How would you guys rule the pricing for a wondrous item that allows cure light wounds 5 times a day?
Few sessions ago, the bard in my group asked me to let him craft an oil that can be applied on wounds that heals as cure light wounds (1d8+1) 5 times a day, with the restriction that he needs the Heal skill to apply it and that it cant be used in combat (the oil takes time to take effect).
I checked the table and following the examples (latern of revelation and cape of mountebank), if the effect is continuous it is 2000 po base price, but if it has a command word anyone can use it as long as they know that word, which goes to 1800 po.
What i dont get is why the use activated and continuous effect are the same price. Or it doesnt matter at all?
Anyway, i based the final price on 2000 po, with a reduction of 30% due to all the restrictions. And allowed him to craft it for 700 po.
Note that a skill restriction is only 10%, while a class or alignment restriction is 30%, and you cant apply both. I ruled it as 30% for being both a skill (RaW) and only outside combat (house) because otherwise he would just make it "bard-only" restriction, and since he is the one carrying it around and applying it, it didnt really matter.
Back to the initial question, how would you guys rule the creation of an item like that?
If you have access to the 3.5 Magic Item Compendium, take a look at some of the charges per day items in there. I think there is one that already does something similar to what you describe, with a scaling effect based on how many charges you expend at one time.
If not, at least it'll give you a better idea of price guidelines for such an item.
|
tell him CLW is bad, have him make an infernal healing item, much better healing.
but back to the point the rules for making an item like that are in the magic item creation section of the CRB. i think it would cost about 10k or somewhere close if i remember correctly.
i personally wouldnt allow it because wands are dirt cheap and are basically the same thing. a wonderous item like that is unnecessary, and letting custom made magic items is a slippery slope. i mean a player can make a level 1 spell into an item that can destroy your game (i wont mention the item, but it costs about 6k).
@SideKick
A wand of cure light wounds has a base cost of 750 gp, with a class restriction it goes to 525 gp, which translates into a cost of 262,5 gp plus a spellcraft check.
Its not hard at all to craft, would cost almost a third of the value and in the end he could craft one and still use in combat, but he would have to wait a few levels to obtain the craft wand feat.
By the time he used up all 100 charges from two wands like that, they would already be lv6 or 7 and the item would be useless. They are lv4 now and the item is their last option on healing.
Custom made magic items are the reason that the magic creation table exists, but i did consider all alternatives to achieving the same effect before deciding what to allow or not. A cure light wounds spell is no different than a teleportation spell (boots of teleport), and their base price calculation is the same.
Im curious though, how did you achieve the 10k base price?
By the way, the player is a bard, infernal healing isnt on his spell list , or known spells even if it was, he would have to level up before crafting the item.
@Bob
Thanks for the tip, i will take a look.
I ruled out anything 3.5 related, the pathfinder rules for creation are much clearer and allows less exploits (anyone remember items of +20 skill?)
Thanks for the input, both of you.
@SideKick
A wand of cure light wounds has a base cost of 750 gp, with a class restriction it goes to 525 gp, which translates into a cost of 262,5 gp plus a spellcraft check.
First off, you should not be using class restrictions like that.
Second, let's look at the formula. It's a command word item, with a 1. level spell. So that's 1,800 GP. 5 uses per day is divide by 5/5, so no change there.
But that assumes that 5 is a reasonable number of uses per day. And that's fine for some things, but not for CLW. Given the choice between this item and 2 wands of CLW, most of my characters would bring the wands for the adventure. Assume conservatively that 10 uses per day would be a reasonable number, so now we're multiplying by 5/10, for 900 GP.
Should it take up a slot? Nah, it's an item for between encounters. If we make it a healing vest, people still won't make an agonizing choice between this tem and another. Besides, healing others is not strongly associated with an item slot, it's associated with wielded items.
900 gold? Seems reasonable.
I ruled out anything 3.5 related, the pathfinder rules for creation are much clearer and allows less exploits (anyone remember items of +20 skill?)
I'm curious.. The PF rules allow such items just as much as the 3.5 rules did; they would even cost exactly the same (PF's "estimating magic item gold piece values" table is a copy/paste of 3.5's table, apart from removing two lines regarding uncustomary slots and XP costs).
Just like in 3.5, the only thing stopping someone from creating a custom item (such as an item of +20 to a skill) is the GM :)
First off, you should not be using class restrictions like that.
