Does anyone know what the action would be to change a headband?
Here is the issue: I will be playing a cleric / Envoy of Balance. I would like to have both a phylactery of positive channeling and a phylactery of negative channeling available.
Combining them into one object via the custom item creation rules isn't an option, so my thought was: I could have one on and then when I want, I switch the headbands, even in the middle of combat if needed since neither says they have to be worn for X hours beforehand.
So again, the question becomes: What type of action would changing a headband be? Any ideas?
If you begin your turn with one headband worn and the other in one hand while your second hand is free, a move action to remove the currently worn headband that results in that headband now being in your formerly free second hand. Then a second move action can place the headband from your other hand on your head.
These are both instances of "Manipulate an item". You many need additional actions to stow the removed headband or to have gotten the one you intend to don out from a secure location. Note also that wearing a helmet may interfere with easy access to your headband slot (despite not itself occupying that slot).
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
Also, ask your GM if you can swap this out without waiting 24 hours. The general wisdom has been you can't swap out items. Some items have had errata to block the swapping, mostly for low cost items. So your GM might say you can't swap due to not being attuned to the new item. If they say sure, it's at least 3 move actions. One to remove and drop free action. One to acquire new from handy haversack. One to put on new one.
Gloves of Storing can cut down an added move action.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Also, ask your GM if you can swap this out without waiting 24 hours. The general wisdom has been you can't swap out items. Some items have had errata to block the swapping, mostly for low cost items. So your GM might say you can't swap due to not being attuned to the new item. If they say sure, it's at least 3 move actions. One to remove and drop free action. One to acquire new from handy haversack. One to put on new one.
Umm, I don't understand why I'd have to do this. There are rules specifically in place for certain items saying they don't work until the wearer has them on for so long (such as a ring of sustenance). I mean, if I get a piece of gear in the middle of the dungeon and throw it on (such as a cloak of resistance) I don't have to wait, so why wouldn't I be able to swap out items?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The Phylactery of Positive/Negative Channeling does not have a 24 hour rule. A number of items were errata'd to have this restriction, but the Phylactery of Channeling was not one of them. If you take the necessary actions to swap them out, then you get the new effect.
|
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
I mean, if I get a piece of gear in the middle of the dungeon and throw it on (such as a cloak of resistance) I don't have to wait, so why wouldn't I be able to swap out items?
The general design is one item per slot, and activated items can't be carried around as a spell in a can.
There is no rule saying the general design, but if you have read enough posts over the decades about item creation design and game design you would have ran into that concept.
Ultimately your GM is in charge of whether or not an activated item requires attuning. In 3.5 for example, it was advised to ignore it if the player doesn't it. In other words, ask your GM.
|
As the phylactery don't change the daily number of uses of the channel ability I don't think that there is any need to limit the ability to swap it for another phylactery.
On the other hand, looking the images of a phylactery in internet, it don't seem an item that can be don rapidly.
So, unless you are using magic items that make it easier:
removing the fist phylactery: move action that provoke an AoO
Putting it away in your backpack or pouch: move action that provoke (like sheathing a sword)
Retrieving the new phylactery from a container: move action that provoke
Placing it securely on your head: full round action that provoke.
Generally too time consuming to do it in a combat.
As 3 out of 4 actions are move actions, so you can do that while casting standard action spells without reducing your offensive/defensive potential too much, but most battles end in 3-4 rounds.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The Phylactery of Positive/Negative Channeling does not have a 24 hour rule. A number of items were errata'd to have this restriction, but the Phylactery of Channeling was not one of them. If you take the necessary actions to swap them out, then you get the new effect.
^This.
By RAW you need only remove the old item and put the new one on to get its benefits unless the item description actually says otherwise (very few do). Anything else is a house rule that your GM should have informed you about already.
And unless the item description states otherwise, a move action is enough to put one on or take one off---again, unless your GM has a house rule about some items being harder to don/doff, which they should have informed you of already. Normally, if you go into combat with one on your head and the other in your hand, you can swap them in one round and use the new one on the next.
And I would be particularly surprised at a house rule that made it more than a move action to don/doff a phylactery of positive or negative channeling considering that they're both weightless headbands.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I mean, if I get a piece of gear in the middle of the dungeon and throw it on (such as a cloak of resistance) I don't have to wait, so why wouldn't I be able to swap out items?The general design is one item per slot, and activated items can't be carried around as a spell in a can.
