A legitimate request to ban the Ring of Seven Lovely Colors


Pathfinder Society

101 to 150 of 517 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
The Exchange 4/5 Venture-Lieutenant, Kentucky—Lexington

Joe Ducey wrote:
Actually using BS II instead of BS IV makes a big difference, it matches the CL .

That doesn't follow item creation rules. You jumped to the step that uses the charts and formulas. Before that price it based on other items and its power. It has more uses and the drawback of locked into a form, but is comparable to other items like featherscale clock. The cloak costs less for the poly, 1500 gp, after removing some other abilities. So more uses with limitations costs 2000 gp.

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

Someone said wrote:


FEATHERSCALE CLOAK
(GOZREH)PRICE
4,000 GP
SLOT shoulders CL 5th WEIGHT 1 lb.
AURA faint abjuration and transmutation
This heavy linen cloak has a fish-scale pattern
that darkens toward the bottom and white
feathers on the shoulders. Once per day, the
wearer can use beast shape I, but only to
transform into a bird or fish. In addition, the
wearer can use hide from animals (affecting
only the wearer) once per day. The wearer
gains a +5 competence bonus on Swim checks.
Once per day, the wearer can use feather fall.
CONSTRUCTION REQUIREMENTS COST 2,000 GP
Craft Wondrous Item, beast shape I, feather fall, hide from animals

Just for reference, quoting the cloak.

It only uses beast shape I so you could become an eagle once per day for five minutes. While you get 3 natural attacks, you only get small (which for some characters will be an advantage) and you get a lower bonus to dexterity but not the penalty to strength.

For some characters, this item will perform better however, some builds and class features where you want to be significantly smaller than your enemy will prefer the songbird.

Using with a couple of once per day powers the item is pretty nice, not sure how much I would value the hide from animals (I literally haven't seen this spell used, and in PFS I don't recall a lot of encounters where the group faces animals and has time to cast this (and even then in only affects you).
Of course, it uses a more valuable slot (shoulder) than the ring. And I don't have a single character over level 3 without a cloak of resistance (of course that might just be my bias).

The ring allows the character to become smaller, resulting in a higher AC from dexterity and size and can be used seven times per day, for 10 minutes each... which really is a big part of the problem. A character could presumably activate it just in case (when the metagaming sense starts tingling).

EDIT: Magic item pricing is hard, and it becomes difficult when you add various abilities together... staffs are a perfect example. The designers take the time to craft thematically fitting staffs, but I rarely see them in PFS, since many players view them as overpriced/include spells that they don't want.

The Exchange 4/5 Venture-Lieutenant, Kentucky—Lexington

Sebastian Hirsch wrote:

3 times per day for 6000-8000 would make the item much more reasonable. For the current price, it is an attractive option for a lot of classes and cheap enough to buy, just in case. For those classes that can really benefit, it is severely underpriced (but my suggested changes would help a lot.

Another reason why this ring is so unpleasant is that you can buy it relatively early, and push your AC into the area where only nat 20s will hit you... which in theory is ok for a tank with combat expertise and maybe with a shield... but characters with the ring really don't have a decreased offense... offense just gets better.

I think 6000-8000 for 3 times a day, would be fine. I don't think any character that would buy this item, would change their mind for an extra 2000 to 4000 gp.

Your other point is void. A generic fighter with full plate and dark wood tower shield can spent less money for more AC than any character hoping to gain AC. You simply can't match 20,000 gp spent by a fighter with 20,000 gp spent on a songbird character to get more Ac than the fighter. Your touch Ac will be higher but not normal Ac.

The Exchange 4/5 Venture-Lieutenant, Kentucky—Lexington

Sebastian Hirsch wrote:
It only uses beast shape I so you could become an eagle once per day for five minutes. While you get 3 natural attacks, you only get small (which for some characters will be an advantage) and you get a lower bonus to dexterity but not the penalty to strength.

Comparing Eagle to Raven:

Benefits of Beast Shape I to Beast Shape IV for Small to Tiny
You get good fly upgrade from average and a speed bump from 30 to 40.
You get +1 to DEX things.
You gain +1 to attack and +1 to AC from Small to Tiny.
You get DEX to Combat Maneuvers from being Tiny.
You need 11 levels of full BAB classes to get more attacks than the Eagle, so for 10 or less levels the raven is a worse form for damage.

Negatives of being Tiny:
You provoke to enter the enemy square.
You don't threaten adjacent squares and you can't get it in any meaningful way (bad or limited ways include Lunge Feat, Longarm Bracers, and Bloodrager rage powers.)

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

James Risner wrote:
Sebastian Hirsch wrote:

3 times per day for 6000-8000 would make the item much more reasonable. For the current price, it is an attractive option for a lot of classes and cheap enough to buy, just in case. For those classes that can really benefit, it is severely underpriced (but my suggested changes would help a lot.

Another reason why this ring is so unpleasant is that you can buy it relatively early, and push your AC into the area where only nat 20s will hit you... which in theory is ok for a tank with combat expertise and maybe with a shield... but characters with the ring really don't have a decreased offense... offense just gets better.

I think 6000-8000 for 3 times a day, would be fine. I don't think any character that would buy this item, would change their mind for an extra 2000 to 4000 gp.

Your other point is void. A generic fighter with full plate and dark wood tower shield can spent less money for more AC than any character hoping to gain AC. You simply can't match 20,000 gp spent by a fighter with 20,000 gp spent on a songbird character to get more Ac than the fighter. Your touch Ac will be higher but not normal Ac.

I think, that making activating this item a choice (if you only have 3 charges, chances are that you will waste a charge) and the item is so expensive, that you can't just buy two, would already help a lot.

