I'm looking to have created a crown which allows the wearer to grow in size as if under the effect of an enlarge person spell at will and to remain so as long as the crown is worn. I'd just like confirm the price for such an item. Since it's "Use-activated or continuous" item the cost would be Spell level x caster level x 2,000 gp x 2 since the duration of the spell is normally 1 minute/level. So a 1st level spell x 1st level caster x 2,000 x 2 = 4,000 gp. Is this correct?
You should always try to compare your pricing to currently existing items or effects if possible. The pricing formula is very rough.
Given that a permanency enlarge person costs 2,500 GP, that seems reasonable. A crown has the advantage of being dispellable and toggleable.
*edit*
Thinking about it, you may want to increase the price a little to compensate for the ability to turn it on and off at will. 4000 GP is essentially for an item that needs to be reactivated every minute and/or potentially lasts for a minute duration even after removed, making it less tactically useful.
Thinking about it, you may want to increase the price a little to compensate for the ability to turn it on and off at will. 4000 GP is essentially for an item that needs to be reactivated every minute and/or potentially lasts for a minute duration even after removed, making it less tactically useful.
The formula he used was for continuous use. It functions as long as the item is worn, which is what he wanted.
Spell level x caster level x 2000gp x special modifier based on spell duration
Because of the obvious benefits, I feel that 1/day would be reasonable for 4000 GP.
*facepalm*
Gee, once a day enlarge person for 4000gp
Or, 40 potions that will run you half that cost, and used 1/day will last you well into your Pathfinder career.
You guys are kinda nuts. Seriously? A 1/day item should cost ~ 800gp. That's 50gp more than a wand, which would have much more utility in 99% of the parties out there.
A potion requires two actions AND a free hand. A wonderous item like a hat or crown requires one action and no hands. A wand has it's own requirements above and beyond that of a potion or wonderous item.
|
The formulas for making wondrous items or magical items in general are very rough. It usually floats around +/- 25-50% in price and best comparisons are already made items from Core Rulebook.
For 1/day Enlarge person, I would say that price around ~3500 gp seems adequate. Magical items in general are very expensive and Enlarge Person spell in specific should be considered slightly more pricey then usual. The effects of the spell stack with Belt of Giant's Strength likewise. At-will Enlarge Person should probably cost a lot more. Maybe around three times in price more.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Enlarge Person is a 1 minute / level spell so the cost from the base formula gets doubled. Cost for base formula is CL (1) x Spell Level (1) x 2,000 gp = 2000 gp. Doubled to 4,000 gp. Fair enough.
As a GM, if I was going to include an item like this in my game, I'd probably make a boots of speed style item instead, insofar as I'd make it a single charge continuous use item with the duration split into rounds, which would result in the following.
X of Giants; 800 gp; up to 10 rounds of enlarge person per day, split as the wearer desires, activated as a free action; 400 gp to create; requires enlarge person
Mind you, that's how I would create one as a GM. If a player wanted the more expensive 24/7 version (or to add more charges) when creating or upgrading such an item, that would be their prerogative. The 800 gp version is something I'm more likely to use as treasure or on an NPC and is a little more interesting to me.
Thinking about it, you may want to increase the price a little to compensate for the ability to turn it on and off at will. 4000 GP is essentially for an item that needs to be reactivated every minute and/or potentially lasts for a minute duration even after removed, making it less tactically useful.The formula he used was for continuous use. It functions as long as the item is worn, which is what he wanted.
Spell level x caster level x 2000gp x special modifier based on spell duration
I assume you are talking about this:
"Use-activated or continuous -> Spell level x caster level x 2,000 gp2 example: Lantern of revealing"
Use-activated is not command word and probably more applicable to the formula. Truly Continuous is not appropriate here, as it is almost never appropriate for direct spell effects and causes issues re true strike etc. A ring of invisibility, for example, is a use-activated item that still needs to be 'refreshed' and I would follow similar logic for that pricing. This is what I was trying to say.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Thinking about it, you may want to increase the price a little to compensate for the ability to turn it on and off at will. 4000 GP is essentially for an item that needs to be reactivated every minute and/or potentially lasts for a minute duration even after removed, making it less tactically useful.The formula he used was for continuous use. It functions as long as the item is worn, which is what he wanted.
