Good FAQ, matches the rules quite clearly even if it doesn't match some people's ideals.
Nefreet, I've never seen a problem with using the Hat of Disguise. It is a cheap way to get a +10 bonus to your disguise check. (Normally +10 would cost 10,000gp.)
Do your mundane disguise, then use a hat of disguise to add a +10 bonus on top of that.
Good advice for disguise self in general. To give away one of my personal secrets, make your disguise self form clearly a more attractive version of the mundane disguise. Those who disbelieve your disguise self or have true seeing but fail to beat your mundane disguise will just think you're vain.
Nefreet, I've never seen a problem with using the Hat of Disguise. It is a cheap way to get a +10 bonus to your disguise check. (Normally +10 would cost 10,000gp.)
Do your mundane disguise, then use a hat of disguise to add a +10 bonus on top of that.
I'd rather use my Sleeves of Many Garments.
LOL At least the hat actually does something unlike that other item. Worst 200gp paperweight ever...
But yeah, it's gone from a nice item to meh... How much it it to actually get a continuous enchant? I'd pay the extra...
Wait, is it being suggested that you could don a completely mundane disguise and use the hat of disguise, not to give yourself an illusory appearance, but simply to add +10 to the Disguise check of your totally mundane and non-illusory disguise?
Mundane disguise, then illusory disguise on top. Multiple layers of deception.
Good point, the word "extend" was ambiguous. It's been changed to "reset" to unambiguously reflect the fact that is the same as casting the spell at will, you get another instance. Thanks for keeping a sharp eye out as always, and let us know if you find any other bugs like this in the FAQs.
Now I'm not a fan of this FAQ either...
So it has some limitations, what magic item doesn't have limitations?
It really shouldn't come up that often and it just requires you to be a bit creative when it does.
In any case, this is a good FAQ not because it does or doesn't match someone's ideals of how things should work or because it may cause you problems when you need to use the item again but because it clearly matches the rules. FAQ's should explain how to use the rules, not change them (that is what an Errata is for).
Malachi, yes, use a mundane disguise then use the Hat of Disguise for the +10 bonus. This has been SOP (when time permits) for years and allows you to use all other bonuses that can be stacked with Disguise (masterwork equipment for example).
So it has some limitations, what magic item doesn't have limitations?
It really shouldn't come up that often and it just requires you to be a bit creative when it does.
In any case, this is a good FAQ not because it does or doesn't match someone's ideals of how things should work or because it may cause you problems when you need to use the item again but because it clearly matches the rules. FAQ's should explain how to use the rules, not change them (that is what an Errata is for).
I don't think the others disagree that this is what is written; they were probably just hoping for a FAQ to ready action for erratum like we do sometimes when something is off in a published product and we can't issue errata yet.
|
Wait, is it being suggested that you could don a completely mundane disguise and use the hat of disguise, not to give yourself an illusory appearance, but simply to add +10 to the Disguise check of your totally mundane and non-illusory disguise?Mundane disguise, then illusory disguise on top. Multiple layers of deception.
According to the skill description, you only make a single Disguise check. With the hat, that would be at +10. when the spell duration of 10 minutes has expired, does the DC of any attempt to penetrate the disguise stay the same or drop by 10? Based on what?
According to the skill description, you only make a single Disguise check. With the hat, that would be at +10. when the spell duration of 10 minutes has expired, does the DC of any attempt to penetrate the disguise stay the same or drop by 10? Based on what?Wait, is it being suggested that you could don a completely mundane disguise and use the hat of disguise, not to give yourself an illusory appearance, but simply to add +10 to the Disguise check of your totally mundane and non-illusory disguise?Mundane disguise, then illusory disguise on top. Multiple layers of deception.
Based on the "Special" section of page 95:
Divination magic that allows people to see through illusions (such as true seeing) does not penetrate a mundane disguise, but it can negate the magical component of a magically enhanced one.
So it has some limitations, what magic item doesn't have limitations?
