Luthier's Rapier Pricing Error


Pathfinder Society

51 to 100 of 112 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Silver Crusade 5/5 5/55/5 Venture-Captain, Germany—Bavaria

Ed Reppert wrote:
Sebastian Hirsch wrote:
Ed Reppert wrote:

The charisma bonus is why I mentioned the ruby, since that's where it originates.

I still don't know how to compute the cost of it, though. Rulebook cite, anyone?

Quite a number of items don't follow the formula, and there is a good reason for that (ring of true strike anyone ? ), in this case someone might have just set a price that sounded appropriate.

Depending on your build, that +4 sacred bonus to CHA might be a steal .

We have a set of rules on how to construct magic items, and we're not going to follow them? Why not? What is this "good reason"?

They are just a set of guidelines, and some items intentionally have a much higher price, a permanent mage armor item would cost about 2000 GP , now just look at bracers of armor. They are vastly more expensive (and IIRC follow the calculation for an armor bonus to AC).

If the rapier were legal, I think pretty much every character of mine would own one, even as a backup weapon. When buying an item becomes a no brainer .. that is usually a good sign that something is wrong.

Shadow Lodge

it is legal

Equipment: all magic items on page 25 and pages 28-29; Prestige Class: Liberator (reduce all skill rank requirements by -3)

its on page 25

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

Yeah, I really get it.

The thing is, we really can't, and really shouldn't, houserule a price change.

If it officially changes, there are already rules set in place to deal with that.

I would just let it happen, but give a warning, they may lose it, in an errata.

That's it.

Don't try to be a higher authority, as a Judge, or as a player.

Shadow Lodge 5/5 5/5 Regional Venture-Coordinator, Northwest aka WalterGM

1 person marked this as a favorite.

That 3.5 AP chapter won't get reprinted, and I doubt an errata will happen because it is so old. And since PFS doesn't want to set the precedent for changing price, I imagine that item will likely just be added to the "no fly list" for underpriced items. Like the bracers of falcon's aim and the quick runner shirt.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

Yup.

Love it, or hate it, the proper response, outside the boards, is let it be.

Let it be.

I can't say it's very balanced, or anything to agree(or disagree) with that statement.

You just have to work with it, as is, and hope for errata.

Seriously, that is what you must do, legally.


Like Walter said.... an errata on a 3.5 era splat book is going to take a miracle. I am just trying to get the item banned at this point.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

Well, let's not ban everything in the book.

Has it been a problem yet?

Just curious, mind you.

Grand Lodge 4/5 Venture-Agent, Nevada—Las Vegas aka kinevon

To be honest, I have never seen anyone in my area, or in any of the online games I have GMed or played, buy it.

Probably one of those things that no one noticed, until it was brought up here, so no one bought it.... Until now.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

I might buy it.

I have a Swashbuckler that would like it.

If anything, it might bring notice to it.

That's likely the best way to get it banned, or modified.

Just buy it, and use it.

Worked for Crane Wing.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

Worked for Mask of Stony Demeanor too.

Grand Lodge

I've seen 1. (I think until this thread maybe 4 local players knew about the item, the VC, the player with it, another player at the same table as him when he bought it, and me. And I had forgotten about it.) My understanding is that for a splatbook to be erratad/FAQd by the PDT is extremely unlikely and only happens if certain conditions are met. A PFS ruling is somewhat more likely, but would probably be an all or nothing decision i.e. ban it or leave it as is.

Frankly, personally I don't consider this item a problem, it's a lesser known item in an uncommon (and old) book. Plus, I like items like this that feel like a reward for owning and looking through so much material to find one that's a steal. (And yes there are others that I put in the same category, including at least 1 I've had the chance to talk about with a designer)

If it's banned it's banned, until then good on you for finding something so good for such a reasonable price. The clearance racks in the Grand Lodge usually don't have much left on them. However, with all things PFS YMMV.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I'm not sure if abusing something that to get it banned is really the way to fix the problem, though.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

Well, if you change the price, without errata, you are doing something illegal.

No matter the intent.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

You can't even call it abuse, because you don't have a choice.

You either buy it at it's current price, or you don't buy it.

That's it.

Those are the only choices you have.

Grand Lodge 2/5

Sebastian Hirsch wrote:
Ed Reppert wrote:

The charisma bonus is why I mentioned the ruby, since that's where it originates.