Why not? Its RaW.
Isnt that like a sword that can only be wielded by paladins? Or a druid-only armor?EDIT: Personally, i dont like that restriction either, because a crafter could easily make "wizard-only wands" and swim on magic items. Thats why i rather create other restrictions that are more severe. Not being able to use in combat and requiring the Heal skill make it so they dont craft one for each group member and completely replace potions.
Second, let's look at the formula. It's a command word item, with a 1. level spell. So that's 1,800 GP. 5 uses per day is divide by 5/5, so no change there.
Pay attention to the differences between a command word activated item, and an use activated item. The comamnd word is cheaper by 10% because it allows anyone to use the item by using the command word, but they MUST know that word to activate it.
The main difference here is that a command word is always a standard action, while use-activated may or may not use a standard action (weapons and worn items usually dont). Thats why it is a little more expensive.With that i mind, i decided to use use activated (2000 gp) instead of command word (1800 gp). And it does consume an action because it activates a spell effect that takes some time to take effect.
And that's fine for some things, but not for CLW.
Why not?
Given the choice between this item and 2 wands of CLW, most of my characters would bring the wands for the adventure. Assume conservatively that 10 uses per day would be a reasonable number, so now we're multiplying by 5/10, for 900 GP.
I believe everybody would :P
Wands are reliable and can be used by anyone with the spell on their list (or UMD).Please note that your final item, using 10 charges instead of 5, still costed about the same as the item he crafted. Because you got the math mixed there, its X/5, X being charges per day. So an item with 10 charges would double the base price.
1/day = 20% the price, 5/day = 100% price, 10/day = 200% price.
He crafted it for 700 gp base price, considering he had a 30% discount, otherwise it would have been 5/day CLW for 1000 gp.
Your item did the same for 900 gp but 10/day.
The more charges, more expensive it is.
@Are
You are right, i just considered the differences of caster level requeriments and the spellcraft checks that didnt exist. It doesnt mention it, but the cloak of elvenkind has a CL 3, because it requires invisibility to give +5 stealth checks.
I just consider aswell that to craft a +20 jump spell you would need something of higher level (such as fly? CL 5 at least). It is slighly harder to achieve the same results as on 3.5. And many spells had changes, some dont even exist in pathfinder anymore.
But you are right, in the end its the same cost.
First off, you should not be using class restrictions like that.Why not? Its RaW.
Isnt that like a sword that can only be wielded by paladins? Or a druid-only armor?
And the limitation is supposed to be for things like Holy Avengers and whatever druids use. As you say, Wizards could just cut 35% of the cost of their scrolls and wands AND prevent thieves from using them. Except every one of those is a custom magic item that requires GM and approval....and at my table, the answer to "wand of Mage Armor that can only be used by red-haired NG conjuration specialists with the following feats..." is "F~++ no. And you owe me a beer or even asking. Go fetch it."
Please note that your final item, using 10 charges instead of 5, still costed about the same as the item he crafted. Because you got the math mixed there, its X/5, X being charges per day. So an item with 10 charges would...
No, my math is good but my writing might not be. I kept to your suggested 5 daily charges, but I changed the formula from baseline 5 to baseline 10, for a cost multiplier of ½.
No, my math is good but my writing might not be. I kept to your suggested 5 daily charges, but I changed the formula from baseline 5 to baseline 10, for a cost multiplier of ½.
Thats right, if the item has 10 charges, it should cost twice as much as one with 5 charges.
The way to handle it is simple.
Define the number of charges, then divide by 5, and multiply by the base cost (1800 or 2000 gp). Thats the new base cost.
And the limitation is supposed to be for things like Holy Avengers and whatever druids use. As you say, Wizards could just cut 35% of the cost of their scrolls and wands AND prevent thieves from using them. Except every one of those is a custom magic item that requires GM and approval....
Well, i will give paizo the credit, thats a leftover rule from 3.x.
But if the restriction is to be ignored everytime, then it shouldnt even be in the core rulebook. Dont you agree?I wish they made a set of possible restrictions and a 5% of discount for each, with a maximum of 20 or 30% the base cost.
There are many specific magic items that have restrictions on them, so rules for that must exist somewhere.