For me, it's not about limitations. It's the fact that 95% of the reasons I'd take the item are no more. No longer can I impersonate someone long term but instead I only have a very temporary bluff.
For the people usinging it as a temp buff, it doesn't really change anything. Me, I guess i can spend my money elsewhere.
Mark Seifter, I was responding to thejeff specifically because he stated it was not a good FAQ because the of circumstances of use rather than whether or not the FAQ matched the rules.
There have been FAQs that have been departures from the rules (at least, in the eyes of many) and then there are FAQs that are reinforcing the rules.
A FAQ should typically reinforce the rules rather than rewrite them. Paizo's FAQ system is a hybrid of Errata and FAQ and I get that, but when it is Errata you typically indicate that in the FAQ with a statement that the book will be changed in the next printing.
Since no such statement was made this is a true FAQ rather than an Errata in the FAQ section. Being a FAQ clearly based on the rules it is a "Good FAQ" even if people do not like the consequences. Had it been an Errata then whether it was good or not would be based on the reader's rules preference.
|
|
According to the magic item creation rules, the hat is command word activated and cast at 1st level, thus lasting ten minutes.
A continuous hat would cost 3000gp, but would have a single disguise built in; not what we're looking for, really.
A better alternative would be a hat activated by a silent act of will, which would be 2000gp. Then you wouldn't have to say the magic word every ten minutes; very suspicious if you're in disguise.
I can't believe anyone would not pay the extra 200gp for the silent version! You've already spent 1800gp!
graystone, I really am not seeing the long term problems. Just find ways to use it surreptitiously. Many GMs will work with you to do so.
Alternately, go for a more expensive version and raise the CL of the item. Heck, maybe you could go for continuous pricing.
I haven't played a lot of PFS modules but I doubt that the Ring of Invisibility or Hat of Disguise is really an issue in PFS play (for different reasons). Since the issue is not really a PFS issue your GM should be able to work with you.
According to the magic item creation rules, the hat is command word activated and cast at 1st level, thus lasting ten minutes.
A continuous hat would cost 3000gp, but would have a single disguise built in; not what we're looking for, really.
Speak for yourself. If that's the case, then I'll spend my 3000 and be quite happy.
A better alternative would be a hat activated by a silent act of will, which would be 2000gp. Then you wouldn't have to say the magic word every ten minutes; very suspicious if you're in disguise.
I can't believe anyone would not pay the extra 200gp for the silent version! You've already spent 1800gp! .
Better for the temp buff people maybe.
No longer can I impersonate someone long term but instead I only have a very temporary bluff.You know which item works indefinitely, doesn't need to be refreshed, is cheaper than a hat, and can't be disbelieved?
Sleeves of Many Garments =)
Oh goodie, an item where it doesn't matter if you disbelieve or not... I'm all over that. [read in a dry monotone :P]
For me, it's literally worthless as an actual magic item. As I've said, a 200gp paperweight.
|
|
According to the skill description, you only make a single Disguise check. With the hat, that would be at +10. when the spell duration of 10 minutes has expired, does the DC of any attempt to penetrate the disguise stay the same or drop by 10? Based on what?Wait, is it being suggested that you could don a completely mundane disguise and use the hat of disguise, not to give yourself an illusory appearance, but simply to add +10 to the Disguise check of your totally mundane and non-illusory disguise?Mundane disguise, then illusory disguise on top. Multiple layers of deception.Based on the "Special" section of page 95:
Divination magic that allows people to see through illusions (such as true seeing) does not penetrate a mundane disguise, but it can negate the magical component of a magically enhanced one.
Er...you didn't give the answer! Do you lose the +10 when the duration expires?
The reason I ask is because it seems that people are using the hat to gain +10 to a skill roll, without any illusory component to the disguise at all! This would mean that there is no illusion for true seeing to penetrate, preserving that +10 bonus even after the spell duration expired. Essentially, that +10 bonus was an instantaneous bonus granted to the Disguise roll at the instant it was rolled, but since the total is only rolled once that enhanced total will apply for as long as the totally mundane disguise is kept up!
