Magic Missle Glove of Blasting.... Is this legal?


Rules Questions

1 to 50 of 53 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

A player in a game my brother was running wrote up a wizard that created a glove that had stacking magic missle spells enchanted into it (about 25) that can be cast at will with a command word that is shared among them. He speaks a command word (standard action) and 25 magic missle spells are cast at the same time.

Disregarding price or level at the moment, is stacking the same spell legal? Is applying the same command word to all the spells on a single item legal?

If it is legal, how would it be done? (Level limits, pricing, etc)

(Would the rule of similar magic items/spells be applied? What would they be applied to and how?)

Also if it is legal, what are your opinions on balancing for or against the item (and other items that can abuse this ruling).

Please use quotes and page numbers to support your understanding if available.

Thanks in advance. ^_^


1 person marked this as a favorite.

normally one can only cast one spell per turn unless one is quickened in which case they can cast 2 i would think same would apply to items


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

What is the price of this item?

By default, activating a magic item with a command word is a standard action. The rules don't allow you to stack command words in such a significant manner, because this is literally cheating action economy.

At the base, an item that casts a CL 1 Magic Missile by command word would cost (1 x 1 x 1800), or 1800 gp. A CL 9 Magic Missile, to fire 5 missiles at once, would cost (9 x 1 x 1800), or 16,200 gp to use at will.

Temporarily setting aside that Magic Missile caps at 5 bolts, being able to hypothetically fire twenty-five at once would require Caster Level 49, so the cost of the item would be 88,200 gp. (and require extreme GM fiat)

But that requires changing up the rules for Magic Missile, of course. And, honestly, 88k for an at-will infinite-use automatic-hit 25d4+25 force damage attack (average of 87.5 damage) would be several layers of overpowered.

You can mitigate it somewhat by saying Intensified Spell works on Magic Missile. At this point, a CL 19 Intensified Magic Missile to fire 10 bolts would cost 102,600gp. A hypothetical CL49 quadruply-intensified Magic Missile (not that the rules support this) would cost 441,000gp. This is looking a lot more reasonable a price tag for the automatic 87 damage a round.

(information of pricing directly from Paizo's SRD)


Saethori wrote:

What is the price of this item?

By default, activating a magic item with a command word is a standard action. The rules don't allow you to stack command words in such a significant manner, because this is literally cheating action economy.

At the base, an item that casts a CL 1 Magic Missile by command word would cost (1 x 1 x 1800), or 1800 gp. A CL 9 Magic Missile, to fire 5 missiles at once, would cost (9 x 1 x 1800), or 16,200 gp to use at will.

Temporarily setting aside that Magic Missile caps at 5 bolts, being able to hypothetically fire twenty-five at once would require Caster Level 49, so the cost of the item would be 88,200 gp. (and require extreme GM fiat)

But that requires changing up the rules for Magic Missile, of course. And, honestly, 88k for an at-will infinite-use automatic-hit 25d4+25 force damage attack (average of 87.5 damage) would be several layers of overpowered.

You can mitigate it somewhat by saying Intensified Spell works on Magic Missile. At this point, a CL 19 Intensified Magic Missile to fire 10 bolts would cost 102,600gp. A hypothetical CL49 quadruply-intensified Magic Missile (not that the rules support this) would cost 441,000gp. This is looking a lot more reasonable a price tag for the automatic 87 damage a round.

(information of pricing directly from Paizo's SRD)

kenetisits can do similar if your willing to put up with managing burn at the point you would be able to even afford such an item but yes such an item shouldn't exist


1 person marked this as a favorite.

You may want to start with this thread.
http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2ub8k?Continuous-magic-missile-enchant

Here are items that you could use to model the gloves with.

One casting of 5 magic missiles would end up somewhere between these two crowns, and each of these is only going to allow one casting per day for their price.

Crown of Blasting, major
Price 23,760 gp; Aura strong evocation; CL 17th; Weight 1 lb.
On command, this elaborate golden crown projects a blast of searing light (5d8 maximized for 40 points of damage) once per day.
Construction Requirements
Cost 11,880 gp
Craft Wondrous Item, Maximize Spell, searing light

Crown of Blasting, Minor
Price 6,480 gp; Aura moderate evocation; CL 6th; Weight 1 lb.
On command, this simple golden crown projects a blast of searing light (3d8 points of damage) once per day.
Construction Requirements
Cost 3,240 gp
Craft Wondrous Item, searing light

Wand of Magic Missile, 5 missiles at level 9
The price of a wand is equal to the level of the spell × the creator's caster level × 750 gp = 1 * 9 * 750 = 6,750 gp

Staff of Minor Arcana
Price 8,000 gp;
Magic Missile = 2 charges = only 5 uses before it must be recharged.
Uses the bearer's level to determine how many missiles.

Quarterstaff of Entwined Serpents
Price 5,050 gp
At will, the wielder can use the staff to cast 2 magic missiles; also allows Eschew Materials

For your particular request:
25 magic missiles at will seems over the top (and for sure 25 castings of 5 each = 125 would be way too excessive). That would equal the wand times 5, infinite charges, with no chance of being disarmed (unlike the wand or staff) also as they are in glove form.


Lady-J wrote:
normally one can only cast one spell per turn unless one is quickened in which case they can cast 2 i would think same would apply to items

The arguement he gave however is that it is a single standard action to speak a command word, so all he has to do is make all of the spells linked to a single command word.

