So now that 'Brawling' is the worst armor enchant ever . . .


Advice

101 to 150 of 223 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>

With a new page comes a new beginning! And a new chance to try and redirect this thread to the actual reason it was made!

Chess Pwn wrote:
barb/bloodrager dip, more buff spells (heroism?), the magus arcana to get int to attack rolls, Cracked Pale Green Prism +1 competence bonus on attack rolls, FOUR-LEAF CLOVER on three attacks a day, stat boosters.

With the exception of this lonely post, was there anything else mentioned?


Aelryinth wrote:
Darksol the Painbringer wrote:
Aelryinth wrote:

Alex, the Jingasa is an unaffiliated slot for AC bonuses. The price would be doubled.

The Jingasa at 5k giving both the +1 Luck Bonus AND the crit negation is underpriced by the very rules. Given the example of the Buffering Cap being 2000 gp and not even NEGATING the crit, the Jingasa should have been an absolute minimum of 9-10k gp.

The artificial inflation of the Luck Bonus with cheap traits is what prodded the change to the deflection bonus. They could probably have made it a competence or insight bonus, but eh.

==Aelryinth

If by "unaffiliated" you mean "slotless," then that's clearly incorrect.

If by "unaffiliated" you mean "shouldn't grant AC," then a citation from the book would be needed. Even without the book citation, I will go ahead and say that there are precedents, both historical and literary, that would disagree with your claim of a helm being "unaffiliated" with protecting you, especially if we want to consider what a helmet designed for war is supposed to do (though as of recent history, isn't particularly helpful).

And guess what, the artificial inflation applies to more than just the Jingasa, why not change them to a different bonus type too?

I said unaffiliated, and meant unaffiliated.

Rings are affiliated with all effects...you can stuff any spell effect on a ring and it will be the minimum price.

Look at the elemental resistance things for armor. Compare the price to a ring. They are unaffiliated effects, and they cost more.

The Helm slot is not affiliated with Luck or Deflection bonuses to AC.

Look at the Helm of teleportation. Then look at boots of teleportation. They do the exact same thing, and the helm costs 50% more, because boots are affiliated with movement slots, and Helms are not.

So, the 10-11k price range is not bogus, it's an estimate based on existing magic items.

Critical deflection is an armor-slot affiliated item, not a helm item. So we know the price is going to be...

You're really going to need to explain this "affiliated" stuff, because nothing like that is explained in the Magic Item rules. The closest thing is "Compare to existing items," and there aren't any existing items to compare it to.

Also, a Luck bonus is calculated as Bonus Squared X 2,500, not Bonus Squared X 2,000, as the Deflection bonus would be calculated. So it still makes a difference.

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

I'm not sure where they moved the breakdown of it to, they actually had a list of items/slots and the powers affiliated with them.

But as I posted earlier, you can see it in action with Boots of Teleportation and the Helm of teleportation...the Helm is 50% more money for the exact same thing.

Ditto elemental resistances that you can buy for your armor/shield...they are 50% more then getting them on a ring.

The rule that they 'exist' is here:
++++++++++++++++++++
Some Abilities Are Assigned to Certain Slots: Some of the magic items in the standard rules are deliberately assigned to specific magic item slots for balance purposes, so that you have to make hard choices about what items to wear. In particular, the magic belts and circlets that give enhancement bonuses to ability scores are in this category—characters who want to enhance multiple physical or mental ability scores must pay extra for combination items like a belt of physical might or headband of mental prowess.

If there is a trend of all items of a particular type using a particular slot (such as items that grant physical ability score bonuses being belts or items that grant movement bonuses being boots), GMs should be hesitant to allow you to move those abilities to other slots; otherwise, they ignore these deliberate restrictions by cheaply spreading out these items over unused slots.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
but I don't know where the breakdown is now. Gloves were always associated with Dexterity, thief skills, and the like, etc. Boots anything to do with travel, and so on. Rings were always affiliated with anything, that's why it was level 12 to make one...you could stick anything on a Ring.

And we're talking about a +1 bonus, so 500 gp is all I'm going to give on that! ;)

==Aelryinth


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook Subscriber
Maezer wrote:
MMCJawa wrote:


The devs intentionally release errata this way so it coincides with a second printing, which I assume is because of workflow reasons and such. I suspect a lot of these corrections are things that they realized within a year of printing, not something they decided on a lark last month.

Yes I know its their policy. I get that they don't like to publish rule books that are out of date and with incorrect information mere hours after they send them to the printers. I still think its a terrible policy.

If its so broken it warrants the magnitudes of changes brought forth in the errata, then its worth the effort to publish that fact (via FAQ or whatever) when you reach that decision. Waiting years to tell anyone, letting customers invest hundreds to thousands of hours into it, so that you might push a extra copies of your new printing is not a good policy in my opinion.