Okay made an elf fighter in mithral full plate just to compare, thx to the mithral this AC can get even higher once you afford the upgrades.:

Movie plot spoiler:
Generic Figher
Elf fighter 5
Medium humanoid (elf)
Init +4; Senses low-light vision; Perception +2
--------------------
Defense
--------------------
AC 31, touch 16, flat-footed 26 (+10 armor, +1 deflection, +4 Dex, +1 dodge, +1 natural, +4 shield)
hp 44 (5d10+10)
Fort +6, Ref +6, Will +4 (+1 vs. fear); +2 vs. enchantments
Immune sleep
--------------------
Offense
--------------------
Speed 30 ft.
Melee +1 rapier +10 (1d6+4/18-20)
Special Attacks weapon training (light blades +1)
--------------------
Statistics
--------------------
Str 14, Dex 19, Con 12, Int 13, Wis 10, Cha 9
Base Atk +5; CMB +7; CMD 23
Feats Dodge, Iron Will, Power Attack, Shield Focus, Weapon Finesse, Weapon Focus (longsword)
Skills Perception +2; Racial Modifiers +2 Perception, +2 Spellcraft to identify magic item properties
Languages Common, Elven
SQ armor training 1, elven magic
Other Gear +1 mithral full plate, +1 heavy steel shield, +1 rapier, amulet of natural armor +1, cloak of resistance +1, ring of protection +1, 150 gp
--------------------
Special Abilities
--------------------
Armor Training 1 (Ex) Worn armor -1 check penalty, +1 max DEX.
Elven Immunities - Sleep You are immune to magic sleep effects.
Elven Magic +2 to spellcraft checks to determine the properties of a magic item.
Low-Light Vision See twice as far as a human in dim light, distinguishing color and detail.
Power Attack -2/+4 You can subtract from your attack roll to add to your damage.
Shield Focus +1 Shield AC
Weapon Training (Blades, Light) +1 (Ex) +1 Attack, Damage, CMB, CMD with Light Blades

Hero Lab and the Hero Lab logo are Registered Trademarks of LWD Technology, Inc. Free download at http://www.wolflair.com
Pathfinder® and associated marks and logos are trademarks of Paizo Inc.®, and are used under license.

To compare my build from earlier with 20000 GP:

Movie plot spoiler:
Unnamed Hero
Halfling fighter (unarmed fighter) 1/monk (unchained) 1/paladin (iroran paladin) 2/swashbuckler (mouser) 1 (Pathfinder Campaign Setting: Inner Sea Combat, Pathfinder RPG Advanced Class Guide 56, 125, Pathfinder RPG Ultimate Combat 48, Pathfinder Unchained 14)
LG Tiny humanoid (halfling)
Init +8; Senses Perception +10
Aura aura of law
--------------------
Defense
--------------------
AC 27, touch 26, flat-footed 16 (+1 deflection, +10 Dex, +1 dodge, +1 natural, +2 size, +2 Wis)
hp 45 (5d10+11)
Fort +12, Ref +15, Will +8; +2 vs. fear
--------------------
Offense
--------------------
Speed 10 ft., fly 40 ft. (average)
Melee unarmed strike +15/+15 (1d3+8) or
. . bite +15 (1d3+12)
Space 2½ ft.; Reach 0 ft.
Special Attacks flurry of blows (unchained), panache (2), personal trial
--------------------
Statistics
--------------------
Str 4, Dex 27, Con 14, Int 10, Wis 14, Cha 14
Base Atk +5; CMB +11; CMD 22
Feats Dodge, Improved Unarmed Strike, Mobility, Piranha Strike, Snake Style[UC], Stunning Fist, Weapon Finesse
Skills Acrobatics +15 (+7 to jump), Perception +10, Sense Motive +4, Stealth +24
Languages Common, Halfling
SQ confident defense +2, lay on hands 3/day (1d6), sense perfection, swashbuckler finesse
Other Gear agile amulet of mighty fists, belt of incredible dexterity +2, headband of inspired wisdom +2, ring of seven lovely colors, 150 gp
--------------------
Special Abilities
--------------------
Aura of Law (Su) The paladin has an Aura of Law with power equal to her class level.
Confident Defense +2 When lightly armored with no shield add Cha to AC.
Fearless +2 racial bonus on all saving throws against fear. This bonus stacks with the bonus granted by halfling luck.
Flight (40 feet, Average) You can fly!
Flurry of Blows (Unchained) (Ex) As full-rd action, gain extra attacks with unarmed strike/monk weapons.
Improved Unarmed Strike Unarmed strikes don't cause attacks of opportunity, and can be lethal.
Lay on Hands (1d6 hit points, 3/day) (Su) As a standard action (swift on self), touch channels positive energy and applies mercies.
Mobility +4 to AC vs. AoO provoked by moving out of or through a threatened area.
Panache (Ex) Gain a pool of points that are spent to fuel deeds, regained on light/piercing crit/killing blow.
Personal Trial (1/day) (Su) +1 insight bonus to hit, damage, saves, and AC vs. target.
Piranha Strike -2/+4 You can subtract from your attack roll to add to your damage with light weapons.
Sense Perfection (Su) At will, you can detect if a creature has a ki pool.
Snake Style Gain +2 on Sense Motive checks, and deal piercing damage with unarmed attacks
Stunning Fist (2/day, DC 14) You can stun an opponent with an unarmed attack.
Swashbuckler Finesse At 1st level, a swashbuckler gains the benefits of the Weapon Finesse feat with light or one-handed piercing melee weapons, and she can use her Charisma score in place of Intelligence as a prerequisite for combat feats. This ability counts as having

Hero Lab and the Hero Lab logo are Registered Trademarks of LWD Technology, Inc. Free download at http://www.wolflair.com
Pathfinder® and associated marks and logos are trademarks of Paizo Inc.®, and are used under license.

With mage armor they have the same AC (yeah it's the old monk problem, mage armor is so good, that wands or potions of mage armor are a staple). while offense and saves are better for the multiclass abomination. A pure monk would have access to barkskin, which would also boost the AC.

