly not to make them cheesy and make them multi-functional in fun ways.
Fire sling, might use produce flame, fireball x/day and weapon properties with flaming burst +2 or so, the spells will be use activated and function as supernatural abilities rather than spell effects.
Flaming Blade, flame blade, modified hypnotic pattern functioning as long as you display it in a certain fashion or giving a bonus to a bard's fascinate ability, burning hands -like effect with reflex DC based on the wielders BAB /dexterity (10+ 1/2 BAB + dex mod probably), maybe affecting adjacent creatures rather than a cone.
Shillelagh Quarterstaff/Club/spear, making this simple weapon basically more effective for a base gold cost, likely having it grow more powerful as GMW according to level. An 'Earth Spike' attack seems fun. poking the weapon into the ground to skewer foes within 60' as long as you are both standing on the ground, possibly the ability to throw thorns like a manticore by swinging the staff.
last one had little to do with spells at all.. well still seemed like a fun item ^^
I'm going to give you this advice once only.
The player in question knows the feats and the item creation process better than you do, and it's clear that he is going to monkey them to the utmost. EDIT by Foghammer: This is the second rudest thing I think I have seen someone respond with on this forum. Talk about condescension.
Until you know how the feats work, why they work the way they do, and when NOT to allow everything that the mechanics do allow. (BY all means READ the section on creating magic items in the Game Mastery Guide), DO NOT ALLOW CUSTOM ITEM CREATION. Make him stick to items in whatever books you allow and don't be afraid to exercise your divine right as a DM and flat out disallow certain cases.
If the player threatens to cry and whine about this.... hand him a bucket.
LOL! What?
I don't even...
Actually, I didn't want this for my character. It is a coincidence that I started building this character when the idea for this item came to me. The "gauntlet of shocking grasp" is purely speculative design for an item I'd like to see more of (along with things like a "gauntlet of burning hands"), perhaps in my own homebrew games.
That the item is constructed at CL 5 was an arbitrary decision and really has no significant importance outside of setting a number to calculate with.
Were I to design this to be used as a standard "weapon" for a character, the design would change drastically, as shocking grasp is a touch attack and is subject to SR; not ideal mechanics for melee combat IMO.
TL;DR: It's just theorycraft right now... sorry. Lots of good answers though.
Emphasized for clarity, since it obviously wasn't clear enough the first time.
I considered something like this for my Arcane Trickster, but decided a wand is both more themantic and didn't require a special DM exception.
Having an ever expanding gauntlet that did more and more neat spell effects would be pretty cool.
Similar to the Torchlight 'Alchemist' class, actually. Not a bad theme or concept at all.
Would make for a neat unique-factor for an Artificer class, actually, if ever one were built from whole cloth instead of an archetype or prestige class (like how the Magus has a unique feature, being a fighter/caster of whole cloth).
Brox wit Laz on dis one. Little cat-monkey-ting trying teh get edge on DM. Cat-monkey-ting need head punches. C'mere you! I gotz katnip flavered bannannannanna snax...
:D
Having an ever expanding gauntlet that did more and more neat spell effects would be pretty cool.
Similar to the Torchlight 'Alchemist' class, actually. Not a bad theme or concept at all.Would make for a neat unique-factor for an Artificer class, actually, if ever one were built from whole cloth instead of an archetype or prestige class (like how the Magus has a unique feature, being a fighter/caster of whole cloth).
For a high level end-point campaign, what about taking the expanding gauntlet effect to the "grows with you" plan?
Say, for example, that Ezren the Pre-gen Wizard's "cane" (staff) bonded item grows over time - as part of his WBL - into a staff of power.
Having an ever expanding gauntlet that did more and more neat spell effects would be pretty cool. . .For a high level end-point campaign, what about taking the expanding gauntlet effect to the "grows with you" plan?. . .
I'm a huge fan of this method, both as a player and as a GM. Having one signature item (or a small set of signature items) is much more interesting than the typical growth-by-replacement.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Brox wit Laz on dis one. Little cat-monkey-ting trying teh get edge on DM. Cat-monkey-ting need head punches. C'mere you! I gotz katnip flavered bannannannanna snax...
:D
The only thing remotely funny about the fact that responses like this continue to be posted is that I have been the primary DM for our group (mine and Vendis's) for 2 years. It's just barely amusing, and only in an ironic way.
After this post, I'm going to start flagging antagonistic posts that imply that Vendis is being a pushover for considering a perfectly valid use of Core Rulebook material, regardless of personal opinions as to whether or not one thinks the rules function at ANY level.
Just beneath the "submit post" button is a line of text that says... and I quote:
The most important rule: Don't be a jerk. We want our messageboards to be a fun and friendly place.
Our group is a far cry from some gaggle of snot-nosed whiners and munchkins, and throwing crap like that around is getting tiresome. Grow up, have an adult conversation, stay on topic.