I still don't know how to compute the cost of it, though. Rulebook cite, anyone?

Quite a number of items don't follow the formula, and there is a good reason for that (ring of true strike anyone ? ), in this case someone might have just set a price that sounded appropriate.

Depending on your build, that +4 sacred bonus to CHA might be a steal .

JonGarrett wrote:
A Ring of True Striking, set to be permanently active, would cost 2000gp. It would add a permanent +20 to all attacks. That's...pretty good for 2000gp.

A ring of true strike would be about the worst thing you can make as a custom magic item. It would turn off after the first attack. Now you just have a ring that is no longer worth 2000g.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

Hmm.

A one time use, Quickened True Strike effect, might be worth it, for 2000gp.

Grand Lodge 2/5

blackbloodtroll wrote:

Hmm.

A one time use, Quickened True Strike effect, might be worth it, for 2000gp.

That would be slightly different than a ring of true strike. The ring would work on the first attack roll. Not on the first desired attack roll.

Silver Crusade 5/5 5/55/5 Venture-Captain, Germany—Bavaria

Wraith235 wrote:

it is legal

Equipment: all magic items on page 25 and pages 28-29; Prestige Class: Liberator (reduce all skill rank requirements by -3)

its on page 25

The legality of the items is not in question, the issue is if we should/can be allowed to correct an obvious error, especially once it has been confirmed to be unintentional by James Jacobs who, when it comes to the adventure paths, is very much in his element.

Silver Crusade 5/5 5/55/5 Venture-Captain, Germany—Bavaria

claudekennilol wrote:
blackbloodtroll wrote:

Hmm.

A one time use, Quickened True Strike effect, might be worth it, for 2000gp.

That would be slightly different than a ring of true strike. The ring would work on the first attack roll. Not on the first desired attack roll.

A continous true strike ring is a very bad idea indeed.... just make it a use activated ring, so when you use that hand to attack, deliver a touch spell, or make a ranged attack, that lovely bonus will be there....

Silver Crusade 5/5

blackbloodtroll wrote:

I might buy it.

I have a Swashbuckler that would like it.

If anything, it might bring notice to it.

That's likely the best way to get it banned, or modified.

Just buy it, and use it.

Worked for Crane Wing.

Knowingly abusing an underpriced item is a good way to find yourself -5000 gp. I wouldn't be surprised if they removed the item and didn't give out refunds, if people are going to advocate abusing an oversight.


Pathfinder Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
UndeadMitch wrote:

Knowingly abusing an underpriced item is a good way to find yourself -5000 gp. I wouldn't be surprised if they removed the item and didn't give out refunds, if people are going to advocate abusing an oversight.

I know practically nothing about PFS, but this just seems logical. I hope it is how it works or does work.

5/5 5/5

2 people marked this as a favorite.

If I hold my Core Rulebook upside down, that means I can buy a Cloak of Resistance +3 for 000'6 gold, right?
At least until an errata comes out about upside down books or campaign leadership bans the practice of manipulating the Core Rulebook in a three-dimensional space.

Grand Lodge 2/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.
TheFlyingPhoton wrote:
There was a printing error in my Core Rulebook, and some of the pages are upside down. That means I can buy a Cloak of Resistance +3 for 000'6 gold, right?

Only if you're buying a ǝɔuɐʇsᴉsǝɹ ɟo ʞɐolɔ.


claudekennilol wrote:
TheFlyingPhoton wrote:
There was a printing error in my Core Rulebook, and some of the pages are upside down. That means I can buy a Cloak of Resistance +3 for 000'6 gold, right?
Only if you're buying a ǝɔuɐʇsᴉsǝɹ ɟo ʞɐolɔ.

˙ƃuıɥʇʎɹəʌə ɹoɟ ʇɹoddns ʇuoɟ sɐɥ puɐ looɔ sɐʍ ozıɐd ʇɐɥʇ ʇoƃɹoɟ

Have you found one that supports capital letters?

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber
UndeadMitch wrote:


Knowingly abusing an underpriced item is a good way to find yourself -5000 gp. I wouldn't be surprised if they removed the item and didn't give out refunds, if people are going to advocate abusing an oversight.

So, you either buy it, and you, by default, are abusing it, with that one action, or you don't buy it.

That's it.

Those are the choices you have.