The part of the problem seems to be, that the ring is relatively cheap.

Silver Crusade 4/5 5/55/55/5 RPG Superstar 2013 Top 8

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Sebastian Hirsch wrote:

If an enemy still have the 5ft step as an option, he can of course take it, but will provoke an attack of opportunity from the mouser:

Underfoot assault wrote:
...but if the foe attempts to move to a position where the mouser is no longer in its space, the movement provokes an attack of opportunity from the mouser.

I would have previously ruled that as a five foot step it doesn't provoke an AoO, but with the FAQ that says five foot stepping into an opponent's space provokes an AoO, I have no clue. Dogs and cats are living together. Mass hysteria! :)

1/5 5/5

Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Would the spell effect, if made effectively 'Baleful Polymorph' instead of BS 'n' without a Will save needed to save the mentality of the user bring it closer in-line to original design intent while shutting down the twink builds that are terrifying some folks?

Grand Lodge 5/5

James Risner wrote:
Joe Ducey wrote:
Actually using BS II instead of BS IV makes a big difference, it matches the CL .
That doesn't follow item creation rules. You jumped to the step that uses the charts and formulas. Before that price it based on other items and its power. It has more uses and the drawback of locked into a form, but is comparable to other items like featherscale clock. The cloak costs less for the poly, 1500 gp, after removing some other abilities. So more uses with limitations costs 2000 gp.

Ok let's assume for a second that the Featherscale cloak is a good comparison and correctly priced. May or may not be true, but that's a completely different argument I don't have any interest in, atm Can I use it to evaluate the Ring, is that acceptable?

If so:

The Cloak costs the competence bonus to swim (bonus squared * 100) - has to be the main component as it makes up more than half the final cost + 1.5 * feather fall + 1.5 * hide from animals + 1.5 * the polymorph effect
4000 = (5*5*100) + 1.5(1*1*1800*(1/5)) + 1.5(1*1*1800*(1/5)) + 1.5(3*5*1800*(1/5)*x (some modifier to express the limited versatility))
4000 = 3580+8100x
420=8100x
x ~ .05
This by the way maximizes the value of the polymorph effect, if you modify the cost of hide from animals (for not being able to target anyone else instead) the value of the polymorph will go down.

So now let's price the ring of 7 lovely colors (and use half the modifier since you only get half the forms - is that fair? (despite that you get tiny sized which beast shape 1 can't, and all that))

Beast shape 4 - since as you say it doesn't matter + Ring of Protection +1 multiply whichever is lower by 1.5
(6*11*1800*(7/5)*(1/40)) = 4158 + 1.5*2000 = 7158. Or basically 1.8 times as expensive as it is right now.
Just as a note, if you decide to modify the hide from animals by 1/2 to show a decrease in versatility as it's now self only, the ring's price is 8060, or if you leave the modifier the same (saying that the decrease in forms and the access to tiny cancel each other out) it goes to 9160. Just for funnsies

Does that matter? Let's see you couldn't buy it until level 5.1 (at the lowest) instead of level 4 due to fame restrictions. It also makes up a much larger chunk of your wealth (on average you don't get 4k in a scenario until the 6-7 tier or so, and 7200 until the 10-11 tier - Why look at the per scenario gold? I feel that is when you consider purchases like these items, unless they are so integral to your build that you are willing to save gold for them). Next, it makes the item compete with larger ticket items: 4k - stat belt (which the ring is taking care of for you potentially and will stack with later), cloak of resistance from 1 to 2 (or straight to 2, ring gets you the reflex aspect, and will stack later), amulet of mighty fists, armor or shield from 1 - 2 (or straight to 2, again the ring does this for you but won't stack - though monks don't have that option anyway) etc., 7200 - cloak from +3 - +4, same for armor (or nearly from nothing to 3), a weapon from +1 to +2, etc.

Personally I feel the modifier is low in both cases for the utility you gain, and doesn't account for any discounting that items tend to get in one of the main slots versus the ring slot which has a lower intrinsic value with less items to compete with and 2 available ring slots). And I understand that it's not something that is just math there is an art to it, and adjusting prices to make them "correct". However, in practice I don't feel that this ring meets the standards of being appropriately priced for what it gives. Others do.

BTW, just so it doesn't appear I'm trying to lie with numbers, if you instead use beast shape II even 7 times per day with that incredibly small modifier the price very nearly lines up correctly with the ring, if you limit it to once a day on either it actually gets significantly cheaper than the listed cost.

Also, thanks for the polymorph reference, which I looked at you are correct the fly speed takes the lesser so only fly 40 from the raven form, which unfortunately I had missed when looking at beast shape IV and how it was originally explained to me.

The Exchange 4/5 Venture-Lieutenant, Kentucky—Lexington

Sebastian Hirsch wrote:

Generic Figher

Elf fighter 5
AC 31
Melee +1 rapier +10 (1d6+4/18-20)

Our versions of generic are a little different. I'd go with Tower Shield and Bastard Sword.

