Cost of Crafting a Shield spell item usable X / day


Advice

401 to 450 of 471 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

Are you aware how pounce works, Dtbone?

Edit:

It should also be noted that Ilja is presenting a "worst case"-scenario where the character does not already have ranks in UMD (a very highly regarded skill) and he doesn't have a single party member able to use a wand of Shield, either from a class spell list or from UMD.

Personally I have a hard time imagining a party without at least one character with shield on their spell list and/or ranks in use magic device, but I'm sure one exists somewhere.

If we're assuming that characters always move in their first round, then I don't think it's particularly unreasonable to assume that there's always someone around with UMD and/or shield on their spell list as well.

Finally, it should be noted that the Ioun Stone allows the player to store any other 1st level spell in it - he's no longer limited to just Shield.


Kudaku wrote:

Are you aware how pounce works, Dtbone?

Edit:

It should also be noted that Ilja is presenting a "worst case"-scenario where the character does not already have ranks in UMD (a very highly regarded skill) and he doesn't have a single party member able to use a wand of Shield, either from a class spell list or from UMD.

Personally I have a hard time imagining a party without at least one character with shield on their spell list and/or ranks in use magic device, but I'm sure one exists somewhere.

If we're assuming that characters always move in their first round, then I don't think it's particularly unreasonable to assume that there's always someone around with UMD and/or shield on their spell list as well.

Finally, it should be noted that the Ioun Stone allows the player to store any other 1st level spell in it - he's no longer limited to just Shield.

About Full-Attack: The item may be a sub-optimal choice for some builds. Not every build will get full use out of every item in the game. But you can't discount an item because some builds don't find it optimal. Should a +6 Belt of Strength cost less because it isn't particularly useful to a wizard? Should a +3 Greatsword cost less because a monk can't wield it?

There are some builds (and not corner case ones, actual, common, viable builds) which would find this item extremely useful. It should be priced as such.

Also, we are not assuming they ALWAYS move, in fact there will probably be times when not using the ring is a good choice. Probably why the OP wanted 3/day in the first place. He didn't plan to use it every time.

About Casters/UMDers in your group: Having builds where you rely on your party members to use your items for you is not a very convincing argument for how to price items that can be used on their own.

Personally, I find that the ring as described by the OP is reasonably priced between 6-7k. I also find the price Aelryinth suggests for the same ring which may be activated as a free action (which he does include) is reasonable for the price he suggests 12k.

EDIT: I suck at using this forum today :p


1 person marked this as a favorite.

For free action activation, I think around 12k does not sound unreasonable.


Aelryinth wrote:

Actually, without altering the price, you can make it a swift action to activate, as doing so does not change the price. Actually, I believe you can make it a free action, like the Ring of FOrce Shield, and it won't change the price.

This is like post 215 in the thread. How do you imbed links into your post?


By the logic you're presenting mage armor and shield should be priced equally since monks, kensai, and various other classes find mage armor extremely useful. There are some flaws in it.

I was not aware that Aelryinth's 12k price estimate was for a Shield charge ring that is a free action to activate. Could you quote or link to that post, please?


If you click the "how to format your text"-button at the bottom of the post window you'll get some tips on how to edit your post.

For instance if you want to link to PFSRD you add (url=PFSRD.com)to this message(/url).

If you replace the ( ) with [ ] that'll make the text between the brackets a hyperlink, like this:

For instance if you want to link to PFSRD you add to this message.

Wow, that is interesting. My first instinct is actually to price a free action Shield ring at higher than 12k, but I wouldn't consider 12k for a free action shield cast entirely unreasonable. Thanks for quoting :)


Kudaku wrote:

By the logic you're presenting mage armor and shield should be priced equally since monks, kensai, and various other classes find mage armor extremely useful. There are some flaws in it.

I was not aware that Aelryinth's 12k price estimate was for a Shield charge ring that is a free action to activate. Could you quote or link to that post, please?

Not exactly. Armor bonuses (generic) are designed as a core mechanic of the game. They cost what they cost. Other types of armor bonuses are better (and cost more), because they stack. Everyone still gets to have them because they come as part of normal magic items (ring of prot, amulet of nat. armor) Then shield bonuses are also available. They DO cost the same as armor bonuses for people who carry shields. But for people who can't (or don't) carry shields they cost more.