Logically speaking he could do this, rules wise it is very grey and broken because he is simply using an action to speak (using the required standard action because it is a single command word).

I dont know if command word items require any other manipulation besides that though... which is why the action economy is indeed suspect.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

By the rules...no it is not legal. You cannot activate multiple effects at once...he could only activate 1 casting, regardless of what the command word is.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

If you could activate multiple spell triggers at once, every player out there would want an unslotted wondrous item that when you said a single word would cast every buff imaginable at once.


Saethori wrote:

What is the price of this item?

By default, activating a magic item with a command word is a standard action. The rules don't allow you to stack command words in such a significant manner, because this is literally cheating action economy.

At the base, an item that casts a CL 1 Magic Missile by command word would cost (1 x 1 x 1800), or 1800 gp. A CL 9 Magic Missile, to fire 5 missiles at once, would cost (9 x 1 x 1800), or 16,200 gp to use at will.

Temporarily setting aside that Magic Missile caps at 5 bolts, being able to hypothetically fire twenty-five at once would require Caster Level 49, so the cost of the item would be 88,200 gp. (and require extreme GM fiat)

But that requires changing up the rules for Magic Missile, of course. And, honestly, 88k for an at-will infinite-use automatic-hit 25d4+25 force damage attack (average of 87.5 damage) would be several layers of overpowered.

You can mitigate it somewhat by saying Intensified Spell works on Magic Missile. At this point, a CL 19 Intensified Magic Missile to fire 10 bolts would cost 102,600gp. A hypothetical CL49 quadruply-intensified Magic Missile (not that the rules support this) would cost 441,000gp. This is looking a lot more reasonable a price tag for the automatic 87 damage a round.

(information of pricing directly from Paizo's SRD)

To clarify, he isnt using magic missle at a higher level and all magic missle spells are at level 1. He is stacking the spells, meaning using the same spell over and over again on the item itself (25 magic missle spells, plural). Does that increase caster level of the item? If the spells were different, but of the same level and caster level, would this still be the case?

The "base" cost is around 8000 something gold after brining it down using restrictions.

I am not entirely certain of the math, but a he did a whole right up before showing it to my brother.


Kemuri Kunoichi wrote:
By the rules...no it is not legal. You cannot activate multiple effects at once...he could only activate 1 casting, regardless of what the command word is.

I agree with you to an extent. I dont believe something like this should be possible, but without a direct "this is illegal because..." from how to create magic items, it is just a statement of how we feel about it.

Yes it breaks action economy... does it say anywhere about using magic items in such a manner (especially saying a command word as a standard action) being impossible... I dont know... How would it be determined then which spells go off if multiple magic items had the same command word (or the same magic item with mutiple spells had the same command word).

As far as I know I dont have arguements against it despite how wrong it feels... Escpecially if it bypasses the action economy with no other manipulation of the device besides speaking.

Though... does the item actually require more manipulation, thus requiring a longer period of time to activate (I assume that command words are difficult to say for their fuction and use, thus requiring a standard action instead of a free... but we could be wrong)?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Well, considering speaking is a free action, and activating a command-word triggered item is a standard action, there must be something beyond saying the right word that's beyond a simple password. What that is, we don't know, but it's something that prevents you from doing stuff like this.


Arcanic Drake wrote:
Lady-J wrote:
normally one can only cast one spell per turn unless one is quickened in which case they can cast 2 i would think same would apply to items

The arguement he gave however is that it is a single standard action to speak a command word, so all he has to do is make all of the spells linked to a single command word.

Logically speaking he could do this, rules wise it is very grey and broken because he is simply using an action to speak (using the required standard action because it is a single command word).

I dont know if command word items require any other manipulation besides that though... which is why the action economy is indeed suspect.

well seeing as how you can not stack command words he would need 25 different command words needing 25 standard actions to activate all 25 words


1 person marked this as a favorite.

SKR (one time member of the design time) made a comment regarding this here. While the post from him isn't official rules material, it may be sufficient to convince your group that, No, you cannot activate all the MM spells at once.


Dαedαlus wrote:
Well, considering speaking is a free action, and activating a command-word triggered item is a standard action, there must be something beyond saying the right word that's beyond a simple password. What that is, we don't know, but it's something that prevents you from doing stuff like this.

D20PFSRD Magic Items

Quote:

Command Word: If the activation is on command or if no activation method is suggested either in the magic item description or by the nature of the item, assume that a command word is needed to activate it. Command word activation means that a character speaks the word and the item activates. No other special knowledge is needed.

A command word can be a real word, but when this is the case, the holder of the item runs the risk of activating the item accidentally by speaking the word in normal conversation. More often, the command word is some nonsensical word, or a word or phrase from an ancient language. Activating a command word magic item is a standard action and does not provoke attacks of opportunity.

Basically what we saw when looking for rulings on this...


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Dαedαlus wrote:
Well, considering speaking is a free action, and activating a command-word triggered item is a standard action, there must be something beyond saying the right word that's beyond a simple password. What that is, we don't know, but it's something that prevents you from doing stuff like this.

What is confusing with the rules is the part where your magic object can activate if you speak the command word in normal conversation and this without willing to really activate it. So if the player use a magic word to activate one Magic Missile and the command word is the same for the others Magic Missiles then he cast willingly one magic missile and unwillingly the others by the rules... :p

The Command Word Rule :

Quote:
A command word can be a real word, but when this is the case, the holder of the item runs the risk of activating the item accidentally by speaking the word in normal conversation. More often, the command word is some nonsensical word, or a word or phrase from an ancient language. Activating a command word magic item is a standard action and does not provoke attacks of opportunity.

