|
One of the players in my Skull & Shackles campaign is running a warpriest of Calistria with Dervish Dance and Create Wondrous Item. He proposed to construct a pair of gloves with Magic Missile and Shield.
Here's his reasoning on the price:
"Crafting a 'command word' activated magic item, the base price is spell level x caster level x 1,800 gp. For the Magic Missile, that means 1 x 3 x 1,800 gp, which equals 5,400 gp. That would create an unlimited use magic item. Since I am limiting it to 50 charges, it reduces the cost by 50%, equaling 2,700 gp. The second spell is Shield. Using the same formula, and limiting it to 50 charges, it would be (1 x 1 x 1,800) x 0.50, equaling 900 gp. To add the second spell to the same item, increases the second spell’s cost by 50%, equaling 1,350 gp. Adding the costs, that equals 4,050 gp, with a crafting time of 5 days, and a crafting cost of 2,025 gp."
So, that's a command word activated wondrous item in the Hands slot that carries 50 charges of Magic Missile, and 50 charges of Shield. It doesn't require Use Magic Device for the divine caster to activate either of these arcane spells. It seems to work with Dervish Dance, because a Shield spell effect doesn't occupy the PC's off hand; it hovers in front of the PC on its own.
First off, I'm sure the local wizard is going to charge for 5 days of his time, since the PC has a class that can't cast either of the spells involved.
Next, I think I've found a couple of comparable items: a Ring of Force Shield and a Staff of Minor Arcana. The ring seems comparable because it allows an effect similar to Shield, without being a wand or a staff. The staff seems comparable because it holds the exact same spells.
On the other hand, the ring seems less comparable because it's technically based on a different (and higher-level) spell, and it's not a wondrous item. As a spell trigger item, the staff becomes less comparable, too, because it requires the PC to have at least one level in a class that would eventually be able to cast the Magic Missile and Shield.
Now for my counter-proposal. I've noticed that most wondrous items don't precisely duplicate the effects of the spells they're based on. They mimic the theme of a spell, or activate some of the spell effects but not others. I'd definitely like to apply that principle here.
I'd like to start these gloves (or maybe switch them to gauntlets) with the cost and many of the effects of a Ring of Force Shield, not a Shield spell. I figure if Paizo didn't make that item a Ring of Shield, they had a reason.
Apparently, there's a lot of controversy about the compatibility of Dervish Dance with Rings of Force Shield. The Command Word version would go a long way toward settling the problem, because speaking a command word is a standard action, not a free action. That means there's no way to swing a scimitar at an orc, activate the shield in time to block his counter-attack, then dismiss the shield again by the end of the player's turn.
For the Magic Missile, I'm thinking that maybe the gauntlet will produce darts of force, which can be thrown as a ranged touch attack. They still inflict force damage, but they have a chance to miss their target.
What do you think, folks? Would this be acceptable at your table, as invented by the player? Would it be acceptable at your table with the modifications I've suggested? How much would you charge a PC crafter to make it?
First, be careful when pricing items, the table is a guideline, the final decision is the gm's. Players will try anything to make cheaper magic items.
Secondly, he is using a wondrous item to duplicate the effect of a wand (50 charges item) or even a staff (2 spells on same item), i would increase the price based on that. Being a hand slot would stop me from doubling the price though.
Also,
First off, I'm sure the local wizard is going to charge for 5 days of his time, since the PC has a class that can't cast either of the spells involved.
He could still craft it without knowing the spell by increasing the crafting DC by 5.
|
|
He could still craft it without knowing the spell by increasing the crafting DC by 5.
That's true, but then there's also this sentence:
If you need another character to supply one of an item's requirements (such as if you're a wizard creating an item with a divine spell), both you and the other character must be present for the entire duration of the crafting process.
If a wizard needs help to create an item with a divine spell, then it seems likely that a warpriest needs help to create an item with an arcane spell.
He doesnt need unless its a spell-trigger (wands) or spell completition item (scrolls). He could get help from someone who can cast the spell, or he could increase the crafting DC by 5.
If he doesnt want to increase the DC, then yes, he could pay a local wizard to cast the spell once per day of crafting process.
He could still craft it without knowing the spell by increasing the crafting DC by 5.That's true, but then there's also this sentence:
If you need another character to supply one of an item's requirements (such as if you're a wizard creating an item with a divine spell), both you and the other character must be present for the entire duration of the crafting process.If a wizard needs help to create an item with a divine spell, then it seems likely that a warpriest needs help to create an item with an arcane spell.