A bow of acid arrow intrigues me as well.
I've looked at the crafting rules pretty closely myself, for a former character that specialised in crafting. The first thing I did was discuss with my DM what kinds of items were possible. The rules of thumb I worked with were:
1) Was there another item in existence that would do what I was trying to do in a similar way, under existing rules? (for example, glove of shocking grasp would be very similar to wand of shocking grasp or +1 shocking cestus).
If so, those items were the way to go unless the item in question was uniquely different in some fundamental way (and not by just doing the same thing only better).
2) Would what I was attempting to do 'break the game' in a way that no existing item did? (eg Sword of True Strike brokenness).
If so, I don't even go there.
So your bow of acid arrow would be either a normal magic vitriolic bow, or a wand-type device.
One thing I have considered and would perhaps allow is magical ammunition that would duplicate spell effects, such as an arrow that became an acid arrow when shot from a bow. These would be single-use items that happen to be arrow-shaped and use-activated.
A bow of acid arrow intrigues me as well.I've looked at the crafting rules pretty closely myself, for a former character that specialised in crafting. The first thing I did was discuss with my DM what kinds of items were possible. The rules of thumb I worked with were:
1) Was there another item in existence that would do what I was trying to do in a similar way, under existing rules? (for example, glove of shocking grasp would be very similar to wand of shocking grasp or +1 shocking cestus).
If so, those items were the way to go unless the item in question was uniquely different in some fundamental way (and not by just doing the same thing only better).
2) Would what I was attempting to do 'break the game' in a way that no existing item did? (eg Sword of True Strike brokenness).
If so, I don't even go there.
So your bow of acid arrow would be either a normal magic vitriolic bow, or a wand-type device.
One thing I have considered and would perhaps allow is magical ammunition that would duplicate spell effects, such as an arrow that became an acid arrow when shot from a bow. These would be single-use items that happen to be arrow-shaped and use-activated.
There are two simple but fundamental differences between a wand of shocking grasp (which I agree would likely be just as effective) and a gauntlet of the same: the proposed item would A) take up a different slot on the body (the gloves or bracers slot, I'm not sure) and B) ideally be unlimited in use.
The difference in slotting alone is the main draw. A gauntlet can't be disarmed and who expects to be electrocuted by it? It's awesome.
Aside: I just realized that this was moved into the Houserule/Homebrew section. If the question on pricing the item stems from proper use of the magic item creation rules in the CRB, I cannot see a reason to move this thread; it is very much a Rules question. If it had been moved to "conversion" I might have seen the reasoning, since a the inspiration came from a TV show.
I took a general psychology course last semester (because I had to). One of the things that really stuck with me was when the instructor said "People do not pay attention to each other when they communicate anymore." Something about being wrapped up in our own microcosms. I didn't understand what he meant until recently.
There are two simple but fundamental differences between a wand of shocking grasp (which I agree would likely be just as effective) and a gauntlet of the same: the proposed item would A) take up a different slot on the body (the gloves or bracers slot, I'm not sure) and B) ideally be unlimited in use.
The difference in slotting alone is the main draw. A gauntlet can't be disarmed and who expects to be electrocuted by it? It's awesome.
Indeed, but I also cited a +1 shocking cestus as another example. That uses the same body slot and has unlimited uses, exactly like the item you describe. The main difference is that the electrical damage is only 1d6.
Whenever you come up with a concept and think "That's awesome!" the next question to ask is "OK, why hasn't it already been done?"
So let's look at another example: Gauntlet of Rusting Grasp. This does a very similar thing to the item you describe (releases a touch spell on contact), save that it has limited uses per day. Why? because unlimited uses would be broken with monks rushing through entire battalions of soldiers reducing weapons and armour to dust and then beating up the disarmed and disarmoured fighters afterwards.
If everyone could get a gauntlet that did 5d6 damage on touch attacks for barely more than a +2 weapon, you could change the balance of power in the game significantly at mid-levels. 5d6 is a lot of damage if you can dish it as an attack, and hit as a touch attack. Sure, you can do more with some builds at higher levels, but it being a touch attack is actually the dangerous factor.
So sure, if you want the special electrical gauntlet, but model it on the GoRG so it works 5/day, and it provides electrical resistance as a bonus. Maybe activates as a standard action, too. That, then, is different from both the cestus and the wand.
I took a general psychology course last semester (because I had to). One of the things that really stuck with me was when the instructor said "People do not pay attention to each other when they communicate anymore." Something about being wrapped up in our own microcosms. I didn't understand what he meant until recently.
Oh this is so true. For example, you cited the wand above to claim your item as fundamentally different, but ignored the cestus, from which it is not fundamentally different in any way save in scale (requires a normal attack, does only 1d6 electrical damage).