Now what happen when a spell is cast unwillingly ? That's the question... :p

P.S. : Here is what I would do in that case : He can aim one magic missile like normal, for the others since the spells are cast unwillingly I will randomly choose the target of the spell within range :D
But that's me, it's entirely a Houserule since I can't find a rule for what happen when a spell is cast unwillingly...
Remark : Others can't cast the spell on an object with a word command you own per the rule. Only you can unwillingly cast it and we don't know what happen in this case...


bbangerter wrote:
SKR (one time member of the design time) made a comment regarding this here. While the post from him isn't official rules material, it may be sufficient to convince your group that, No, you cannot activate all the MM spells at once.

Thank you for this, every little bit towards clarifying this issue helps...

but SKR also didnt answer how magic items with common words as command words could be activated by accident and ignored how to handle them (though I believe this was unintentional). He specifically said that for a command word to work it needs to be directed at a magic item with a specific inflection (though nothing says it cant be a normal conversational tone) and didnt clarify how magic items were accidently activated if this was the case.

Not saying he isnt correct, but there is previous evidence to the contrary... though it could have been an earlier mistake to say so...

Edit: loengrin beat me to the punch.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Arcanic Drake wrote:
bbangerter wrote:
SKR (one time member of the design time) made a comment regarding this here. While the post from him isn't official rules material, it may be sufficient to convince your group that, No, you cannot activate all the MM spells at once.

Thank you for this, every little bit towards clarifying this issue helps...

but SKR also didnt answer how magic items with common words as command words could be activated by accident and ignored how to handle them (though I believe this was unintentional). He specifically said that for a command word to work it needs to be directed at a magic item with a specific inflection (though nothing says it cant be a normal conversational tone) and didnt clarify how magic items were accidently activated if this was the case.

Not saying he isnt correct, but there is previous evidence to the contrary... though it could have been an earlier mistake to say so...

Erf I have looked at the discussion from SK and a little under the one quoted there's that :

Sean K Reynolds wrote:
Are wrote:

Perhaps it would be a good idea to remove the "the holder of the item runs the risk of activating the item accidentally by speaking the word in normal conversation" part of the rule? It doesn't seem like that could ever happen, considering the owner must speak the word for the specific reason of activating the item in order for it to do so.

That text wording allows a GM to give the PC a clue about an item's unknown activation word. "Jonas, while you were talking to the blacksmith about your adventures, you felt a momentary twitch from your new sword when you said the word 'dragonfire.'" Then Jonas can try using that word as a command word and see if it works.

Old-school gamers use an abbreviation: TANSTAAFL—there ain't no such thing as a free lunch. It's cool from a story perspective for a magic item to unexpectedly activate in the middle of a conversation, but game designers have to expect that players will attempt to cheese as much free magic item activation as possible, and have to disallow freebie activation by using common words as command words.

Coupled with this :

Sean K Reynolds wrote:

1. Activating an item's command word is a standard action. If your command word is "fire," and you're in initiative, you have to spend your standard action saying the word AT the sword with the proper inflection, you can't activate it for free (without spending an action).

2. You can give several actions the same command word, but that doesn't get around the standard-action-to-activate-each. It just means you only have to remember one word, not multiple words (which means your allies have an easier time using those items to save your life if you're bleeding to death).

3. Activating flaming doesn't deactivate any other abilities on the weapon. If your sword has three different command words, you can spend three standard actions activating each to have them all active at the same time. If the sword has the same command word for all three special abilities, you can spend three standard actions speaking that command word to activate the three special abilities, and have them activated at the same time.

"Until another command is given" means "... specifically to turn off that weapon special ability with the 'off' command." It doesn't mean "any command directed at the weapon turns off this ability" or "any command you speak turns off this ability" or "any command anyone in the world speaks at any time turns off this ability."

That settle the issue it seems ;)


You can cast 5 missiles in a round by doing a 1st casting of the level 1 spell Magic Missile at caster level 9, and 5 more missiles if you add a 2nd casting that is quickened (at caster level 11 since quicken is +4 to the level 1 spell = spell level 5). You only get to cast 1 spell with your standard, and 1 other spell with your swift if you quicken, in any one round. There is no way to get 25 missiles with the level 1 version of Magic Missile (and certainly not 25 castings), and no way to get multiple missiles at all without upping the caster level beyond level 1.

Magic items do not break those limits; in fact they are more likely to apply additional limits (e.g. Quickened Magic Missile is level 5, and Wands only go up to level 4, so you'd need a staff or rod in this math).

However, you can break the number of missiles limit using another spell from the older 2nd Edition AD&D.
http://wiki.avlis.org/Magic:Snillocs_Major_Missile
Snilloc's Major Missile
5th level spell
Does the same damage as Magic Missile, but you get an extra missile for every 2 levels of the caster, and stretches beyond 5 missiles.
Some sites say the limit is up to caster level 30 (15d4+15); other sites do not mention a limit.

Spell Slot for Level 9 (Spell Level 5 + 4 to Quicken) = 1 Quickened Major Missile = 10d4 + 10 (for CL 20, the usual PF limit)
Spell Slot for Level 8 (Spell Level 5 + 3 to Maximize) = 1 Maximized Major Missile = 10d4 + 10 (for CL 20, the usual PF limit) = 50 maximized.