This clarifies that both characters must be present in order to fulfill the item's requirement. It doesn't overrule the fact that you can bypass the requirement entirely via a +5 to DC.
The only things you cannot bypass are the requisite feats; the cost in gp; and, in the case of potions, spell trigger and spell completion items only, the spell being reproduced. This is by design.
The GM can override this for custom items, of course, as we're already deep into discretion territory now, but that's how the item creation rules were intended to work.
|
|
What do you think about my idea to re-shape Magic Missile into an effect that doesn't automatically hit, and my substitution of the force shield effect for Shield? I think a literal casting of Shield is too powerful for the player's calculated price, especially since these gloves will be used in combination with Dervish Dance.
Keep in mind that deflection bonus has it's own pricing, regardless of the cost of spell-triggered shield, thus you should calculate the price based on that instead.
Deflection Bonus - Bonus squared x 2,000 gp
4k? Sounds about right.
Keep in mind that deflection bonus has it's own pricing, regardless of the cost of spell-triggered shield, thus you should calculate the price based on that instead.
Deflection Bonus - Bonus squared x 2,000 gp
But that 32k price tag is for an always-on effect. This is a massively less useful item.
But that 32k price tag is for an always-on effect. This is a massively less useful item.
They still provide the same bonus while in effect, +4 do CA deflection bonus. That price difference shouldnt be ignored just because you need a standard action to activate it.
Its a 32k vs 2k price difference.
They are not any less useful, just more restricted (charged and needs an action to activate).
|
|
The standard action requirement means that sometimes the deflection bonus won't be active in the surprise round, or in the first round of regular combat before the character's turn. During that first round, a standard action is a pretty valuable commodity. I could be convinced to split the difference, although I'd probably still land closer to 32k than 2k.
The standard action requirement means that sometimes the deflection bonus won't be active in the surprise round, or in the first round of regular combat before the character's turn. During that first round, a standard action is a pretty valuable commodity. I could be convinced to split the difference, although I'd probably still land closer to 32k than 2k.
And the better part of the character's first turn is devoted to activating the item. Still a powerful item, but not as much as a no-assembly-required constant effect item.
Ouch - you've got a crafty player...
FYI - Force Shield is not deflection, it's also a shield effect.
Here's how I feel you should price the item:
An item only has a single caster level, so he can't have CL 3 magic missile and CL 1 shield. There's nothing wrong with the +4 AC bonus, as long as he is using an action to do it (and it's not at-will). He could have one glove as CL 3 MM, and the other as CL 1 Shield, but the latter would double in price for essentially being "non-slot", double-using the hands slot.
This places the price at:
At the price he gave you, with the changes you suggested (+2 AC at CL 1, attack rolls to hit with the MM's), I think you're about on the mark. Maybe a little cheap, but fun and inventive.
|
|
The pricing of the deflection bonus also depends on whether I leave the bonus at the +4 of a Shield spell, or reduce it to the +2 of the Ring of Force Shield.
There's no direct calculation, but it seems like the applicability of the final item with Dervish Dance should also be a factor, related to game balance. A shield that hovers in front of the character seems to maintain the required empty hand. A shield emanating from and moving with a glove might or might not. (Let's leave that argument in its own threads for now, please.)
To me, replacing the literal spell effects with partial or altered effects seems to follow the guideline of respecting each item type's niche. A Wand of Magic Missiles fires bolts of force that never miss, just like the spell. A glove that summons force darts that must be thrown as a ranged touch attack seems to fit better with other wondrous items.
Edit: Majuba, I believe your post happened while I was typing mine. I wasn't ignoring it.
|
|
Good Afternoon Everyone,
Thanks to KarlBob and everyone else for your comments and suggestions. Here are my comments to clarify the thought process behind the creation of the item in question:
1. The Shield spell is a "Shield bonus." It is extremely less versatile than a deflection bonus. It does not count against touch AC, or CMD. The effect is not centered on the glove, it just allows the casting of the spell as a normal caster would.
2. Both spells are command-word activated. Standard actions are required to use either effect, and as agreed upon, are very valuable actions in a combat situation.