Kudaku wrote:


Wow, that is interesting. My first instinct is actually to price a free action Shield ring at higher than 12k, but I wouldn't consider 12k for a free action shield cast entirely unreasonable. Thanks for quoting :)

Seems fair to point out that his item is still 3/day not unlimited like Ring of Force Shield. And would have a 12 minute duration.


@Kudaku about mage armor.

I also think bracers of armor ARE priced where they are because of the classes that find them MOST useful. Clearly, Bracers of armor +(anything) is a poor choice for the fighter who wears full plate.

This does not lower the price however, just because the fighter in full plate wont find the item useful doesn't mean that the monk/wizard/kensai won't find them extremely useful.

I think that shield bonus is above that because it stacks with all other AC bonuses. That is to say AC bonus in general is useful to everyone and particular bonuses that stack are more valuable.

Also, in the example given about characters not finding the ring useful: The provided AC bonus isn't what made the item UNuseful, it was the action economy. Action economy is something that every class, and every build gets equal access to. How they spend it is a different story.

Basically, it isn't a class restriction that prohibits them from using a standard action to activate the ring (like monks wearing armor) it was a decision they made.


That is an entirely fair point.

I do however still think that the ioun stone solution should be considered both as an option with and without the added cost of UMD.


BigDTBone wrote:
Kudaku wrote:


Wow, that is interesting. My first instinct is actually to price a free action Shield ring at higher than 12k, but I wouldn't consider 12k for a free action shield cast entirely unreasonable. Thanks for quoting :)
Seems fair to point out that his item is still 3/day not unlimited like Ring of Force Shield. And would have a 12 minute duration.

I did not mean to imply that the ring would have an unlimited duration. 12 minute Shield spell ring with 3 charges/day, a free action to activate for 12k is still very interesting.


Kudaku wrote:
BigDTBone wrote:
Kudaku wrote:


Wow, that is interesting. My first instinct is actually to price a free action Shield ring at higher than 12k, but I wouldn't consider 12k for a free action shield cast entirely unreasonable. Thanks for quoting :)
Seems fair to point out that his item is still 3/day not unlimited like Ring of Force Shield. And would have a 12 minute duration.
I did not mean to imply that the ring would have an unlimited duration. 12 minute Shield spell ring with 3 charges/day, a free action to activate for 12k is still very interesting.

I really meant to just get all that information on the same page so everyone knows what we are talking about, not to suggest you thought otherwise...


Fair enough! I realized my previous post could have been read as 'continuous' and wanted to clarify my statement.


BigDTBone wrote:
Aelryinth wrote:

Actually, without altering the price, you can make it a swift action to activate, as doing so does not change the price. Actually, I believe you can make it a free action, like the Ring of FOrce Shield, and it won't change the price.

This is like post 215 in the thread. How do you imbed links into your post?

I think the reason is extremely weird consider this is what the guidelines say:

Spoiler:

"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 Gold Piece Values."
"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. The pricing of scrolls assumes that, whenever possible, a wizard or cleric created it. Potions and wands follow the formulas exactly. Staves follow the formulas closely, and other items require at least some judgment calls."

So it's pretty much what I mean with staring oneself blind at the formulas: Considering that a major powerup for the item (the difference between casting a 1st level spell slot Shield and a 5th level spell slot Quickened Shield) should be "free" because there isn't a line in the formula saying it should cost extra.

But the end result is not unreasonable. 12k for a swift action shield doesn't sound unreasonable in my ears.


BigDTBone wrote:

@Magimaster

"Higher" was anyone in the 5k+ group.

And your example demonstrated that 5 charges should be good for the whole day. This item (at every price suggested) is discounted by 40% to reflect that it only has 3 charges per day.

Then we're not actually disagreeing here. I said most people would price it lower than 12k. You said most people would price it higher than 5k.

Note that I also said I'd price it higher than 5k in a low magic game. I haven't said what I'd price it at in a normal magic game (if you could even define that) because it'd likely depend on what restrictions, if any, I put on magic item creation.

The main thing I want is a way to generalize. I hate having to dig through every item in existence to find something similar enough that I can be confident that the comparison is valid, and as you can tell from this thread that can be basically impossible.

