How Expensive Would This Weapon Enchantment Be?


Advice


So I'm looking into a weapon called a "mageblade", which is taken from the (wonderful) Relics and Rituals splatbook from Swords and Sorcery Studios. Due to setting reasons, much of their magical items don't have a listed price. I'm looking for a way to figure out how much a weapon with the enchantment would be in PF.

Here's the text:

"A typical mageblade is a +1 longsword with mage armor cast on it. When the weapon is drawn, it surrounds its wielder with a shimmering suit of armor that increases his AC by 4, thanks to a deflection bonus. This armor carries none of the mundane penalties of true armor, but disappears as soon as the wielder puts down or sheaths the weapon; thus, he is particularly vulnerable to disarm attempts."

Assuming that a longsword wasn't the intended weapon (I'm looking for a more general assessement, not longsword-specific), what are we looking at for costs of a weapon with such a trait?


First of all, it depends on whether it provides 4 points of (force) Armor bonus, or it provides 4 points of Deflection bonus.

If it's a +4 Deflection bonus, that's 4*4*2.000*2 for not taking up a slot, or 64.000 (+2.315 for being a +1 sword).

But that's really not an appropriate price IMO. I will always sell this and buy something else with the cash. I think adding 50% (instead of 100%) for not using a ring slot is more reasonable. That puts the sword at 50.315 GP total. That seems about right. I probably wouldn't buy it, and I probably wouldn't sell it.

If it's a +4 [Force] Armor Bonus, that's technically 82.315, more like 34.315 if we're emulating "slotless bracers of armor", and I'm unloading it on the first merchant who'll give me 25%, because Bracers of Armor are way, way overpriced. Call it continuous Mage Armor at 2k, semi-slotless and not always on balancing each other out, and call it a day.


Correct me if I am wong (I don't enchant items very often) but that sounds like a weapon that has a +1 enchantment and situational diflection AC +4.
The AC bonus here is the expencive one. (4^2)x2000=32000
The msterwork enchanting of a sword is 15+300+2000=2315
Now under "multiple abilities" it's all about "Multiply lower item cost by 1.5". In this case 2000x1.5=3000.

So it could be 35315. But since the bonus is situational, I'd go with deflection calculation as (4^2)x1800=28800 and end up with 32115 in gold.

A sword thta has a permament Mage armor could be cheaper...


So what would the cost of a generic "sword-with-continuous-mage-armor" or "sword-with-continuous-shield" be, and is that even a legal enchantment for a weapon?


Pathfinder Adventure, Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

it's not legal, if you go to the chart, you start at the top. Since Armor and AC bonus are above Spell effect, you use that pricing first. It needs to be as Pupsocket priced it, 4 x 4 (AC bonus squared) x 2000 (Deflection bonus) x 2 (not being a slotted item) = 64k. This is expensive but it frees up a ring slot and it stacks with bracers of armor or other armor, and since you could put it on a staff, it would be on constantly.


well I would build this piece by piece
so we have to have a master work weapon, you already said you don't want to use a long sword so we have 300+ chosen weapon.

+1 weapon costs 2k

next choose to mimic ring of protection, mage armor, or bracers of armor.
Protection for +4 costs 32k, 64k if considered to not hold a slot

circumstantial reductions: change 2000 multiplier to 1500 IE 3/4 price
24 or 48K

Mage armor:
opt 1: at will ability to cast mage armor as a standard action
opt 2: ability that activates a constant mage armor effect when unsheathed.

1: cost for a level 1 spell is 1800gp, down side must use a standard action to activate. 3600gp if not slotted

2: costs 2000gp, and does not use up an additional action to use. 4000gp if not slotted. this one is better so I will use this for future numbers.

mind you that mage armor does not stack with armor so that is the big difference between the deflection bonus and mage armor.

Bracers of armor: also does not stack with armor.
cost: 16k, 32 slotted.

now then lets work out the final costs for comparison (using longsword for simple math)

50gp+300gp+2000gp=2350gp this is what we know we must pay.

opt 1: increased by 50% for the additional ability rule: 36k or 72k
opt 2: increased by 50% and then reduced to 75% for circumstantial: 2250/4500.
opt 3: same as opt 2: 18k/36k

final costs
opt 1: 38350, 74350
opt 2: 4600, 6850
opt 3: 20350, 38350

so for your decision I would advise keeping in mind if you want this to stack with armor or not, and then what your gm will accept I would say you would be best offering up the opt 2 slot less option for believable
or the the slotted opt 3 most gms I think would accept.

good luck


So, to clarify, how did you get the 6,850 gp option? That seems significantly cheaper than everything else, and I have next to no experience with crafting, so I'm completely lost how you got that :)

For a +1 longsword that activates mage armor when unsheathed, it would cost 6,850gp...?