There is no rule saying the general design, but if you have read enough posts over the decades about item creation design and game design you would have ran into that concept.
Ultimately your GM is in charge of whether or not an activated item requires attuning. In 3.5 for example, it was advised to ignore it if the player doesn't it. In other words, ask your GM.
I've never seen this 24 hour recommendation in 3.5 or Pathfinder.
Some items specifically mention that you need to wear the item for 24 hours to get some or all of its benefits. Obviously you would not get any benefits that require the item to have been worn that long if you just put it on. If the item has no specific mention to that effect, then you can use its full benefits immediately.
Note, however, that there is a FAQ that won't let you "recharge" an ability with limited daily uses per day by losing and then regaining that ability. In the case of a magic item, that means that if you expend one use of a magic item whose power can be used three times per day, take it off, and then put it back on, you still have only two daily uses of that power left.
|
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
I've never seen this 24 hour recommendation in 3.5 or Pathfinder.
It’s unfortunate that all the “rules of the game”, “sage advice”, FAQ, and Book of Heavily Debated Topics, are forever lost to websites reorganize/deletion/offline.
Topics that loosely touch on this were:
Item slots are not like interchangeable parts, you wear items not put them on for their function then replace.
That is demonstrated for a number of the offensive items that were heavily abused this way (with errata in pathfinder).
The healing belt in MIC was another that wasn’t designed to be swapped out.
Things with daily uses like LB Nightstick, can’t be swapped out or you own multiple for more effect.
It’s explained the GM is expected to step in if they feel the player is exploiting the loose language. Fixes such as forcing daily refresh at the same time, blocking swapping around items to the party (like using one healing belt to give everyone in the party their own charges), etc.
There is a ton of wisdom in how the game is written that goes beyond the actual text written. The GM is in charge of adjudication for all things not written, so places that are fine if not exploited. The ones with the errata are the problem items that were exploited most often.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
As far as I know, this is not a general or implied rule in Pathfinder. They already moved to fix specific problem items--otherwise, it would have been simple enough to make an explicit rule to cover all cases. The articles you (James) mention were for a different game--and equally dubious besides.
I allow my players to wear multiple of some items and activate them as a standard action. Like wearing a 3rd/4th ring or a second necklace. But a headband doesn't sound like something that would be easy to wear two of.
|
|
I allow my players to wear multiple of some items and activate them as a standard action. Like wearing a 3rd/4th ring or a second necklace. But a headband doesn't sound like something that would be easy to wear two of.
Very unbalancing. You are transforming all the items that can be activated by a standard action and don't need to be used constantly in slottless items.
To make an example, a character in your game could wear a deflection ring on his main hand and a ring of climbing, one of jumping and one of swimming on his other hand. The rings abilities would almost never be used at the same time, but there are plenty of times when removing a gauntlet, then the ring, putting it away, drawing a new ring, putting it on and putting the gauntlet on again would be an annoying loss of time. To the point that there are magic items made to allow you to do that. Changing that change one of the paradigm in the game.
Do the same thing with items that use the chest slot and it become even worse. You are back to "I am wearing 3 quick runner shirts, so I spend a standard action to activate the second one and be able to use the use again i the next combat".
Note: the PDR isn't up to date with the Quick runner shirt, there is an errata to it:
Page 222—In quick runner’s shirt, in the second sentence, change “on his turn” to “and then immediately end his turn, losing any unspent actions. A character must wear this shirt continuously for 24 hours before he can activate this ability.”
D20PRD too don't list the errata.
I allow my players to wear multiple of some items and activate them as a standard action. Like wearing a 3rd/4th ring or a second necklace. But a headband doesn't sound like something that would be easy to wear two of.
Very unbalancing. You are transforming all the items that can be activated by a standard action and don't need to be used constantly in slottless items.
To make an example, a character in your game could wear a deflection ring on his main hand and a ring of climbing, one of jumping and one of swimming on his other hand. The rings abilities would almost never be used at the same time, but there are plenty of times when removing a gauntlet, then the ring, putting it away, drawing a new ring, putting it on and putting the gauntlet on again would be an annoying loss of time. To the point that there are magic items made to allow you to do that. Changing that change one of the paradigm in the game.