I've come to the conclusion that the formulas aren't nearly as useless as nearly everyone thinks. 99% of items you would want to make can be priced according to the formula with no problem. I think I've got most of the corner cases covered with just 3 or 4 house-guidelines on top of the table, although for my present game I've even thrown most of those out and just said have at it. Nothing's broken yet, but they're still fairly low level.


To me at least, the reason the formula often may match the result is because the formulas give so many different options for calculating the same result that if one formula doesn't fit what one thinks is the right price, another interpretation of them may.

Honestly, I only think the formulas are useful when there really are no other items providing a similar benefit, and then only as the very basest baseline.


D'arandriel wrote:

My GM allows the crafting of unusal or unique items. At this point he has agreed to charge for these items using the formulas that are currently in the books. So, I have had our party crafter make a ring that provides the Shield spell 3/day with a CL1. The cost for this is 1x1x1800x3/5/2=540.

Anyway the GM is OK with this cost, but the crafter feels it should be much more expensive since it provides a +4 shield bonus to AC and incorporeal attacks, as well as protection from magic missiles. He feels this item should cost almost as much as +4 armor.

I feel that 540 gp is a fair cost for an item that activates a 1st level spell and must use a standard action to activate with a duration of 1 minute (10 rounds), which admittedly is plenty for one combat.

How would others cost this item?

Responding to original post, because not going to read 9 pages of this.

AC Bonus (other) = 4 x 4 x 2,500 = 40,000 gp for the +4 ac

Spell = 1 x 1 x 1800 = 1800 added to 40,000 gp for the other spell effects (magic missile negation, Invisible force shield that you do not have to wield with any hand, protection from incorporeal attacks). = 41,800 base

Charges per day (5/3) = 1.666 modifier = 41,800 divided by 1.666 = 25,090 gp base

Cost still seem to high, so would add in a Cost Reduction.
(Reversing Note 2, so has backward effect) = "If the duration of the spell is 1 minute/level, multiply the cost by 2"; so in this case i would divide by 2; since in this use, you need to reduce the continues effect of the AC bonus.

25,090 divided by 2 for duration = 12,545 base cost.

12,545 Market = 6,272.5 gp Creation Cost.

Character Wealth by level =
1/2 total wealth = 8th level to buy or 6th level to make.
1/4 total wealth = 10th level to buy or 8th level to make.

-----------------------------------------------

3 times per day on command word, for 10 rounds per use

Shield creates an invisible shield of force that hovers in front of you. It negates magic missile attacks directed at you. The disk also provides a +4 shield bonus to AC. This bonus applies against incorporeal touch attacks, since it is a force effect. The shield has no armor check penalty or arcane spell failure chance.

-----------------------------------------------

Based on Caster level 1. If you want to increase the duration of the ring, just increase the spell part of caster level, to increase the cost for the extra duration.

....................

How i would do it anyways.


Oliver McShade wrote:
How i would do it anyways.

You may have just stepped into something bigger than you realize. For what it's worth, some people here agree with you, others don't.


Oh ye gods, not another one >__<

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

Wow, I make a point on the Ring of FOrce Shield being a free action over 200 posts ago and someone finally catches it. Ilja, I'm sorry, but I also lowered my price target hundreds of posts ago, and you're still clinging to the initial calculation. I cut it in half when someone pointed out the duration rules for minute/level spells cut the cost in half.

And, to reiterate, the price savings if you make it a standard action is 10,800, or 10% less. That's IT. That's all the cost savings you get. It's right there in the rules...continuous vs command word.

Why? Because you're largely still going to use it during a surprise round or before a fight, and it will last long enough. Using it IN a fight is too late, and you'll only use it if really necessary...exactly like a wizard won't cast it in a fight if he has something better to do. I see no reason any other class shouldn't have to make that same choice.

===Aelryinth


Aelryinth wrote:

Wow, I make a point on the Ring of FOrce Shield being a free action over 200 posts ago and someone finally catches it. Ilja, I'm sorry, but I also lowered my price target hundreds of posts ago, and you're still clinging to the initial calculation. I cut it in half when someone pointed out the duration rules for minute/level spells cut the cost in half.

And, to reiterate, the price savings if you make it a standard action is 10,800, or 10% less. That's IT. That's all the cost savings you get. It's right there in the rules...continuous vs command word.