Spell level x caster level x 2000gp x special modifier based on spell duration
I assume you are talking about this:
"Use-activated or continuous -> Spell level x caster level x 2,000 gp2 example: Lantern of revealing"
Use-activated is not command word and probably more applicable to the formula. Truly Continuous is not appropriate here, as it is almost never appropriate for direct spell effects and causes issues re true strike etc. A ring of invisibility, for example, is a use-activated item that still needs to be 'refreshed' and I would follow similar logic for that pricing. This is what I was trying to say.
It's been pointed out many times already, but always bears repeating, you can't make a continuous true strike item per the rules even using the forumulas. The way true strike functions as per the spell it's impossible.
Wow. A lot of heated debate on this issue. I'm glad to read people's take on it though, so keep it coming.
In assessing power vs cost, I think the most straightforward approach is to compare it to a permanent enlarge person spell which is 2500 gp. Power-wise, the benefits (and penalties) are in effect every combat, which is the only time it matters power-wise and seems to be the main concern of those who propose an increased cost for the item.
Each option has pros and cons on its side. On the good side, the permanency spell requires no actions to activate, takes up no body slots and can't be stolen. On the downside, there's the added hassle of not being able to end the effect when it would be helpful to do so and there's the risk of having a high level opponent dispel the effect permanently. As for an equivalent item the main benefits are that the effect can be ended when desired and it can't be permanently dispelled. On the downside, it costs more, takes up a body slot and the item can be taken from you.
In my mind, the difference between the two isn't so great and consequently the prices for each should be fairly close to each other. I'd say increasing the price for the item by 1500 over the cost of the permanent spell and adding in the body slot requirement easily makes up for the added benefit of being able to discontinue the effect when desired. If the price we're much higher than the 4,000 that the guidelines propose, I'd probably just opt for the permanency effect and use reduce person spells as needed to get around obstacles. Thoughts?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I still stand by the 4000 gp or 800 gp for a 1/day. It's internally consistent and I believe priced fairly. It costs an item slot too unless you want to double the price of the item (or add the effect for x1.5).
I don't generally like ad-hoc'ing for the heck of it and when I do ad-hoc it's usually try to come up with a reasonable measurement for doing so. Permanancy has its own benefits and/or drawbacks so trying to price the magic item against permanancy (which has no effective limit and/or slot requirements and doesn't get more expensive with greater caster levels) seems wrong to me somehow.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Those paldrons are quite a big above the scope of Enlarge Person. As noted, enlarge person is -2 AC, +1.5 Strength bonus, and typically another +2 on weapon damage, and +5 ft. reach (albeit you now also take up 4 spaces making you an easy target). As noted, I think the core pricing is fair for it.
The Pauldrons on the other hand effectively grant the Diehard feat, a bonus on CMD in some situations, command-activated enlarge person, and a peculiarly designed juggernaut spell ability (which I'm having some difficulty parsing as the spell itself typically lasts 10 rounds/CL, but the duration of the effect is at CL 1, yet it triggers as an immediate action post-defeating an enemy, though that would be too late to benefit from defeating an enemy for the juggernaut effect to do anything and isn't keyed off the HD of your foe). It's kind of weird.
It's been pointed out many times already, but always bears repeating, you can't make a continuous true strike item per the rules even using the forumulas. The way true strike functions as per the spell it's impossible.Thinking about it, you may want to increase the price a little to compensate for the ability to turn it on and off at will. 4000 GP is essentially for an item that needs to be reactivated every minute and/or potentially lasts for a minute duration even after removed, making it less tactically useful.The formula he used was for continuous use. It functions as long as the item is worn, which is what he wanted.
Spell level x caster level x 2000gp x special modifier based on spell duration
I assume you are talking about this:
"Use-activated or continuous -> Spell level x caster level x 2,000 gp2 example: Lantern of revealing"
Use-activated is not command word and probably more applicable to the formula. Truly Continuous is not appropriate here, as it is almost never appropriate for direct spell effects and causes issues re true strike etc. A ring of invisibility, for example, is a use-activated item that still needs to be 'refreshed' and I would follow similar logic for that pricing. This is what I was trying to say.
I feel like you are missing the point, but there's plenty of other examples. Another even more common one that violates the formula is mage armour.
I mentioned true strike because it is explicitly called out in the CRB as being a failure of the continuous item pricing formula.
I'm wondering, why are people whining about 'game balance' on the rules questions forum? It took until 15 posts into this thread before someone gave a straightforward answer to a simple question "what are the rules about X".
LazarX and co, you seem to have suffered from a Misdirection spell (or item :D ). The homebrew/house rules forum is here.
searching for 'game balance' gives me only your post.
