Thanks! :D
Yep, it would be a mass Bull's Strength, with a delayed onset time and limited range. Note that it would also affect any enemies that got into the cloud.
It functions like a fog cloud, so the same thing would happen as if you cast one of those on a fog cloud (it would dissipate; nothing/they'd overlap).
Hmm, most Superstar Items are combat items, true, but not all. At least one was a vehicle. Besides, it has plenty of combat uses:
- Attract the guards with the whistle and knock them out (sleeping potion, bam!).
- Obscure the battlefield with a fog cloud.
- Heal/buff during battle.
- Get the entire ballroom drunk.
What people said before was that the onset time and rounds for imbibed substances to take effect were too long to be used in combat. I think that could be easily solved by reducing those times.
Giving me a larger wordcount would be counterproductive! I think I can make it fit if I word it correctly. Do you have any specific errata that need to be added?
And any advice on the cloak that I posted above the kettle?
Hanging Moss Cloak
I like the name...it makes me think of creeping ivy (which would ALSO make a cool name). Conjures good imagery.
I don't know where we ended up on mixing auras. It feels weird to me to have a 1st level spell lumped into a moderate aura.
Reserving judgement on price until I finish reading the item.
I would put a period after "its wearers shoulders". Start a new sentence with the coiling down (this gives you a chance to fluffily describe the cloak again)
The word "indefinitely" worries me in the first mechanics sentence.
It disguises him, but does it actually grant a bonus or is he now effectively invisible?
There's no save to disbelieve the illusion? I'm starting to think the price should be higher.
"Appropriate natural sounds" is what I'd stick with here. You don't need to give examples in the mechanics section.
I'm getting what you are going for but I am not digging the mechanics so far. What happens if they try this when in a natural surrounding...of a desert?
You also could have simply said that any spell that allows communication with plants will allow vocalizations as normal.
Indefinite 5 foot steps and remaining disguised every day?
Aha! Now we finally get an effect to look to...invisibility!
Does the disguise function of the cloak have to be active to allow this touch attack?
Pricing should be higher for an item that allows an indefinite disguise with no save to disbelieve the illusion effects and also can entangle a creature for a full day. Also allows indefinite 5 foot steps while remaining disguised. I would probably put this in the 45-50 thousand range.
Overall I like the idea and the description of the cloak. I think in this case that your desire to fill word count worked against you. You should focus on rewriting this and simplifying the mechanics section to actually have some effect to mimic and a Will save to disbelieve the illusion. I almost think I would nix the melee part as it's not needed to make the item flashier. I think directly to Lord of the Rings and Frodo's cloak when they are watching the procession of armies enter into Mordor. So the first power is cool and cinematic already.
Fogsmith's Teakettle
Name, love it.
Same remarks on mixing auras as the Hanging Moss Cloak.
I would cut the ", and" and make these 2 separate sentences.
Em-Dash!
I don't really have much to say on this...I love the item. BUT! I would take the same approach with simplifying the verbage in the mechanics section so as to A)cut some words out and B)follow the 80/20 rule (try using verbage that hits 80% of the possible questions).
I don't think I like the last sentence. At least, I don't like the "susceptible creatures" bit. Leave it just the fog dealing the splash damage.
Cost and pricing seem more in line with this item. I'd pay 20k for it.
OVerall bang up job. I like it, it's cool, and it is quirky.
Saying it functions like a fog cloud is the problem, a fog cloud only obscures vision and covers an area of effect. It doesn't spread a posion, potion, or slash weapon effect.
I need something like potion effects all within area of effect with a save option (even on a buff potion.) A seperate sentence for the posion effect and a seperate sentence for the slash damage.
I like the item allot I just want it spaced and the effects slightly more defined (basis of the DC ect.) As a DM I could well see this as an ambush weapon.
I'll access you cloak soon with detail.
Be very careful of "see this as an ambush weapon" - once an item use gets that pigeon holed it changes from Wondrous Item to Auto Reject Plot Device. I don't think this is, just be very careful - it is so easy to cross that line.
Also, start by defining the cool effect of the cloud and end with something like
"This item creates a cloud that spreads..., for all other effects, size, and duration treat as fog cloud."
This way you cover all the basics, dispersal, misschance, and so on and at the same time free up a lot of words.
Information received. Processing. ~BrrRRrzzzzTT~
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
In the month of October, I pledged myself to start reading general writing books to improve my writing style.
I may not be able to write a thesis on passivity, but I can share what I believe are simple gems. So here is a little share.