Why? Because you're largely still going to use it during a surprise round or before a fight, and it will last long enough. Using it IN a fight is too late, and you'll only use it if really necessary...exactly like a wizard won't cast it in a fight if he has something better to do. I see no reason any other class shouldn't have to make that same choice.

===Aelryinth

To be honest, I thought everyone had noticed was just ignoring it. When I brought it up I was kinda surprised by the reaction. Oh well.


@Aelryinth

I find it quite entertaining that you apparently made the free action argument 200 posts ago and then spent 200 posts banging your head against the action economy argument without ever bringing it up again. Each to his own I guess :)

@BigDTBone

When this discussion started off Aelryinth thought a CL 1 3/day Shield spell ring was worth 24 000 GP.
At the moment he's arguing that a CL 12 3/day free action to cast Shield spell ring is worth 12k.
Clearly there has been some movement.

Aelryinth has created his own item and should probably open a new thread if he wants to discuss the merits and drawbacks of it. Personally I consider this discussion ended because we're not talking about the same item anymore.

For what it's worth I do think Aelryinth's development is a classic example of what happens when you stare yourself blind at the formula without considering the magic item price guidelines as a whole:

His first price was 24k which he was perfectly happy with until someone pointed out he missed something in the formula, then he reduced it by a whopping 50%. I find it interesting that his approximate value was "cut in half" not because of a logical argument or realizing that there was a flaw in the item and the price he had listed, but specifically because someone else pointed out an error in how he applied his own formula.

Now he's claiming that the difference between a free action spell cast and a standard action spell cast is 10%. The formula might back this up but if you actually consider other options that speed up spellcasting (like Quicken Spell you can see that Paizo values the difference between a swift action and a standard action spell quite highly - to the tone of a +4 spell level modifier. Also note that even Quicken Spell only allows you to cast on a Swift action, limiting you to one swift spell per round - Aelryinth's item works on a free action, and has no such limitation.

I can't believe I actually have to state this, but the difference between a free action cast Shield spell and a standard action cast shield spell should not be 1200 GP. If you disagree with that then I ask, no, I implore you to start a different thread and/or post in any of the game dev "ask us anything"-threads and ask for yourself.


Kudaku wrote:


@BigDTBone

I'm pretty sure we are on the same page here.


BigDTBone wrote:
Kudaku wrote:


@BigDTBone
I'm pretty sure we are on the same page here.

Good to know!


I'll say that I don't consider any use-activated item to be a free action to activate. I consider all of them to be a standard action (or possibly part of a more common standard action) with the 10% discount applying if you have to speak a command word which gives away your position and intention, etc. (I haven't completely decided how to handle move action or swift action items in general. Quicken is the obvious choice, but for many items it seems to give much to high of a price.)

Now, I do admit that's only my interpretation of the guidelines but it gives prices that seem reasonable to me.

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

What Paizo values for a quickened spell with metamagic is far different then what they allow in continuous/free action activated MAGIC ITEMS.

Especially in the arena of AC.

A Ring of Force Shield is effectively a continuous effect. You turn it off when you don't want it on, you turn it back on when you do. If it was continuous, you'd run into penalties for having a shield up. So, they made it a free action to manipulate.

Furthermore, the 12k formula is based off the continuous AC pricing formula for X benefit, then modified for the uses/day, which modifies Base Price, regardless if that is continuous, command word derived, or AC calculation derived.

A Ring of Shield AC +4 is 40k. Straight calculation (none of the other SHield spell benefits). This should also be the price of a Ring of Force Shield +4...they amount to the same thing.
To Save MONEY, this was revised to be x charges/day, and settled on a 1 minute/CL effect. This cut the price in half, and limited the amount of time it was around.
The duration cut moved the base price to 20k for a 5/day use item...which basically means the item is usable any time there's a fight. The cut to 3/day dropped that to 12k.

Because a base AC item has to have 3x the bonus in CL, the base CL of the item is 12th, giving a duration of 12 minutes per activation for Shield AC.

Note that a Ring trying to duplicate this effect with CLxSL is going to have to be at CL12, which will blow the pricing out of the water (1080 gp becomes 12,960 gp). Nobody wants a Ring of Shield Spell with a duration longer then a minute...it drives the price up too much. Much better to have more uses a day, instead.

but those who want the cheap AC so desperately are trying to minimize the value of an extra +4 AC, which is nuts, and also trying to minimize the obvious...they'll simply buy multiples if they need more uses/day.