For example:
Sword of Subtlely: +4 on attack and damage when the user is using sneak attacks (22000 gp). The user must have sneak attack, thats the item restriction. Otherwise it would be a +4 sword and cost 32000 gp (it had a 10k gp discount).
No, my math is good but my writing might not be. I kept to your suggested 5 daily charges, but I changed the formula from baseline 5 to baseline 10, for a cost multiplier of ½.Thats right, if the item has 10 charges, it should cost twice as much as one with 5 charges.
The way to handle it is simple.
Define the number of charges, then divide by 5, and multiply by the base cost (1800 or 2000 gp). Thats the new base cost.
No, that's not what I mean.
What I mean is..."Divide by 5? That doesn't make sense for this particular item. I'm going to divide by 10 instead."
Still resulted on a cheaper item, instead of being more expensive :P
Or was that your intent?
Well, i will give paizo the credit thats a leftover rule from 3.x.
But if the restriction is to be ignored everytime, then it shouldnt even be in the core rulebook. Dont you agree?
I wish they made a set of possible restrictions and a 5% of discount for each, with a maximum of 20 or 30% the base cost.There are many specific magic items that have restrictions on them, so rules for that must exist somewhere.
Yes, it's that rule.
The point he was trying to make is that it's supposed to be used for things that would be unique to a certain class or alignment, and not for things that could be used by any class or alignment, but the crafter decided "hey, I want a 30% discount, so I'll say it only works for my class".
Essentially, those types of things are part of the "magic item creation is an art, not just selecting from a table" philosophy. That discount should only be used when necessary.
@Are
Thats why i didnt use that one. I dont like class restrictions unless the item was made with a purpose on mind.
Like an undead slaying sword that is crafted by a paladin order.
He would have crafted it with a 10% discount regardless of that, because his "oil" requires a Heal check. I gave him another 20% so he couldnt use it in combat like a potion or wand.
|
I think you might have stopped too soon on the table (15-29 of the CRB, pg. 550) in pricing the item.
I agree with your assessment that this is a "use-activated or continuous" time since the user has to use the Heal skill to make sure it is rubbed in thoroughly (hence warranting the 10% reduction in price). This give the item a base price of 2,000gp.
From here we must look at the footnote #2. This spell (Cure Light Wounds) has a duration that is shorter than round/level and the shorter the duration, the more the items seem to cost. There is no duration shorter than rounds on the list, but I would either just use the rounds adjustment and multiply by 4 or even extrapolate that durations shorter than rounds get a x8 multiplier. For my example I'll stick with x4 and increase the cost of the item to 8,000gp.
From here we jump down to the somewhat confusing Charges section. This item contains 5 charges and according to the writing you are to divide the price by a number equal to (5 divided by the number of charges or "5" in this case). The result of this is you are dividing by 5/5 or 1, so no change in the price. If the charges were 10/day then you would divide by 5/10 or 1/2. In math, when you divide by a fraction, it is the same as multiplying by the inverse of the fraction (10/5 or 2/1 or 2 in this case). I only wrote about this section to clear up the math error Pupsocket was having and to say it is a common one people run into sometimes.
After this, you run into the fact that this wondrous item has no space limitation and must multiply the total by 2 which brings us to 16,000gp. Looking at this I am thinking this price is a bit much for an item whose only effect is to give an application of CLW, 5 times a day and one who you have to use the Heal skill to utilize. The use outside of combat I would probably ignore and just require that each charge takes 1 full minute to properly rub in. This will effectively make it unusable in combat, but if someone really wanted to, they could stand there for 10 rounds working this balm into the wounded person's skin as battle rages all around.
So let's take out the x4 requirement for the short duration (I suspect many of you disagreed with my assumption anyway, but that is of no concern - I was asked how I would rule) and the price drops to 4,000gp which is further modified by a 10% reduction due to the skill requirement making the total price 3,600gp and 1,800gp to craft. This seems appropriate to me because what if a PC decided to have 4 or 5 of these made and hand them out to his henchmen whose only job is to stand there during combat and rub the ointment into his/her wounds? Or the same PC uses the ointments to keep himself/herself fully healed between battles?
In any case, that is how I would rule it.
ymmv
Nifty
How would you guys rule the pricing for a wondrous item that allows cure light wounds 5 times a day?