Do the same thing with items that use the chest slot and it become even worse. You are back to "I am wearing 3 quick runner shirts, so I spend a standard action to activate the second one and be able to use the use again i the next combat".
Note: the PDR isn't up to date with the Quick runner shirt, there is an errata to it:
Page 222—In quick runner’s shirt, in the second sentence, change “on his turn” to “and then immediately end his turn, losing any unspent actions. A character must wear this shirt continuously for 24 hours before he can activate this ability.”D20PRD too don't list the errata.
Expanding on this example, there is a 1,000 gold belt slot item that lets you switch between rings as an action (I think it's Swift or Free, done at the start of your turn, and only once per turn). Going with his proposed rule, that item just became invalidated, when the item's sole purpose is to allow a character to switch between equipped rings for their effects (there are two standard slots, and you can attach up to two additional magic rings to the belt, meaning you can alternate between a minimum of 4 magic rings, not including items like Hand of Glory neck item or a Ten Ring Broadsword).
Sure, it's not a Core item (from what I remember), but the item sets a precedent that one cannot normally choose between multiple item slots at their convenience (especially for rings, anyway), without coughing up an additional magic item slot and some gold.
The ironic part is that you can make that belt "slotless" for an additional 1,000 gold, and still maintain its benefits of switching between rings without coughing up that precious belt slot. You could stack multiples of these, being a famous Ring collector, and be able to alternate between any two rings of your choosing. (Well, it's official, I have my next "fun" character concept; thanks!)
Expanding on this example, there is a 1,000 gold belt slot item that lets you switch between rings as an action (I think it's Swift or Free, done at the start of your turn, and only once per turn). Going with his proposed rule, that item just became invalidated, when the item's sole purpose is to allow a character to switch between equipped rings for their effects (there are two standard slots,...
A swift or free action is a very different thing than a standard action. This item is not anywhere near invalidated. Please let me know the name of this item because adding as an extra enchant to a belt will be cheap.
I allow my players to wear multiple of some items and activate them as a standard action. Like wearing a 3rd/4th ring or a second necklace. But a headband doesn't sound like something that would be easy to wear two of.
Very unbalancing. You are transforming all the items that can be activated by a standard action and don't need to be used constantly in slottless items.
Wow that is incredibly unbalancing, all of a sudden my player spent a standard action to be able to swim better instead of climb better, way to overpowered I will stop immediately.
Honestly this may under-power the player instead. Because now they aren't selling the useless swimming ring to buy a better item. Currently this feature I offer has been used twice ever (in combat), once someone switched to a fire resistance ring and another time someone activated a golem bane scarab.
About the third ring..
*Please show by RAW what happens when you put a third ring on.
*Now also show by RAW what happens when you take the second ring off.
*Now show by RAW what happens when you put the second ring back on.
This is what I expect would be the case in most games
*Nothing happens you already have 2 rings active
*The third ring now works, the second is unequipped
*Nothing happens you already have 2 rings active
Expanding on this example, there is a 1,000 gold belt slot item that lets you switch between rings as an action (I think it's Swift or Free, done at the start of your turn, and only once per turn). Going with his proposed rule, that item just became invalidated, when the item's sole purpose is to allow a character to switch between equipped rings for their effects (there are two standard slots,...A swift or free action is a very different thing than a standard action. This item is not anywhere near invalidated. Please let me know the name of this item because adding as an extra enchant to a belt will be cheap.
As much as I don't want to get into this argument, I was curious as to the item. It is the Meridian Belt
|
|
I allow my players to wear multiple of some items and activate them as a standard action. Like wearing a 3rd/4th ring or a second necklace. But a headband doesn't sound like something that would be easy to wear two of.
Very unbalancing. You are transforming all the items that can be activated by a standard action and don't need to be used constantly in slottless items.
Wow that is incredibly unbalancing, all of a sudden my player spent a standard action to be able to swim better instead of climb better, way to overpowered I will stop immediately.
Honestly this may under-power the player instead. Because now they aren't selling the useless swimming ring to buy a better item. Currently this feature I offer has been used twice ever (in combat), once someone switched to a fire resistance ring and another time someone activated a golem bane scarab.