As someone who doesn't do game design but faces similar issues of when to wrap up and submit something (papers on my research), a good motto I often use is "Do not let the perfect become the enemy of the good". In this case, minor errata (and despite the complaints the amount of errata here is pretty minor) isn't really sufficient to hold up a release, especially since they have a strict schedule of when things need to be sent to the printer, and the developers don't get much breathing room between books, nor I think do the editors. The devs and editors could look over something for a solid year and still miss something. There is such a huge amount of table variance that things that end up becoming exploits or cause weird rules interactions just simply may not be something the devs consider.

They could spend longer on books, sure, but that means either dropping a book from a year's development cycle or hiring more people, and at some point it's just diminishing returns. And they have responded to this to a certain extent. The ACG fiasco did lead to some the hiring of new folks IIRC. And I have absolutely no doubt in my mind that errata is released to correct issues, not to "force" people to buy new books. I am guessing that, ACG aside, sales of books that have been errated to people who already own good copies is trivial.

Also, on a completely different note, people keep bringing up Fate's Favored trait from Ultimate Campaign, and saying that should have been fixed. Ultimate Campaign as far as I know is only on its first printing still. What makes people thing that trait won't be heavily nerfed when that book gets errata.

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Oh, Lordy, jawa, don't tell them FF is gonna get nerfed. Do you know how much gnashing of teeth is going to go on for PFS when they do that?

Just because it's worth a 40-50k magic item?

==Aelryinth


1 person marked this as a favorite.

All this talk about Fate's Favored and nobody stopped to think that maybe it's the trait that's the problem?

"10k is too cheap for the Jingasa because a trait can double its AC bonus!"

Lolwut?


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook Subscriber
Aelryinth wrote:

Oh, Lordy, jawa, don't tell them FF is gonna get nerfed. Do you know how much gnashing of teeth is going to go on for PFS when they do that?

Just because it's worth a 40-50k magic item?

==Aelryinth

Well I thought about adding a line about the inevitable table flipping that will occur when that happens...


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Sundakan wrote:

All this talk about Fate's Favored and nobody stopped to think that maybe it's the trait that's the problem?

"10k is too cheap for the Jingasa because a trait can double its AC bonus!"

Lolwut?

I think it's safe to say EVERYONE knows that's the problem.

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Cavall wrote:
Sundakan wrote:

All this talk about Fate's Favored and nobody stopped to think that maybe it's the trait that's the problem?

"10k is too cheap for the Jingasa because a trait can double its AC bonus!"

Lolwut?

I think it's safe to say EVERYONE knows that's the problem.

Fate's Favored is worth a 40-50k item by itself.

The Jingasa is worth 10-15k BY ITSELF in its original form, just based on similar items. Fate's just made it worse.

==Aelryinth


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Sundakan wrote:

All this talk about Fate's Favored and nobody stopped to think that maybe it's the trait that's the problem?

"10k is too cheap for the Jingasa because a trait can double its AC bonus!"

Lolwut?

I think this was said over at the other thread about the Jingasa, it seems like this thread is stuff calculating prices for magic items.

So yeah, all of this arguing over a trait that basically double a lot of the smaller luck bonuses in the game... and yet they nerf a item instead...

Honestly, i am starting to lose faith in Paizos decision making.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Dracoknight wrote:


I think this was said over at the other thread about the Jingasa, it seems like this thread is stuff calculating prices for magic items.

So yeah, all of this arguing over a trait that basically double a lot of the smaller luck bonuses in the game... and yet they nerf a item instead...

Honestly, i am starting to lose faith in Paizos decision making.

As said above. Ultimate Campaign hasn't gotten its second printing yet. FF will probably get nerfed then.

And don't worry, your bracers and armor properties are probably going to get fixed to be more usable when UE hits its third printing!

So don't worry, just a short short wait of maybe five or six years for some common sense, basic fixes that they couldn't get right the first two times.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
graystone wrote:
Overall better? That's questionable. Even people that wanted those items looked at have expressed disappointment of how they where 'fixed'. Making underpriced options suck instead of pricing them correctly isn't really making anything better: I don't find options that are a waste of space/ink 'better' in any way.

This I think is towards the root of why this sort of errata has been bugging me and why I dropped my subscriptions. I try to keep house rules to an absolute minimum (and the ones I do have are more geared toward table management than mechanics) so my players don't have to remember them and can just use online references to plan out their characters\do other research while at home. I like to have hard copy references at the table during a game session to keep the temptation of their phones rather than paying attention to the actions of their fellow players to a minimum. However, going through my first printing books to paste in errata notations is not a valuable use of my time, so going to the online reference during session due to these revisions makes more sense.

The other fork of the decreasing utility of hard copy books was the simple fact that the 'crunch' (mechanics) provided in them was largely a waste of page count. I don't like purchasing books that after giving it a good read through, only see a handful of feats that might be an option for a few builds (considering how few feats most characters get...), maybe an archetype or two that is a equal trade off with the vanilla option (and oft times the dross would have been better as a PRC or can be simulated by other basic choices), and maybe a half dozen magic items total that both are priced correctly and useful and\or affordable for PCs in a typical WBL range during a campaign.