Gauss: is this how you use it? Is this what you mean?
PDT: is this your intent for the use of a magic item that works by creating an illusion?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
graystone, I really am not seeing the long term problems. Just find ways to use it surreptitiously. Many GMs will work with you to do so.
Alternately, go for a more expensive version and raise the CL of the item. Heck, maybe you could go for continuous pricing.
I haven't played a lot of PFS modules but I doubt that the Ring of Invisibility or Hat of Disguise is really an issue in PFS play (for different reasons). Since the issue is not really a PFS issue your GM should be able to work with you.
When I use the item, it's usually to look like another person 24/7. Having to become a disguise expert JUST to hide the times I take an 11 min+ nap makes it a pretty crappy magic item. [for my use] Why did I buy the item then instead of a direct boost to the skill that DOES work all the time?
EDIT: i have less of an issue with inv, though having to speak to keep it working can have some problems.
Mark Seifter, I was responding to thejeff specifically because he stated it was not a good FAQ because the of circumstances of use rather than whether or not the FAQ matched the rules.
There have been FAQs that have been departures from the rules (at least, in the eyes of many) and then there are FAQs that are reinforcing the rules.
A FAQ should typically reinforce the rules rather than rewrite them. Paizo's FAQ system is a hybrid of Errata and FAQ and I get that, but when it is Errata you typically indicate that in the FAQ with a statement that the book will be changed in the next printing.
Since no such statement was made this is a true FAQ rather than an Errata in the FAQ section. Being a FAQ clearly based on the rules it is a "Good FAQ" even if people do not like the consequences. Had it been an Errata then whether it was good or not would be based on the reader's rules preference.
I don't disagree, particularly that we should endeavor to indicate when a readied-action to errata FAQ will be reflected in future errata.
|
|
Where's the rule on "activated by a silent act of will"? I'm not seeing it.According to the magic item creation rules, the hat is command word activated and cast at 1st level, thus lasting ten minutes.
A continuous hat would cost 3000gp, but would have a single disguise built in; not what we're looking for, really.
A better alternative would be a hat activated by a silent act of will, which would be 2000gp. Then you wouldn't have to say the magic word every ten minutes; very suspicious if you're in disguise.
I can't believe anyone would not pay the extra 200gp for the silent version! You've already spent 1800gp!
Page 458 of the CRB:-
Use Activated: This type of item simply has to be used in order to activate it. A character has to drink a potion, swing a sword, interpose a shield to deflect a blow in combat, look through a lens, sprinkle dust, wear a ring, or don a hat. Use activation is generally straightforward and self-explanatory.
Many use-activated items are objects that a character wears. Continually functioning items are practically always items that one wears. A few must simply be in the character's possession (meaning on his person). However, some items made for wearing must still be activated. Although this activation sometimes requires a command word (see above), usually it means mentally willing the activation to happen. The description of an item states whether a command word is needed in such a case.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
EDIT: i have less of an issue with inv, though having to speak to keep it working can have some problems.
The ring actually says "by activating" rather than "on command", so my (unofficial) opinion based on that fact is that it's use-activated.
EDIT: I may have been wrong all these years, as rings by default are command word it seems
EDIT: i have less of an issue with inv, though having to speak to keep it working can have some problems.The ring actually says "by activating" rather than "on command", so my (unofficial) opinion based on that fact is that it's use-activated.
Works for me.
Huh, I'd forgotten about this thread. Nice to have an answer to put the controversy to bed.
Or not. The controversy is never put to bed.
Or a whole new controversy starts in bed.
Whatever.
Ergh, yikes, no, please.
I don't want to have to take off my ring just so I can use it again =(.
Command word is just fine.