There's some debate as to proper costing because the rules explicitly state that the pricing formula is a rough guide and needs to be adjudicated on a case by case basis.
Not that there is much debate. I think most people are agreeing that 4k, which the formula gives, is about right, while arguing about unrelated minutae. Welcome to the internet.
I'm wondering, why are people whining about 'game balance' on the rules questions forum? It took until 15 posts into this thread before someone gave a straightforward answer to a simple question "what are the rules about X".
LazarX and co, you seem to have suffered from a Misdirection spell (or item :D ). The homebrew/house rules forum is here.
The Magic Item pricing "rules" are actually guidelines that themselves tell you to take more than just the guidelines into consideration, including things like balance.
So, despite your protests, telling someone that you would likely price something differently than what strict adherence to the guidelines would suggest actually is abiding by the rules, as they are written. There are any number of items in the CRB and other places that do not themselves follow the pricing guidelines, specifically because of balance reasons.
As lovely as the homebrew section is, there's no reason that this discussion needs to occur over there.
|
As established often, the custom magic item rules are merely guidelines to help a GM determine a rough estimate of an items worth. They are not set in stone and are very much not balanced around every possible combination or spell. It is up to the GM to determine if the price after formulating a cost is sufficient or if it needs to be adjusted.
Arguing this point is like arguing why a GM is even necessary...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It's been pointed out many times already, but always bears repeating, you can't make a continuous true strike item per the rules even using the forumulas. The way true strike functions as per the spell it's impossible.Thinking about it, you may want to increase the price a little to compensate for the ability to turn it on and off at will. 4000 GP is essentially for an item that needs to be reactivated every minute and/or potentially lasts for a minute duration even after removed, making it less tactically useful.The formula he used was for continuous use. It functions as long as the item is worn, which is what he wanted.
Spell level x caster level x 2000gp x special modifier based on spell duration
I assume you are talking about this:
"Use-activated or continuous -> Spell level x caster level x 2,000 gp2 example: Lantern of revealing"
Use-activated is not command word and probably more applicable to the formula. Truly Continuous is not appropriate here, as it is almost never appropriate for direct spell effects and causes issues re true strike etc. A ring of invisibility, for example, is a use-activated item that still needs to be 'refreshed' and I would follow similar logic for that pricing. This is what I was trying to say.
I feel like you are missing the point, but there's plenty of other examples. Another even more common one that violates the formula is mage armour.
I mentioned true strike because it is explicitly called out in the CRB as being a failure of the continuous item pricing formula.
Well mage armor would be trumped by the existing pricing rules for an armor bonus (bonus^ x 1000 gp). If there's an effect already governed by a formula (this includes things like bull's strength) you go with those.
The item creation rules work very well when used correctly.
RPG Superstar 2011 Top 32
|
I'm wondering, why are people whining about 'game balance' on the rules questions forum? It took until 15 posts into this thread before someone gave a straightforward answer to a simple question "what are the rules about X".
LazarX and co, you seem to have suffered from a Misdirection spell (or item :D ). The homebrew/house rules forum is here.
By your logic, this entire thread is in the wrong forum because all custom items are houserules. By strict RAW you can make the items listed in the book and that's it, everything else require GM approval and usually ad hoc pricing.
Having said that, I think the comparison to permanency is a valid one. The proposed item is in some ways better than the permanent spell:
Only suppressed if dispelled instead of gone(although the item probably has a lower CL)
Can be taken off/turned off in situations where being big is a disadvantage.
So I think I agree with something in the 3500-4000 price range. For that price I would still keep something like the spell's full-round casting time to activate - so for a full-round action, you get enlarge for 1 minute at a time whenever you want. For 3500 or so that seems reasonable. Bumping it down to a standard action I think warrants a small price increase, maybe to 5500? Clearly 12k is the far upper bound as you can get items that do far more at that price point.
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So a 1st level spell x 1st level caster x 2,000 x 2 = 4,000 gp. Is this correct?
That couldn't be more wrong, because you skipped the first two and jumped to the charts.
The chart is the last resort. The first is similar ability. The second is similar power.
For reference 1/day ability of Enlarge Person was 12,000 gp. There are several versions of items like this, and pretty much none of them were 4,000 gp.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Mind sharing what item you use as a baseline for 12 000 gp?