I don't know if the problem is with paizo writers or the editors (or both) but options that are not somewhere in the range of being roughly equivalent of a core vanilla choice (whether it is a class ability, feat, or magic item) is not really an option (and making choices\tradeoffs is part of the fun of D&D). I think a lot of the perceived paizo overcompensation to err on the side of nerf that creates a lot of this page count dross comes from a lack of system mastery. They don't really display a feel for how the rules interact with an actual campaign. So way too many of these 'errata'... or rather revisions strike me as knee-jerk theory craft judgement calls rather than from actual experience.

Add to the fact many of these crunch additions would be eliminated at a glance if they were entries to paizo's RPG superstar contests for a number of reasons makes it hard to purchase that sort of professional output.

Eh... I wouldn't care if I didn't want to support (throw cash at) the company but this continuing issue hit my frustration limit. Sorry to vent.

Liberty's Edge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Maps, Pawns Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber
Wonderstell wrote:
With a new page comes a new beginning! And a new chance to try and redirect this thread to the actual reason it was made!

Oh, look... optimism! Faith in humanity! Hope for the future!

That's adorable. :]


swoosh wrote:


As said above. Ultimate Campaign hasn't gotten its second printing yet. FF will probably get nerfed then.

And don't worry, your bracers and armor properties are probably going to get fixed to be more usable when UE hits its third printing!

So don't worry, just a short short wait of maybe five or six years for some common sense, basic fixes that they couldn't get right the first two times.

Until then, i think i am just going to ignore most erratas as they just cause me a headache rather than clearity.

Liberty's Edge

4 people marked this as a favorite.

I know that people are going to be of differing opinions about about whether or not Paizo did right or not in their attempts to re-balance various items in the game.

I will say this about the Jingasa, though. In the campaign I'm currently playing in, every PC except for one is wearing a Jingasa of the Fortunate Soldier (although based on the theme of the campaign, they're probably more like Pirate Hats of the Lucky Freebooters). The one guy that doesn't is a Spellslinger Wizard sporting a Cyclop's Helm. Barring any changes, in our next game, everyone would have been sporting brand spanking new Jingasas, even if they doubled the price.

Someone argued that making an item that everyone must have into an item that nobody wants doesn't improve the game (or something to that effect). I disagree. I actually think it makes the game marginally better. Removing the Jingasa from the game entirely is preferable to having it everywhere, in my opinion.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Aelryinth wrote:

I'm not sure where they moved the breakdown of it to, they actually had a list of items/slots and the powers affiliated with them.

But as I posted earlier, you can see it in action with Boots of Teleportation and the Helm of teleportation...the Helm is 50% more money for the exact same thing.

Ditto elemental resistances that you can buy for your armor/shield...they are 50% more then getting them on a ring.

Basically, the affiliation table disappeared with the progression from 3.5 to Pathfinder, but many items didn't get their price changed. That's why you can't find the table, but still have many examples of such a table existing somewhere.

So while item +50% slot affinity price increase is RAI, it's not RAW.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

I also am happy it's removed (Jingasa), it was an item that everyone with 20 or more AC had to buy (required purchase.)

It hurt because it worked on the high AC folks.

Fighter 7 AC 36:

24 k gp
10 Base
3 Dex 16
12 +2 full plate and defender of the society trait
6 +2 dark wood full plate
2 Jingasa with trait
1 amulet of natural armor
1 ring of protection
1 dusty rose
--
36

From a design point of view, if they want to keep a luck bonus AC item in the game, it needs to conflict with armor. So it needs to use that slot.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

For those who are happy about having Jingasa gone i just have to ask... honestly what other item is worth tossing your cash on to even have in the helmet slot that isnt a niche pick?

I think its just that there is a lack of anything interesting or even worthwhile to pick between items.

Hear me out. The problem with the "big 6" and similar "best in slot" kind of items is that there is a lack of sidegrades or anything that is equal in terms of power.

You could nerf the top of the list, but then the slot is going to be ignored for something more important anyway. And there is not even enough items for everyone across the board either.

The argument "i am glad X is gone, because then my party isnt full of X anymore"... well guess what they are just all going to item Y instead, because now that X is gone and without sidegrades you are just repeating the process to a lower level.

And if we are to go on numbers we all have to go back on the beastiary where you need to have Z Numbers or more or you lose by default. I saw the "use automatic progression system" earlier and i am like..."thats not dungeons and dragons at all..."

So to end my rant... i just feel they should add more viable options rather than shrinking it. On the price list of Jingasa you have 3 options for a head item: Helm of comprehend languages and read magic, Jingasa of the fortunate soldier, Helm of fearsome mien and Grappler's mask. If you wanted to replace the Jingasa...which would you pick?

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

Dracoknight wrote:
For those who are happy about having Jingasa gone i just have to ask... honestly what other item is worth tossing your cash on to even have in the helmet slot that isnt a niche pick?

Kinda missing the point. The point is that AC 36 is too high, so knocking it back down to AC 34 by changing the Jingasa to no longer be luck bonus to AC.