How about a slightly optimized build:
Human Fighter 5 (Tower Shield Specialist)
17,965 gp spent (AoNA+1, RoP+1, CoP+1, +2 HKPlate, +2 DTShield, +1 bastard sword)
Dodge, EWP, WF/WS, DotS trait, Covering Shield, SF, PA.
The Bastard Sword would be +10 1d10+12 (Needs 8 to hit CR 5 AC 18)

Spoiler:
Unnamed Hero
Human fighter (tower shield specialist) 5 (Pathfinder RPG Ultimate Combat 48)
N Medium humanoid (human)
Init +2; Senses Perception +5
--------------------
Defense
--------------------
AC 34, touch 15, flat-footed 31 (+11 armor, +1 deflection, +2 Dex, +1 dodge, +1 natural, +7 shield, +1 trait)
hp 44 (5d10+10)
Fort +6, Ref +4 (+1 vs. burst spells and effects while using a tower shield, +5 bonus vs. area of effect attacks), Will +2
Defensive Abilities burst barrier
--------------------
Offense
--------------------
Speed 30 ft. (20 ft. in armor)
Melee +1 bastard sword +10 (1d10+12/19-20)
--------------------
Statistics
--------------------
Str 21, Dex 14, Con 12, Int 10, Wis 10, Cha 7
Base Atk +5; CMB +8; CMD 24
Feats Covering Shield, Dodge, Exotic Weapon Proficiency (bastard sword), Power Attack, Shield Focus, Weapon Focus (bastard sword), Weapon Specialization (bastard sword)
Traits defender of the society
Skills Acrobatics -2 (-6 to jump), Perception +5, Swim +4
Languages Common
SQ armor training 1, tower shield specialist, tower shield training
Other Gear +2 Hellknight plate[ISWG], +2 darkwood tower shield, +1 bastard sword, amulet of natural armor +1, cloak of resistance +1, ring of protection +1, 150 gp
--------------------
Tracked Resources
--------------------
-none-
--------------------
Special Abilities
--------------------
Armor Training 1 (Ex) Worn armor -1 check penalty, +1 max DEX.
Burst Barrier +1 (Ex) +1 on Reflex saves vs. burst spells and effects while using a tower shield.
Covering Shield Add your shield's base bonus to reflex saves vs. area of effect attacks.
Power Attack -2/+4 You can subtract from your attack roll to add to your damage.
Shield Focus +1 Shield AC
Tower Shield Specialist (Ex) Do not suffer penalty to attack rolls from using a tower shield.
Tower Shield Training 1 (Ex) Worn tower shield -3 check penalty, +2 max DEX.

Hero Lab and the Hero Lab logo are Registered Trademarks of LWD Technology, Inc. Free download at http://www.wolflair.com
Pathfinder® and associated marks and logos are trademarks of Paizo Inc.®, and are used under license.

The point is, that a small halfling dex based build is going to be very close to the same benefits of the raven form. Without all the negative issues. Also, most people don't like burning an action at the start of combat. So you will find more "permanent" fox form Kitsune and bat form Skinwalkers than you find Ring of Seven Lovely Colors PCs.

2/5

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Stay tuned for me proposing that PFS ban/nerf Adamantine weapons. I mean, even characters not built to capitalize on them can use them for great utility purposes, and I find ignoring most hardnesses for just +3000 gp cost is underpriced if not overpowered.

Silver Crusade 5/5 5/5 **

James Risner wrote:


So you will find more "permanent" fox form Kitsune and bat form Skinwalkers than you find Ring of Seven Lovely Colors PCs.

In fairness, my Fox form kitsune bought the ring. He mostly fights in fox form but, at 4K, the ring was too good to pass up for those times when you really need to fly.

Which is why I think the ring too cheap but not game breakingly so.

Silver Crusade 5/5 5/5 **

Barton "Bart" Oliver wrote:


Ok let's assume for a second that the Featherscale cloak is a good comparison and correctly priced. May or may not be true, but that's a completely different argument I don't have any interest in, atm Can I use it to evaluate the Ring, is that acceptable?

** spoiler omitted **...

The "build your own magic item" guidelines aren't a great guide to how valuable an item is.

Far better to do the mental experiment "would I buy the item at price x".

Personally, for my fox form Kitsune, I'd buy the item for about 8-10k or so.

And I wouldn't build a character around the item, not when it is pissible to build a simikar character as a fox kitsune, halfling with reduce person, etc.

5/5 5/55/55/5

Quote:
kay, I guess I mischaracterized your argument here. What you're really saying is that stealth is unusable by anyone, ever, because you're going to get auto-spotted. Unless you're not, in which case you have to admit that a +10 modifier (equivalent to a 250 gp elixir) has considerable value.

You have two arguments running here. 1) is that its too good for everyone by so much that we should ban it and 2 That its too good for some builds

It is not worth the same as the elixir because the elixir does not stick you in bird form. You have to discount the trouble with the WAY you get the plus with the plus. You can't talk, you can't cast spells, you can't disable device, you can't wear armor , you can't wear weapons, most of your magic items shut off.

Now for a VERY small amount of characters, those restrictions violate the champion systems rules of "an disadvantage that isn't a disadvantage for you isn't a disadvantage", but you can't just look at those people. For the vast number of people this things benefits come with a signifigant cost. I believe those costs take the ring from "so good we should ban it" to "too good but not worth banning". Casters can sidestep these encounters anyway, and by the time a martial has 4k to spare getting the ring is just getting in on their action.

The second argument is that its too good for a specific build. For that to be true it doesn't matter one bit what % it increases the things damage by. The only thing that matters is that the end result isn't any crazier than the rest of the party. Doubling harsk's crossbow damage is not the same as doubling Amiri's Bastard sword damage. If you keep saying we need to judge it based on the percentage increase, I'm discounting your conclusion because your argument is looking at the wrong thing and is a complete non argument. Is the resulting build around this item more broken than the rest of the system? No. Is it more broken than the other things in the same niche? no.

Grand Lodge 5/5

Paul Jackson wrote:
Barton "Bart" Oliver wrote:


Ok let's assume for a second that the Featherscale cloak is a good comparison and correctly priced. May or may not be true, but that's a completely different argument I don't have any interest in, atm Can I use it to evaluate the Ring, is that acceptable?

** spoiler omitted **...

The "build your own magic item" guidelines aren't a great guide to how valuable an item is.

Far better to do the mental experiment "would I buy the item at price x".

Personally, for my fox form Kitsune, I'd buy the item for about 8-10k or so.