Few sessions ago, the bard in my group asked me to let him craft an oil that can be applied on wounds that heals as cure light wounds (1d8+1) 5 times a day, with the restriction that he needs the Heal skill to apply it and that it cant be used in combat (the oil takes time to take effect).
I checked the table and following the examples (latern of revelation and cape of mountebank), if the effect is continuous it is 2000 po base price, but if it has a command word anyone can use it as long as they know that word, which goes to 1800 po.
What i dont get is why the use activated and continuous effect are the same price. Or it doesnt matter at all?
Anyway, i based the final price on 2000 po, with a reduction of 30% due to all the restrictions. And allowed him to craft it for 700 po.
Note that a skill restriction is only 10%, while a class or alignment restriction is 30%, and you cant apply both. I ruled it as 30% for being both a skill (RaW) and only outside combat (house) because otherwise he would just make it "bard-only" restriction, and since he is the one carrying it around and applying it, it didnt really matter.Back to the initial question, how would you guys rule the creation of an item like that?
@Nifty
Hey, thanks for the input man.
But see, that exception (#2 on the table) is specifically talking about items with a duration, not instantaneous (such as the boots of teleportation. Teleport is an instantanous "duration" spell, just like cure light wounds, so you cant apply that rule for that item.
Otherwise, the boots themselves (and many, many others, would cost 4 times more).
On top of that, it states that only works for continuous items. Which would be the case of an item that permanently grant a spell effect, such as mage armor, or a vanishing cape (vanish gives invisibility for 1 round/lv, up to 5), then those multipliers would apply.
Also, that space multiplier (2x) is only for items that do occupy a slot normally, but wont. Ignoring the slot limitation.
That said, if the "oil" was actually gloves that grant CLW 5 times a day, which would use the hand slot, it would have normal cost. Because it uses a slot that could be used for something else. Or twice the price if they were wearable that didnt occupy any slot, like the ioun stones, that float around you, not using slots but still applying a certain bonus constantly.
If you want to apply the slot rule, you could easily say that they use the weapon hand slot, which means they cant be used in combat, unless you want to heal the opponent and/or cause attacks of opportunity healing yourself. And they would still not be x2 price, but only 1x.
See the difference?
By the way, thanks, the term i was looking for is "balm", not "oil". But just couldnt remember the word we used.
Let me just quote the rules i mentioned on this post:
#2If a continuous item has an effect based on a spell with a duration measured in rounds, multiply the cost by 4. If the duration of the spell is 1 minute/level, multiply the cost by 2, and if the duration is 10 minutes/level, multiply the cost by 1.5. If the spell has a 24-hour duration or greater, divide the cost in half.
#4 If item is continuous or unlimited, not charged, determine cost as if it had 100 charges. If it has some daily limit, determine as if it had 50 charges.
Note that if we applied #4, they would have a trully infinite potion (no charge per day limit) for the cost of two regular wands, which would be ridiculous any way you look at it.
Lets take the boots of teleportation as example, they cost 49.000 gp, and allow the use of teleport 3 times a day, and doesnt mention any restriction on that, just that uses the feet slot, for being boots.
Nor does it mention which type of action they use to activate, meaning they use a standard action, which could be command word or use-activated.
The caster level to cast teleport as a wizard is 9, and its a 5th level spell. If we take it as a command word item, thats (49 * 1800) to craft.
3/day reduces it further, to ((49*1800)*(3/5)) or 48.600 gp.
If we take it as an use-activated, it should be ((49*2000)*(3/5)) or 54.000 gp.
Lastly, althought it doesnt mention it, the boots are PROBABLY a command-word type item, because the "use" of boots is walking. The wearer would teleport once per round when wearing it, until the charges were over. :P
Joke aside, they follow the default action for activating (standard), so we can safely assume they calculated those as command-word.
My take on this item is:
1. I don't like healing items which never run out, but 5 charges per day is not terribly excessive. I would however apply an additional limitation, that no individual can benefit from more than 5 applications per day. This is to rule out someone making lots of these and using them too many times. YMMV.
2. Restrictions. As far I am concerned, the price reductions from any restrictions only apply to the sale price. There is no discount on crafting cost.
3. Price. 3000gp, or 1500 to craft feels about right. Pricing is always an art, the suggested numbers in the rulebook are merely a place to start not the sole arbiter.