"However, some items made for wearing must still be activated." You wear it and silent command it to activate. Where is the removing part coming from?
graystone, I really am not seeing the long term problems. Just find ways to use it surreptitiously. Many GMs will work with you to do so.
Alternately, go for a more expensive version and raise the CL of the item. Heck, maybe you could go for continuous pricing.
I haven't played a lot of PFS modules but I doubt that the Ring of Invisibility or Hat of Disguise is really an issue in PFS play (for different reasons). Since the issue is not really a PFS issue your GM should be able to work with you.
When I use the item, it's usually to look like another person 24/7. Having to become a disguise expert JUST to hide the times I take an 11 min+ nap makes it a pretty crappy magic item. [for my use] Why did I buy the item then instead of a direct boost to the skill that DOES work all the time?
EDIT: i have less of an issue with inv, though having to speak to keep it working can have some problems.
If you are using it 24/7 then clearly you are going well beyond the scope of the item. In 24hours I am quite certain someone is going to touch you or in some way interact with you in such a way that warrants a Will save. A successful Will save will pretty much blow your disguise regardless of the ruling today and since the DC of that Will save is only 11, good luck succeeding.
The Hat of Disguise is for the casual 'quick change' or 'quick skill bump' rather than a constant +10. I would actually suggest a direct boost item rather than the Hat of Disguise for what you are suggesting simply due to the Will save.
Mark Seifter, I was responding to thejeff specifically because he stated it was not a good FAQ because the of circumstances of use rather than whether or not the FAQ matched the rules.Actually, I was saying it wasn't a cheap way to get a +10, not that it wasn't a good FAQ.
I can see how you read it that way though.It's also not clear to me how that +10 works. Does it give me a +10 to create a better disguise, which then lasts as long as I wear the disguise? Or is it just the illusion from the hat improving the disguise so the bonus goes away when the duration expires? Assuming I don't use the command word to reset it beforehand.
Since that's a new instance of the spell, do I have to redo the Disguise roll as well?
Ring of invisibility is at least simpler. :)
Edit: OTOH, the ring only lasts 3 minutes and it's even more important not to be heard using the command word.
You get the +10 for as long as the spell lasts. If you are refreshing the spell's duration (as the FAQ states) then it has not stopped.
|
|
Where'd the extra cost come from?
Since both the Hat and the Ring are worn items and no mention is made of command words, according to that text, it seems perfectly reasonable to have them activated by "mentally willing the activation to happen".
The cost formula for a command word activated item is CL x SL x 1800gp. The hat is CL1 casting a 1st level spell and costs 1800gp. The hat is command word activated, QED.
The cost formula for use activated (silent act of will) is CL x SL x 2000gp. This would be the cost of the hat if it were activated by a silent act of will instead of a command word.
The cost of a continuous item is the same as for a use activated item, with a multiplier based on the duration formula for the spell the item emulates. The modifier for an item that mimics a spell with a duration of 10 minutes/level is 1.5, so the final cost would be 3000gp, but the disguise it was created with would last indefinitely, so you couldn't change the disguise into a different disguise.
|
"However, some items made for wearing must still be activated." You wear it and silent command it to activate. Where is the removing part coming from?I don't want to have to take off my ring just so I can use it again =(.
Command word is just fine.
Because under "use activated", rings are specified as being worn in order to activate them.
Which first requires that it be removed.
I much prefer "command activated".
"However, some items made for wearing must still be activated." You wear it and silent command it to activate. Where is the removing part coming from?I don't want to have to take off my ring just so I can use it again =(.
Command word is just fine.
Because under "use activated", rings are specified as being worn in order to activate them.
Which first requires that it be removed.
I much prefer "command activated".
Actually, I just saw the text Nefreet mentioned obliquely there that states that rings are activated by command word by default. So ring of invisibility may indeed be command word after all due to that default being indicated. Huh, in that case I've been doing it wrong all this time.
graystone, I really am not seeing the long term problems. Just find ways to use it surreptitiously. Many GMs will work with you to do so.