As for your question, I replaced the hat with my "preferred" item that I had to choose to skip because a "required" item was in that slot. For my current melee character who is diplomatic, that item is the Circlet of Persuasion.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
James Risner wrote:
Dracoknight wrote:
For those who are happy about having Jingasa gone i just have to ask... honestly what other item is worth tossing your cash on to even have in the helmet slot that isnt a niche pick?

Kinda missing the point. The point is that AC 36 is too high, so knocking it back down to AC 34 by changing the Jingasa to no longer be luck bonus to AC.

As for your question, I replaced the hat with my "preferred" item that I had to choose to skip because a "required" item was in that slot. For my current melee character who is diplomatic, that item is the Circlet of Persuasion.

Yeah i am not a too much of a fan of the whole required bit myself and i think its mostly the lack of interesting options. Something that is more interesting than just "i got AC"... plus, its only a +1AC and the problem is from the trait that makes a whole of a lot of other issues with similar luck bonuses.

There is other AC options that should have taken a hit over the Jingasa too, but this was such a hard hit that the item have crashed down into "utterly useless land" and only given as vendor trash.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Aelryinth wrote:

I'm not sure where they moved the breakdown of it to, they actually had a list of items/slots and the powers affiliated with them.

But as I posted earlier, you can see it in action with Boots of Teleportation and the Helm of teleportation...the Helm is 50% more money for the exact same thing.

Ditto elemental resistances that you can buy for your armor/shield...they are 50% more then getting them on a ring.

The rule that they 'exist' is here:
++++++++++++++++++++
Some Abilities Are Assigned to Certain Slots: Some of the magic items in the standard rules are deliberately assigned to specific magic item slots for balance purposes, so that you have to make hard choices about what items to wear. In particular, the magic belts and circlets that give enhancement bonuses to ability scores are in this category—characters who want to enhance multiple physical or mental ability scores must pay extra for combination items like a belt of physical might or headband of mental prowess.

If there is a trend of all items of a particular type using a particular slot (such as items that grant physical ability score bonuses being belts or items that grant movement bonuses being boots), GMs should be hesitant to allow you to move those abilities to other slots; otherwise, they ignore these deliberate restrictions by cheaply spreading out these items over unused slots.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
but I don't know where the breakdown is now. Gloves were always associated with Dexterity, thief skills, and the like, etc. Boots anything to do with travel, and so on. Rings were always affiliated with anything, that's why it was level 12 to make one...you could stick anything on a Ring.

And we're talking about a +1 bonus, so 500 gp is all I'm going to give on that! ;)

==Aelryinth

I'm pretty sure you're holding on to 3.5 text that did not make the transition to pathfinder. There's no sure rule as slot affiliation in PF.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Aelryinth wrote:

+3 Competence bonus on Percept Checks, 900 gp.

+1 Competence bonus on all ranged attacks. 2500 gp, based on dusty rose prism ioun stone? Maybe 2k gp, since restricted to missile weapons?
keen on all bows and crossbows, stacking with weapon enhancements...?? 10k? 20k?

Unaffiliated slot for all of this? x 1.5, x2?

There's no way you can justify the Bracers of Falcon's Aim being the price they were. You have to ignore ALL the pricing guidelines and go right to the dumbest one to get the price they were at.

==Aelryinth

I don't get the pricing much

Effortless Lace gives you Weapon Finesse with only 1 handed piercing weapons, for only 2500GP. That's a feat, for 2500 Gold. Yeah, Aspect of the Falcon gives this to all bows, but as you can lose 1 weapon, you can lose the bracers, so losing the item is not really a point.
They both do the same type of damage, only difference is that Arches can switch to other type of arrows.
But according to me, you can't charge more than 8k for this item pre errata.

+3 Perception 900
+1 Competence Bonus 2000
Feat 2500

5400 is my total.
There's a guideline in there. It doesn't matter what is the power of the feat, took me 5 minutes to get an item with 2500 as a baseline price.

Don't want to look at it as a feat? Then look it as Keen, it's only worth a +1, though in this case it could be any number, depending on your enhancement.

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

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

I also am happy it's removed (Jingasa), it was an item that everyone with 20 or more AC had to buy (required purchase.)

It hurt because it worked on the high AC folks.
** spoiler omitted **

From a design point of view, if they want to keep a luck bonus AC item in the game, it needs to conflict with armor. So it needs to use that slot.

Gotta ask, why do you have two armor bonuses in there?

Is that +2 Darkwood full plate supposed to be a Tower Shield? :)

And anyone who uses a Tower shield is going to be nigh ineffectual in an actual fight.

---------
As for the AC...hey, people, the best way to get a high AC has always been to grab as many bonuses as possible, rather then shoot a single bonus to the moon.

Being able to add +2 Luck AC for 5k and a trait is BELOW dirt cheap.

Seriously, just make yourself a +5 DISMAL Ring of Protection. Deflection, Insight, Sacred, Morale and Luck, +1 each. 2k, 2.5k, 2.5k, 2,5k, 2.5k.

