I really like the Inner Sea Gods book as it gives non-divine casters a bunch of reasons to think about what deity they worship. And I particularly like the section on magic items, since the items have a "theme" corresponding to their religion.
I note though that most of the items do not specify that you need to be a worshipper of the specific god to use or craft the item in question (some of them grant bonus abilities to worshippers). Is this correct? And is that still true for Society games?
I haven't gone through every item but I was particularly interested in some Nethys-themed items. And this one seems a little too good to be true:
Quarterstaff of Entwined Serpents
This +1 quarterstaff is made of wood carved and dyed to look like two entwined asps, one black and one white. At will, the wielder can use the staff to cast magic missile, creating two such missiles. One of the created missiles always takes the form of a glowing white snake, while the other missile always takes the form of a shadowy black snake. When held in hand, the wielder of the quarterstaff of entwined serpents can cast spells as if he had the Eschew Materials feat.
Now when I break it down, a +1 quarterstaff should cost 4600, i.e. 2300 for each end.
On top of that it grants the ability to cast a 3rd level magic missile at will! Note the cost for a 3rd level wand of magic missile is 2250 and that runs out after 50 shots, while this one is forever. The base cost for a 50 charge wand is 750 while the base cost for an unlimited command word item is 1800, so this effect alone ought to cost 5400.
Yet on top of that you get Eschew Materials while holding it. No idea how much that should be worth cash-wise.
But between the first two powers it ought to cost 10,000. Instead it is listed as 5,050 gp.
That just seems to be too good to be true.
So to clarify:
1. Are both ends of the quarterstaff enchanted? Or just one? If it is only one end then the price is a bit more reasonable. Still really good though. However the construction cost math indicates that the masterwork quarterstaff used as a base for the weapon costs 600, so definitely double-ended (though that alone does not prove this one way or the other).
2. Do you have to worship Nethys to use it? If so this would reduce the price. Nowhere in the description does it suggest that this is so, though.
3. Is this a spell-trigger item, like a wand? If so then you could use the formula of "Charged (50 charges) = 1/2 unlimited use base price" to suggest that an unlimited spell trigger item only costs twice as much as a wand (instead of 2.4 as in the above math).
It seems to me that limitations like these would make the weapon's price more reasonable; by this math a single-ended spell trigger version would cost 2600 + 4500 or 7,100 gp (3850 to craft) instead of the 10,000 I quoted above. But even this value is well above the listed price of 5,050 gp.
What do you guys think?
Peet
I'd attribute that as an oversight on the editors part. Probably thought of that being a staff, not a weapon.
Can't FAQ this post though...
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
1. It's explicitly listed as one end of double-weapon. It would be +1/+1 quarterstaff if both ends would be enhanced.
The matter is that there are ridiculous problems with pricing that made lots of magic items crap - their price is too high for low level characters, and the characters that can afford them find them too weak for their level.
Power-wise this item would be suitable for character at 5-8th level and it is priced accordingly to wealth by level guidelines.
Peet, you're right, it's severely under-priced. There's a long stretch discussing it (I think in the product thread for the book). Some quick notes though:
Drejk is right that it's a +1/+0 staff, so 2300 for that.
You forgot to double the wand price price for unlimited use (9000), so the 5400 number is actually cheaper. A lackluster, 1st-tier feat generally costs 5000 gp in a slotted item. Altogether, factoring in +50% for secondary effects, you get:
5400 (magic missile)
+7500 (feat)
+3000 (+1)
+ 300 (masterwork)
-----
16200 gp
It should probably be priced as a weapon, with other additional effects, but that would just make it more.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Here's the thing; the Eschew Material feat verges on valueless. It allows you to not have a spell component pouch, which means 5gp. That's what that feat is worth. 5gp. Why? Because you have to have the staff around to benefit from the feat, just like the spell component pouch. If you've been disarmed, you don't have the feat.
I'm 100% in agreement with Drejk regarding pricing. There's too much slavish following-the-rules for pricing that makes way too many really cool items nothing but a waste of the paper they're printed upon. What's the point in a cloak that grants you SR 15 when you're up against caster level 15 enemies? Sure, sure, you might also get swarmed but a bunch of wizard 1s some day, but there are so many other items that aren't broken for pricing that nobody will ever buy such a cloak.