I'm not sure how much these can be applied to our games design writing, but I think they all have some value.
Here are eight words or phrases that should be hunted down in your entry and deleted with extreme prejudice.
1 - "Suddenly"
"Sudden" means quickly and without warning, but using the word "suddenly" both slows down the action and warns your reader. Do you know what's more effective for creating the sense of the sudden? Just saying what happens.
When using "suddenly," you communicate through the narrator that the action seemed sudden. By jumping directly into the action, you allow the reader to experience that suddenness first hand.
2 - "Then"
"Then" points vaguely to the existing timeline and says, "It was after that last thing I talked about." But the new action taking place in a subsequent sentence or sentence part implies that much already. You can almost always eliminate your "then"s without disrupting meaning or flow.
3 - "In order to"
You almost never need the phrase "in order to" to express a point. The only situation where it's appropriate to use this phrase is when using "to" alone would create ambiguity or confusion.
4 - "Very" and "Really"
Words are self-contained descriptors, and saying, "Think of tasty. Now think of more tasty" doesn't help readers develop a better sense of the meal or person you're describing.
Mark Twain suggested that writers could "substitute 'damn' every time you're inclined to write 'very'; your editor will delete it and the writing will be just as it should be."
Another strategy is to find a more powerful version of the same idea or give concrete details. To say "It was very/really/damn hot" does little, but saying "It was scorching" helps.
5 - "Is"
Is, am, are, was, or were—whatever form your "is" takes, it's likely useless. The "is" verbs are connecting terms that stand between your readers and the actual description
If the description is actually about a state of being—"they are angry," "are evil," or "are dead"—then is it up. But don't gunk up your verbs with unnecessary is, am, or was-ing.
6 - "Started"
Any action a person takes is started, continued, and finished. All three of these can be expressed by the root form of the verb. For example, "I jumped." The reader who stops in frustration, saying, "But when did the jump start? When did it finish?" has problems well beyond the scope of the content they're reading.
7 - "That"
"That" is a useful word for adding clarity, but like Bibles on the bedstands of seedy motel rooms, the word's presence is often out of place.
When "that" is employed to add a description, you can almost always move the description to before the term and make a more powerful image.
In many other cases, "that" can simply be dropped or replaced with a more descriptive term.
8 - "Like"
I'm not just saying that, like, you shouldn't, like, talk like a valley girl (though that too). Here's the problem: "Like" is used to show uncertainty. You should not be uncertain.
Be bold. When making a comparison, use force. Use metaphor over simile. Don't let yourself cop out by coming up with a halfway description.
Food for thought at least.
Just posted to my review circle what may become my item entry for this year - of course, now Paizo will catch me out by changing round 1 to something else >.<
For me comes the real challenge now - not tinkering, over-thinking or ruining it before the competition starts >.<
I believe this skill is referred to as "knowing when to stop".
Argh!
Aye, put it away! :)
Come up with something better, faster, stronger.
Then in two months you can put them in an arena and they can battle to the death!
I have a problem - lol (I know, who said "only one?" :P)
Every item I am currently coming up with is "too good" to be a practice item! >.<
heh heard the same thing from Jacob yesterday :)
Me? I worry I am practicing mediocrity :) (frex: almost nothing inspiring has come up yet.)
Welcome from Template Fu - now to business...
I only looked at revision 1 - in the competition, we go by what is entered, so I treated this review in that manner. Hope that's ok!
Name needs work, it is very "say whats in the tin" but it is also not very inspiring. And that is from the self confessed king of bad names!
Watch your template - some of those (Ex) had more than one space in front of them! Template Fu points these things out with glee should you qualify for the competition and do this on any template on any round.
Tactical Reach (Ex)
A reach expert gains Combat Expertise as a bonus feat at first level even if he doesn't qualify for it.
This ability replaces the fighter's proficiency with heavy armor and shields.
Name, ok, not exciting but very functional.
The wording of the first sentence should be revisited - if you award a feat which must be taken/awarded, then you simply say the character gets it. I don't believe you need the "doesn't qualify for it" - not sure as I am working late without my books to hand, so do check that. (Currently taking a tea - break while the server tries to revive itself :P)
I'm not sure about the equality of the swap at this point. One of the judges advice was to try to swap like for like in power terms. I can understand the reason behind this swap, but even a reach specialist soon gets surrounded by any intelligent foes who identify this weakness - especially as some reach weapons can't target adjacent enemies!