Total for the round = 10d4 + 60 (average 85) if a single target is hit by both Major Missile spells (i.e. has no shield spell or spell resistance, and the caster threw all 20 missiles at 1 target).


Lowering the Major Missile back to plain Magic Missile:
Spell Slot for Level 5 (Spell Level 1 + 4 to Quicken) = 1 Quickened Magic Missile = 5d4 + 5 (at CL 11 for casting a level 5 spell)
Spell Slot for Level 4 (Spell Level 1 + 3 to Maximize) = 1 Maximized Magic Missile = 5d4 + 5 = 25 maximized.
Total for the round = 5d4 + 30 (average 42.5) if a single target is hit by both Magic Missile spells (i.e. has no shield spell or spell resistance, and the caster threw all 10 missiles at 1 target).


Skipping the Maximize, but keeping the Quicken Magic Missile:
Spell Slot for Level 5 (Spell Level 1 + 4 to Quicken) = 1 Quickened Magic Missile = 5d4 + 5 (at CL 11 for casting a level 5 spell)
Spell Slot for Level 1 (Spell Level 1 at CL 9+) = 1 Magic Missile = 5d4 + 5
Total for the round = 10d4 + 10 (average 35) if a single target is hit by both Magic Missile spells (i.e. has no shield spell or spell resistance, and the caster threw all 10 missiles at 1 target).


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

One of the above messages quoted the TANSTAAFL rule.

If you allow this multiple casting from a single command word, then you also have to allow the taping together of a dozen wands which you can then fire simultaneously with the same command word.

The Command Word Rule wrote:
Activating a command word magic item is a standard action

Note the presence of the indefinite article "a" as in "one".

The other problem with the original premise is the DM allowing the player to place an attack spell in a magic glove. Normally, those sorts of spells have to be placed in wands, not in wondrous items. Sure, there are exceptions, like the necklace of fireballs, but those exceptions still don't allow the kind of cheese this player is proposing. IMHO, the DM shouldn't allow the placing of even a single magic missile spell in a glove. None of the examples of extant magical gloves that I could find include putting command word activated attack spells in them.

So the best DM decision would be to tell your player to make a wand of magic missile, which can fire multiple missiles with a higher caster level, up to five, as mentioned above.

Even if you decide to allow a glove of magic missiles, you should (a) make it work like a wand (expending charges) and (b) allow only a single spell for each command word activation.

And if the player insists, calmly explain that if he can do it, so can his enemies. I'd like to see him survive several dozen simultaneous fireballs from the wands his next encounter will have duct taped together. Of course, at that point, your campaign will have been thoroughly trashed.

The DM has final say over the creation of magic items. You don't *need* any special rule to invalidate a given item. Espcially for items not listed from any official PF source.

Dark Archive

He can activate the items on "accident". This would let him fire all of his spells at once. Of course it is fair game for you to do the same.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

The "activating items on accident" is fluff text, not rules text.

We know this because the actions required for each are different, and there are no rules in place for accidental activation.

Think of a command word item more like a spell trigger item. The command word primes the item for use, essentially functioning as an automatic Use Magic Device check. Once primed, you can then actually activate the item, much like a spell trigger item.

The player is wrong, it doesn't work the way he thinks it does.

"If it seems too good to be true, it probably is."

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

Arcanic Drake wrote:
Lady-J wrote:
normally one can only cast one spell per turn unless one is quickened in which case they can cast 2 i would think same would apply to items

The arguement he gave however is that it is a single standard action to speak a command word, so all he has to do is make all of the spells linked to a single command word.

Logically speaking he could do this, rules wise it is very grey and broken because he is simply using an action to speak (using the required standard action because it is a single command word).

I dont know if command word items require any other manipulation besides that though... which is why the action economy is indeed suspect.

Not how it works.

Command word is a standard action to say one word to activate one item.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Even if the rules support this ridiculous magic item (which they don't), because I'm assuming he's going with the "well it doesn't say I can't do this, therefore I can" argument, the GM should not allow it. Even with a hefty price tag, the item is overpowered, but with the tiny price this player is trying to pawn this off with? I agree that if the player makes a big deal out of it, then the GM should retaliate in kind.

I imagine the player would not like getting slammed with that many magic missiles in a single round. What's good for the goose, is good for the gander.


This a good example of why rule 0 exists. Ultimately the GM is always right and has the responsibility to adjust rules as written for the good of the story and the enjoyment of all his players. Giving in to a rules lawyer with an agenda is a good way to ruin a game for everyone.

If I were to accidentally approve something that ended up being over powered I would turn it into a story point. An evil thief will hear of them and sneak into the camp at night to steal the gloves, possibly with the wizards hands still in them. Said thief would begin to use it to take over the underworld of a major city causing great strife. The players would either be hired or driven by guilt to hunt down the thief and the gloves and destroy them both to prevent them from being abused again.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

How about this: similiar items are not used by immortal archmages that are statted up in books, or by dpr optimizing theory crafters on the boards. Does this player believe that his character is smarter than those Runelords and liches and simultaneously he has better system mastery and game knowledge than all the theory crafters here? That is the unspoken assertion made by pushing to have this unique item.


As for my view on the cost. .
1) if we ignore the discussion if the same command word can be used to trigger multiple activation's
2) also assume that targeting the spell only needs to be done for one spell and or is a free action, personally I think even if you could trigger all instances at once each requires an action to target, only personal only spells do I think pass this test.