3. Unlike staves or wands, the glove takes up a magic item body slot and therefore is more limiting than either item.
4. Using the spells as they are written, minimizes discussions on applications and mechanics. The caster level for the item (3rd) would be applicable in matters related to Spell Resistance, Duration and Dispelling attempts. The item is designed to cast certain spells for their written effects. If the item was to grant a Shield bonus or generate force projectiles, there are other established crafting mechanics for such effects.
5. The item is designed as a low-power item to help increase the versatility of a character, without diluting focus by multi-classing. The character creating the item is a 4th level Warpriest. Both spells are available to several arcane casters of that level, and should not be considered a "game changer."
6. Majuba does have a point about both items needing the same caster level. With that in mind, the market value of the item would increase to 6,750 GP, with a crafting cost of 3,375 GP and a crafting time of 7 days. I think this makes the cost of the item (for a 4th level character) with the intended capabilities of the item, a lot more reasonable.
What does everyone think about that?
item would increase to 6,750 GP,
My price calculation went more likely to 8000 GP, similar to majuba's.
PS: My bad about the deflection bonus, forgot it duplicates a physical shield.
GM has final say in these situations. If you are hesitant about the item or his proposition, then say no.
But that 32k price tag is for an always-on effect. This is a massively less useful item.They still provide the same bonus while in effect, +4 do CA deflection bonus. That price difference shouldnt be ignored just because you need a standard action to activate it.
Its a 32k vs 2k price difference.
They are not any less useful, just more restricted (charged and needs an action to activate).
Dude, would you read your post? How is "costs 25% of a character's significant actions in a fight" not less useful than always-on?
A wand of Shield and a spring-loaded wrist sheath does the same (except takes up a swift action as well and requires being able to cast the spell), and costs 755 GP and zero magic item slots. A wand + a cracked vibrant purple prism ioun stone lets you cast Shield as a standard action with no risk of a failed action from UMD, and that costs 2.750 and zero magic item slots.
You need to grab the wand if it isnt already on your hand, and when on your hand, it will be using that hand slot before you can cast it.
If you use a wrist sheath, you will be using your wrist slot for the sheath. You also cant put the item back in the sheath without a full-round action.
If you have a two-handed weapon, you will have to drop your wand before attacking, or use another action to put it away. If you are using a shield, you could use the shield hand to cast it, but until you put it away you lost the shield AC bonus, depending on it's type.
Being on his gloves, he doesnt need to drop or put away anything, that alone makes it better than a wand, even if using the same standard action. He is using an item type (wondrous) to cast effects that use another type of feat (craft wand). The guideless will tell you to consider that, because he is basically duplicating the effect of another feat.
Respect Each Crafting Feat's Niche: You might be tempted to create rings that have charges like wands, or bracers with multiple charge-based effects like staves. A GM allowing this makes Craft Wondrous Item and Forge Ring even more versatile and powerful, and devalues Craft Staff and Craft Wand because those two feats can create only charged items.
You cant compare a 50 charges item with a spell storing ion stone. The stone can only cast the spells slots once before it has to be recharged.
Even if you compare with a minor ring of spell storing, that allows three shields to be cast on it before being empty, you would be comparing to 18000 gp. If we make the spell storing a charged ability, that can only be done 50 times before the item is useless, that's still 9000 gp.Lets say we cut that price in half because it only allows one specific spell on it, 4500 gp.
Add a second spell and you have 11250 gp, we could reduce it a bit because of other restrictions, but will end up being over 6k gp easily.
The usefulness of the item is the bonuses you can obtain from it, the conditions to obtain such bonus are restrictions that will reduce it's price. He would have no action disvantage at all if he casts shield before the combat starts.
You cant compare a 50 charges item with a spell storing ion stone. The stone can only cast the spells slots once before it has to be recharged.
Which you do, out of combat, with the wand you bought.
But still would cost much more than 2000-4000 GP.
EDIT
I get it, you meant the cracked stone.
He could only cast it once before recharing the stone though, but for "already in combat" purposes it's a good deal. With the gloves he could recast it anytime, even if it gets dispelled.
As i said, i would price each ability around 4k GP.
|
|
I just thought of something. The character, who entered the game at 3rd level, could also take a retroactive one-level dip into Wizard, Sorcerer, or another arcane class, buy a Staff of Minor Arcana (New shipment at the magic shop!), and spare his GM from having to make this call...
(Wishful thinking, but it's worth a shot.)
|
|
Rod Bruce has decided to withdraw the item from consideration, and he'll be reassigning Craft Wondrous Item to another feat. I've requested that the players stick to building existing items from now on. I'll allow some item combining, on a case-by-case basis, but I'd really prefer not to adjudicate custom item abilities and prices.