Cloak of the Hedge Wizard allows Enlarge Person and Expeditious Retreat 1/day as well as at-will use of Mage Hand and Prestidigitation for 2500 GP. The Dire Collar from ACG allows 1/day Enlarge Person (even on an animal) for 1000 GP.
|
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
Mind sharing what item you use as a baseline for 12 000 gp?
I meant to say "For reference in 3.5". I'm aware of the much lower rate for Pathfinder, but I think the Enlarge Person/ER/MG/Pres for 2,500 is underpriced a bit, just as the Bracers of Falcon's Aim is an admitted pricing error.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Because DPR and reach, I'd say it should be more than 4k. How much SHOULD it be? I dunno. I'd have to think about it more. Since it's pretty dang subjective, the GM who is making the decision and has to live with it should make that final call.
Probably go with 4k and make it 3 times per day.
3/day for 10 rounds at a time is likely going to be functionally similar to at-will for most adventures while just adding an extra resource to track.
The strongest thing about the spell is the reach. DPR doesn't even go up all that much in most cases, but it comes with some heafty drawbacks (including -2 AC, -1 Reflex, and you are now a fat ass who's a big target and has to deal with mobility difficulties and space problems while gaining no speed benefits).
Want to ruin someone with enlarge person? Turn over a barstool.
Want to ruin someone with enlarge person? Turn over a barstool.
What's so bad about difficult terrain?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What's so bad about difficult terrain?
Want to ruin someone with enlarge person? Turn over a barstool.
Larger creatures have more trouble dealing with scattered difficult terrain because it becomes progressively more difficult to avoid it, they have more space to trigger it, and they still suffer the same limitations as small creatures (a colossal dragon still only gets a 5 ft. step like humans do).
Difficult terrain means no charging and each square of difficult terrain requires 2 squares of movement. Your typical beefcake type is going to be moving at 20 ft. (for medium or heavy armor) at most levels that enlarge person is really nice, so eating 10 ft. of movement for every square of difficult terrain you need to move through sucks.
It's just really not that hard to out-maneuver an enlarged character if you have any space, and in many cases easier if you don't (in an indoor scenario, it's incredibly easy for a 2x2 space creature to end up in an area that cannot fully accept its size which means it has to squeeze which is another -4 to hit and AC in addition to the usual penalties).
Enlarge person is great in certain cases but it's a good way to get dead in a lot of cases as well. I still think 4,000 gp is plenty expensive (but I still prefer the idea of an 800 gp 10 rounds/day item because I think those are more amusing). Personal preference.
If not, screw it and just carry some potions. At 50 gp / 10 rounds, you'd have to drink 81 of the things before 4,000 gp was suddenly more economical than just chugging a potion or oil (you can even have someone else apply the oil to you, such as a familiar).
WHen I did a similar thing, I made it as a ring that cost 2,000 gold. I dont' remember how I got that price, but it was as per the charts. Later I remade it as a tattoo which of course increased the cost because it had to be slotless at that point.
It's just really not that hard to out-maneuver an enlarged character if you have any space, and in many cases easier if you don't (in an indoor scenario, it's incredibly easy for a 2x2 space creature to end up in an area that cannot fully accept its size which means it has to squeeze which is another -4 to hit and AC in addition to the usual penalties).
That's one reason why a Hat of Enlarge Person would be very useful - you could switch it off by removing the hat whenever the terrain makes it a liability.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It's just really not that hard to out-maneuver an enlarged character if you have any space, and in many cases easier if you don't (in an indoor scenario, it's incredibly easy for a 2x2 space creature to end up in an area that cannot fully accept its size which means it has to squeeze which is another -4 to hit and AC in addition to the usual penalties).That's one reason why a Hat of Enlarge Person would be very useful - you could switch it off by removing the hat whenever the terrain makes it a liability.
S'one of the reasons I think a boots of speed style 1/day item would be amusing for players, though at least it's dismissible for everything else if you really need to shrink back down.
For an unlimited use enlarge person item (which has benefits over a permanancied version) I would probably price the item around 5000 to 6000 gold. The permanent version can be dispelled and is just gone, a major weakness. The item version can have the spell effect dispelled but can just be reactivated. It can also be deactivated when being large would be inconvient, something the permanent version cannot do.
Enlarge person is a powerful effect if for no other reason than a stacking strength bonus and increased reach, these things should not be overlooked. But, considering the availability of permanency you really have to look at the drawbacks of being permanently enlarge and the cost to get rid of those penalties. Double the price seems roughly fair, maybe a bit more (6000 instead of 5000) for the extra benefit.