The base cost for a CL 1 MM unlimited command word gloves is 1800. Each additional instance of the spell would fall under the multiple different ability multiplier of 1.5 to make them a base of 2700 per each additional layer. Total cost would be 66600 or 33300 to craft. I would also say that to prevent under valuating craft wand one fully charged wand of MM would be consumed as a talismanic component for each instance. If the wizard did not also have craft wand that would add 375 to each instance for another 9375.

Secondly making these gloves at a low level would take a tremendous amount of time. 25 days for the wands and 2 days for the first gloves enchant and 3 days for each additional without any failures for a total of 169 8 hour work days. Any failures would increase both the time and the cost.

As a GM I would also consider saying that while you could make this, only one of the magic missiles hits your target, the rest target a random square within spell range, hitting the first target in its path to the square.


Pathfinder Maps, Pawns Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

I've heard of weapons with multiple enchantments that used the same activate keyword so that, for example, you could activate flaming, frost, and shock at the same time with one command word.

I think a game developer might even have said that it worked, but I don't trust my memory in this particular instance.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

SKR (quoted above) said exactly the opposite. One standard action is one command word is one item and one property activated. This added to the wording of the definition of command word activation eliminates any possibility for confusion.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Maps, Pawns Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber
Wheldrake wrote:
SKR (quoted above) said exactly the opposite. One standard action is one command word is one item and one property activated. This added to the wording of the definition of command word activation eliminates any possibility for confusion.

I'm not surprised.

Even, if I'm remembering correctly, I'm pretty certain it was just an unofficial offhand comment, and should be taken as much.

There is most definitely potential for abuse if you let it go too far.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Isn't it because activating weapon properties are free actions?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

They are sometimes houseruled to be free actions, but since there is no specific language to that effect, they default to standard action activation - one standard action per property, mind.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Once you activate a weapon's property, you don't have to deactivate it. When you sheath your flaming longsword, the next time you draw it, it will still be flaming. So that helps with some of the time issue.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
fretgod99 wrote:
When you sheath your flaming longsword, the next time you draw it, it will still be flaming. So that helps with some of the time issue.

This would be a good trick for the Decanter of Endless Water, too.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Not looking for hate, but putting the numbers down for effective crafting of the object and then what it would look like for making something comparable through comparing the effect to what tier of item it should actually be:

Assumptions - he's a dwarf wizard with 3 traits and a drawback; the three positives being Eldritch Smith, Hedge Magician, And Spark of Creation.
Each of those traits decrease cost by 5%, and through restricting the item to class, alignment, and skill (spell craft or use magic device or sleight of hand, etc.), the discounts added in are 30%, 30%, and 10% respectively.

Magic missile stacking on an item would technically fall under similar abilities (cause what's not more similar to something than the exact same thing; apples to apples, oranges to oranges and such), however, that discount only applies to a slotless items.

We have our discounts now. The item described was a command word magic missile stacked 25 times.
Thats ({1800 × 1×1 × .95^(3) × .7^(2) × .9}/2)×25
Which is 8,507.3034375 rounded to 8,507.3 GP + Scroll cost to facilitate each additional casting (using 25 scrolls to make cost more cut, less eratic, and buying them) for each day (9 days×25scrolls×25gp=5625)
Total cost is 14,132.3 GP

The item itself is command word Magic missile×25:
Thats 1d4+1 25 times to any combination of targets; minimum of 50 DMG, maximum of 125, a middle ground of 75-100 DMG. Thats coupled with a sub-effect of always hit (true strike) but can be blocked by shield and spell resistance. For the sake of argument (although almost any spell resistance would trump most of the DMG, or even a single shield spell IE a lvl 1 spell!), because of its high and auto hitting DMG, let's just say its on par with a lvl 9 spell (as some lv 9 spells get this high in DMG).

Our formula would be a little different then:
({1800×9×17×.95^(3)×.7^(2)×.9}/2)= 52,064.6970375 rounded to 52,064.7 GP give or take a bit if you wanted to add a truestrike effect (which I'd advise against as again this is already harder to dismiss than lv 1 cl 1 spells are).

With that in mind, I'd say this runs you the base cost of a comparable item price to craft. Its not that much better (by miles it isn't) but its still approximately the new cost that can then be modified further by the gm.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Al-Khen wrote:

Not looking for hate, but putting the numbers down for effective crafting of the object and then what it would look like for making something comparable through comparing the effect to what tier of item it should actually be:

Assumptions - he's a dwarf wizard with 3 traits and a drawback; the three positives being Eldritch Smith, Hedge Magician, And Spark of Creation.
Each of those traits decrease cost by 5%, and through restricting the item to class, alignment, and skill (spell craft or use magic device or sleight of hand, etc.), the discounts added in are 30%, 30%, and 10% respectively.

Magic missile stacking on an item would technically fall under similar abilities (cause what's not more similar to something than the exact same thing; apples to apples, oranges to oranges and such), however, that discount only applies to a slotless items.

We have our discounts now. The item described was a command word magic missile stacked 25 times.
Thats ({1800 × 1×1 × .95^(3) × .7^(2) × .9}/2)×25
Which is 8,507.3034375 rounded to 8,507.3 GP + Scroll cost to facilitate each additional casting (using 25 scrolls to make cost more cut, less eratic, and buying them) for each day (9 days×25scrolls×25gp=5625)
Total cost is 14,132.3 GP

The item itself is command word Magic missile×25:
Thats 1d4+1 25 times to any combination of targets; minimum of 50 DMG, maximum of 125, a middle ground of 75-100 DMG. Thats coupled with a sub-effect of always hit (true strike) but can be blocked by shield and spell resistance. For the sake of argument (although almost any spell resistance would trump most of the DMG, or even a single shield spell IE a lvl 1 spell!), because of its high and auto hitting DMG, let's just say its on par with a lvl 9 spell (as some lv 9 spells get this high in DMG).