@Gilarius
Thats actually a pretty good idea. I simply forbid him of making more than one of those, even though it seemed excessive.
As i said earlier, they crafted that item on earlier levels, when they didnt have a healer (the bard is the healer), so i allowed it.
Now, they use that balm once everything else ran out (bard spells, paladin heals, etc).
About the restrictions, it specifically mention that the 10% and 30% restrictions are applied when you are figuring out the item price. It is just after the line that mentions 0-level spells being cut in half.
@Gilarius
Thats actually a pretty good idea. I simply forbid him of making more than one of those, even though it seemed excessive.
As i said earlier, they crafted that item on earlier levels, when they didnt have a healer (the bard is the healer), so i allowed it.
Now, they use that balm once everything else ran out (bard spells, paladin heals, etc).About the restrictions, it specifically mention that the 10% and 30% restrictions are applied when you are figuring out the item price. It is just after the line that mentions 0-level spells being cut in half.
Yes, but:
1. Rule 0 applies.2. It is very slightly ambiguous about whether or not that reduction applies only to the market price or to crafting cost too. Very teeny bit of ambiguity, but I mostly rely on rule 0.
3. I also apply logic (not always a good idea in games, but...). If the vast majority of magic items in a game world are made without restrictions, then there is no discount on crafting; conversely, if the discount applies then almost all magic items will have restrictions on them. Why? Because if there is a cheaper (and therefore quicker) way of making an item, then that is how most crafters will operate. The only exceptions will be items made specifically to be sold in a magic item shop.
Eg NPC Bob the Evil (henchman to Evil Jim the BBEG) is making items to equip the evil army of doom. He will definitely take advantage of any rule to reduce the cost and allow him to make more items.
Eg The Dwarven Forgemasters making items for their clan - yep, they will restrict them to dwarves only. For the same reasons.
Overall, allowing restrictions to reduce crafting money (& time) penalises the PCs and particularly impacts on fighters, because the way around the restrictions is the UMD skill and fighters lack sufficient skill points to be able to buy it.
Remember that an item that a PC can use when found is worth twice as much as an item that needs to be sold, with the proceeds going towards buying a replacement (because of the 'sell at 50%, buy at 100%' rule). The more restrictions on items generally, the more often items have to be sold rather than be usable.
|
|
so you cant apply that rule for that item
Oh, but as the DM, I can, indeed apply that rule. From my perspective, that is a continuous item that has been modified to have charges per day. For this reason Footnote #2 can and does apply, but I decided the price was too high for what the item did. This was my judgement call as is my purview as arbiter in my campaign.
Also, that space multiplier (2x) is only for items that do occupy a slot normally, but wont.
I see this as an error in thinking because the wondrous item you are talking about falls under the footnote #3 where it says:
An item that does not take up one of the spaces on a body costs double
By the way, thanks, the term i was looking for is "balm", not "oil". But just couldnt remember the word we used.
Happy to be of assistance :)
Let me just quote the rules i mentioned on this post:
I think you got a little off base with the rules you are talking about on #4. That footnote is referring to spell component costs which was never mentioned in my response to your original post, but that is okay, Cure Light Wounds has no material component, costly or otherwise, so that rule has no bearing here.
We'll just have to agree to disagree about how we price things the players come up with in our own campaigns. Nothing you'll say will convince me that the way I would do it is wrong, just as I would never even attempt to say your way is wrong either. I believe in the purview of the DM - must be the old school in me. Ha ha!
One thing I didn't mention is that in our games we do not allow PCs to reduce the price of things that are clearly not disadvantageous for them to use. If they want to take a reduction in cost, they have to make it harder for them to actually use the item. Like making an item that can only be used by a class they are not and thus requiring an UMD check to activate it.
Tata for now!
Nifty
|
|
I could live with this too.
Cheers,
Nifty
My take on this item is:
1. I don't like healing items which never run out, but 5 charges per day is not terribly excessive. I would however apply an additional limitation, that no individual can benefit from more than 5 applications per day. This is to rule out someone making lots of these and using them too many times. YMMV.
2. Restrictions. As far I am concerned, the price reductions from any restrictions only apply to the sale price. There is no discount on crafting cost.
3. Price. 3000gp, or 1500 to craft feels about right. Pricing is always an art, the suggested numbers in the rulebook are merely a place to start not the sole arbiter.