The prices listed in this thread are insane. We're talking about an item with a limited amount of charges that can cast two 1st level spell (not at the same time) and it eats up the hands magic item slot.
4000, 6000, 8000? Holy crap. I think you all are getting too caught up in the actual rules and not thinking about the actual power of the item. It's a standard action to use and you can only use one function at a time. The shield is nice, but the magic missile is a 1d4+1. This isn't that cool of an item. Especially considering it has charges and then it's worthless.
I'd only recommend those prices if it didn't have charges and was instead useable a couple times a day. Otherwise I wouldn't make it much more expensive than 2 wands. That's 1500 gold. So I recommend the 1500 to 2000 or so range if you want to keep the charges.
By the way. I do understand that there's no UMD check involved with this item, but considering it's eating up a magic item slot I'd be a little lenient. This is my 2 cents though and that's not worth very much.
I would not. Staves and wands eat up slots, too. More useful slots. They're called "hands".
I would not. Staves and wands eat up slots, too. More useful slots. They're called "hands".
You can hold a wand in the same hand that you're using an actual shield and not lose the shield bonus if I remember right (because you only lose the shield bonus if you attack with the shield). You can use a wand in one hand and still cast spells. Same is true for using a staff. It only requires one hand to cast from them and I think the shield rule holds true as well. So, uh, it's not really eating up any slots unless you're wielding a two handed weapon.
I would not. Staves and wands eat up slots, too. More useful slots. They're called "hands".You can hold a wand in the same hand that you're using an actual shield and not lose the shield bonus if I remember right (because you only lose the shield bonus if you attack with the shield). You can use a wand in one hand and still cast spells. Same is true for using a staff. It only requires one hand to cast from them and I think the shield rule holds true as well. So, uh, it's not really eating up any slots unless you're wielding a two handed weapon.
The character who wanted this item was a Dervish Dancer, meaning the player wanted to gain the benefits of a shield's AC while not wielding one.
The character who wanted this item was a Dervish Dancer, meaning the player wanted to gain the benefits of a shield's AC while not wielding one.
True. As with the case of many forums posts it got off point to argue another.
I would not. Staves and wands eat up slots, too. More useful slots. They're called "hands".You can hold a wand in the same hand that you're using an actual shield and not lose the shield bonus if I remember right (because you only lose the shield bonus if you attack with the shield). You can use a wand in one hand and still cast spells. Same is true for using a staff. It only requires one hand to cast from them and I think the shield rule holds true as well. So, uh, it's not really eating up any slots unless you're wielding a two handed weapon.
You might need that hand for something else--a metamagic rod, another wand, a scroll, a pearl of power, etc. More often than not, a hand is worth more than a slot.
Just to clarify ... are we expecting that we use the 50 charges and then the item becomes non-magical, like a wand? Or can it be recharged?
Secondly, you're talking about caster-level 3rd for the magic missile. Presumably that's so it fires two missiles?
You might need that hand for something else--a metamagic rod, another wand, a scroll, a pearl of power, etc. More often than not, a hand is worth more than a slot.
I, er, what? Is your argument that you might need a different wand than the one your using? Or a different magic item altogether? In that case why not argue that you could be a different class? You could be an alchemist and gain an extra hand to solve this issue of not enough hands.
I just feel like that's a cop out statement because the same could be said of any item slot. What if I need this pair of boots or that cloak or this other pair of gloves? The 'hand' magic slot isn't any more important than any other in the grand scheme of things. Wizards can function just fine without ever holding anything. Sure there are things that they can hold that will make them stronger, but a headband will probably serve them even better. Hell, a fighter doesn't even need to use his 'hand' slot if he doesn't want to. He can take unarmed strike and get an amulet of might fists. It's a strawman argument.
However we're getting off topic here. The topic at hand is the price of an item. For something that's running on charges and will eventually turn to crap everyone is wanting to slap a big price tag on it. No one would buy such a thing. At least no one in their right mind. The guidelines for this have to be taken with a grain of salt. Let's ask ourselves, "Would I buy this?"
The point is the benefit of the item against it's drawbacks, it is comparable to items that are stronger than wands and cost much more, not that the item is charged.
If he wanted to make two wands that cast those spells, i would have no problems with it.
A wand of fireballs is pretty damn expensive and run on charges.