Our formula would be a little different then:
({1800×9×17×.95^(3)×.7^(2)×.9}/2)= 52,064.6970375 rounded to 52,064.7 GP give or take a bit if you wanted to add a truestrike effect (which I'd advise against as again this is already harder...

what about changing it from magic missile to battering blast the cost would be 54k for a caster level of 10 or 108k for a caster level of 20


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Take Magic Missile and:
1. Remove the 5 missile limit.
2. Increase from 1 missile per 2 levels to 1 missile per each level.
3. Cast it at level 20 to get 20 missiles.

Total damage = 20d4 + 20 = average of (20 * 2.5 + 20) = 70 average damage

The major missile spell from 2E came in at level 5, but by default only did #1 above (though obviously #3 would be a natural extension). It was somewhat weak for a level 5 spell, but adding in #2 above should make the spell about 6th level.

Range = medium (100 ft. + 10 ft./level) = 300 feet at level 20.

Price = 1,800 gp * CL 20 * SL 6 = 216,000 gp.

At 70 damage per round almost without fail, at a sizeable range, you are probably outclassing an average level 10 archer, plus you still have all the other spells/abilities/whatever of your chosen class.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

*Glances in* For a damage-focused character, ~70 per-turn is indeed about right for Level 10. For a character who's okay at damage but doesn't truly focus on it, that's more appropriate for Level 17.

That said, the system is built around certain limits for casting - generally just one spell a turn, maybe two if you're using Quicken Spell. Anything that allows a player to cast a bunch of spells all at once should be rejected on general principles, especially because, as mentioned above, they might want to start creating easy super-buffs and whatnot. I suggest you just point out that's not how the system is designed to work and go from there.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Ultimate Magic also lists maximum single target damage of 20 dice of d6 should be a level 6 spell [page 130]. And a d4 + 1 is the same 3.5 average per die as a d6 assumed in the chart for arcane spells. Further, this spell has no saving throw, unlike what the table assumes (which could easily push this spell to level 7).


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Two huge limitations that have been briefly mentioned:

At a caster level of 1st, SR of 22+ will utterly ignore the volley of missiles. Any and all shield spells thwart them. Not counting sundry other abjurations. These are significant drawbacks in their own right. Depending on the campaign as to how significant. Tack on certain magic items... yeah.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

It's not legal. I would be very afraid if the GM ruled it legal, because a bunch of npcs with gloves like that can totally TPK the party.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Instead of at will, how about charges per day?
25/day, that'd be 2000 x5= 10K

Each useage is a charge. Let us assume you can use them all in same round.
Good Nova effect, but not at will. Still Nova's that big are pretty frowned upon.

Now compare to the Quarterstaff of Entwined Serpents, At will, the wielder can use the staff to cast 2 magic missiles.
Price 5,050 gp but gives more stuff. so let us say 1K for eschew materials, 4K at will 2 MM.

I think, a cool and more balanced ideaL

Gauntlet of blasting (can still be disarmed): At will, the wielder can use the gauntlet to cast 2 magic missile. Each forms as a boxing glove to the enemy face dealing 1d4+1 damage. It possesses 5 charges/day; but utilizing one charge, you can shoot a single magic missile dealing 1d4+1 damage as a swift action. The charges renew at dawn.
Price: 10K. Caster 3rd.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

So most of the good advice has been given already.

That said, looking at the rules, here, it notes:

Quote:
The correct way to price an item is by comparing its abilities to similar items (see Magic Item Gold Piece Values), and only if there are no similar items should you use the pricing formulas to determine an approximate price for the item. If you discover a loophole that allows an item to have an ability for a much lower price than is given for a comparable item, the GM should require using the price of the item, as that is the standard cost for such an effect. Most of these loopholes stem from trying to get unlimited uses per day of a spell effect from the “command word” or “use-activated or continuous” lines of Table: Estimating Magic Item Gold Piece Values.

That is pretty strong language.

It's not even particularly language that I like, as I enjoy making nifty items in just such a way.

If your curious, this language comes from the Ultimate Campaign book, published by Paizo, which is why it is not in the Core book.

But what this means is simple: the advice already given entirely negates the attempt to get twenty five CL 1 magic missiles, because that cost is considered "too low" for what the player is trying to do.

Note that this is considered a definitive ruling - it is Paizo telling you how to make your magic items, just like the Core book does.

So... that's pretty much lined up with what has already been said.

-----------------------

Good advice delivered, now for the bad advice.

Should the player be insistent, than, you know that's fine. No problem, really. Because all the bad guys will now be sporting a magical tattoo (CL 1, of course), that entirely negates the magic missile (and grants them a +4 AC), for the price of 8k*, which, you know, is taken from the treasure they would otherwise over-all guard.

Of course, the question may be why all these people suddenly have this thing. That's fair... and phenomenally easy to answer; in two different ways, actually - it's just that something about said item has started a problem, somewhere, and it needs to be rendered moot so that others don't learn from and try the same tactic.