Also consider a lot of reach weapons are two handed, so he wouldn't often benefit from a shield, so it could be argued he is just giving up the armor, but it still grabs me as a non equal trade off at the moment. It may grow on me as I think about it, but that's my initial impression.
Precise Reach (Ex)
At 2nd level when a reach expert makes a melee attack through an ally's square, that ally only provides partial cover instead of the normal cover.
At 6th level a reach expert ignores cover from allies when making melee attacks through an ally's square.
This ability replaces the fighter's 2nd level bonus feat.
Be careful with your wording, some less experienced players may read that first sentence as reducing the cover granted to the expert by the adjacent ally - I am reasonably sure you meant the cover granted to the opponent by the adjacent ally is reduced!
Now this is interesting, in the first swap we swapped defense for a feat, and here we swapped a feat for effectively an attack bonus. What I would have done here, and its not perfect, it made the first power the swap for the bonus feat to make it feat for feat, and allowing armor and shield use in the early game levels for survivability and made this swap the initial swap. The initial swap still wouldn't be perfect but I think it would feel a better fit.
Fortify Defense (Ex)
At 3rd level a reach expert using the Combat Expertise feat may forgo the bonus to AC and instead grant an adjacent ally a bonus to AC and CMD equal to the AC bonus granted by the feat.
A reach expert may grant this bonus to an additional adjacent ally for every four levels beyond 3rd.
This ability replaces Armor Training 1.
Defense for defense of an ally in effect, and electable to grant as well, this is a good swap, maybe a bit powerful for level 3 but it does seem to fit nicely with the base class abilities, so I think you are good to go on this one. :D
Tight Formation (Ex)
At 11th level after taking a 5-foot step, a reach expert may use a swift action to grant an ally that was adjacent to him at the start of his turn a 5-foot step. This movement must end in a legal square adjacent to the reach expert and does not count towards the number of actions that the ally can take each round.
At 19th level a reach expert may extend this benefit to any number of allies that were adjacent to him at the start of his turn.
This ability replaces Armor Training 3 and Armor Mastery.
Swapping two for one is asking for trouble in the competition, bear that in mind. Do go check out last years forums for round 2 and find Sean's archetype advice, it will help a lot more than my ramble and half tired half remembered points. The 19th level could be split out and then you can replace individual abilities, the initial ability at 11th and then the improved ability at 19th.
At 11th level, tying it to taking a 5 foot step means that you have to take a 5 foot step as currently written AND then a swift action - so it actually costs you a swift plus your move actions - no full round action for you which means just the one attack for starters! I think this is too much cost for an 11th level ability - but that's just my gut feel speaking.
What you did very right was taking your a self defense and making it a grant-able defense to allies - a nice swap and quite cool, especially when you drag your allies with you.
Again, welcome to the group - now give us the visual and cinematic that goes with this. All of the abilities could use a little visual sexing up and the intro is missing at present. So give us the whole pie, we are hungry!
In general, albeit the extra space here and there, the template use was pretty good!
Dang! The server restarted...
... and my tea cup is empty!
Hope there is something in there you can make use of! See you all later!
I think swift is fine, especially as currently your allies could benefit from 2x 5-foot moves per round, they get the one from your ability swift action and then on their initiative, they effectively have their own.
For balance and interesting game situations though, I would make it that the swift has to be spent at the same time as the 5 foot step... using your example
take attack
take 5 foot step
finish full attack
hmm, but if I spend my swift now, my ally is no longer adjacent to me...
I hope that makes sense, so the swift spend and both your and the ally 5 foot movement happen simultaneously, thus preserving adjacency - and additionally opens up the option for the reach expert to step into the same space as an adjacent ally as the adjacent ally would be vacating that space simultaneously!
An ally can choose not to move with you of course - so you might want to consider if the swift action is still spent or not when no allies move with you.
Also not that if your speed is reduced to 5, you can't take 5 foot steps - this might affect your allies preventing them from moving with you even though you have said it doesn't cost.
So, consider adding something along the lines of "if the ally is able to make 5 foot steps then they can step with the reach expert" - it will save questions arising at the game table and keep the game flowing.
I brought this up in my review that got eaten:
You can move 5 feet in any round when you don't perform any other kind of movement. Taking this 5-foot step never provokes an attack of opportunity. You can't take more than one 5-foot step in a round, and you can't take a 5-foot step in the same round that you move any distance.You can take a 5-foot step before, during, or after your other actions in the round.
You can only take a 5-foot-step if your movement isn't hampered by difficult terrain or darkness. Any creature with a speed of 5 feet or less can't take a 5-foot step, since moving even 5 feet requires a move action for such a slow creature.