Even after the +50% pricing for secondary effects, that's 2.5k +3.75k +3.75k +3.75k, +3k, a whopping 16.75k for the exact same protective effect on your AC as a +5 Ring of Deflection. For less then a third of the price. It's why you grab the Ioun stones for +1 Competence and Insight to AC...they are cheap ways to grant AC.

A +2 DISMAL Ring is 8k/10/10/10/10k, or rather, 10K +12+15+15+15, or 67k for a +10 bonus to your AC and TOuch AC.

The more low bonuses you can add to your AC that stack, the more costs go down and the more your AC goes up.

==Aelryinth

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

Letric wrote:
Aelryinth wrote:

+3 Competence bonus on Percept Checks, 900 gp.

+1 Competence bonus on all ranged attacks. 2500 gp, based on dusty rose prism ioun stone? Maybe 2k gp, since restricted to missile weapons?
keen on all bows and crossbows, stacking with weapon enhancements...?? 10k? 20k?

Unaffiliated slot for all of this? x 1.5, x2?

There's no way you can justify the Bracers of Falcon's Aim being the price they were. You have to ignore ALL the pricing guidelines and go right to the dumbest one to get the price they were at.

==Aelryinth

I don't get the pricing much

Effortless Lace gives you Weapon Finesse with only 1 handed piercing weapons, for only 2500GP. That's a feat, for 2500 Gold. Yeah, Aspect of the Falcon gives this to all bows, but as you can lose 1 weapon, you can lose the bracers, so losing the item is not really a point.
They both do the same type of damage, only difference is that Arches can switch to other type of arrows.
But according to me, you can't charge more than 8k for this item pre errata.

+3 Perception 900
+1 Competence Bonus 2000
Feat 2500

5400 is my total.
There's a guideline in there. It doesn't matter what is the power of the feat, took me 5 minutes to get an item with 2500 as a baseline price.

Don't want to look at it as a feat? Then look it as Keen, it's only worth a +1, though in this case it could be any number, depending on your enhancement.

It's also a weapon enhancement, except it's stronger then a weapon enhancement.

It works on all ranged attacks, and it even affects your Crit multiplier. It is indirect, so it stacks on top of a +10 weapon, unlike, say, Deliquescent Gloves, which ALSO add a +1 effect to your weapons.

Or, to put it another way : Feat: 2500. x Long bow, short bow, composite short bow, pellet bow, composite long bow, Great Bow, crossbow, H crossbow, hand crossbow. Looks like x9 to me. Or do you think a Bracers of the Archer granting proficiency in all bows is MORE valuable then granting a virtual Keen, an effect you can't even put on a bow, on all your bows and crossbows?

And you're also leaving out secondary and non-affiliated slot pricing, which are both real concerns for the dev team, and cited specifically in the rules. i.e. you want to put an effect in a seldom used slot, raise the price to balance things out, there's a reason they make you make choices about these things.

Effortless Lace? That works on ONE WEAPON, ever. The feat works on ALL weapons. Of course it's cheaper. Now, if effortless Lace was a bracelet that wrapped around your wrist, and allowed all its effects with any weapon you wielded, we'd have a comparison to what the bracers do.

==Aelryinth

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

Darigaaz the Igniter wrote:
Aelryinth wrote:

I'm not sure where they moved the breakdown of it to, they actually had a list of items/slots and the powers affiliated with them.

But as I posted earlier, you can see it in action with Boots of Teleportation and the Helm of teleportation...the Helm is 50% more money for the exact same thing.

Ditto elemental resistances that you can buy for your armor/shield...they are 50% more then getting them on a ring.

The rule that they 'exist' is here:
++++++++++++++++++++
Some Abilities Are Assigned to Certain Slots: Some of the magic items in the standard rules are deliberately assigned to specific magic item slots for balance purposes, so that you have to make hard choices about what items to wear. In particular, the magic belts and circlets that give enhancement bonuses to ability scores are in this category—characters who want to enhance multiple physical or mental ability scores must pay extra for combination items like a belt of physical might or headband of mental prowess.

If there is a trend of all items of a particular type using a particular slot (such as items that grant physical ability score bonuses being belts or items that grant movement bonuses being boots), GMs should be hesitant to allow you to move those abilities to other slots; otherwise, they ignore these deliberate restrictions by cheaply spreading out these items over unused slots.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
but I don't know where the breakdown is now. Gloves were always associated with Dexterity, thief skills, and the like, etc. Boots anything to do with travel, and so on. Rings were always affiliated with anything, that's why it was level 12 to make one...you could stick anything on a Ring.

And we're talking about a +1 bonus, so 500 gp is all I'm going to give on that! ;)

==Aelryinth

I'm pretty sure you're holding on to 3.5 text that did not make the transition to pathfinder. There's no sure rule as slot affiliation in PF.

Just quoted it off the SRD for magic items. Pretty sure it was in the magic item book, and it's definitely still used in pricing abilities, as the helm/boots fo teleportation illustrate, and the pricing between elemental resistances on armor/rings. They actually adjusted the Helm UP to precisely +50% over the boots to follow the affiliated slot guidelines. There's a reason they use them.