Nonetheless, the item made is now effectively worthless, and your entire party effectively loses 8,000 gold per enemy you come across.

This is just as rules-legal as the wand is in the first place.

Oh, and if the question is crafting time, that's not really a problem either. See, mythic creatures can hypothetically access to a thing call mythic time stop, and it takes only a single cheesed off mythic aeon to start this process, allowing them to make 8 hours of progress for a single full round.

* Basic formula is (CL x SL x 2k); double for not taking up a slot; double again for being measured in minutes. Citation.

This latter, however, is bad advice because it fails to resolve the problem before it exists in game.

Really, personally, I wouldn't have a problem with it. A single dude with a tendency to say nonsense words, or a chance encounter with a gibbering mouther or allip will very likely cause the thing to go off in a time and manner undesired, and I give most of my nobility continuous protections of that sort anyway (I mean, they're going to face assassins, so it's really just decent sense). Many warrior-type classes would vastly out damage it, and it has its own limitations - a low SR (22) will entirely negate it, beyond the specious use of shield as a spell anyway.

Mostly, you, as a group, need to think about and decide what you want to do. If you decide to allow this clever tactic, the idea that the PC is the first to discover it is... unlikely, at best. Possible, sure, but unlikely. And it means that the GM is going to have NPCs not only capable of the same trick, but well versed in many variants thereof.

Imagine, if you will, a phylactery that uses meteor swarm, wail of the banshee, cursed earth, icy prison, mass, and weird every time any words like "phylactery" or "lich" or "undead" or "monster" or "destroy" or "I hate this thing" or "daggummit, how many friggin' command words did he make?!" are uttered.

Or, perhaps, the DISSOLUTIONER: it's a passel of 80 wands of acid arrow bound together by sovereign glue and have the unfortunate drawbacks of only working for little blonde girls without spellcasting named "Sefenuhpyorz, Mayk" (though, fortunately for any would-be wielder, it helpfully permanently and irrevocably turns them into that exact physical description - along with giving them an embarrassingly rude tattoo on their forehead; the name and lack of spellcasting need be taken care of by the wielder themselves) who have discarded all other magic items, and, in return for all of this, gain an incurable disease, and become selfishly possessive of the item. So that's a standard action to get fifty separate attacks, each resolved with a unique attack roll, dealing up to 200d4 damage (average: 500 dmg) over two rounds (so 250 damage per round), at a range of 520 feet. The damage can be spread around to multiple targets in range or focused on a single target. This incredibly horrendous device would cost 227,400 gold - a steal, considering it can one-shot most things in the game not immune or resistant to acid. Of course you could make the thing for only 113,700 instead. Either way, wouldn't you know it: there happens to be a villain who just so happened to always want to be named "Sefenuhpyors, Mayk" and doesn't care about its physical appearance: it just wants to acid stuff. Heck, make it sentient for 500 more gold, and automatically recharging for an extra 18k^. Legit!

Math: 50*2d4; at CL 3 it lasts two rounds. The price is (CL *
SL * 750) times fifty, plus the cost of a single sovereign glue (that is 2,400 gold). That's 50(2*3*750)+2.4k = 227,400 gold.

^ It would not be 18k. It would be (18k*50) or 900k. But a reading that would permit the monstrosity that is the DISSOLUTIONER would also permit a single "recharge" ability to apply to the whole item.

My point is merely this: if your group decides to open that door, be ready to accept the consequences thereof. The PC might get a nifty benefit, but the GM will suddenly have leeway, by implicit agreement, to do monstrously terrible things back. You probably don't want that. The GM probably doesn't want that.

The rules were expressly originally intended as part of a conversational style - not a tight matrix that controls every element. This is from the creators themselves.

To that end, use them as seems more reasonable to the group, not as a bludgeon to force one person's version of fun on the rest.

EDIT: to make my final point a bit clearer, and also properly format the DISSOLUTIONER's name. I mean, unless it's "DISSOLUTIONER" it's hardly worth making the point, you know?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

It really depends on what level we're talking about, how optimized the rest of the party is, and whether they are really paying the full value of the item. Something this powerful should also be taking up at least 1 hand.

Just progress through these:

Wand of Magic Missile,
1-5 missiles, requires UMD or the spell on your list, 50 charges, 1 hand
1 missile, SL 1, CL 1 = 750 gp
2 missiles, SL 1, CL 3 = 2,250 gp
3 missiles, SL 1, CL 5 = 3,750 gp
4 missiles, SL 1, CL 7 = 5,250 gp
5 missiles, SL 1, CL 9 = 6,750 gp

Quarterstaff of Entwined Serpents
http://www.pfsdb.com/magicitems/quarterstaff-of-entwined
2 missiles, no UMD required, 1 hand, infinite uses, includes Eschew Materials feat
5,050 gp

Metamagic Rod, Quicken
quicken a spell 3 times per day
35,000 gp (lesser), 75,500 gp (normal), 170,000 gp (greater);
With a level 9 casting of Magic Missile as a level 1 spell, you could use the lesser rod, but still just 3 times per day.
To take the level cap off of the number of missiles with a custom spell(once you are casting at 11th level to get a 6th missile), you would need the normal rod.
To double or triple the number of missiles (from 1 per 2 levels to 1 per level or more) AND remove the cap with a custom spell (to exceed 5 missiles), that spell would have to be level 7+, you would need the greater rod. And it still just works 3 times per day.