This item is priced appropriately such that someone might actually buy it. And like it. And then shortly thereafter stop using the magic missile ability entirely, making it a +1/+0 staff that you can wrap your component pouch around. Meh. It's really not that big a deal.
I was concerned about letting someone have this in a game I am running. I certainly do agree that Eschew Materials is not a big deal.
That does answer my question about the two ends of the weapon. The fact that it is a +1/+0 staff still means 2600 though, because the non-magic end will still have to be masterwork for the non-weapon properties to be added (and it would be pretty weird if it wasn't).
An unlimited use CL3 magic missile wand would indeed be 4500, as I mentioned above. But that would make this a spell-trigger item. If it is simply command word activated then the ability is spell level x caster level x 1800, or 5400.
So either it ought to be 7100 or 8000.
On the other hand, giving a wizard a discount on a magical melee weapon probably won't kill my game.
Since the item is meant for worshippers of Nethys I probably will keep it as a spell trigger item, since worshippers of Nethys are specifically forbidden from giving magical spells to non-casters, so thematically that would make sense.
Peet
I was concerned about letting someone have this in a game I am running. I certainly do agree that Eschew Materials is not a big deal.
That does answer my question about the two ends of the weapon. The fact that it is a +1/+0 staff still means 2600 though, because the non-magic end will still have to be masterwork for the non-weapon properties to be added (and it would be pretty weird if it wasn't).
An unlimited use CL3 magic missile wand would indeed be 4500, as I mentioned above. But that would make this a spell-trigger item. If it is simply command word activated then the ability is spell level x caster level x 1800, or 5400.
So either it ought to be 7100 or 8000.
On the other hand, giving a wizard a discount on a magical melee weapon probably won't kill my game.
Since the item is meant for worshippers of Nethys I probably will keep it as a spell trigger item, since worshippers of Nethys are specifically forbidden from giving magical spells to non-casters, so thematically that would make sense.
Peet
I hear you. But Peet, the point here is "at what level is an at-will weapon that produces exactly two magic missiles for an average damage of 5 hit points useful?"
It's great if you're 1st through maybe 5th. It's an occasional go-to from there up to maybe 7th. Beyond 7th, a party will have plenty of other, better things to do with an action than activate this.
So it got priced such that someone at low levels simply won't afford it, and someone at mid-levels who might use it can. Pricing it by-formula puts it into the realm of do-not-buy-ever.
Sometimes you need to ignore the pricing guidelines and ask "what is it worth?" At 8k, I've never had a character who could afford this thing that would.
Average 7 hp, auto-hit, full to incorporeal, at 130' is pretty much always useful. Not always your go-to response, but always useful against anything that doesn't have SR. My 11th level PFS Wizard uses a 5th level MM wand often enough.
It is *worth* 10k. Maybe not for every character, maybe not for most, but that is its value. Devaluing it starts the outrageous cycle of magic item power-creep.
|
Put me in the "Its cost is about right" camp. Its maybe a little low, but only a little. At the correct crafting price it would be absurdly overpriced.
For a Wizard, the magic weapon aspects just aren't that useful.
Where it really rocks is for a character like a Staff Magus. For that character, its significantly under costed. But, even for that character, its not game breakingly so. It would be on every Staff Magus list of purchases, admittedly, but it would be lower down on the priority list than a Furious weapon is for a barbarian.
If an item is only somewhat under costed for the niche character that it perfectly fits then its price is close enough to right for RPG work :-)
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Sometimes you need to ignore the pricing guidelines and ask "what is it worth?" At 8k, I've never had a character who could afford this thing that would.
Actually, according to the rules, you first say "what is it worth?," and if there isn't anything obvious to compare it to, you turn to the formulas as a fallback option.
That's why the at-will ring of invisibility is 20,000 gp instead of the by-formula 12,000 gp. And that's why a ring of regeneration is 90,000 gp when you could theoretically craft an at-will ring of cure light wounds (which heals 1d8+1 per standard action instead of just 1 hp) for a mere 2,000 gp.
(Note: I didn't work on that item in the book, so this reply is not me defending my own design decisions. It's me pointing out, as it must be done from time to time, that the cost formulas are a backup for when you can't suss out an appropriate cost by comparing it to other items and its expected wielders.)
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16, Contributor
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
If an item costs too much, it won't get purchased. If it costs too little, everyone buys it. A "Right Priced" item sits in the sweet spot between the two.