==Aelryinth

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

James Risner wrote:
Dracoknight wrote:
For those who are happy about having Jingasa gone i just have to ask... honestly what other item is worth tossing your cash on to even have in the helmet slot that isnt a niche pick?

Kinda missing the point. The point is that AC 36 is too high, so knocking it back down to AC 34 by changing the Jingasa to no longer be luck bonus to AC.

As for your question, I replaced the hat with my "preferred" item that I had to choose to skip because a "required" item was in that slot. For my current melee character who is diplomatic, that item is the Circlet of Persuasion.

Just use the buffering hat, myself. That 'save me from dying cause the orc got lucky' effect is a steal for 2k.

==Aelryinth


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Aelryinth wrote:

Just quoted it off the SRD for magic items. Pretty sure it was in the magic item book, and it's definitely still used in pricing abilities, as the helm/boots fo teleportation illustrate, and the pricing between elemental resistances on armor/rings. They actually adjusted the Helm UP to precisely +50% over the boots to follow the affiliated slot guidelines. There's a reason they use them.

==Aelryinth

And I did a search on the PRD for "affiliate" and "affiliation" and the only two results that show up are festerogs and gods and their temples and shrines. You should really know better than to take an unofficial site over the official one.


CBDunkerson wrote:
Wonderstell wrote:
With a new page comes a new beginning! And a new chance to try and redirect this thread to the actual reason it was made!

Oh, look... optimism! Faith in humanity! Hope for the future!

That's adorable. :]

As long as there is life, there is hope.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Quote:
Or, to put it another way : Feat: 2500. x Long bow, short bow, composite short bow, pellet bow, composite long bow, Great Bow, crossbow, H crossbow, hand crossbow. Looks like x9 to me.

It's a slightly disingenuous position. While technically correct, having it work with all weapons has increasingly diminishing returns for any given character.

I mean, would you say a theoretical pre-errata Bracers of Falcon's Aim that only worked with composite longbows would be balanced? After all, +1 to attack is kind of like a free weapon focus, and having it apply to all weapons means it's Feat x 65 or something. So the bracers should cost about 200k to compensate for the over 70 bonus feats it gives you. Limiting it to only composite longbows would effectively make it about a hundred times weaker, right?

But that's not how that works.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Letric wrote:

I don't get the pricing much

Effortless Lace gives you Weapon Finesse with only 1 handed piercing weapons, for only 2500GP. That's a feat, for 2500 Gold. Yeah, Aspect of the Falcon gives this to all bows, but as you can lose 1 weapon, you can lose the bracers, so losing the item is not really a point.
They both do the same type of damage, only difference is that Arches can switch to other type of arrows.
But according to me, you can't charge more than 8k for this item pre errata.

+3 Perception 900
+1 Competence Bonus 2000
Feat 2500

5400 is my total.
There's a guideline in there. It doesn't matter what is the power of the feat, took me 5 minutes to get an item with 2500 as a baseline price.

Don't want to look at it as a feat? Then look it as Keen, it's only worth a +1, though in this case it could be any number, depending on your enhancement.

Effortless Lace does not give you Weapon Finesse. You can use Weapon Finesse with the weapon, but it never grants you the feat.

And you add a +50% price increase on every lesser cost ability in the case of multiple abilites.

So your price should be:

+3 Perception 900*1.5
+1 Competence Bonus 2000*1.5
"Feat" 2500

6850 gp.

But that is wrong.

You can buy the Endurance/Alertness feat for 5000 gp (10,000 gp slotless), which would place the old Bracers of Falcon's Aim at:

+3 Perception 900*1.5
+1 Competence Bonus 2000*1.5
Feat 5000

9350 gp.

*****

But Improved Critical is a more valuable feat than Endurance/Alertness (more pre-requisites), so the feat price of 5000 is far too low.

Edit:

Effortless Lace Description:
This elegant silk ribbon gleams like mithral and feels like polished steel.

When wrapped around the grip of a one-handed piercing or slashing melee weapon for 24 hours, the ribbon's magic permanently merges with the weapon, reducing the attack roll penalty incurred by a wielder who is smaller than the weapon's intended wielder by 2 (to a minimum penalty of 0).

If the weapon is wielded by a creature whose size matches that of the weapon's intended wielder, the weapon is treated as a light melee weapon when determining whether it can be used with Weapon Finesse, as well as with any feat, spell, or special weapon ability that can be used in conjunction with light weapons.

Once an effortless lace's abilities have been conveyed to a weapon, the ribbon must remain attached to the weapon or its effects end immediately, its magic is permanently lost, and it is reduced to worthless cloth. Effects that would dispel the magic of the weapon or cause the weapon to gain the broken condition (such as sundering) destroy the ribbon as well.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
James Risner wrote:
Dracoknight wrote:
For those who are happy about having Jingasa gone i just have to ask... honestly what other item is worth tossing your cash on to even have in the helmet slot that isnt a niche pick?

Kinda missing the point. The point is that AC 36 is too high, so knocking it back down to AC 34 by changing the Jingasa to no longer be luck bonus to AC.