And I wouldn't build a character around the item, not when it is pissible to build a simikar character as a fox kitsune, halfling with reduce person, etc.

Ok, but let's separate two concepts - value and cost. Value would be the value to your situation versus the value of something else taking into account the cost of that item/feat/trait versus using that gp/feat slot/trait for something else. (In other words cost benefit analysis). The cost is what the item costs - which the Build a Magic Item guidelines are literally the guidelines for determining some additional fudging required.

Also, I wouldn't build around the item either, but that doesn't mean 1. it can't be done or 2. it doesn't still benefit a number of those builds or 3. builds that have no use for it except the flight and +1 deflection modifier. A halfling with reduce person and a fox-form kitsune still don't fly. You even bought the item - with a fox-form kitsune so obviously there is something else beneficial there.

Personally, at 8k I believe it would still be a steal for many builds for the functionality you get, but at least that cost equates to a tougher decision and later entry.

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

1 person marked this as a favorite.
James Risner wrote:
Sebastian Hirsch wrote:

Generic Figher

Elf fighter 5
AC 31
Melee +1 rapier +10 (1d6+4/18-20)

Our versions of generic are a little different. I'd go with Tower Shield and Bastard Sword.

How about a slightly optimized build:
Human Fighter 5 (Tower Shield Specialist)
17,965 gp spent (AoNA+1, RoP+1, CoP+1, +2 HKPlate, +2 DTShield, +1 bastard sword)
Dodge, EWP, WF/WS, DotS trait, Covering Shield, SF, PA.
The Bastard Sword would be +10 1d10+12 (Needs 8 to hit CR 5 AC 18)

** spoiler omitted **...

Nice Fighter, I assume that the dex variant would catch up with a little bit more money, since there are a couple of cheaper upgrades left, but yeah that is some impressive AC.

Burning an action at the start of combat can be unpleasant (though I usually view it as a good investment compared to a single attack) but with so many charges, the ring allows the user to activate it just in case.. which isn't great.

My usual metric to view these items is usually in the context of specific builds that take advantage of them (you might call that worst case scenarios) and yeah in the case of many dex based characters (mostly monks, and other natural attack fighters), the ring is at that price and with that many charges.. is clearly a no-brainer. The item is so good, that not taking it seems like intentionally crippling yourself.

That's usually a sign that something went wrong at some point.

(since the multiclass abomination has a fighter level DotS would also be an option).

Shadow Lodge 4/5

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Kind of wondering what would make this request illegitimate.

5/5 5/55/55/5

3 people marked this as a favorite.
TOZ wrote:
Kind of wondering what would make this request illegitimate.

A bottle of wine and a romantic moonlit picnic?

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

technarken wrote:
Stay tuned for me proposing that PFS ban/nerf Adamantine weapons. I mean, even characters not built to capitalize on them can use them for great utility purposes, and I find ignoring most hardnesses for just +3000 gp cost is underpriced if not overpowered.

Good idea... ^^

No, but it seems fair to say that most martial who have a primary melee weapon tend to invest in an adamantine version (along the cold iron and silver versions) but that's usually the only expensive material I see.

My paladin recently had the pleasure of fighting an enemy with the ability to create walls of stone... at will. I had to deal with a lot of walls, and my adamantine weapon... was critical.

3/5 *** Venture-Agent, Massachusetts—Boston Metro

Quote:

A 42% increase in damage is huge. A 70% increase in damage is even bigger. This was on a very simple, unoptimized, bare-bones character. There are numerous ways to achieve those, or even superior results. When designing a character option, a good designer thinks not only of the typical usages to which the item will be put (which are obviously worth FAR more than 2,000 gp in and of themselves), but also the maximal utility that can be drawn from it.

42% increase is on the low side as is 70% is kind of on the low side for a damage increase and for all the people saying its great for Dex based characters that isn't that enticing. You've just basically put all your eggs into doing damage which isn't the best of things.

Silver Crusade 5/5 5/5 **

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Barton "Bart" Oliver wrote:


Ok, but let's separate two concepts - value and cost. Value would be the value to your situation versus the value of something else taking into account the cost of that item/feat/trait versus using that gp/feat slot/trait for something else. (In other words cost benefit analysis). The cost is what the item costs - which the Build a Magic Item guidelines are literally the guidelines for determining some additional fudging required.

I don't care one whit what an item "should" cost per the magic item creation guidelines. I only care what it does cost (lots and lots and lots of items are NOT costed correctly according to those creation guidelines) AND what its value is.

Ideally, the cost should approximate the value. Well over 1/2 the magic items in the game fall into the "cost is way higher than the value and are therefore ignored in any game with Magic Wall Mart" category. Which is unfortunate.

An item is only a problem if the value is significantly less than the cost. Actual value vs actual cost.

And an item should be banned in PFS only if the value is game breakingly less than the cost.

For a build like the Bird of Doom built completely around the ring the value is, admittedly, very high. But that is an extreme edge case. And, even then, one could argue that the value is the difference in effectiveness between a Human or 1/2 Orc or whatever Bird of doom vs a Kitsune fox or halfling with the Ring.

The Exchange 4/5 Venture-Lieutenant, Kentucky—Lexington

MadScientistWorking wrote:
Quote:
A 42% increase in damage is huge.
You've just basically put all your eggs into doing damage which isn't the best of things.

I'm having trouble figuring out how a +2 to damage and +3 to hit turns into 42%.

1d3+8 to 1d3+10 should be 16% and a little more due to the +1 size additional and +2 Dex to hit.


Hmm wrote:

Lyric the Singing Paladin has been saving up for one of these because.. well, Shelyn. It will serve her no benefit other than as occasional transportation and as a ring of protection +1.

I was also hoping to get it as the "wild shape" of my future Feyspeaker Druid, so that she had a shape she could reliably take and have some kind of druid bragging rights.