Also, if you have this much focus on the spell, you may want to use some features of The Force Missile Mage prestige class from Dragon #328.
http://raugh.net/marhaven/notebook/missilemage.pdf
Big benefits:
Level 1 + Level 5: 1 extra magic missile
Level 3: a force missile mage's magic missiles penetrate shield spells and brooches of shielding as if they didn't offer protection from the spell.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

Al-Khen wrote:

1) restricting the item to class, alignment, and skill

2) Magic missile stacking on an item would technically fall under similar abilities

3) command word magic missile stacked 25 times.

4) {lots of math}.

1) This is a GM tool to be used to give items to NPC that the PC won't want and will need to sell but will sell for less. It isn't designed for PC use as a restriction that's not a restriction isn't a restriction.

2) No similar are charged items like a staff. Different are your normal fly and resistance bonus items.

3) No rule allows 25 on one command.

4) math is wrong because 1-3 is wrong.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Tacticslion wrote:
Some bad advice.

Nevermind, guys, everything is ruined: I messed up a bit of my coding, and I wrote 80 wands instead of 50. Sorry! My point is no longer! I am undone! Sorry for ruining the thread for eeeeeeeevvvvveeeerrrryyyyyyyy one! Post flagged!

EDIT: I mean, that's in addition to referring to the glove as a "wand" and so on! Ugh! So laaaaaaame!

No one pointed this out, I'm just doing so because those things bother me and it seemed funny. I submit I am weird at times.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

The post from SKR is not official, as has been pointed out, but what it should be considered is 'Really good advice for not screwing everything up.' So probably even better to listen to than slavishly applying rules to every situation equally.

There is no rule against having items that have the same command words and there is clear indication that speaking a command word in conversation can cause an accidental activation (which is not the same as meaning it has the intended effect). Accidentally activating a wand you are carrying doesn't mean it gets to fire at your target, it might explode on the ground or even strike you in the leg.

While it may be considered abuse-able by a majority of GMs to allow a character to have multiple items with the same command word and activate them all at once, as some kind of mega-buff combo that gives you shield, mage armor, bull's strength, etc., that's ultimately up to the GM based on whether they want to allow it. At least in that example, you'd be using multiple slots.

In the case of this one item firing off multiple effects, it's still possible (since we're clearly allowing custom crafting) but you would also have to price it at the power level it is equivalent to. Just like the commonly used continual true strike item (which costs way more than a continuous 1st-level effect) an item that fires 20 1st-level spells should be based on either equivalent damage-potential or the spell power needed, so it's likely to cost far more than just 20 magic missile wands.

The most important limitation is that activating items is typically a standard action, and SKR's explanation is as sound a reason as any other to be very circumspect in allowing a broad freedom for such things. If you don't want to completely restrict it, you always have the option to deny it on an individual basis or allow it for one combination of effects but not another.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Al-Khen wrote:

Not looking for hate, but putting the numbers down for effective crafting of the object and then what it would look like for making something comparable through comparing the effect to what tier of item it should actually be:

Assumptions - he's a dwarf wizard with 3 traits and a drawback; the three positives being Eldritch Smith, Hedge Magician, And Spark of Creation.
Each of those traits decrease cost by 5%, and through restricting the item to class, alignment, and skill (spell craft or use magic device or sleight of hand, etc.), the discounts added in are 30%, 30%, and 10% respectively.

Magic missile stacking on an item would technically fall under similar abilities (cause what's not more similar to something than the exact same thing; apples to apples, oranges to oranges and such), however, that discount only applies to a slotless items.

We have our discounts now. The item described was a command word magic missile stacked 25 times.
Thats ({1800 × 1×1 × .95^(3) × .7^(2) × .9}/2)×25
Which is 8,507.3034375 rounded to 8,507.3 GP + Scroll cost to facilitate each additional casting (using 25 scrolls to make cost more cut, less eratic, and buying them) for each day (9 days×25scrolls×25gp=5625)
Total cost is 14,132.3 GP
.

Multiple Similar Abilities: For items with multiple similar abilities that don't take up space on a character's body, use the following formula: Calculate the price of the single most costly ability, then add 75% of the value of the next most costly ability, plus 1/2 the value of any other abilities.

Your equation is wrong for multiple similar is wrong if it were multiple similar, which it is not, it would be
1800+1800*0.75+1800*0.5*23 = 23850 gp base

“Other Considerations: Once you have a cost figure, reduce that number if either of the following conditions applies:”

You can apply the highest reduction the item qualifies for not each one for a maximum of -30% so
23850*0.7 = 16,695

All three traits you listed are Magic Traits and while I am having trouble finding the source, it may be PFS, you are only supposed to have 1 trait from each category. So only one of the 5% discounts can be used. So

16,695 * 0.95 = 15,860.25 if your PFS rules but homebrew table
16,695*0.95*0.95*0.95 = 14,313.88

"The multiple similar abilities rule is specifically for items that don't use a magic item slot (such as staves), and can't be used for items that do use a magic item slot."

So its multiple different, not multiple similar so
1800+1800*1.5*24 = 66,600
66,600*0.95*0.70 = 44,289

Its being crafted as an equipment slot item that breaks the rules for staff creation and uses the easiest to get and most versatile crafting feat. Its is most certainly multiple different enchantments and by no means meets the test for similar enchantments. Each enchantment adds to the intended effect and multiplies the action economy value, saying anything else is miss leading to people who don't understand magic item creation.

1 to 50 of 53 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Magic Missle Glove of Blasting.... Is this legal? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.