You could set aside some gold, in preparation of errata, but you still bought it legally.

Silver Crusade 5/5

blackbloodtroll wrote:
UndeadMitch wrote:


Knowingly abusing an underpriced item is a good way to find yourself -5000 gp. I wouldn't be surprised if they removed the item and didn't give out refunds, if people are going to advocate abusing an oversight.

So, you either buy it, and you, by default, are abusing it, with that one action, or you don't buy it.

That's it.

Those are the choices you have.

You could set aside some gold, in preparation of errata, but you still bought it legally.

Judging from this thread, it is easily apparent that everyone here knows that the pricing is in error. By purchasing the item you are abusing an oversight. If you (or anyone else abusing the mispricing) choose to abuse the item, I don't think you should be reimbursed when it gets removed from play (since it being errata'd seems very unlikely, since it's from a 3.5 source.)

This seems similar to the old Mysterious Pistolero exploit, and people abusing the rapier should face the same consequences as then.

Silver Crusade 5/5

blackbloodtroll wrote:

You can't even call it abuse, because you don't have a choice.

You either buy it at it's current price, or you don't buy it.

That's it.

Those are the only choices you have.

If you buy an item, knowing that it is mispriced and will either be errata'd or removed from play, that is abuse. What's more, you know that, so when the boot drops, they should not be merciful to those abusing an oversight.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

Okay, so you can't buy it as is, otherwise your a villain, or you break the rules, pay a different price, and you're a saint?

Look, I already suggested that the player set aside some gold, to pay for an errata'd price.

Going out of your way to say they just lose all the gold they spent, with no sell back, or anything, is also not what's outlined in the guide.

Basically, you are advocating breaking several guidelines.

You are not even advocating one simply prepare for an errata(which they should), but that people should be punished for not breaking the rules.

None of us have the authority to do that.

Why do you?

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

1) So, how does one legally buy it now?

2) At what price?

3) On whose authority?

I don't agree with the price, but unless those three questions can be answered, I don't see what one can do.

Silver Crusade 5/5

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Yeah, I'm done here, I've said my piece. I know you've got troll in your name, but try not to be so obvious next time.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

I am not trolling.

I am making a honest, and I believe, valid point.

You can walk off in a huff, but you have not contributed to solving a damn thing.

What are you even trying to win?

5/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Blackbloodtroll - feel free to deal with this as you describe. What are you trying to win, by repeating your same point over and over?

For myself, I know how I will deal with players who knowingly abuse this. It doesn't involve letting a pricing typo destroy the game.

Shadow Lodge 5/5 5/5 Regional Venture-Coordinator, Northwest aka WalterGM

3 people marked this as a favorite.

The thing to do now is to ensure people using the weapon actually have the source for it. The 3.5 AP book is hard to come by, so I'd be checking watermarked PDFs on principle for this one. The other thing is to mention to those people, and others interested in it, that the item is misprinted and the other shoe is going to drop eventually, so if they wanna buy it be aware of that at they can spend their gold how they choose. The final thing to do is hang tight, and wait for John or the new CC to address this. The OP has over 20 FAQ requests, and Johns been posting on the boards today--they know this is an issue. It will be addressed, just hang out until then.

If I were making a character that used a rapier, I wouldn't touch this item with a 10 foot pole because it's begging to get the ban hammer. I wouldn't risk negative repercussions. If you are willing to do that (and likely endure sideways glances from posters here and your play area for exploiting a loophole), then feel free. It is currently legal. How long it remains so is unknown. The rest is up to you.

Shadow Lodge

more than likely it will be banned over Errata'ed .... I have a friend who has said "a bargin at 25k" so I hope its just a simple price change

but since its a splat book an errata is unlikely particularly one this old

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

Okay, so how does one buy the item, without negative repercussions, legally?

Shadow Lodge 4/5

It's a bargain, but 25k means that you need 40 Fame in order to buy the thing. That's at least 7th level and requires some major savings too. I wouldn't be too worried.

take care, might annoy someone:

Now the current price? It's just silly. It's the mask of stony demeanor situation, but redux. Fortunately my players wouldd self-judge and leave it unbought because any "but it's legal! black on white!" entitlement might just see me walk from the table. Life's too short for these kinds of confrontations.