I made an example using low cost rings that are available at low level. I notice that you haven't touched the quick runner shirt. a 1.000 gp item that let you use a swift action to get a move action. With the errata and the normal rules only one can be used in a day, with your house rule several can be wear at the same time and used in different fights in the same day.
Or a character can wear several energy resistance rings and activate the right one when he see what the opponent use.Your game, your rules, but the ability to use more magic items than normal is a noticeable power up.
I made an example using low cost rings that are available at low level. I notice that you haven't touched the quick runner shirt. a 1.000 gp item that let you use a swift action to get a move action. With the errata and the normal rules only one can be used in a day, with your house rule several can be wear at the same time and used in different fights in the same day.
Or a character can wear several energy resistance rings and activate the right one when he see what the opponent use.Your game, your rules, but the ability to use more magic items than normal is a noticeable power up.
Quick runners shirt is easy. The item must be equipped for 24 hours before use. It isn't equipped until after the user switches to it.
Again by RAW show where someone can't wear 3 rings and remove 1 to activate the 3rd.
|
The general design is one item per slot, and activated items can't be carried around as a spell in a can.
Ultimately your GM is in charge of whether or not an activated item requires attuning.
I've never seen this 24 hour recommendation in 3.5 or Pathfinder.
It may not be worded in that exact way, but it's the concept behind why PF differentiates between temporary and permanent stat bonuses.
You can't have the cleric, druid, and ranger pass around one headband of Wisdom in the morning, to benefit from the resulting bonus spells.
Whoever's currently wearing it can have the bonus to Will saves and Wisdom skills, but no-one gets bonus uses of Wis-related abilities, until they've worn it for a day.
Expanding on this example, there is a 1,000 gold belt slot item that lets you switch between rings as an action (I think it's Swift or Free, done at the start of your turn, and only once per turn). Going with his proposed rule, that item just became invalidated, when the item's sole purpose is to allow a character to switch between equipped rings for their effects (there are two standard slots,...A swift or free action is a very different thing than a standard action. This item is not anywhere near invalidated. Please let me know the name of this item because adding as an extra enchant to a belt will be cheap.
All it requires is a Swift Action, which can be done at any point during your turn, and wearing rings on your toes counts for the purposes of attuning to magic items with a 24 hour wait time before it becomes active.
It's only 1,000 gold and takes up a Belt slot. Making it Slotless for 2,000 gold without sacrificing a Physical Stats Belt gives you a lot of powerful options, though that falls into GM FIAT territory, and I honestly wouldn't allow a player to do that at my table. I would allow them to enhance it with another belt item, but I wouldn't allow any more than two items to be combined together.
so no belt of physical perfection or headband of mental perfection because those are 3 physical score belts/ 3 mental score headbands fused together
Expanding on this example, there is a 1,000 gold belt slot item that lets you switch between rings as an action (I think it's Swift or Free, done at the start of your turn, and only once per turn). Going with his proposed rule, that item just became invalidated, when the item's sole purpose is to allow a character to switch between equipped rings for their effects (there are two standard slots,...A swift or free action is a very different thing than a standard action. This item is not anywhere near invalidated. Please let me know the name of this item because adding as an extra enchant to a belt will be cheap.
All it requires is a Swift Action, which can be done at any point during your turn, and wearing rings on your toes counts for the purposes of attuning to magic items with a 24 hour wait time before it becomes active.
It's only 1,000 gold and takes up a Belt slot. Making it Slotless for 2,000 gold without sacrificing a Physical Stats Belt gives you a lot of powerful options, though that falls into GM FIAT territory, and I honestly wouldn't allow a player to do that at my table. I would allow them to enhance it with another belt item, but I wouldn't allow any more than two items to be combined together.
A better example of what I mean would be Ring of Protection + Ring of Evasion + Ring of Freedom of Movement is impossible. Only two of those three combinations would work.
|
|
a belt of physical perfection is still just a belt of str, belt of dex and a belt of con so im not seeing what the issue with allowing 3 or more items to be combined together is
No, it don't "combine 3 items together", it is a specific item, described in the rules, that work as having 3 different belts.