You may not take a 5-foot step using a form of movement for which you do not have a listed speed.
You can't perform ANY other kind of movement when taking a 5 foot step. So basically, no one could take a movement or a 5 foot step when this ability is used.
Lol, great minds - I was just looking at that in my book >.< -
If an ally moves to adjacent to the reach expert, he can't take a five foot move until his next initiative and so couldn't benefit from the ability - I think that's what we are getting at.
The adjacent allies can't take move actions that involve movement without precluding themselves from the ability that round.
I agree the 5' step ability needs some work, however a design that plays with the rules (without breaking balance) is usually considered good design space.
@Curaigh - I like that feat because you HAVE to have Step Up to use it. I agree about tweaking the balance being good design space...but that's also a pit to watch out for!
Pocket Saddle
I like the name so far. Although it could conjure up an image of something entirely to toy-like.
Weight - Hmmm....it seems weird to me to have a wondrous item as this fraction of a pound. Not a deal breaker or even a big deal at all...just stuck out to me.
Reserving judgement on price until I read it all the way...first impression though is that it better be one time use or limited.
Does there need to be a comma between finely-tooled and miniature? Should finely tooled be hyphenated?
I don't know that I would describe it as what its NOT. I would just give a description of what it IS like...much stronger that way.
A flat numerical +8 to Str for carrying capacity. I don't think I would lead with this power. Even put in language like this...it's still just a flat +8.
This second power is more interesting. I can see putting this on a Small or Tiny animal...human riding a squirrel!! Even though it physically shouldn't be possible. That's what I read into this though, even though the actual size of the rider doesn't change, they count as one size smaller for purposes of riding. Which means a Tiny sized mount should be able to carry a light Medium sized character. But this is probably at risk for being a "jokey" item.
Creation should be Construction Requirements on 2 lines.
Price should probably be slightly higher but it feels like you are in the right ballpark so I wouldn't worry overtly about this. The only that causes me concern in this area is the fact that it can be used indefinitely and on anything sized Medium to Tiny. Even with the +8 being restricted to carrying capacity the mount power makes it kind of useful.
Overall - I'm not 100% sure if this IS a serious item or if it is meant to be slightly jokey. I like the 2nd power better than the 1st. Assuming of course that's the way you MEANT that power to be read. I like it but I don't think I would have voted for it. You have some good descriptiveness in there.
And Welcome!
I have one question Curaigh.
Just the one...
Why doesn't it change the size of the rider?
...
...
...
If it changes its own size, I think it would be very cool to be able to shrink down the rider so I could, for example, ride that squirrel to climb that tree higher than I could as a 200 lb+ dwarf! Sit astride that spider using its silk to lower us safely down into the endless dark of the deep dark hole... etc.
The movement of the Tiny mount will still be much smaller than say a riding horse, so it wouldn't break long distance travel times (unless riding a swallow or other fast bird) and introduces the chance of being eaten by eagles, smaller hunting animals and the like.
...
...
...
Can anyone else say "familiar mount"? :D
mmmm, Creation indeed!,
Munch.
I had forgotten how tasty Curaigh template points were.
Pssst...Curaigh didn't do the item :) It was olePigeon.
Pssst...Curaigh didn't do the item :) It was olePigeon.
Sorry about that - my fault for reviewing after a 14 hour shift.
Wow, just ran through the Bestiary 4 preview 1 discussion - looks like mythic might be very polarizing - so I am re-visiting whether to mythic up my entry or not for Superstar.
I think the deciding factors will be
a) The general public reaction to mythic (this appears to be like Marmite/Vegemite) - love/hate. This is my biggest worry as I think this will limit the public vote on a mythic item.
b) how the item works/feels sans mythic. This *might* be possible to do in such a way that some of the public that aren't keen on mythic might consider voting for the item.
Considering how hard it is to get to top 32, I think I am leaning towards non mythic now.
Here's the link for you to read and consider for yourselves. It illustrates the confusion about mythic quite well.
This is a shame, I find the mythic idea fascinating and it opens up so many design possibilities. If I did make top 32, don't be surprised if I don't get mythic in subsequent rounds though :D
Reading Homer at the moment - I got inspired by his prose.
Here is what resulted - yes it's sak, yes it's not fully formatted, yes it was an experiment in an alternate way of describing an item - totally and utterly experimental.
I quite liked the effect in the end, but not something I would normally enter. Still, fun to share I think - and what a few words can do - lol - 38 words Curaigh!