There is no other metric that really matters.
By that measure, it's well priced. I can see some people buying it, but ultimately there aren't a lot of levels where it's "Great". When it's most useful, you can't afford it, when you can first afford it, it's pretty nice, but not long after that, 7 points of damage per round from magic missiles is trivial. The only levels where 2 magic missiles per round is really unbalancing this is just too expensive to gain. If you play PFS, it's not even an option.
RPG Superstar 2008 Top 32, 2011 Top 16
|
The amusing thing is that while this item and one or two others stood out as good/worth considering buying, the vast majority of the items were boring "it lets you cast a spell, or another spell, and gives you +2 to a skill". I had hoped for more than a swiss army knife/spell in a can combo that was themed to a god for most of the items in the book.
Sometimes you need to ignore the pricing guidelines and ask "what is it worth?" At 8k, I've never had a character who could afford this thing that would.Actually, according to the rules, you first say "what is it worth?," and if there isn't anything obvious to compare it to, you turn to the formulas as a fallback option.
Hi Sean!
I appreciate you weighing in on my thread!
I do want to point out though, that while this may be your understanding, this is not what the rules actually say.
Magic Item Gold Piece Values
Many factors must be considered when determining the price of new magic items. 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. (emphasis mine)
So the rules here are saying that it is simpler to use existing items to try to figure out the value of a new item, but not that you are required to use that; a GM can try to work out an exact cost if he wants.
The real question is: is there another similar item that this is based on? I had based my figures on a similar wand of magic missile, and then used the guidelines to account for the changes in function.
Peet
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
*shrug*
I know how you're supposed to do it. Whether or not the rule in the book actually says that is not under my control.
*shrug*
I know how you're supposed to do it. Whether or not the rule in the book actually says that is not under my control.
:)
Well, what can I say... you did start with:
Actually, according to the rules... (snip)
But it is useful to know what the intent of the rules are, even if they don't specifically spell it out.
Anyway, I do wonder if there is some other item that has this kind of property for comparison. Anyone?
Peet
Well, what can I say... you did start with:
True, but there are rules that the designers abide by even though they're not printed in the books. Like "don't grant abilities that let you fly before level 5 when a wizard gets fly," "classes with d8 HD are 3/4 BAB classes," "the game is written assuming that PCs are humanoids with 2 arms and 2 legs," or "don't make feats that invalidate feats in the Core Rulebook" (like a feat that's identical to Weapon Focus, but gives +3 to attack rolls instead of +1).
So, having forgotten the actual printed wording of that rule, I was talking about the intent behind it, which is "the formulas are a fallback option if the comparison method doesn't get you anywhere." And of course, there's the unwritten caveat of, "items that are explicitly formulaic in their pricing, such as potions, scrolls, and wands, do follow the formulas rather than using the comparison method."
But whatever, we're nitpicking. :)
Well, what can I say... you did start with:So, having forgotten the actual printed wording of that rule, I was talking about the intent behind it, which is "the formulas are a fallback option if the comparison method doesn't get you anywhere." And of course, there's the unwritten caveat of, "items that are explicitly formulaic in their pricing, such as potions, scrolls, and wands, do follow the formulas rather than using the comparison method."
But whatever, we're nitpicking. :)
I really do mean it when I say that it is valuable to me to know what the intent of a rule is. When I run home games I try to go by RAI instead of RAW when the two things are different.
I do think though that Dennis Baker has a point that an item should cost a fair price which makes the item worth buying without breaking the game. There are a lot of items in the game that are great for low level characters but cost enough that by the time you can afford one the item is essentially useless.
On the other hand, I am careful about overdoing it with players' access to things. I use a lot of PFS rules about items even in home games, like not letting people buy paladin versions of potions of lesser restoration, for example.
Peet
|
I recently purchased this for one of my toons. It was expensive relative to my current gold but the character is also a follower of Nethys so it fit really well. If it was much more, I woulda passed. I was also able to find a good mini that has the exact staff.
Power wise, it's been a niche item for incorporeal help. Otherwise, I'm using other spells.
It sounds way cooler than it is actually. Perhaps a campaign that is a war setting where the holder can sit in a tower and shoot all day is too good. But 3-4 combats an adventure and I use it maybe once or twice if the combat is really long.