Alternately, go for a more expensive version and raise the CL of the item. Heck, maybe you could go for continuous pricing.
I haven't played a lot of PFS modules but I doubt that the Ring of Invisibility or Hat of Disguise is really an issue in PFS play (for different reasons). Since the issue is not really a PFS issue your GM should be able to work with you.
When I use the item, it's usually to look like another person 24/7. Having to become a disguise expert JUST to hide the times I take an 11 min+ nap makes it a pretty crappy magic item. [for my use] Why did I buy the item then instead of a direct boost to the skill that DOES work all the time?
EDIT: i have less of an issue with inv, though having to speak to keep it working can have some problems.
If you are using it 24/7 then clearly you are going well beyond the scope of the item. In 24hours I am quite certain someone is going to touch you or in some way interact with you in such a way that warrants a Will save. A successful Will save will pretty much blow your disguise regardless of the ruling today and since the DC of that Will save is only 11, good luck succeeding.
The Hat of Disguise is for the casual 'quick change' or 'quick skill bump' rather than a constant +10. I would actually suggest a direct boost item rather than the Hat of Disguise for what you are suggesting simply due to the Will save.
Some points.
#1 I've played from the start of 3.0 d&d to pathfinder, had dozens of Dm's in hundreds of games. Not once have i ever seen the hat run as anything other than a 24/7, always on item.#2 it's only when they interact with the illusion that they get a save. I make an illusion of a person. Then I don equipment, clothes, armor ect. To interact with it, they have to touch skin. How often do you find people feeling you up on a daily basis? Remember it's not touching you that's needed but the illusion.
#3 Hat of Disguise may have worked like a 'quick change' or 'quick skill bump', but I've never seen it used as such.
"However, some items made for wearing must still be activated." You wear it and silent command it to activate. Where is the removing part coming from?I don't want to have to take off my ring just so I can use it again =(.
Command word is just fine.
Because under "use activated", rings are specified as being worn in order to activate them.
Which first requires that it be removed.
I much prefer "command activated".
It says "wear a ring". That's a passive action. It doesn't say 'put on a ring'. Being required to wear a cloak wouldn't require you to take it off and wear it a second time when it was already worn.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think that the FAQ makes perfect sense in terms of explaining how the rules work, but I think that the descriptions of some magic items were written carelessly.
Sure, it takes extra words, but going to the effort of writing 'By mentally activating this simple silver ring, the wearer can benefit from invisibility, as the spell, continuously until deactivated.'
This would mean that the state of invisibility matches that found in the spell description, including becoming visible after attacking, but that otherwise the invisible state would last. I think that this matches the RAI of the original writer (and matches legends of such rings) much better than the brief wording that (unintentionally?) changed it to only lasting three minutes!
I also think the RAI for the hat is for the spell to last until you take it off or deactivate it.
But with the wording as it is, the FAQ had to be what it is. What we need is errata, not for this rule but for individual magic item descriptions. Quite a task!
|
|
Actually, I just saw the text Nefreet mentioned obliquely there that states that rings are activated by command word by default. So ring of invisibility may indeed be command word after all due to that default being indicated. Huh, in that case I've been doing it wrong all this time."However, some items made for wearing must still be activated." You wear it and silent command it to activate. Where is the removing part coming from?I don't want to have to take off my ring just so I can use it again =(.
Command word is just fine.
Because under "use activated", rings are specified as being worn in order to activate them.
Which first requires that it be removed.
I much prefer "command activated".
The ring is much more expensive than the formula dictates, for either command word or use activated. Given that, and given that no-one would create a stealth item that works by speaking assertively(!), then you were doing it right the whole time.
According to the general rules of magic ring activation:-
Activation: A ring's ability is usually activated by a spoken command word (a standard action that does not provoke attacks of opportunity) or its effects work continually.