As for your question, I replaced the hat with my "preferred" item that I had to choose to skip because a "required" item was in that slot. For my current melee character who is diplomatic, that item is the Circlet of Persuasion.

At level 7, sure. But once character hit the levels where the system breaks down AC becomes irrelavant. I read through a Rise of the Runelords game where the players went through the final dungeon as a 'let us try high level play' one-shot. The barbarian wore a Ring of Blinking and Freedom of Movement and might of used UMD for Blur since the giants where reagularly hitting his AC so choosing a 20% miss chance for his attacks in return for a 50% chance for the giants was more sensible.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Aelryinth wrote:

It's also a weapon enhancement, except it's stronger then a weapon enhancement.

It works on all ranged attacks, and it even affects your Crit multiplier. It is indirect, so it stacks on top of a +10 weapon, unlike, say, Deliquescent Gloves, which ALSO add a +1 effect to your weapons.

Or, to put it another way : Feat: 2500. x Long bow, short bow, composite short bow, pellet bow, composite long bow, Great Bow, crossbow, H crossbow, hand crossbow. Looks like x9 to me. Or do you think a Bracers of the Archer granting proficiency in all bows is MORE valuable then granting a...

Why is that important? How many weapons it affect. If you're an archer, you're just using 1 bow. I don't get it.

Even if affects all weapon, you're just gonna have 1 bow that it's enchanted. Losing your bow but getting another +1 to another is good, but no way overpowered nor broken.

The slots thing shouldn't matter, they're replicating a spell effect. A caster with access to this spell gets this spell for 750 for free, while a martial with no spell list gets screwed.

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Maps, Pawns Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber
MannyGoblin wrote:
CBDunkerson wrote:
Wonderstell wrote:
With a new page comes a new beginning! And a new chance to try and redirect this thread to the actual reason it was made!

Oh, look... optimism! Faith in humanity! Hope for the future!

That's adorable. :]

As long as there is life, there is hope.

And yet... not one on topic post to be seen.

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

oh, affiliate doesn't show on the unofficial site, either.I'm using the term because I can't think of a better one.

IF you want to read it on Paizo's SRD site, it's right here:

http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/ultimateCampaign/campaignSystems/magicIt emCreation.html#altering-existing-items

The d20 site is just a copy/paste of the official SRD, under Altering Existing Items. I just clipped some relevant language.

(wags finger) d20 does a very good job keeping up to date on the SRD. I see what you were trying to do there! :)

==Aelryinth

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

Letric wrote:
Aelryinth wrote:

It's also a weapon enhancement, except it's stronger then a weapon enhancement.

It works on all ranged attacks, and it even affects your Crit multiplier. It is indirect, so it stacks on top of a +10 weapon, unlike, say, Deliquescent Gloves, which ALSO add a +1 effect to your weapons.

Or, to put it another way : Feat: 2500. x Long bow, short bow, composite short bow, pellet bow, composite long bow, Great Bow, crossbow, H crossbow, hand crossbow. Looks like x9 to me. Or do you think a Bracers of the Archer granting proficiency in all bows is MORE valuable then granting a...

Why is that important? How many weapons it affect. If you're an archer, you're just using 1 bow. I don't get it.

Even if affects all weapon, you're just gonna have 1 bow that it's enchanted. Losing your bow but getting another +1 to another is good, but no way overpowered nor broken.

The slots thing shouldn't matter, they're replicating a spell effect. A caster with access to this spell gets this spell for 750 for free, while a martial with no spell list gets screwed.

YOu're using bad logic again.

A caster gets true strike for free, so having a sword with continuous true strike should be cheap, right?

Or are you trying to tell me that an item which gives you Rapid Fire with a Short Bow is worthless because you use a longbow, and should be priced accordingly? That a feat which applied Improved Critical to all bows and crossbows you wield is equal to a feat which just does it for a short bow?

Because the former exists as TWO Advanced Weapon Training feats...one each for the Bow and Crossbow group. i.e. you also need to be a fighter to get them! ANd you STILL need the original iMproved critical feat...so technically, THREE feats and you must be a fighter!

So, your pricing logic is off. The fact you are 'only going to use one bow' in no way obviates the fact that this works for all bows and crossbows. That's like saying this magical mace should be almost free since I'll never use it since I'm a swordsman, you should give it to me for nothing. The logic just doesn't track.

==Aelryinth

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

swoosh wrote:
Quote:
Or, to put it another way : Feat: 2500. x Long bow, short bow, composite short bow, pellet bow, composite long bow, Great Bow, crossbow, H crossbow, hand crossbow. Looks like x9 to me.

It's a slightly disingenuous position. While technically correct, having it work with all weapons has increasingly diminishing returns for any given character.

I mean, would you say a theoretical pre-errata Bracers of Falcon's Aim that only worked with composite longbows would be balanced? After all, +1 to attack is kind of like a free weapon focus, and having it apply to all weapons means it's Feat x 65 or something. So the bracers should cost about 200k to compensate for the over 70 bonus feats it gives you. Limiting it to only composite longbows would effectively make it about a hundred times weaker, right?