Druids don't bother with bragging rights. What they have are contests on who can eat who in wildshape. At least in the Forgotten Realms, they do.

4/5

James Risner wrote:
Jeffrey Fox wrote:
So yes, in some places it has caused issues.
Care to articulate how it caused issues that a Large Animal Druid, Fox Shape Kitsune or Bat Shape Skinwalker wouldn't cause identical issues

Honestly, no I'd wouldn't care to do so. Me presenting my anecdotal evidence in order to have it refuted by others who don't agree isn't really that appealing to me.

I will try to present some reason though, as that is fair.

A large shape animal druid needs to be 16th level to wildshape 7 times a day. Though it can sustain it's form for longer duration it has a harder time going from social encounter to combat to social while maintaining it's power level. It is also generally built with less skill points and feats than the multi class monstrosities that tend to fuel the Bird builds.

Fox Shape can't fly. You lose a lot of versatility by lacking flight.

Skinwalkers are a Gen Con GM boon race, if they become more available then I'd worry about it.

The item is a wonderfully flavorful item. If it was changed to one use per day I think it'd be marvelous.

5/5 *****

Hmm wrote:
I was also hoping to get it as the "wild shape" of my future Feyspeaker Druid, so that she had a shape she could reliably take and have some kind of druid bragging rights.

Bear in mind that Natural Spell only works for Druids using Wild Shape, it is not enough to be using any old polymorph type spell.

The Exchange 4/5

3 people marked this as a favorite.
andreww wrote:
Hmm wrote:
I was also hoping to get it as the "wild shape" of my future Feyspeaker Druid, so that she had a shape she could reliably take and have some kind of druid bragging rights.
Bear in mind

I see what you did there

Scarab Sages

It's funny, I was just thinking of getting this item as flavor for my Paladin of Shelyn, thinking 'well, I can't upgrade it, but the songbird would be nice roleplaying and maybe make some climbing easier.' I searched online to see how much it cost and this thread comes right up...

If you are going to ban everything that might possibly lead to OP, scenario-clearing builds, you might as well just ban all of Pathfinder. Or you could just make fun of munchkins and invite them to play elsewhere.

5/5

I vote for banning it.
Not for the silly combat builds but for its utility.
Paying 2000 to turn your ring of protection +1 (which is all most of my characters buy) into a source of non combat bird form seems really handy.
-skip climb checks
-win a lot of chase scenes
-scout
If you are a psychic caster you can even keep using your magic.

Yes Kitsune have Fox shape but that requires A race choice and a feat, the ring cost 2000 on top of a relatively common magic item.

Like bracers of Falconers aim i feel this should be banned until the price is increased.

3/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber
BigNorseWolf wrote:
Quote:
kay, I guess I mischaracterized your argument here. What you're really saying is that stealth is unusable by anyone, ever, because you're going to get auto-spotted. Unless you're not, in which case you have to admit that a +10 modifier (equivalent to a 250 gp elixir) has considerable value.

You have two arguments running here. 1) is that its too good for everyone by so much that we should ban it and 2 That its too good for some builds

It is not worth the same as the elixir because the elixir does not stick you in bird form. You have to discount the trouble with the WAY you get the plus with the plus. You can't talk, you can't cast spells, you can't disable device, you can't wear armor , you can't wear weapons, most of your magic items shut off.

Now for a VERY small amount of characters, those restrictions violate the champion systems rules of "an disadvantage that isn't a disadvantage for you isn't a disadvantage", but you can't just look at those people. For the vast number of people this things benefits come with a signifigant cost. I believe those costs take the ring from "so good we should ban it" to "too good but not worth banning". Casters can sidestep these encounters anyway, and by the time a martial has 4k to spare getting the ring is just getting in on their action.

The second argument is that its too good for a specific build. For that to be true it doesn't matter one bit what % it increases the things damage by. The only thing that matters is that the end result isn't any crazier than the rest of the party. Doubling harsk's crossbow damage is not the same as doubling Amiri's Bastard sword damage. If you keep saying we need to judge it based on the percentage increase, I'm discounting your conclusion because your argument is looking at the wrong thing and is a complete non argument. Is the resulting build around this item more broken than the rest of the system? No. Is it more broken than the other things in the same niche? no.

/agree. Keep it in.

1/5 5/5

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

I have an alternative solution, one that may not have been presented before, or if it has, I've missed it?

What if the item in question was put 'on probation', as it were?

That is to say, the use of the item is monitored for a *a given time unit TBD*, with notable abuses sent up the chain of command, and if it appears to be abused too much, THEN ban it, and if the hype and concern is isolated then there will be an empirical method of verifying such?

I don't doubt that there may be niche players that are misusing this as letter of rules versus spirit.

However, the other side of the coin is that there might be a great deal many more players who are *playing it straight* and as a result aren't showing up on the radar?

Drawback to above suggestion: It would require some form of documentation, and it would be resource-intensive and violate the basic trust levels of the campaign.

Benefit to the above suggestion: It would provide a 'cooling off' period so that the rhetoric can be dialed back a bit and things analyzed to see if the impact is being magnified via forum presence?

The Exchange 3/5

Wei Ji the Learner wrote:
Probation idea.

Honestly I don't think the system is in place to record this properly as you said.

I also don't have so much faith that the results wouldn't be completely destroyed by confirmation bias. Who can evaluate this game objectively? I'm sure the games I play in and even the games played in other locations nearby are worlds apart. My area sees tons of very 'competent' characters so when I see builds like this posted I go 'oh that's cool/nice good for you'. If it wasn't even the build designed to specifically abuse it the ring wouldn't even be noticeable.

You are going to see reports of 'he flew and bypassed the challenge! ban it!' You are going to see reports of 'he has too much AC!' People are going to think the options this ring provides are too early when in fact 3rd level spells are happening right in front of them.