That has has some drawback too. If you want to enhance it following the game structure (instead of creating a item that currently don't exist in the rules) you will have to increase all three stats at the same time and keep them at the same value, with a noticeable cost in money and time.
Three different belts fused together instead can have different values, so you can have a a "fused belt of Physical Might + Incredible Dexterity + Mighty Constitution" that give +6 strength, +4 dexterity and +2 constitution.
No, it don't "combine 3 items together", it is a specific item, described in the rules, that work as having 3 different belts.a belt of physical perfection is still just a belt of str, belt of dex and a belt of con so im not seeing what the issue with allowing 3 or more items to be combined together is
See, this guy gets it. Because it has a specific entry in the book, it counts as a singular item for the purposes of combining it with other items at my table.
So, a Belt of Physical Perfection + Belt of Fallen Heroes is possible, for example. But not the above combination with a third belt entry (such as a Belt of Teeth).
I've never seen this 24 hour recommendation in 3.5 or Pathfinder.It’s unfortunate that all the “rules of the game”, “sage advice”, FAQ, and Book of Heavily Debated Topics, are forever lost to websites reorganize/deletion/offline.
Topics that loosely touch on this were:
Item slots are not like interchangeable parts, you wear items not put them on for their function then replace.
That is demonstrated for a number of the offensive items that were heavily abused this way (with errata in pathfinder).
The healing belt in MIC was another that wasn’t designed to be swapped out.
Things with daily uses like LB Nightstick, can’t be swapped out or you own multiple for more effect.
It’s explained the GM is expected to step in if they feel the player is exploiting the loose language. Fixes such as forcing daily refresh at the same time, blocking swapping around items to the party (like using one healing belt to give everyone in the party their own charges), etc.There is a ton of wisdom in how the game is written that goes beyond the actual text written. The GM is in charge of adjudication for all things not written, so places that are fine if not exploited. The ones with the errata are the problem items that were exploited most often.
What you are describing only applies to casting stat headbands, and casting, not other aspects of the casting stat. Otherwise you are quite wrong about the 24h rule. This game is too simulationist to invoke directly narrative rules like that in general.
It may not be worded in that exact way, but it's the concept behind why PF differentiates between temporary and permanent stat bonuses.
Actually, this FAQ has muddied even that. It's a bit contentious because it runs against long-running convention, but it does seem that in Pathfinder temporary ability score bonuses do increase your daily usage of abilities. For instance, if a Cleric casts Eagle's Splendor on himself, he'd gain 2 temporary uses of his Channel Energy ability (Note that this FAQ would prevent this from being abused; these two extra uses are "remembered" across multiple castings of Eagle's Splendor so he cannot ever gain more than two extra uses per day in this fashion). This same logic applies on everything up to and including spell slots.
It's a contentious topic, but in light of that FAQ it's unclear if there is any difference between temporary or permanent ability score bonuses other than duration.
|
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
Actually, this FAQ has muddied even that.
This isn't a PF thing. The water got muddied back in 3.5. The best examples came from the answers to my Book of Heavily Debated Topics just before the introduction of 4e D&D. A lot of "gives me daily uses" things got explained as "additional max uses" not "additional uses" so it tracks your daily use. For example nightstick from Libre Mortis was "add 4 turns to your max". So if you had 4 and used a nightstick, you have 8. Use 8, and it doesn't matter how many nightsticks you own, you don't get any more turns. They also explained "ring of sustenance" for multiple spell slots per day by explaining what day means. AKA 24 hrs apart or close to it and that if players attempt to exploit your loose definition, make it rigid.
No, it don't "combine 3 items together", it is a specific item, described in the rules, that work as having 3 different belts.
That has has some drawback too. If you want to enhance it following the game structure (instead of creating a item that currently don't exist in the rules) you will have to increase all three stats at the same time and keep them at the same value, with a noticeable cost in money and time.
Three different belts fused together instead can have different values, so you can have a a "fused belt of Physical Might + Incredible Dexterity + Mighty Constitution" that give +6 strength, +4 dexterity and +2 constitution.
The only reason there isn't specific entries for +2/+2/+4, +2/+4/+2, +4/+2/+2, etc is for space reasons (and yes, I am channeling the developer) :)