I read an interesting article on this in a recent edition of New Scientist and it suggested that this 'confirmation bias' is nothing new. We only select positive information for our stance and only attack negative information to our stance, rather than considering all the information objectively primarily to argue. A single person will as a result often make some very biased decisions, ignoring information that they do not like the sound of. A group of people will argue and poke holes in one another's arguments until somebody comes up with an answer no-one can poke holes in. This is why groups of people surprisingly make relatively good decisions, while individuals for the most part make some good ones and some real bad ones.
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Aside: I just realized that this was moved into the Houserule/Homebrew section. If the question on pricing the item stems from proper use of the magic item creation rules in the CRB, I cannot see a reason to move this thread; it is very much a Rules question. If it had been moved to "conversion" I might...
I am also baffled that any item created by the rules in the core rulebook is relegated to the houserules section. It's not a houserule guys, it's the magic item creation rules. And with just a little bit of GM supervision, there's nothing wrong with them.
Like I said before, CL 5 was an arbitrarily assigned [not zero, not one] number to give us something to work with. If it was decided there's no way to balance it apart from making it function at CL1, then that would just be that. 5d6 damage is not a target or goal.
Gauntlet of rusting grasp is a great example of a spell on a gauntlet and I considered it early on, but as an item -- this based purely on design -- I'm iffy on it. Rusting grasp is ONLY a druid spell; druids cannot wear metal armor, but they can use metal weapons. Realistically, a gauntlet is armor, but in Pathfinder it also happens to be a weapon. At any rate, I wouldn't think a druid could wear a gauntlet of rusting grasp. I can't imagine why a druid would MAKE such an item that she couldn't wear, except to give to an ally, but this is a spell unique to druids... would they share the power so easily? [shrug] Just one of those things I'm not real sure about.
As to the "shocking gauntlet." I didn't "not pay attention" to it, I just didn't cite it. I don't think it functions adequately in the capacity I would want this theoretical item to work. Shocking grasp is ideal because it provides a touch attack. The shocking gauntlet could be used for more than one attack per round, but is attacking full AC.
Part of the confusion stems from the fact that Vendis thought I wanted the item for a wizard I am building (in the event my ranger dies in Kingmaker) who DOES have some crafting plans. I just happened to postulate the item after seeing Korra on TV that morning, and I guess he thought he needed to figure it out for me. The item is theoretical and based on a weapon the Equalists use: they touch the target, the target is electrocuted. They don't punch with them, they just reach out and touch. Looks kinda like a steampunk Iron Man gauntlet.
I remember reading about confirmation bias in psych. I'm pretty sure that having a narrow definition isn't supporting a bias though.
As long as we are aware of confirmation bias, we can compensate for it and try and think objectively.
I agree, a gauntlet of rusting grasp is a strange item, and it does kind of break an unspoken rule of DMing: Mess with the player's stuff at your peril, because nothing aggravates a player faster than breaking his coveted loot.
I do understand the way you want the item to work, I just used the cestus as an example of how you had to make the gauntlet different in that respect, that's all.
|
Keep in mind that a wand of Shocking Grasp (CL 5) costs 3,750 gp. It would only have 50 charges (not to mention being a spell trigger item), but in my experience 50 charges is practically unlimited in terms of a PC's career (with the possible exception of wands of Cure Light Wounds).
A magus with the right arcana would probably chew through them pretty fast as well.
But I think that is a novel case and your statement holds true.
As for CLW, I think I eat one of those a game session (Level 11 at the moment.
Let's try using the wand as a baseline? Not sure about my order of operations here...
Give a wand of shocking grasp (CL 1) unlimited charges, price it appropriately. (I think it is treated as having 100 charges, so what, just double the price?)
Multiply the cost by 1.5 for changing its slot (from held item to glove slot).
For reference, I've done some digging for images; I tried to find better animated ones to illustrate the function, but these are the best I got:
Sigh. Post eaten.
In short: the formulas produce a price I find on the low side. I also tend towards preferring a use/day metric, rather than all day long use -- but that's just me, in both cases.
The real issue is, will this item enhance your game? And that's a question that is entirely subjective.
For the record, if it's unlimited use at 5d6 as a standard action, I'd probably charge about 30K for it (which is about 3 times what the formula provides as I read it). If it's usable on iterative attacks, I wouldn't let it cost under 100K (especially as a touch attack).
This is just based on my own prejudices, not sourced in the math of the crafting rules beyond giving me a figure from which to start working.
I think it's not a bad idea, but I would recommend fine-tuning it with a limited number of uses per day, or require something funky like a d4+1 round recharge time between uses... unlimited-use items just make me nervous.
:-)
|
Shocking Grasp has a duration of instantaneous. The subscript 2 on "Use activated or continuous" does not have an instantaneous entry. Therefore, continuous is not a valid choice for that spell effect item.
Therefore, the item is pushed back to the Command Word category, which is five charges per day unless you adjust the charges per day.
9,000 for five charges per day at 5th level, std action to activate with an average damage of 17.5 hp per use.