So while a probation sounds nice you are just going to give the people who dislike like the item time to complain and be frustrated by the item saying 'why isn't this banned already?' while cases where it isn't intrusive get ignored... because it didn't do anything.

Shadow Lodge 4/5 5/5 RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 8

2 people marked this as a favorite.

/VCHatOff
/PersonalRantModeOn

I hate this item.

Don't take my word for it, though. My advice is to post this item on the Blazing 9 thread over on RPGSS and watch as everyone there tears it to shreds for being woefully underpriced and mechanically strong for its cost.

I would do so myself, but I already know this ring is busted in half.

/PersonalRantModeOff
/VCHatOn

The Exchange 4/5 Venture-Lieutenant, Kentucky—Lexington

@Walter Sheppard, the link didn't seem to have the word "Seven" associated with this item. Can you verify the link?

The Exchange 4/5 Venture-Lieutenant, Kentucky—Lexington

Let's do a poll. It's not about whether or not the item needs a price change or banned. Frankly I don't care either way, I don't use the item. I think the root problem is people that buy the item don't understand the rules.

How many of the following have you seen at a table.

Someone using the ring at a table said:


  • A) "my fly speed is 120" or anything else over 40.
  • B) "I turn back into human" without being able to speak and not waiting 10 minutes
  • C) "Being tiny gives me +8 Dex, +3 NA" instead of the +4 dex and +1 NA that Beast Shape II provides.
  • D) "my AC is over 34 before combat expertise or fighting defensively" which is a simple 5th level fighter build with 17,000 gp will have.
  • E) "I full attack and deal 45 damage" or more damage in a turn.
  • F) I've seen none of the above.

A, B, or C are incorrect rules interpretations.

For D, I'm pretty sure there is no legal way to have this be true. I spent 50+ hrs building my Fox Shape Kitsune to get AC 26 and I didn't bother buying the ring.

For E, I also don't think you can exceed 45 damage maximum legally. I've seen plenty of druid builds, fighter builds, magus builds that exceed 45 average damage done in a full attack.

I'm going first:

@Risner My response is F) None of the above.

5/5 *****

I have run for 3 different "songbird of doom" characters over the last 12 months or so, all of them prior to the MoMS nerf. So far they have failed to impress.

One ran away after he nearly died to a Marut (admittedly level 9 in a 10-11).

One was rendered unconscious to non lethal damage after he miserably failed an acrobatics followed by a single attack from an enemy longspear in a 3-7. He was I think level 6.

The last fled from some greater shadows in another 10-11 when he was level 10. I guess a good chance to die from a single touch attack was a tad off putting.

I haven't seen one since the nerf.

1/5 5/5

Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
James Risner wrote:

Let's do a poll. It's not about whether or not the item needs a price change or banned. Frankly I don't care either way, I don't use the item. I think the root problem is people that buy the item don't understand the rules.

I'm going first:

@Risner My response is F) None of the above.

I'll hop in on this. Response is F) None of the above.

Seen far, far worse without the ring, though, but I don't think anyone is banning Druids, Clerics, Oracles, Swashbucklers, Gunslingers, Investigators, Bards, Skalds, Witches, or Wizards any time soon?

Sovereign Court 4/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I'd say F. As far as I know, I'm the only person who owns one locally, on my Sentinel of Shelyn. My main use for the bird shape function is remembering I could have used it shortly after I completed a climb, swim, or similar obstacle that's a challenge for a heavily armored character.

Silver Crusade 5/5 5/5 **

@Risner
My fox Kitsune (who also happens to have a ring):

I think that I may have turned back into a human by mistake. Definitely did NOT make the other errors

At level 6 gets attacks at +16/16/11 doing d3+15. So can easily do 50 odd pts of damage on a full attack unbuffed.

Has a base AC of 25 or so at level 6.

@andreww - my fox Kitsune has been pretty effective in your games. Not game breakingly so but effective. Of course, I try hard to NOT build characters that are too powerful.

5/5 *****

Paul Jackson wrote:
@andreww - my fox Kitsune has been pretty effective in your games. Not game breakingly so but effective. Of course, I try hard to NOT build characters that are too powerful.

I think it must have been at lower level then as he doesn't stick out in my memory as having been disproportionately effective.

Sczarni 3/5

F!

Shadow Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Paizo Superscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Starfinder Superscriber
James Risner wrote:
  • D) "my AC is over 34 before combat expertise or fighting defensively" which is a simple 5th level fighter build with 17,000 gp will have.

    ...

    For D, I'm pretty sure there is no legal way to have this be true. I spent 50+ hrs building my Fox Shape Kitsune to get AC 26 and I didn't bother buying the ring.

  • As DEX-based as the build is I'm also pretty sure that the songbird's AC is vulnerable to feinting. I sure hope they're also putting ranks into Sense Motive.

    Grand Lodge 2/5

    pH unbalanced wrote:
    James Risner wrote:
  • D) "my AC is over 34 before combat expertise or fighting defensively" which is a simple 5th level fighter build with 17,000 gp will have.

    ...

    For D, I'm pretty sure there is no legal way to have this be true. I spent 50+ hrs building my Fox Shape Kitsune to get AC 26 and I didn't bother buying the ring.

  • As DEX-based as the build is I'm also pretty sure that the songbird's AC is vulnerable to feinting. I sure hope they're also putting ranks into Sense Motive.

    You mean for when they come across the one scenario that has a mook that can feint for anything except the default standard action?

    5/5 5/55/55/5

    3 people marked this as a favorite.

    Ahah, i Standard action feint you! You are doomed next R..FOUNTAIN OF BLOOD

    Flawless Victory
    Fatality.

    The Exchange 4/5 Venture-Lieutenant, Kentucky—Lexington

    1 person marked this as a favorite.
    Paul Jackson wrote:

    At level 6 gets attacks at +16/16/11 doing d3+15. So can easily do 50 odd pts of damage on a full attack unbuffed.