Blood of the Mythic God
Fluid runs along swords keen edge, (+1 to damage)
Coats thoroughly an arrows head, (+10 to range increment)
Radiates deaths final chill,
Strike, loose, immortal kill! (treat as mythic for bypassing DR mythic)
Here a little something I cooked up. I have this nagging feeling that I forgot something ...
The Unraveling Talisman
Aura moderate abjuration; CL 9th
Slot neck; Price 38,400 gp; Weight 0.5 lb.
Description
This jade talisman is embedded in a wooden, oval casing, which is decorated with dimly illuminated arcane writings that seamlessly change every day.
As a spellcaster is preparing spells, he can choose to imbue the talisman with a spell. He cannot cast that spell nor use a single spell slot equal to the spell’s level until the next time he prepares spells.
When the talisman is imbued with a particular spell, within a 30ft area around the talisman’s wearer, every time an attempt is made to cast the same spell as the one stored within the talisman, its caster must pass a concentration check equal to 10 + level of the spell stored + the wearer’s Wisdom modifier. If the caster does not pass the concentration check the spell immediately fails.
In case the opposing spellcaster succeeds in casting the spell, the wearer of the talisman can chose to expend the spell stored in the talisman to change the target of the spell. If the chosen target of the spell does not match that of the expended spell, or if the spell doesn’t have a target, it simply fails.
Construction
Requirements Craft Wondrous Item, Greater Dispel Magic; Cost 19,200 gp
I'm going to try a different layout for my reviews. Should make more sense. Also, correction, item names ARE italicized within text.
Orcus of Undeath: Scabbard of Dissonance
Name: I assume this is going to be sound-related? Bursting eardrums by smacking the sword back in the scabbard? :p
Description: You had me until "fresh leather". This isn't a new car - it's a scabbard made out of monstrous faces! Try to avoid passive sentence construction. I don't like the feat in a can, UNLESS it dovetails into the actual ability of the item. Doesn't seem to, at first glance.
I'm fine with 3/day, just be aware that it's probably THE most common usage limit, and people might start to get tired of seeing it on every other item. Not necessarily a negative though.
By saying "with a magical effect", my brain thinks you mean "any magical effect", or "a magical effect from the following", but it seems there's only one. It may be better to just say that it becomes a bane weapon.
Construction Requirements/Aura/CL: I don't know if Limited Wish is really what you're going for. I generally think it's a good idea to avoid using wish/miracle spells as requirements, unless the effect is actually wish/miracle-related. There is a "Bane" spell. It has a different effect, but it might be a good place to start. Using limited wish will not give you a transmutation aura. It will be (no school) instead (as I recently discovered). Also, a CL of 13 will give this item a 'strong' aura.
Price/Cost/Slot/Weight: It is rather costly, but seems useful enough to almost warrant it. Final Thoughts: What worries me here is that while it is useful, it's also 1) A feat in a can, and 2) A weapon feature in a can. It doesn't really do anything innovative. The name also doesn't fit what it does. Most people will be thinking it's sound-related, but it ends up being all about bane. Still, you have decent writing ability and what looks to...
You sir, are a trooper. Thank you for the review. I knew that it was a feat in a can from the moment I started doing it, but I liked the concept so I went with it. The item seemed rather ... flashy :)
At first glance, Orcus, I like it. Simple, similar to ring of counterspells but different enough to be it's own item. I'm not sure I like the idea that the spell simply fails, but I do like the being able to change the target tweak on counterspelling.
I'm tired, so I may be missing something else, but only other things I notice is Craft Wondrous Items shouldn't be italicized and the spell shouldn't be capitalized. There should be a space between 30 and ft. as well.
Not sure if the DC should be the Wisdom modifier or the modifier of the main stat that affects spellcasting. I'd probably want to look that up.
I might like a little more description -- and you can just cut "which is" from that first graf -- but that's being a bit nitpicky.
All in all, I think it's a pretty cool item, though.
I rather like the idea, but losing all spell slots for a level - so a 20th level mage using a 2nd or 3rd level spell to counter with this item gives up more spell slots than a 5th level mage for the same effect?
That's a bit odd in my thought - a simple suggested fix is to say that you sacrifice a number of spell slots equal to the level of the spell imbued, and not necessarily the same level. e.g. if I imbue a 3rd level spell, I could sacrifice 3x 1st level spell slots, or a 1st and 2nd level spell slot or a 3rd level spell slot. This means the cost of the protection afforded is consistent at all levels and for all spells.