As for logic and pricing...CL x SL is NOT logical for an item like this. Technically speaking, a uses/day item is NOT logical for an item like this...but it can be calculated based on a continuous item.

==Aelryinth


but the thread isn't about free action items. it's about standard action items, as mentioned in the OP.

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

Aaaaand as repeated for the nth time, the difference in price is 10% from that of a continuous/free action item.

==Aelryinth


And again, I'm not buying that, although again, I admit that's only my interpretation.


He is refering to 1800 for command word vs 2000 unlimited= which is a 10% difference in price.

On the other hand, the unlimited, also has note 2 attached. Which would drive up the price of anything with short duration, and thereby make it much more than a 10% over all difference in price between command word vs unlimited use.

Therefore would not use the 10%, as it need to be constantly modified by the other factor in the equation. Sorry no short cut there.


I know. I'm referring to command word versus use activated. Like I mentioned before, I take use activated to mean either it requires a standard action or it's part of some existing standard action (roughly) and so the 10% difference is not applicable as the difference between that and a continuous item, which as you say needs to account for the duration, or a swift action item, which I don't feel is well covered in the guidelines.


But Ael, because of:
"Furthermore, the 12k formula is based off the continuous AC pricing formula for X benefit, then modified for the uses/day, which modifies Base Price, regardless if that is continuous, command word derived, or AC calculation derived."

wouldn't it have the same price if it was a free action and lasted for 7 hours per day instead of a swift action lasting for 3 rounds per day?

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

The fact you want to gimp yourself by using charges/day instead of a continuous effect just to save some money is not an issue with the item.

And on top of that, once you get to a duration of a minute, you're lasting basically a whole fight. It's pure cheese metagaming, but that doesn't stop people from buying multiple Battle Shirts now, does it?

Aaaand, I'm not really sure what you're trying to say there, Ilja.

==Aelryinth


Well, since you base your price of the continuous AC, and modify it for uses/day, and don't take anything else into consideration, wouldn't the price be the same for an item that grants +4 AC for 7 hours 3/day?


Aelryinth wrote:

The fact you want to gimp yourself by using charges/day instead of a continuous effect just to save some money is not an issue with the item.

And on top of that, once you get to a duration of a minute, you're lasting basically a whole fight. It's pure cheese metagaming, but that doesn't stop people from buying multiple Battle Shirts now, does it?

Aaaand, I'm not really sure what you're trying to say there, Ilja.

==Aelryinth

You know, this is my biggest problem with your argument. It's not entirely what you're saying (which I do still disagree with) but how you're saying it.

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

Ilja wrote:
Well, since you base your price of the continuous AC, and modify it for uses/day, and don't take anything else into consideration, wouldn't the price be the same for an item that grants +4 AC for 7 hours 3/day?

What kind of AC?

And no, a long duration item would cost double a minute/level item if we're using charges.
And the devs said not to do this, explicitly.

-----------
And you say you think calling pure cheese metagaming what it is is offensive, but don't call out the guy that recommended you just buy 3 Abjuration Cloaks of the Hedge Wizard for the shield spells?

That's pure metagame cheese. What else are you going to call it?

Double standard, anyone?

==Aelryinth


1 person marked this as a favorite.

The thing is, I'm not metagame cheesing anything. I'm the GM. I'm not out to get my player's. I'm not out to win anything. What am I cheesing here? How can I be metagaming when I am the metagame?

While I agree that actually using three cloaks is cheesy (though not metagaming as that might be a reasonable if odd tactic in game), I don't agree that using that as a point of comparison is metagame cheese.

So no, no double standard here. I still don't like the way you argue things.


Aelryinth wrote:

Aaaaand as repeated for the nth time, the difference in price is 10% from that of a continuous/free action item.

That sounds like an incredibly unbalanced rule for most types of item. Compare a Ring of Invisibility that allows you to turn invisible as a standard action against one that allows you attack and then turn invisible as a free action.

I'd cost the difference as typically 100% to 500% more valuable.


I don't see how a fighter buying three cloaks of the hedge wizard is any more cheezy than a wizard scribing three scroll knock is.