    Has a base AC of 25 or so at level 6.

    Compare that to a Druid doing 6d8+16 on 3 attacks just one level more (7th) and you find the d3 hurts when the druid has the same number of attacks and deals 4 times your minimum on the dice (1d3 vs 6d8). Their minimum is more than your maximum. 66 damage minimum on a full attack unbuffed with 156 maximum.

    Large Animal Druid:
    Human druid 4/monk (unchained) 1/ranger 1
    LN Large humanoid (human) wild shaped into a Arsioitherium
    AC 22, touch 11, flat-footed 21 (+7 armor, +1 deflection, +1 dodge, +4 natural, -1 size)
    hp 45 (6 HD; 4d8+2d10+10)
    Fort +9, Ref +5, Will +5; +4 vs. fey and plant-targeted effects
    Speed 30 ft. (20 ft. in armor)
    Melee gore +10/+10 (4d8+16)
    Space 10 ft.; Reach 5 ft.
    Special Attacks favored enemy (dragons +2), flurry of blows (unchained), wild shape 2/day
    Str 25, Dex 10, Con 13, Int 10, Wis 12, Cha 7
    Base Atk +5; CMB +11; CMD 25 (29 vs. trip)
    Feats Dodge, Feral Combat Training[UC], Improved Unarmed Strike, Power Attack, Shaping Focus[UM], Stunning Fist, Weapon Focus (gore)
    Traits beast of the society
    SQ cavesight, nature bond (Cave domain[UM]), nature sense, track +1, trackless step, wild empathy +3, woodland stride
    Other Gear +1 wild dragonhide breastplate, ring of protection +1, 150 gp
    Herolab is cool!

    At 7th level you would add a second level of ranger for natural weapon combat style for improved natural attack gore.

    The Exchange 3/5

    F because I haven't seen the ring used.

    Grand Lodge 4/5 Venture-Lieutenant, Arizona—Phoenix

    Also F. No one has used it, but I have seen a fox-form PC before.

    Lantern Lodge 5/5

    1 person marked this as a favorite.

    F as well.

    But, keep in mind, that saying "I have not witnessed this personally," and "this is not abusable" are not synonymous.

    I would be in favor of it being removed before I find it's an issue locally.

    4/5 5/55/55/55/5 ***

    Jeff Hazuka wrote:

    F as well.

    But, keep in mind, that saying "I have not witnessed this personally," and "this is not abusable" are not synonymous.

    I would be in favor of it being removed before I find it's an issue locally.

    This same line of reasoning also works for 'let's ban the game, because it can be abused even if no one has seen it personally.'

    The fact that it hasn't been seen personally, while not proof that it is 'not abusable' it does point to it not needing to be banned as it is not the epidemic game breaker it is being made out to be.

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

    James Risner wrote:
    Paul Jackson wrote:

    At level 6 gets attacks at +16/16/11 doing d3+15. So can easily do 50 odd pts of damage on a full attack unbuffed.

    Has a base AC of 25 or so at level 6.

    Compare that to a Druid doing 6d8+16 on 3 attacks just one level more (7th) and you find the d3 hurts when the druid has the same number of attacks and deals 4 times your minimum on the dice (1d3 vs 6d8). Their minimum is more than your maximum. 66 damage minimum on a full attack unbuffed with 156 maximum.

    ** spoiler omitted **

    FAQ wrote:

    Wild armor and other transforming armor: When I use a wild armor and gain the armor’s benefits, what restrictions, if any, apply to me? In general, when I transform with a polymorph effect and some of my gear melds into the form, what restrictions do I have for melding with large amounts of heavy gear? What about other types of transforming armor?

    If you were in medium or heavy load from encumbrance before transforming, you continue to take those penalties in your melded form. Otherwise, ignore the weight of melded items and calculate your encumbrance in your polymorphed form entirely based on non-melded items. When wearing melded armor and shields, if you gain no benefit from the melded armor, you still count as wearing an armor of that type, but you do not suffer its armor check penalty, movement speed reduction, or arcane spell failure chance. If you do gain any benefits (as with the wild property), then you do suffer the armor check penalty, movement speed reduction, and arcane spell failure chance. This also applies to all other situations where you or an armor transform: you always count as wearing an armor of that type, and if you gain any benefit at all from the armor (such as mistmail), you apply the armor check penalty, movement speed reduction, and arcane spell failure chance.

    Wild armor or not an unchained monk can't wear armor and flurry.

    I also have to point out that you are large, which quite often has serious downsides, either you are the only party member who can stand in front (or stand in front of you... so you have to deal with cover) or in the worst case, you will have to squeeze.

    Lantern Lodge 5/5

    Tempest_Knight wrote:
    Jeff Hazuka wrote:

    F as well.

    But, keep in mind, that saying "I have not witnessed this personally," and "this is not abusable" are not synonymous.

    I would be in favor of it being removed before I find it's an issue locally.

    This same line of reasoning also works for 'let's ban the game, because it can be abused even if no one has seen it personally.'

    The fact that it hasn't been seen personally, while not proof that it is 'not abusable' it does point to it not needing to be banned as it is not the epidemic game breaker it is being made out to be.

    I appreciate the absurdity of your statements.

    It's enough of an issue that it has been brought to light. I'll give the benefit of the doubt to others who have experienced it.

    Shadow Lodge 4/5 5/5 RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 8

    James Risner wrote:

    @Walter Sheppard, the link didn't seem to have the word "Seven" associated with this item. Can you verify the link?

    Just a link to that thread--someone can post the item there.

    101 to 150 of 517 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
    Community / Forums / Organized Play / Pathfinder Society / A legitimate request to ban the Ring of Seven Lovely Colors All Messageboards

    Want to post a reply? Sign in.