I think the changing target is cool, but as mentioned, if the casters successfully casts the spell and cant change target, then the spell should function normally but maybe give the wearer (only) a bonus to saves against the spell effect.
Extra thoughts ( I love/hate my subconscious sometimes :D ), I couldn't see a duration on how long the item remains imbued - so just checking your intention is such that:
Imbue the item, it stays imbued until used to counter a spell...
So, if I haven't used it, it remains imbued but I can now prepare all of my spell slots as normal the next time I prepare them?
Effectively the spell slot sacrifice is just for "to the next prepare"?
So what happens if I am a spell caster who just has slots and casts spontaneously from a reduced known list without preparation?
Oh, and can I, as a caster, imbue it, then take it off, putting around the neck of my front line tank so that the 30 foot zone is on him as he closes with the ranks so I can stay safely back away from melee? i.e. does taking it off cancel the imbue?
What about spell effects and items - e.g. if a wand of magic missiles is used when the item is imbued with magic missile, is the wand affected (caster check to function required or something?)
Finally, is the wearer affected too - e.g. beat the baddie wearing it, it has magic missile in it already imbued - the new caster owner puts it on and in the next combat tries to cast magic missile - concentration check needed?
Anthony, I think he intended for you to lose one slot. So if you cast a third-level spell into the item, you can cast one fewer third-level spell that day.
Anthony, I think he intended for you to lose one slot. So if you cast a third-level spell into the item, you can cast one fewer third-level spell that day.
I hope so, grin, but as worded it's almost *me @ three-four years* ago sort of wording >.<
I think some of my latter questions might be useful though :D
And knowing my propensity to over think, here is the over think that I thunk but didn't initially post *evil GM grin*
If two of these items are in the same 30 foot area, both with the same spell, (hey, my players, bound to happen :P), if Talisman A is triggered to use the spell - does Talisman B make Talisman A need a concentration/caster check ? LOL - I am so evil sometimes.
I wrote a long post explaining everything ... And then the forums crashed just as I posted it. I am so very angry right now.
Sorry for the poor wording. I played a lot with it as I was posting it (and copying it back into the word file, and it became a mild clusterf*ck), and it was very late at night.
I'll address some of the concerns right now.
Anyway, the item only requires a single spell slot that the spell would have taken if prepared. Only spellcasters who prepare spells can store the spell in the talisman. As for the two talismans question, if I understood it correctly: If there are two talismans in the same are they do not affect each other, as they are not casting spells, but storing them.
Thanks to you both for taking the time to look at my item. I'm preparing another.
man I am four or five items behind in critique now :(
Version 2.0:
PORTABLE SADDLE
Aura faint transmutation; CL 1st
Slot belt; Price 5,000 gp; Weight 1/4 lb.
Description
This finely tooled, miniature military saddle is not much bigger than the average human hand, and can be easily carried in a large pocket, bag, sack, or slung from a belt. When placed on a medium, small, or tiny animal, it will magically size to fit the animal, and the animal is affected as though subject to a permanent ant haul spell. When also mounted by a rider, the rider is affected as though subject to a permanent reduce person spell.
Construction Requirements
Craft Wondrous Item, ant haul, reduce person; Cost 2500 gp
Nice rewrite - but I am now inviting head slappage from my fellow blazing 9'ers because this next bit, I am king of - lol
Passive words:
Can - get rid of it
When - get rid of it
Also - get rid of it ( you get the idea :) )
This next one is one of my biggest banes - "affected as though" - just simply state what *IS*.
Removing passive words like these makes the writing much stronger, I will (sic) *attempt* to illustrate (and wait for my slap)...
When also mounted by a rider, the rider is affected as though subject to a permanent reduce person spell.
(19 words, suffers 'when', 'also' and 'affected as though', repetition of "rider" in the same sentence)
ok, let's see... something like...
"A rider shrinks as reduce person."
(6 words - punchy and to the point)
(yeah, I went extreme word elimination to hopefully get a good illustration of how passivity eats word count for you)
Notes:
- We italicize the spell, so we don't need to say it's a spell.
- Being the rider implies being mounted, so another saving there (although it could be left in, I'm just being ruthless :D)
- I removed permanent, the effect should only last while riding which is implicit - by saying permanent, a definite game term, could mislead people to use the saddle as a population miniaturization device ;)
Now, there is an inherent problem in this item with either of our wording when referring to reduce person - effectively we are both saying the rider changes size as defined by the spell. So what does that mean? The spell says that my size is halved and weight reduced by a factor of 8 - it's the height that's the biggest problem.