Also, using official published items in the most obvious way possible is not cheesy. Cheesy is manipulating rules, interpreting ambiguous wording in weird ways and using loopholes. This is as cheesy as using power attack to gain a damage bonus. Also note that there are more than one published method to get shield for cheap. So apparently, by the rules and published materials, it's not that big of a deal really. You could say it's optimizing, or maybe even power gaming, but with such a vague interpretation of "power gaming" playing a wizard with an Int above 16 would be power gaming.

Matthew Downie wrote:
Aelryinth wrote:

Aaaaand as repeated for the nth time, the difference in price is 10% from that of a continuous/free action item.

That sounds like an incredibly unbalanced rule for most types of item. Compare a Ring of Invisibility that allows you to turn invisible as a standard action against one that allows you attack and then turn invisible as a free action.

I'd cost the difference as typically 100% to 500% more valuable.

Yeah it's not a rule at all. It's an extrapolation of specific formula that doesn't apply in this case, while also ignoring parts of that formula. If going by the formula (which should be last resort) the difference for a minutes/level item is actuall +122%.

Basically, what they've done is take the "unlimited command word = 1800*lvl*cl" and compared it to the "continuous = 2000*lvl*cl", completely ignored the multipliers to continuous item costs for low-duration spells and extrapolated that continuous and free action unlimited spells are worth equally much (which they aren't, of course, the difference between sleet storm as free action at will and a continuous sleet storm is HUUUGE).

So yeah, they pick out a few words of the guidelines while skipping large parts of it, twist it around a bit and state "THIS IS THE WAY IT IS!"

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

I call cheese cheese and grasping for rules loopholes for what it is. I've seen waaaaaay too much of the stuff to do otherwise.

And several others have weighed in and seen exactly the reasons why I say these things. Then the people on the other side of the equation dismiss them as being inconsequential or invalid or something, basically out of hand saying 'no' because it doesn't fit what they want.

The argument then moves from RAW to nebulous 'balance' arguments that can be twisted to the poster's desires to say anything, and which are also shot down.

THEN they inevitably degrade to personal attacks because they can't win a real argument.

It's an old cycle. I'm used to it.

==Aelryinth

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

Ilja wrote:

I don't see how a fighter buying three cloaks of the hedge wizard is any more cheezy than a wizard scribing three scroll knock is.

Also, using official published items in the most obvious way possible is not cheesy. Cheesy is manipulating rules, interpreting ambiguous wording in weird ways and using loopholes. This is as cheesy as using power attack to gain a damage bonus. Also note that there are more than one published method to get shield for cheap. So apparently, by the rules and published materials, it's not that big of a deal really. You could say it's optimizing, or maybe even power gaming, but with such a vague interpretation of "power gaming" playing a wizard with an Int above 16 would be power gaming.

Matthew Downie wrote:
Aelryinth wrote:

Aaaaand as repeated for the nth time, the difference in price is 10% from that of a continuous/free action item.

That sounds like an incredibly unbalanced rule for most types of item. Compare a Ring of Invisibility that allows you to turn invisible as a standard action against one that allows you attack and then turn invisible as a free action.

I'd cost the difference as typically 100% to 500% more valuable.

Yeah it's not a rule at all. It's an extrapolation of specific formula that doesn't apply in this case, while also ignoring parts of that formula. If going by the formula (which should be last resort) the difference for a minutes/level item is actuall +122%.

Basically, what they've done is take the "unlimited command word = 1800*lvl*cl" and compared it to the "continuous = 2000*lvl*cl", completely ignored the multipliers to continuous item costs for low-duration spells and extrapolated that continuous and free action unlimited spells are worth equally much (which they aren't, of course, the difference between sleet storm as free action at will and a continuous sleet storm is HUUUGE).

So yeah, they pick out a few words of the guidelines while skipping large parts of it, twist it around a bit and state "THIS IS THE...

1) Scrolls are not permanent magic items. The cloak doesn't require UMD or caster levels to use. Swapping out a Cloak to use a mis-priced spell for maximum AC benefit is clearly metagaming the rules. Would you do the same if the spell was Shield of Faith, for half the benefit?

It's cheese.

2) She says, completely ignoring the counter-examples of things like the Bracers of Falcon's Aim, priced so blatantly wrong WoTC errata'd it promptly.