But that's not how that works.

He's saying that because I use a bow, the fact it works for crossbows is meaningless and shouldn't be included in the price, and priced it at one feat.

Man, I wish AWT feats used that logic.

I turned his logic back around on him, to show it was the same as having nine feats, and how ridiculous that was.

Just comparing it to the gloves is far more proper.

==Aelryinth


I honestly can't be bothered to look at magic items really. They're either boring, incredibly situational, or cost so much that you'll never see them in a game. I almost wish magic items and feats were removed from the game. False choice is just work.

Maybe that's the idea! Make the meta game as much like work as possible so that everyone hates it. That'll show those silly munchkins!


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Aelryinth wrote:

stuff we said

==Aelryinth

My point is that at higher level, unless you have access to Magic Weapon, you only ever use 1 weapon, and have spares for DR, and just maybe, since +X bypass that too.

All I'm saying is that the item seems intended for martial classes, which everyone know they suck.
A class with access to magic, can just get a wand and still use this amazing power. He can even set the CL to 2, so it will last 2 min, and it's still CHEAPER than 4k.
So why does this item exist then? I find it cheaper to get UMD and invest on Charisma than actually getting it.

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

So, because a Caster can use Greater Magic Weapon, +enhancements to extra weapons you might need to carry should cost nothing. Because that looks like what you are saying.

Got ya.

Because barbs, rangers and paladins can use their class combat bonuses with any weapon, the fact fighters are restricted to just one weapon is meaningless. Like that time I had to choose between a mace of disruption or a sun sword.

Got ya.

Investing scarce skill points, taking a trait to make UMD a class skill, and investing build points in Cha and/or a skill focus feat so at level 10 you can always get a buff off if you're given time to buff in a fight so you can use a custom wand to give you a benefit when you'd probably want to use that time to give you a major benefit or to attack (and which isn't available if you are under attack) is Cheap to you.

Got ya.

Well, I guess we just play different games. You consider the cost to go around the item to be cheap, and I don't.

==Aelryinth


I think that complaining about being forced into putting umd on every character who can't cast because magic items are a hard troll for non casters is a reality we seem to want to enforce.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Trogdar wrote:
I think that complaining about being forced into putting umd on every character who can't cast because magic items are a hard troll for non casters is a reality we seem to want to enforce.

Spells are just better. You're better off casting a spell than doing a full attack


CBDunkerson wrote:
MannyGoblin wrote:
CBDunkerson wrote:
Wonderstell wrote:
With a new page comes a new beginning! And a new chance to try and redirect this thread to the actual reason it was made!

Oh, look... optimism! Faith in humanity! Hope for the future!

That's adorable. :]

As long as there is life, there is hope.
And yet... not one on topic post to be seen.

To be fair, there are multiple threads about similar subject matter, and people do confuse them from one another.

I certainly do; it's making my head hurt a little keeping track between what I said on this thread in comparison to what I said in another, and what everyone else said...it's just an amalgamation split into 3 parts, and they're all about the same looking blobs of text. It's skull-splitting...ugh...

Though, if we really want to get back on topic, I will go ahead and say that the OP's answer has already been given, which was "There isn't really another alternative to Brawling, sorry." So really, unless we want to rehash that same answer (because nothing has changed since the few days or so that the errata took place), there isn't anything else to add on to the OP's original question, meaning it's technically more productive to continue the discussion as to why there's nothing that can feasibly replace Brawling (or some of the other strong magic items that got nerfed).


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Aelryinth wrote:

==Aelryinth

It's not the logic, I just fail too see how it can be OP if anyone (well, almost) can get access to it.

Investing in UMD for a martial class it's rarely a downside, UMD has to be one of the most powerful skills ever.
And honestly, what else is the BSF gonna get? Swim? Touch of the Sea. Climb? Spider Climb, Levitate, Fly.

There aren't really many skills useful for the figher. If he wants a really high Will Save he needs at least CHA13 for Improved Bravery or he can't chose an Archetype that gives up weapon training to take Armed Bravery.

My point is, that in this case not spell list classes have to pay more to use the item that spell list classes can get access to in form of Wands, for a cheaper way.
Item that only last 1 minutes per day, while Wands guy can use it up to 50 times.

If you think the item is broken, maybe the problem is not the item, but the spell it's emulating.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Letric wrote:
Trogdar wrote:
I think that complaining about being forced into putting umd on every character who can't cast because magic items are a hard troll for non casters is a reality we seem to want to enforce.
Spells are just better. You're better off casting a spell than doing a full attack

The sad thing is, that's true, even if it's a Blasting spell.

A Blood Arcanist with the Orc Bloodline and School Understanding (Evocation) that specializes in the Battering Blast spell can kill anything that's not protected by an Anti-Magic Field, Spellbane, or Mage's Disjunction. It bypasses all DR and Resistances (as it's Force Damage), and casting two of them in a round, you deal upwards of 572 points of damage on average.

101 to 150 of 223 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Advice / So now that 'Brawling' is the worst armor enchant ever . . . All Messageboards