I am a hulking 6 foot tall muscle bound PC, I become a mini me at 3 foot tall - so I am still too big for a hand sized saddle and the mount.
So, although the effect is based on reduce person, you should revisit this and consider rewording to remove the spell reference and replace it with something along the lines of "is reduced to 1 foot in height to fit the saddle".
Don't worry about the weight, that's just maths and any player / gm aren't going to want that level of detail (oh, look at me not over-thinking! >.<), should they need it, I am sure they can rule of thumb it.
Also look for extremes when dealing with changes of size - e.f. check advanced races guide and bestiaries for playable races smallest size - if less than one foot (yes, I am talking playing a woodland fairy - Hackmaster style :P) then you would need both reduce and enlarge to allow the rider to always "size to fit".
In this case, I can't find a playable race less than one foot in Pathfinder, so I think it's okay.
In your description you also mention the saddle size is "not much bigger than the average human hand" - I think this is okay for the evocative description but could be a candidate should you encounter word limit issues (unlikely this item) to be made more definite.
Think of it as asking yourself questions like (are there regions of the world where the "average human size" is different - a race of tall jungle dewellers might have larger hands then those found in cities.
"Average" is another one of the words that indicate "uncertainty" - it's always better to be specific in this sort of designing.
Hanging Moss Cloak
This mantle of supple green moss hangs heavily upon its wearer's shoulders, coiling down to dry, irregular tatters at ankle height.
Hanging Moss Cloak
Aura moderate illusion and transmutation; CL 9th
Slot shoulders; Price 20,000 gp; Weight 3 lbs.
Description
This mantle of supple green moss hangs heavily upon its wearer's shoulders, coiling down to dry, irregular tatters at ankle height.
*supple or heavy? green or dry? coiling or hanging? (OK if the second is a gradation it works for me :)
**invisibility but you are visible? Treeshape makes sense, why tag on the invisibility?***Price is too steep IMHO. This is in the category of carpet of flying and horn of blasting and portable holes. I would even pick the +3 amulet of natural armor over this even though it is cheaper.
I can see elements of Quicksand Cloak and the Last Leaves of the Fallen Dryad but there are enough differences to make it unique. I like the trapping a target as a tree--a sort of a flesh to stone(wood) effect (entangle falls short IMHO, but works). It is not clear to me the entangled target would have the same verbal restrictions as the wearer, though I think that is the intent. I would prefer if the target could not cast spells or communicate with their partners, especially as I would want the BBEG to use this against the party before I gave it to them.
Nice work!
Fogsmith's Teakettle
*use rounds or minutes, seconds is not a game term (even though we translate rounds into minutes all the time.)
**I think someone already asked. How long does the fog last? three hours?***fireball has instantaneous under duration. Does a kettle in its area need to catch on fire for the allotted time (30 seconds) or is that moment of fireball enough?
***mass X, might be OP mass poison/alchemy turns this into SiaC or maybe a SiaC. Not to mention splash damage from an alchemist is horridly deadly when it is just a single target.
Love the name, kudos on that. I like the fog cloud effect even if it is a little mundane for RPGSS. It needs an effect other than AoE an item and the right one is definately a keeper.
Nice job :)
Although I do have a question on items taking multiple slots.
.
.
.Decoy Aura
*how big is the aura & how strong (CL 3?)? On a related note how far & how fast does it run?
**What affect does a decoy have (other than a paladin knowing to smite evil) I cannae think of a use?***SKR's design trap #25. I disagree with Jacob, that a different item would be better. If the BBEG sees a little doll run out then can't detect alignment wouldn't she ignore the doll/aura ability? Something less visible would be better IMHO. Now that I think about it most of the decoys I have seen resemble ducks not dolls.
I like the idea of a decoy (beware SKR's DT #27), but not sure aura is the best choice. I love the idea of a multi-hued light resembling a doll: a hologram of sorts. (yes I realize you later made it clear the item is a doll, but at first I was pretty excited :)
Nice work! keep em coming :)
EDIT: . needed on lbs. & did you get your first question answered?
Going to be a quiet weekend from me - our Uk satellite schedule includes hours and hours of classic Doctor Who this weekend, starting with The Aztecs, William Hartnell.
So, i am currently geeking out to the max ;)
Going to be a quiet weekend from me - our Uk satellite schedule includes hours and hours of classic Doctor Who this weekend, starting with The Aztecs, William Hartnell.