3) And this is why you don't use CL x SL stuff. Continuous Sleet Storm, riiiiiiight. Very much akin to saying continuous Walls of Fire, ie. offensive spells, instead of defensive ones. Continuous Lightning Storm or Call Lightning up next, I'm sure.
Massive, MASSIVE Straw Man argument.

Pricing is there because, all other things being equal, the devs consider the standard action to activate only worth a 10% discount on a normal item, all other things being relatively equal.
Kindly note that the invisibility spell is not a continuous item. It's an unlimited uses/day item with a standard action to activate. There is no pricing paradigm to compare such a thing to one with a free action to activate, because in this case, you're trying to reverse-cheese....massively increase the marginal benefit of the effect with only a minor increase in price.

This is simply your 'a standard action is more valuable then that, so I should get a huge discount!' argument, only you're trying to leverage it from the opposite direction.

Nobody's buying, happily.

==Aelryinth


Aelryinth wrote:

Aaaaand as repeated for the nth time, the difference in price is 10% from that of a continuous/free action item.

==Aelryinth

Aelryinth, could you please make a post in the Advice section asking if your interpretation of the 10% price difference between use activated/continuous and command word is correct? This is not the thread to discuss that in. Clearly you won't take our word for the general balance of such a ruling, and honestly I think you'd benefit from getting some (perceived) unbiased feedback. You can phrase the post however you want and use whatever items you deem appropriate as examples of your formula.

Actually, if you won't do make such a thread then I will - though I probably won't be able to give your argument the full benefit of your presentation.


Aelryinth wrote:

I call cheese cheese and grasping for rules loopholes for what it is. I've seen waaaaaay too much of the stuff to do otherwise.

And several others have weighed in and seen exactly the reasons why I say these things. Then the people on the other side of the equation dismiss them as being inconsequential or invalid or something, basically out of hand saying 'no' because it doesn't fit what they want.

The argument then moves from RAW to nebulous 'balance' arguments that can be twisted to the poster's desires to say anything, and which are also shot down.

THEN they inevitably degrade to personal attacks because they can't win a real argument.

It's an old cycle. I'm used to it.

==Aelryinth

Many more people have weighed in saying that your price is too high.

This isn't a loophole. This isn't cheese. We just value different things differently. There is more than one right way to play the game.

And you're going through the same cycle as the rest of us, if not leading the pack.

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

Aaaaaaand those people, as soon as they actually read my pricing, to some extent promptly revised their opinions.

They also had NO defense for the comparison of pricing vs the other AC spells, and tried to stay as far away from that argument as possible, trying to bring it all down to 'cost of a standard action'. Indeed, the whole 'this level of AC in magic items should scale by level' is something they scrupulously avoided.

Why? Because Shield, like Mage Armor, is incredibly powerful as a magic item. More powerful, because Armor is easier to get and Shields is very difficult AC to get without, you know, using a shield. The fixed benefit of +4 is INSANELY good as a first level spell, especially compared to an actual shield at that level. (Mage Armor is actually just light armor).

And that's why they are focusing on that spell.

Why not Barkskin? Because the AC benefit would be +2, and the cost 6x as much. For a thirty minute benefit that they don't care about.

Why not Shield of Faith? Because the benefit is only +1, and Rings of Prot +1 or 2 aren't that expensive.

Why Shield? Because the benefit is huge and they normally couldn't get Shield AC without using a Shield.

They want cheap Shield AC, and are trying everything they can to drive the price down, ignoring everything that gets in the way.

And I've no sympathy for what they are attempting. It's unbalanced, it's to be avoided if at all possible, and if not, it's to be priced compared to other things that grant AC...not at the cheapest level possible.

==Aelryinth


That's your opinion, which is valid at your table. My opinion is valid at my table. On the messageboards there is no right way to do it, only different ways.

BTW, I'm pretty sure most people in this thread are focusing on shield because the OP asked about shield. As simple as that and nothing more.


Part of my group was doing this earlier in the year, so the DM started throwing monsters with their own crafted gear and the their class/their alignment only specialty items, so no one could use the items and the magical items sold for less. Shortly thereafter the party learned to not cheap the system.


The class/alignment discounts are a whole 'nother discussion.

And despite Aelryinth's assumptions, no one is trying to cheap the system here.

401 to 450 of 471 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Advice / Cost of Crafting a Shield spell item usable X / day All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.