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

He got it by failing to use the first rule of magic item creation, and leaping straight to the formulae. In fact, any item that grants a continuous use mage armour needs to be compared to an existing item that provides a similar benefit, which is bracers of armour +4 at 16,000 gp. So option 2 doesn't actually exist.


There it is. I thought something was strange about that discrepancy. So basically, bare minimum, we're looking at 40k+ for such an item, eh?


Chemlak wrote:
He got it by failing to use the first rule of magic item creation, and leaping straight to the formulae. In fact, any item that grants a continuous use mage armour needs to be compared to an existing item that provides a similar benefit, which is bracers of armour +4 at 16,000 gp. So option 2 doesn't actually exist.

Except that, while 16K for +4 Bracers might be the relevant precedent, it's also obviously b%++~#&#.


TheBlackPlague wrote:
There it is. I thought something was strange about that discrepancy. So basically, bare minimum, we're looking at 40k+ for such an item, eh?

Nah. I rate almost-always-on Mage Armor at 2k, call it 3k for not taking up a magic item slot but still requiring a hand, and you're good to go. 40K+ is obviously nonsense.


There is a significant, as I feel there should be, cost associated with not counting as armor for the purposes of class limitations.


I wouldn't use the Magic Item prices for a total price anyway. There are several things to consider:

1. This is from a specific item. All specific items generally cannot be enhanced any further than what is listed. Although using items as a precedent is a conservative way to do it, a +1 Longsword with Mage Armor active while drawn and wielded, is still a pretty weak item by the endgame when you can't enhance it beyond having a +1, or having other neat abilities. The Ten-Ring Broadsword is an example of an item with a very nice and potentially powerful benefit, and doesn't really cost anything.

2. Consider what place it has in the game you're running. If you want it to be something powerful (which, I don't think it is unless you're going two-handed, but if it's a Deflection Bonus, then it's kind of pointless anyway), then give it a fairly high price. If it's not that strong, then it shouldn't be too expensive, otherwise it becomes the Greater Bracers of Archery in comparison to Bracers of Falcon's Aim.

3. If this is supposed to be an actual weapon property, debating actual gold cost should only become relevant if you want it to be a flat gold charge and to have it stack with everything else. It should otherwise cost a +X Bonus, which entirely solves the "Multiple Different Abilities" issue. Those rules are meant for Wondrous Items, so unless you want this on a Wondrous Item, it's not gonna work that way.

That being said, compared to a Bracers of Armor +4 that costs 16K to buy, and a +3 Weapon which is priced at 18K, minus the cost of a +1 Weapon, valued at 2K, equates to the Bracers of Armor +4 Price. So, assuming a required +1 Weapon, having it cost a +2 Bonus for a +4 Deflection (or better yet, have the weapon grant a Deflection equal to the weapon's Enhancement Bonus) is a very fair price in my honest opinion.

Some names to give the property are Force Shield, Protector, and Barrier, but you're welcome to call it whatever you like.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I get where you're coming from, Darksol, but bonus equivalent special abilities are used for effects that improve the item's primary purpose (yes, there are exceptions), which for weapons is attack, damage, and number of attacks. A weapon improving AC will (normally) have a fixed gp cost (defending is a special case because it uses the base enhancement bonus).


Chemlak wrote:
I get where you're coming from, Darksol, but bonus equivalent special abilities are used for effects that improve the item's primary purpose (yes, there are exceptions), which for weapons is attack, damage, and number of attacks. A weapon improving AC will (normally) have a fixed gp cost (defending is a special case because it uses the base enhancement bonus).

There are several effects that you can place on a weapon that grant benefits other than increased attack or damage effecitveness. In fact, the Defending property is a prime example of this, not to mention its cousin, the Guardian property, or the Defiant property.

The opposite is also true; there are effects that make a Shield or Armor help your attack or damage effectiveness, such as the Spell Storing property on Armor, or the Bashing property on Shields, or even the Grinding property for either.

Saying that because it doesn't serve its primary purpose is hogwash because there are several properties that are used in conjunction to the base item's effects on a defensive/offensive level, and yet they are still allowed in the book. There are more exceptions than what you just listed as being "the special case," and even that comes at the cost of being offensively effective.

My third point still stands: If it's something that's not really strong enough or worthwhile to be able to adjust the Base Price Bonus limits for a given item, then it should be a flat gold cost, as it is with several Armor bonuses Given that this is a pretty prominent special ability and provides a universal, semi-powerful (and non-stacking) effect, it should be a Base Price Bonus limit adjustment, the cost scaling in accordance.

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Advice / How Expensive Would This Weapon Enchantment Be? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.