Now, before people sit here and say that this is a complaint thread and doesn't belong in this forum, I will say that I pose this as a question of why the rule is what it is compared to the rules of magical effects from other sources
Let's take for example, a Sleep Arrow. These arrows cost 132 gold a piece. They are a +1 Arrow that comes with a Sleep property. Now, the RAW for this arrow says that creatures hit by it must make a DC 11 Will Save or fall asleep (as the spell). This DC seems extremely low for this magic item to be all that much better than any other +1 Arrows.
Now we take, for example, a Wizard with an 18 Intelligence casting the Sleep spell. The DC for creatures affected to save against the spell would be equal to 10, plus the spell level (1), plus the caster's modifier (4), equating to a DC 15 Will Save. Compared to the Arrow, this DC is significantly stronger than the Sleep Arrow mentioned.
Let's say that same Wizard who has the Sleep spell, was the same Wizard who created the Sleep Arrow I brought up. Why would I ever want a Sleep Arrow with such a very low DC compared to a Sleep Spell cast by that Wizard?
Being abstract of the whole "That Wizard won't always be there," or "Because he doesn't want to waste his first level spell slots for the spell," arguments, the point and crux that I am asking with this question is why are the DCs for the items listed generated differently than that of the spells used to comprise the effect of the item (and the caster that created the item)? Why should an item he created have a less effective DC compared to that cast from himself, when the magic he used to create the item (and the spell) is exactly the same?
So you don't have a caster create a wand of charm person with a DC of 17+ for only 750gp.
Also somethings don't store well magic is apparently one of those things.
I don't see how that's an issue. If the caster can create a Wand of Charm Person with that high of DC for only 750 gold pieces, then they are actually a competent caster. The DC of 17+ is actually pretty good (depending upon the level, of course) for the lower levels. Even so, a spell like that requires an opposed Charisma check for each 'command,' that the target normally wouldn't do, and if the user has garbage Charisma, then they won't be able to maintain the spell that well, so they'll burn through that Wand after a few encounters, meaning another 750 gold has to be coughed up.
The idea is that found magic items have DCs based on the lowest possible stat required to cast the spell.
There is some factory somewhere with level 1 Wizards with 11 Intelligence churning out Sleep Arrows, I guess.
But yeah, that's why you'll notice all level 1 spells in items have DCs of 11, level 2 spells have DCs of 13, level 3 -> 14, level 4 -> 16, etc.
(1): Mechanical simplicity. Each item the replicates a spell is assumed to function at the minimum level and caster stat needed to cast said spell. That is where the Sleep Arrow DC comes from.
(2): Spell slots should be more valuable than magical items, otherwise items outshine players.
Who the heck would burn through wands of charm person? 50 castings? Only on humanoids. Yeesh.
(1): Mechanical simplicity. Each item the replicates a spell is assumed to function at the minimum level and caster stat needed to cast said spell. That is where the Sleep Arrow DC comes from.
(2): Spell slots should be more valuable than magical items, otherwise items outshine players.
Who the heck would burn through wands of charm person? 50 castings? Only on humanoids. Yeesh.
They would burn through them if they cannot effectively utilize Charm Person with the opposed Charisma checks. I did forget that even if the target succeeds the opposed Charisma, they don't break out of the spell effect, they just sit there and pick their nose, so I should apologize for my terminology.
What I should say is that they will burn through it with little to no gain if their Charisma is garbage. And heck, I probably didn't think that one through either, since chances are, their Charisma isn't garbage, whereas the target they're using it on (an enemy party fighter with a Charisma dump-stat for optimization of melee capability) is.
Either way, I still think that the DC for an item crafted (even by a PC at the least) should have the DC adjusted based on the crafter's 'casting' modifier.
(1): Mechanical simplicity. Each item the replicates a spell is assumed to function at the minimum level and caster stat needed to cast said spell. That is where the Sleep Arrow DC comes from.
(2): Spell slots should be more valuable than magical items, otherwise items outshine players.
Who the heck would burn through wands of charm person? 50 castings? Only on humanoids. Yeesh.
They would burn through them if they cannot effectively utilize Charm Person with the opposed Charisma checks. I did forget that even if the target succeeds the opposed Charisma, they don't break out of the spell effect, they just sit there and pick their nose, so I should apologize for my terminology.
What I should say is that they will burn through it with little to no gain if their Charisma is garbage. And heck, I probably didn't think that one through either, since chances are, their Charisma isn't garbage, whereas the target they're using it on (an enemy party fighter with a Charisma dump-stat for optimization of melee capability) is.
Either way, I still think that the DC for an item crafted (even by a PC at the least) should have the DC adjusted based on the crafter's 'casting' modifier.
They don't just 'sit there'; all charm person does is make them treat you as a friend and ally (i.e. the best relationship described in the diplomacy skill).
If you were to house rule an increase in DC for spell effects you would need to figure out how to price this. A DC 11 wand of Charm Person should not cost the same as a DC 15 wand of Charm person. The closest precedent would be something like heighten spell (i.e. craft it as if it were a higher level spell), but if you run the math you will see it wouldn't be worth it. Any other ideas for how to price increases in DC from a primary spellcasting stat?
The idea is that found magic items have DCs based on the lowest possible stat required to cast the spell.
There is some factory somewhere with level 1 Wizards with 11 Intelligence churning out Sleep Arrows, I guess.
But yeah, that's why you'll notice all level 1 spells in items have DCs of 11, level 2 spells have DCs of 13, level 3 -> 14, level 4 -> 16, etc.