Disclaimer: my players live close enough to not be in risk of wasting gas/tickets/too much money. Now walking from a con table...hope it never comes to that.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

Seriously, how is one going to buy this?

If you must pay an unlisted price, then how do you determine that?

How do you get it approved?

Who has the authority, sign off on an unmarked price?

Someone really wants to pay more for it.

How do they legally do that?

Paizo Employee 5/5 Developer

13 people marked this as a favorite.
blackbloodtroll wrote:

You can't even call it abuse, because you don't have a choice.

You either buy it at it's current price, or you don't buy it.

That's it.

Those are the only choices you have.

I prefer choice D: Developer rules on the matter and updates the Additional Resources file for the next time we update the Additional Resources page. The updated price will be 25,020 gp, at which point a PC will need to sell back the rapier at its full market cost (or the cost of a +1 rapier, assuming they detonated the gem) and can buy the sword back at its new cost (Fame and gp permitting).

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

There we go.

That solves the issue.

Silver Crusade

5 people marked this as a favorite.
John Compton wrote:
blackbloodtroll wrote:

You can't even call it abuse, because you don't have a choice.

You either buy it at it's current price, or you don't buy it.

That's it.

Those are the only choices you have.

I prefer choice D: Developer rules on the matter and updates the Additional Resources file for the next time we update the Additional Resources page. The updated price will be 25,020 gp, at which point a PC will need to sell back the rapier at its full market cost (or the cost of a +1 rapier, assuming they detonated the gem) and can buy the sword back at its new cost (Fame and gp permitting).

John, there are a lot of people involved in this thread who would have liked the ruling to be: "The item is banned, and there is no refund for anyone who bought it. Take that, munchkins!"

I just want to say thank you for not going that route.

I don't have any characters with this item (even though I do own the resource). I would never have bought said item; it was obviously an error. Like Walter, I wouldn't touch such an obvious mistake with a 10-foot pole.

I think that PFS leadership should move away from punitive rulings. I don't think they are good for the campaign. To put it another way, I think they are worse for the campaign than munchkins exploiting rules loopholes. In the end, punitive rulings end up catching the rest of us in the crossfire, and the exploiters just move on the the next exploit.

Again, thank you for a more measured and fair ruling. :)

The Exchange

Completely agree with The Fox. Thanks so much for dealing with this issue in a fair manner. I also believe punitive measures damage relationships with players and catch people who never understood/intended to abuse a legal feature.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

Yes.

Thank you for avoiding punitive rulings.

Well done.


John Compton wrote:
blackbloodtroll wrote:

You can't even call it abuse, because you don't have a choice.

You either buy it at it's current price, or you don't buy it.

That's it.

Those are the only choices you have.

I prefer choice D: Developer rules on the matter and updates the Additional Resources file for the next time we update the Additional Resources page. The updated price will be 25,020 gp, at which point a PC will need to sell back the rapier at its full market cost (or the cost of a +1 rapier, assuming they detonated the gem) and can buy the sword back at its new cost (Fame and gp permitting).

John you're awesome. This was more than I expected, considering previous items with issues. Thank you.

Shadow Lodge 5/5 5/5 Regional Venture-Coordinator, Northwest aka WalterGM

5 people marked this as a favorite.
Walter Sheppard wrote:
The final thing to do is hang tight, and wait for John or the new CC to address this.

Holy crap, I'm psychic!

5/5 5/55/55/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Walter Sheppard wrote:
Walter Sheppard wrote:
The final thing to do is hang tight, and wait for John or the new CC to address this.
Holy crap, I'm psychic!

O.

Big difference. :)

OW OW OW STOP CRUSHING MY HEAD

Silver Crusade 5/5 5/55/5 Venture-Captain, Germany—Bavaria

It is nice to have a firm ruling. Thank you John.

(I don't really care about punitive measures, but players who want to abuse obvious errors like that are welcome to avoid my tables) .

Liberty's Edge 5/5

8 people marked this as a favorite.

Well, looks like John took care of it.

I just wanted to make one point.

There are a lot of people who play this game casually, who aren't knowledgeable about the magic item costing rules, message board posts, or whatever. They might have innocently run across this item without realizing the cost was significantly broken.

Let's not immediately jump to conclusions.

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.

The Fox speaks reason

51 to 100 of 112 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Organized Play / Pathfinder Society / Luthier's Rapier Pricing Error All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.