Since 'continually' makes the most sense, and 'use activated' also makes sense, and 'command word' does not make sense in context of stealth, then 'usually' doesn't mean 'always'.
|
|
"However, some items made for wearing must still be activated." You wear it and silent command it to activate. Where is the removing part coming from?I don't want to have to take off my ring just so I can use it again =(.
Command word is just fine.
Because under "use activated", rings are specified as being worn in order to activate them.
Which first requires that it be removed.
I much prefer "command activated".
Putting it on doesn't activate the ring or the hat. The item must be worn as a prerequisite to being able to activate it, using either command word or silent act of will.
graystone, I really am not seeing the long term problems. Just find ways to use it surreptitiously. Many GMs will work with you to do so.
Alternately, go for a more expensive version and raise the CL of the item. Heck, maybe you could go for continuous pricing.
I haven't played a lot of PFS modules but I doubt that the Ring of Invisibility or Hat of Disguise is really an issue in PFS play (for different reasons). Since the issue is not really a PFS issue your GM should be able to work with you.
When I use the item, it's usually to look like another person 24/7. Having to become a disguise expert JUST to hide the times I take an 11 min+ nap makes it a pretty crappy magic item. [for my use] Why did I buy the item then instead of a direct boost to the skill that DOES work all the time?
EDIT: i have less of an issue with inv, though having to speak to keep it working can have some problems.
If you are using it 24/7 then clearly you are going well beyond the scope of the item. In 24hours I am quite certain someone is going to touch you or in some way interact with you in such a way that warrants a Will save. A successful Will save will pretty much blow your disguise regardless of the ruling today and since the DC of that Will save is only 11, good luck succeeding.
The Hat of Disguise is for the casual 'quick change' or 'quick skill bump' rather than a constant +10. I would actually suggest a direct boost item rather than the Hat of Disguise for what you are suggesting simply due to the Will save.
Some points.
#1 I've played from the start of 3.0 d&d to pathfinder, had dozens of Dm's in hundreds of games. Not once have i ever seen the hat run as anything other than a 24/7, always on item.#2 it's only when they interact with the illusion that they get a save. I make an illusion of a person. Then I don equipment, clothes, armor ect. To interact with it, they have to touch skin. How often do you find people...
#1: That's interesting, I've been playing since...well much longer than 3.X but for this conversation 3.X is what is relevant and I have never seen it run your way. What you are describing might have amounted to it due to hand-waiving but it is not actually that way.
Most GMs do not require their players to say each and every time they eat or drink and similarly, they do not require them to say each and every time they reactivate an at will effect. It is probable that some of the GMs you remember running it as a 24/7 item were actually hand-waiving it since it was at will. Most people don't bother to argue 'yes, you can use it that way but really what you are doing is....' since that just takes time out of gaming.
#2: Do you really think you can walk around 24/7 without touching someone? It is simply not feasible to not associate with people and avoid all physical contact. Heck, just a handshake will give them a chance to save.
As for your premise of skin contact only where do you find that in the rules? It isn't. The disguise self illusion is your entire person and the rules do not make that level of distinction. If they touch you they get a save.
#3: I have seen it used as a quick use to get in past a guard. I have also seen it used longer term but with the understanding that it has some limitations when doing that.
Well, lovely, both items just took a significant drop in usefulness. The ring is now laughable, though I can think of some use for the hat at least, however it is now quite limited.
Really, the hat I can understand. It's a 1000gp item; I can see why it might have limits. But, the ring? Seriously? It's priced differently for it's utility; nearly another 10,000 over the formula cost. Having to blow my stealth once every 3 minutes is not utility; that's asking to get myself killed. If this stands, I no longer would agree that the item is priced correctly.
The Archive, really? I do not see it as laughable. It is still quite useful.
How often do you have to maintain stealth for 3minutes without break? Not very.
How hard is it to get to a point where you can quietly say a command word? Not very.
With the understanding that the Ring requires a command word every 3 minutes I have had players buying and using this ring since 3.X without ever finding it not worth the price.
Heck, starting every combat invisible is worth the price alone.