So, i am currently geeking out to the max ;)
Have fun :)
lol :)
The Unraveling Talisman
*an odd cost, round it too the nearest 500 gp (or so). When it is this exact a number people tend to look closer at the math and then we discover this is worth 9.6 rings of counterspells. Correct or not, we assume the author did not compare the price to existing items (the second step in pricing guidelines). For its effect, I think it should be closer to the ring in cost, but then I think it too close to this ring in function as well. Actually I think it should be cheaper than the ring as a ring can be charged on downtime and an adventurer can still have all spell slots available when on an adventure.
**Concentration is not as hard to beat so most spells will succeed. A floating DC like described should be avoided as well (it makes GMing and pricing harder).***It forces a check, which if successful, the wearer can negate anyway. Am I reading that right? By choosing an ineligible target or a target on a non-targeting spell. I think I know what the intent here is, but as written I cannae be sure.
I do like changing the target of the spell. This is what makes it different from a rings of counterspell. The top 32 are filled with gauntlets/gloves/vambraces that mess with a caster so there is some potential in the heart of this item.
Nice work Orcus :)
Version 2.0:
PORTABLE SADDLE
*name does not need to be in all caps, this is a common error when following the CRB. The 'all caps' visual is a function of the font. Also I think all saddles are portable by nature. I like pocket saddle better myself.
**some run-on sentences and the creature probably needs to have a rider, not the saddle correct? (watch pronouns)***Give us some more flavor, there are lots of wordcount left dinnae be afraid to use it to spice it up. Similarly dinnae tell us where an item can be carried (since it has to be worn to work) we can figure out the carry bit. Technically as written this shouldn't be carried but worn around someone's waist per the belt slot. :)
I like where this is going, and with the description given I actually like the idea of a bracer that looks like a saddle. Somehow targeting an animal puts a magical saddle on them and the wearer becomes the rider. Trying to keep your hand attached to the animal to ride it should prove an interesting prospect. :)
Good Job. :)
I know we worked on this a bit when we were playing with saddles last year. Does anyone remember what slot we settled on for a saddle.
The geekdom continues today I'm afraid - lol, Tomb of the Cybermen - Patrick Troughton (excellent story), Dr Who at the Proms 2010, Dr Who Confidentials, Behind the scenes footage and interview sections.
Grin.
Cy'a when I escape the draw of the Tardis! :P
Ok, I haven't costed this. It has a strong image but is skirting a number of Auto Rejects.
I can't settle on a definitive version and so this is an item that is really hard to do well - I may have overstretched my writing chops on this one due to the strength of imagery of the base item and so not being able to settle on an effect/power that feels worthy of the base item.
It is also quite close to spell in a can and to plot device, plus, the base item I think is likely to be very polarizing in a public voting arena.
So... I think the best place for it is here in the practice threads for general going over. It is a prime example of identifying a strong item but then not knowing what to do with it, to give it justice.
Price wise, I think it will end up in the 2,000-3,000 bracket - the effect this has is powerful but tempered by limitations of target and that it is a one shot consumable.
I won't say enjoy, because of the polarizing aspects it engenders.
(246 words)
Orphans Tears
Aura medium enchantment; CL 9th
Slot neck; Price todo gp; Weight —
Description
A cluster of tears, harvested at the moment of realization of becoming an orphan, are suspended inside a crystal vial that hangs from a silver chain necklace.
Pulling the vial from the necklace and throwing it at a target of the same race as the orphan requires, on a successful hit, that the target makes an immediate Will save, DC 18, or be filled with wretched guilt and shame. This is a mind affecting effect. Failing the save causes the target to throw down their weapons and shields in remorse, fall to their knees, and beg forgiveness of the necklace wearer.
The necklace wearer can forgive or deny the target. Either choice requires the target make a second DC 18 Will save. Failing this save when forgiven causes the target to flee. Failing this save when denied forgiveness causes the target to wail in anguish for d3 rounds after which they may act normally, benefiting from a +1 to attacks against the necklace wearer.
Passing the secondary save allows the target to determine they have been duped. The target rises in rage and immediately attacks the necklace wearer with their bare hands, attempting to grapple the necklace wearer to the ground and beat them to unconsciousness, with a +2 circumstance bonus to all grapple checks and unarmed strikes against the necklace wearer.
Construction
Requirements Craft Wondrous Item, forced repentance; Cost todo gp
Finally getting back to real life after a week long conference.
Thanks Curaigh for the review. My question was really if it is allowed to have an item that takes the head and shoulders slot simultaneously (as an example)?
I'll catch up sometime in the next couple of days.