Finding Magic Items? Probably, if only for simplicity, though you'd think that for specific magic items that are actually powerful, the DCs wouldn't be a joke. I'd find if the BBEG got done completing his ultimate Death Ray Staff with his insane 30 Intelligence, having a DC 13 Will Save or Die would make his item seem like a complete joke. That's no Death Ray Staff, that's just a Laser Pointer shining in the eyes of somebody that just might be Seizure-sensitive.
Now, if the BBEG was able to apply his insane 30 Intelligence to the DC of his Death Ray Staff, that joke of a DC 13 Will Save will turn into a monstrous, life-threatening DC 23 Will Save, meaning the Death Ray Staff will actually be a Death Ray Staff, not a Laser Pointer of the Fairies.
LOL @ the Factory; probably a bunch of Level 1 Keebler Forest Elf Wizards making Sleep Arrows and baking them with chocolate chip cookies.
I don't know if it's just me finding that the DCs from Magic Items (and Magic Properties) are just a complete joke for any of them to be effective, or if it's because I'm exaggerating the capabilities of monsters/creatures, but for me a DC 11 Charm Spell against something like a Half Elf Wizard with a +4 Will Save base minimum (not including Traits, stats, or other good things) have to roll a 2 just to not be controlled by some Keebler Elf who made the item, and the factor of it scaling up to a maximum of maybe DC 23 against a creature's strongest save (Fortitude) makes the DCs of Magic Items seem a joke. Why even have the Magic Item with that property if it doesn't do anything almost 100% of time (if not already 100% of the time)?
Well, first, as the GM, you can make the DC of the death ray staff whatever you want. The crafting rules are for PCs.
Additionally, I'm not sure where you're getting a +4 Will Save vs. DC 11 to be rolling a 2...
But regardless, I think you're a little bit exaggerating bad guy saves and a little bit not realizing how terrible it would be for someone to zap PCs with wands of Charm Person with ease.
"What'd you roll?"
"20!"
"You're charmed."
"From a wand?!"
"Yep, the guy that made it was really Smart."
Or worse, reverse it:
If the Wizard with super high Int makes wands for everyone in the party to UMD, you could be dealing with volleys of super tough save DC Charms coming at your NPCs.
I am also slightly concerned you're talking about this from a GM's perspective, as if you somehow can't have a higher DC in an item. A GM's hands are never tied like that--you can always just decide something is higher.
Finding Magic Items? Probably, if only for simplicity, though you'd think that for specific magic items that are actually powerful, the DCs wouldn't be a joke. I'd find if the BBEG got done completing his ultimate Death Ray Staff with his insane 30 Intelligence, having a DC 13 Will Save or Die would make his item seem like a complete joke. That's no Death Ray Staff, that's just a Laser Pointer shining in the eyes of somebody that just might be Seizure-sensitive.
Staves us the caster's stats for determining DCs. That's what makes them special. Magi can do the same thing with wands (with the right arcana), while in 3.5 there was a feat that did that (as lot of 3.5 feats became magi arcana).
Finding Magic Items? Probably, if only for simplicity, though you'd think that for specific magic items that are actually powerful, the DCs wouldn't be a joke. I'd find if the BBEG got done completing his ultimate Death Ray Staff with his insane 30 Intelligence, having a DC 13 Will Save or Die would make his item seem like a complete joke. That's no Death Ray Staff, that's just a Laser Pointer shining in the eyes of somebody that just might be Seizure-sensitive.Staves us the caster's stats for determining DCs. That's what makes them special. Magi can do the same thing with wands (with the right arcana), while in 3.5 there was a feat that did that (as lot of 3.5 feats became magi arcana).
As an actual Staff Magic Item? Yes. As a special Quarterstaff with a charge/day-like power? Not really.
My point is that the magic item DCs for PCs are complete garbage. Most all creatures are going to have some sort of high-end saving throw, and if the creature is a caster or has the right spells, they can just say "I cast X, that spell won't do crap to me anymore."
I mean come on, a Slaying Arrow with a mere DC 20 (or 23) Fortitude Save is significantly weak compared to facing creatures that have amazing saving throws to begin with, matching with a crazy stat modifier, combined with other special features/spells, and you're looking at a +16 Saving Throw right off the top.
@ MLP: The +4 V.S. DC 11 thing, as I said, only included Base Saves and Racial Traits, no stat modifier or conditional modifiers; When we throw in that extra +2 Race bonus V.S. Charm, have a 12 Wisdom (+1), as well as another buff or two against enchantment effects, raking in at least a 2 or higher to succeed. The casting modifier is an extremely important part of the spell casting's power, something that the spell itself does not apply, but the caster.
And the worst part is, even if that PC made that same item, the RAW would still say that the item has the listed DC, which makes no sense with the rules of spells being cast when they can cast the spell with a superior effect than what is listed. Outside of Spell Preparation and Variable Party Make-up reasons (which don't exactly address the issue), why would a PC get a magic item with an obsolete DC when the spell cast by the person who made the item actually gets better results than something that he actually cast?
I mean, I see it as the caster casting two spells in two different instances, except with the same exact variables. Why should the concept of an item inherently interfere with the net result of the casting?
This sounds highly suspect. 19 maybe, but if a 20 isn't enough, there's something at work beyond simply spell DCs
"What'd you roll?"
"20!"
"You're charmed."
"From a wand?!"
"Yep, the guy that made it was really Smart."
First, it was rhetorical hyperbole. Second, maybe it was Charm Monster :P
|
FWIW, DC 11 sleep arrows -- specifically -- saved my group from a PC death they would have suffered at the maw of a glacier toad in JR 3. Granted, the archer shot three of them off, two of which hit, and only one of which provoked a failed save, but it was still a pretty good bargain. (This was an APL 7 group, BTW.)
I'm actually somewhat surprised they haven't looked into acquiring more of them.